- Email: [email protected]
Leader Academy: A layered approach to learning leadership
Currents in Pharmacy Teaching and Learning xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Currents in Pharmacy Teaching and Learning journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/cptl
Experiences in Teaching and Learning
Leader Academy: A layered approach to learning leadership Kristy Brittaina, , Alan Spiesb, Cathy Worralla ⁎
a b
Clinical Pharmacy and Outcome Sciences, Medical University of South Carolina College of Pharmacy, Charleston, SC 29425, United States GiANT Worldwide, United States
ARTICLE INFO
ABSTRACT
Keywords: Leadership Professional development Emotional intelligence Peer evaluation Team-based learning
Background and purpose: Leader Academy (LA) is a co-curricular experience for students that builds communication skills, fosters leadership skills, and offers opportunities in professional development. The program couples leadership development during the first year of the curriculum with activities conducted in a team-based learning course. Educational activity and setting: An emotional intelligence (EI) assessment was administered to students during their first year. Students are led through a series of monthly programs utilizing GiANT Worldwide tools and team discussion. LA utilizes faculty, pharmacy residents, and student leaders to serve as facilitators for each team. Students participate in monthly meetings and are assigned team activities within required courses. Peer- and self-assessments are conducted through CATME SMARTER Teamwork program. The EI assessment will be re-administered at the end of LA to assess change in EI. A survey asked students to address the value and relevance of the GiANT Worldwide tools, how often they used the tools, and if they had taught a tool to someone else. Findings: On average, students scored lower in assertiveness, stress tolerance, emotional expression and independence in comparison to all of the areas assessed. The lowest composite scores were self-expression and stress management. Students indicated that they find the GiANT Worldwide tools valuable and relevant. Summary: There are specific areas of focus within EI where we can continue to build skills in selfexpression and stress management. Students tailor their personal growth in EI by setting SMART goals at the beginning of the program and continually reassess throughout the program.
Background and purpose With the addition of leadership and professional development to the Accreditation Council on Pharmacy Education (ACPE) Standards, colleges of pharmacy have been challenged to add curricular and co-curricular content to their programs.1 While colleges may take a variety of approaches to teaching future pharmacists about leadership and professional development, it is also important to assess the impact of such training. A 2019 study by Ward and colleagues2 identified motivation, critical thinking, emotional intelligence (EI), core competencies, and work-life balance as significant contributors to the success of pharmacists. In 2015, Nelson et al.3 recommended that colleges of pharmacy add EI-related competencies to their curriculum. This builds upon previously published reports that EI may be a possible predictor of academic and professional success.4 Maxwell and colleagues5 demonstrated a positive impact on self-awareness by improvement in self-perception scores through the implementation of a Birkman Method training program. There have been published studies evaluating leadership and professional development programs in colleges of
⁎
Corresponding author. E-mail address: [email protected] (K. Brittain).
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cptl.2019.12.012
1877-1297/ © 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Please cite this article as: Kristy Brittain, Alan Spies and Cathy Worrall, Currents in Pharmacy Teaching and Learning, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cptl.2019.12.012
Currents in Pharmacy Teaching and Learning xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx
K. Brittain, et al.
Table 1 Matriculation demographics for the Class of 2021 (cohort 1). Demographic Age (years) Gender Grade point average (4.0 scale) Ethnicity Race
Degree
Mean n = 77 (%) Female Male Cumulative Key Hispanic or Latino Not Hispanic Asian Asian & White Black/African American Black/African American & American Indian/Alaska Native International Undeclared White No degree Associates Bachelors Masters
23.12 57 (74%) 20 (26%) 3.41 3.54 5 (6%) 72 (94%) 10 (13%) 1 (1.3%) 5 (6.5%) 1 (1.3%) 2 (2.5%) 1 (1.3%) 57 (74%) 20 (26%) 2 (2.5%) 53 (69%) 2 (2.5%)
pharmacy on EI, however these programs were elective courses.2,6 No studies have evaluated the impact of a program offered to all students as part of a curricular or required co-curricular program. The intent of our required co-curricular program is to introduce leadership and communication concepts early in the curriculum, build facilitation and communication skills of students as they progress in their development, and evaluate changes in EI at the conclusion of the two-year program. Leader Academy (LA) at the Medical University of South Carolina's (MUSC) College of Pharmacy started in fall 2017. LA is a cocurricular initiative that introduces and builds on communication skills, in addition to fostering leadership skills and offering professional development. Based on the principles of 5 Voices (Know Yourself to Lead Yourself to Lead Others) and 5 Gears (How to be Both Present and Productive), resources and tools offered by the international GiANT Worldwide Company are utilized.7 At their foundational core, these resources are theoretically grounded in both self-awareness and emotional intelligence, areas in which growth can be fostered throughout one's lifetime. In additional, a common leadership language is implemented (similar to the common language used in any profession) as this helps lower walls of self-preservation between facilitator and participant. LA started during orientation for first-year pharmacy students in the Class of 2021 (cohort 1). Students (n = 78) were grouped in teams of 5–6 students who participated in a self-assessment of the 5 Voices program. Student teams were formed utilizing the CATME TeamMaker© function utilizing gender, race, age, leadership role, leadership preference and big picture/detail-orientation questions.8 Matriculation demographics for the Class of 2021 are found in Table 1. There are five leadership voices that comprise our daily behaviors and tendencies, thereby impacting (both positively and negatively) communication and interaction with others. The 5 Voices include: pioneer, connector, guardian, creative and nurturer. The 5 Voices are based, in the empirical research from Myers-Briggs Theory and its 16 representative subtypes.7 Though very powerful, the Myers-Briggs Theory Step II instrument requires extensive time in order to process and apply, especially as it relates to team building and communication. For that reason, the 5 Voices assessment was selected as it provides a simpler model, making it easier to understand and apply. The 5 Voices self-assessment produces a report that ranks each participant's five voices in order of ease of accessibility. A brief synopsis of each voice:
• Pioneer – Champion of results and forward progress • Connector – Champion of relationships and strategic partnerships • Guardian – Champion of responsibility and stewardship • Creative –Champion of innovation and future-oriented thinking • Nurturer – Champion of people and relational harmony Educational activity and setting During orientation, the students participated in a three hour session. The students completed a 5 Voices self-assessment, which involved ranking each of the voices in relation to those they most closely related with and used naturally. The facilitator then presented pertinent information about each voice, including what each voice brings at its best and potential negative impacts (blind spots) of each voice. This session provided an orientation to the 5 Voices concepts. All future sessions of the LA program build on this foundational information so as to provide further discussions and activities for applying this information. The college utilized faculty, pharmacy residents and Phi Lambda Sigma (PLS) collegiate members to serve as facilitators for each team. The facilitators were responsible for learning a new “tool” each month by watching brief videos (5–40 min). Then via a web2
Currents in Pharmacy Teaching and Learning xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx
K. Brittain, et al.
Table 2 Monthly topics for Leader Academy 1.0. Month
Topic
August September October November January February March
Orientation – introduction to 5 voices & 5 gears How to bring support and challenge to those you lead Know yourself to lead yourself Five gears of productivity and power of medium (effective methods of communication) Cracking the communication code & discussion of EQi-2.0 results (emotional intelligence assessment) Push and pull (assertive vs. responsive) Self–preservation and impact on the team
based conference call, the GiANT Consultant helped identify how to discuss and utilize the tool (see Table 2) within individuals assigned to the small groups. The following week, the facilitator met in-person with their respective student team for one hour to discuss the tool, employing an approach similar to patient counseling as the facilitators would ask questions of group members, thereby drawing out their insights. This allowed real-world application of content in the context of a safe environment for group discussion. Other core components of the program included an EI assessment (EQi2.0).8 Two faculty were trained to administer the EQi2.0 for Higher Education© assessment. This is a reliable and valid assessment that can longitudinally track quantitative growth in EI factors. Though there are many EI resources available (e.g., Emotional Intelligence 2.0 by Bradberry), the EQi2.0 was selected as its multiple factors provided greater insight into specific areas for growth. Furthermore, this robust instrument provided a personalized, visual report for participants to utilize as they began to set SMART goals for their personal development. Lastly, the GiANT tools implemented throughout this program provided simple, tangible next steps that were mapped to each sub-scale, thus allowing for an easier path to desired growth. The EQi2.0 for Higher Education© compares students' results to other students enrolled in higher education.8 Therefore, this assessment targets emotional and social functioning and its impact on a student's academic, professional and personal development. The EQi2.0 provides an individualized report for each student. This report includes an overall EI score, composite scores and individual sub-scale scores. The composite areas and associated sub-scales include stress management (flexibility, stress tolerance, optimism), self-perception (self-regard, self-actualization, emotional self-awareness), self-expression (emotional expression, assertiveness, independence), interpersonal (interpersonal relationships, empathy, social responsibility) and decision-making (problem solving, reality testing, impulse control). The results are presented in the form of a quantitative score with a corresponding range of low (< 90), medium (90–110) and high (> 110). All reporting and testing is conducted within the MultiHealth Systems (MHS) assessment portal.7 Students were provided their EQi2.0 results and participated in an overview session of EI that broke down each of the components of the report. At the conclusion, students were asked to address specific areas (composite and/or sub-scale) and set SMART goals that could be tracked over the next two years. In addition, students worked in the same teams during two courses: Introduction to Pharmacy (fall 2017) and Self-Care and Complementary Medicines (spring 2018). During each course, students completed in-class, team-based activities including two outof-class projects per course. Students completed peer- and self-assessments during each course utilizing the CATME system.9 At the completion of the fall semester, overall general feedback from the students was used to identify content that would help them grow and subsequently was then incorporated into each monthly LA meeting. Facilitators conducted monthly feedback sessions and discussed on-going operations of the program with the program directors. In year two of this program, the now P2 students (cohort 1) are facilitating LA 1.0 for the P1 class (cohort 2). The advantage of this program and its tools is that they are easily taught to others. In addition to facilitating the P1 LA, the P2 students (cohort 1) continue to meet with an individual facilitator (faculty, pharmacy resident, PLS collegiate member) during their P2 year so as to learn additional skills and tools to enhance their own leadership and professional development. This allows the college to continue to integrate leadership and professional development training throughout the curriculum, thereby helping to meet ACPE - Standard 4, specifically as LA provides multiple, intentional opportunities for students to begin the process of reflection as they develop a lifelong process of continuing personal development.1 Findings The initial EQi2.0 assessments were administered in fall 2017. Student specific scores were extracted from individual student reports and de-identified. Overall student emotional intelligence data was analyzed using descriptive statistics. Table 3 outlines each composite, individual attributes and scores for the class of 2021 (cohort 1). Sub-scale scores are used to calculate the composite score. The investigators reviewed all composite and sub-scale scores to identify those areas with the lowest score average. On average, students scored lowest in the sub-scale areas of assertiveness (97), stress tolerance (100), emotional expression (100) and independence (101). The lowest overall composite scores were self-expression (100) and stress management (101). Despite identifying specific areas of lower scoring, it should be noted that all averages are considered mid-range (medium). Additionally, individual student reports were flagged utilizing the MHS assessments portal. MHS assessments utilize a report flagging system to indicate individuals who may benefit from additional intervention. This included results for students that are outside of the normalized range set by MHS. These students were offered additional in-person counseling and review of their reports. The EQi2.0 will be administered again to the same cohort of students in the spring of 2019. At that time we will be able to analyze 3
Currents in Pharmacy Teaching and Learning xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx
K. Brittain, et al.
Table 3 EQi2.0 student EI baseline scores (cohort 1). Composite and score (Mean ± SD)
Individual attribute score
Score (mean ± SD)
Self-perception 105 ( ± 13)
Self-regarda Self-actualizationa Emotional self-awareness Emotional expression Assertiveness Independence Interpersonal relationshipsa Empathy Social responsibility Problem solving Reality testing Impulse control Flexibility Stress tolerance Optimisma
104 ( ± 13) 105 ( ± 12) 102 ( ± 14) 100 ( ± 15) 97 ( ± 15) 101 ( ± 15) 102 ( ± 13) 106 ( ± 13) 105 ( ± 11) 102 ( ± 13) 103 ( ± 12) 103 ( ± 16) 102 ( ± 17) 100 ( ± 13) 102 ( ± 12) 105 ( ± 13) 104 ( ± 12)
Self-expression 100 ( ± 14) Interpersonal composite 105 ( ± 11) Decision making composite 104 ( ± 13) Stress management 101 ( ± 12) Well-being indicator Total emotional intelligence
EQi2.0 scale: low-range < 90; mid-range 90–110; high-range > 110. a Individual attributes that contribute to well-being indicator.
the change in EI scores from first-professional (P1) year to the end of the second professional (P2) year, during which time students will have completed both LA 1.0 and LA 2.0. Cohort 1 students were surveyed at the conclusion of LA 1.0 (spring 2018). An anonymous survey asked students to address the value and relevance of the GiANT Worldwide tools introduced, how often they used the tools and if they had taught a tool to someone else. The survey also asked students to indicate the effectiveness of the facilitator in their growth. Survey results are documented in Table 4. A majority of students (94.5%) agreed or strongly agreed that the tools used in the program were valuable. Most of the students (95.9%) felt that the tools were relevant to their life. However, students indicated that they were less likely to have used the tools regularly and/or taught the tools to someone else. Most of the students (95.9%) agreed that their facilitators helped them grow throughout the program. Discussion LA provides a novel approach for students to build both leadership and communication skills starting in the first-year of the professional curriculum. Students indicate that they find the tools valuable and relevant to their life. The group facilitator approach has allowed the students to not only grow throughout the program but also has helped empower the students to take a greater role in their own personal development. The layered model involving co-curricular team activities paired with in-class curricular team activities allows the students to apply the skills they are learning in real time within their teams. This design also allows course instructors and co-curricular instructors to assess peer-assessment data (from CATME) and subsequently design discussions with specific tools based on areas in which the student teams are struggling. LA 2.0 will build on cohort one's ability to facilitate discussion around the tools with the subsequent expectation to teach others the tools. This enhancement to the program will address the fact that students indicated that they were less likely to have used the tools regularly and/or taught the tools to someone else. EI data will also be used longitudinally to assess the cohort of students over time, starting with the initial assessment in the first year compared to the assessment at the completion of the second year. Baseline EI data has been helpful to note that as a whole the class does not have primary areas of low emotional intelligence scoring. However, baseline EI data has highlighted students who may be struggling in one or more of the specific composite areas or sub-scales. There are specific areas of focus where we can continue to build skills in self-expression (emotional expression, assertiveness and independence) and stress management (flexibility, stress tolerance and optimism). Students will also track their individual growth in EI by monitoring their SMART goals. Table 4 Leader Academy 1.0 (cohort 1) end-of-year survey (n = 74).
I find the tools valuable. The tools are relevant to my life. I use the tools regularly. I have taught a tool to someone else. The facilitators have helped me grow.
Strongly agree n (%)
Agree n (%)
Disagree n (%)
Strongly disagree n (%)
28 47 10 10 46
42 24 44 36 25
4 (5.4) 3 (4) 19 (25.6) 26 (35.1) 3 (4.1)
0 0 1 2 0
(37.8) (63.5) (13.5) (13.5) (62.1)
4
(56.7) (32.4) (59.4) (48.6) (33.8)
(0) (0) (1.4) (2.7) (0)
Currents in Pharmacy Teaching and Learning xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx
K. Brittain, et al.
Summary Overall, the facilitators saw significant growth in team interactions and communication within the teams. While some of the students did not believe they learned anything from the experience, it was apparent that their behaviors had changed significantly throughout the experience. This evidence is based on both self and peer evaluation. That being said, it is often a challenge to understand and see one's personal growth in these specific areas that may change slowly over time. For that reason, this initiative extends beyond a single year as lasting development occurs over time. When it comes to personal development, more is not necessarily better. Adult learners of today are informationally overloaded and time poor. Therefore, a simple model is needed that will stick, leading to more lasting personal transformation. Lastly, given the pace of health-care (and society), adult learners of today require something they can immediately apply. This model captures all these key ingredients in that it is simple, scalable and sustainable. As such, it is the authors' hope this model can be shared with our profession as we continue to meet the challenges in advancing our profession. Author statement Author verification occurred prior to implementation of requiring an Author statement. Disclosure(s) When this study was conducted, Alan Spies served as Professor and Kennedy Chair at the Kennedy Pharmacy Innovation Center at the University of South Carolina College of Pharmacy. Declaration of competing interest None. References 1. Accreditation Standards and Key Elements for the Professional Program in Pharmacy Leading to the Doctor of Pharmacy Degree. Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education. https://www.acpe-accredit.org/pdf/Standards2016FINAL.pdf. Published February 2015. Accessed 4 December 2019. 2. Ward A, Hall J, Mutch J, Cheung L, Cor MK, Charrois TL. What makes pharmacists successful? An investigation of personal characteristics. J Am Pharm Assoc. 2019;59(1):23–29 (2003). e1. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.japh.2018.09.001. 3. Nelson MH, Fierke KK, Sucher BJ, Janke KK. Including emotional intelligence in pharmacy curricular to help achieve CAPE outcomes. Am J Pharm Educ. 2015;79(4) https://doi.org/10.5688/ajpe79448. 4. Romanelli F, Cain F, Smith KM. Emotional intelligence as a predictor of academic and/or professional success. Am J Pharm Educ. 2006;70(3) https://doi.org/10. 5688/aj700369. 5. Maxwell WD, Grant AD, Fabel PH, et al. Impact of the Birkman method assessment on pharmacy student self-confidence, self-perceptions, and self-awareness. Am J Pharm Educ. 2016;80(9) https://doi.org/10.5688/ajpe809148. 6. Smith MJ, Wilson J, George DL, Laster K, Filippo C, Spies A. Emotional intelligence scores among three cohorts of pharmacy students before and after completing the University of Oklahoma College of Pharmacy’s leadership degree option program. Curr Pharm Teach Learn. 2018;10(7):911–917. 7. GiANT Worldwide. https://giantworldwide.com Accessed 4 December 2019. 8. Multi-Health Systems (MHS) Inc. The EQi 2.0 Model. https://legacytap.mhs.com/EQi20.aspx Accessed 4 December 2019. 9. CATME SMARTER Teamwork. https://info.catme.org/ Accessed 4 December 2019.
5
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Currents in Pharmacy Teaching and Learning journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/cptl
Experiences in Teaching and Learning
Leader Academy: A layered approach to learning leadership Kristy Brittaina, , Alan Spiesb, Cathy Worralla ⁎
a b
Clinical Pharmacy and Outcome Sciences, Medical University of South Carolina College of Pharmacy, Charleston, SC 29425, United States GiANT Worldwide, United States
ARTICLE INFO
ABSTRACT
Keywords: Leadership Professional development Emotional intelligence Peer evaluation Team-based learning
Background and purpose: Leader Academy (LA) is a co-curricular experience for students that builds communication skills, fosters leadership skills, and offers opportunities in professional development. The program couples leadership development during the first year of the curriculum with activities conducted in a team-based learning course. Educational activity and setting: An emotional intelligence (EI) assessment was administered to students during their first year. Students are led through a series of monthly programs utilizing GiANT Worldwide tools and team discussion. LA utilizes faculty, pharmacy residents, and student leaders to serve as facilitators for each team. Students participate in monthly meetings and are assigned team activities within required courses. Peer- and self-assessments are conducted through CATME SMARTER Teamwork program. The EI assessment will be re-administered at the end of LA to assess change in EI. A survey asked students to address the value and relevance of the GiANT Worldwide tools, how often they used the tools, and if they had taught a tool to someone else. Findings: On average, students scored lower in assertiveness, stress tolerance, emotional expression and independence in comparison to all of the areas assessed. The lowest composite scores were self-expression and stress management. Students indicated that they find the GiANT Worldwide tools valuable and relevant. Summary: There are specific areas of focus within EI where we can continue to build skills in selfexpression and stress management. Students tailor their personal growth in EI by setting SMART goals at the beginning of the program and continually reassess throughout the program.
Background and purpose With the addition of leadership and professional development to the Accreditation Council on Pharmacy Education (ACPE) Standards, colleges of pharmacy have been challenged to add curricular and co-curricular content to their programs.1 While colleges may take a variety of approaches to teaching future pharmacists about leadership and professional development, it is also important to assess the impact of such training. A 2019 study by Ward and colleagues2 identified motivation, critical thinking, emotional intelligence (EI), core competencies, and work-life balance as significant contributors to the success of pharmacists. In 2015, Nelson et al.3 recommended that colleges of pharmacy add EI-related competencies to their curriculum. This builds upon previously published reports that EI may be a possible predictor of academic and professional success.4 Maxwell and colleagues5 demonstrated a positive impact on self-awareness by improvement in self-perception scores through the implementation of a Birkman Method training program. There have been published studies evaluating leadership and professional development programs in colleges of
⁎
Corresponding author. E-mail address: [email protected] (K. Brittain).
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cptl.2019.12.012
1877-1297/ © 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Please cite this article as: Kristy Brittain, Alan Spies and Cathy Worrall, Currents in Pharmacy Teaching and Learning, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cptl.2019.12.012
Currents in Pharmacy Teaching and Learning xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx
K. Brittain, et al.
Table 1 Matriculation demographics for the Class of 2021 (cohort 1). Demographic Age (years) Gender Grade point average (4.0 scale) Ethnicity Race
Degree
Mean n = 77 (%) Female Male Cumulative Key Hispanic or Latino Not Hispanic Asian Asian & White Black/African American Black/African American & American Indian/Alaska Native International Undeclared White No degree Associates Bachelors Masters
23.12 57 (74%) 20 (26%) 3.41 3.54 5 (6%) 72 (94%) 10 (13%) 1 (1.3%) 5 (6.5%) 1 (1.3%) 2 (2.5%) 1 (1.3%) 57 (74%) 20 (26%) 2 (2.5%) 53 (69%) 2 (2.5%)
pharmacy on EI, however these programs were elective courses.2,6 No studies have evaluated the impact of a program offered to all students as part of a curricular or required co-curricular program. The intent of our required co-curricular program is to introduce leadership and communication concepts early in the curriculum, build facilitation and communication skills of students as they progress in their development, and evaluate changes in EI at the conclusion of the two-year program. Leader Academy (LA) at the Medical University of South Carolina's (MUSC) College of Pharmacy started in fall 2017. LA is a cocurricular initiative that introduces and builds on communication skills, in addition to fostering leadership skills and offering professional development. Based on the principles of 5 Voices (Know Yourself to Lead Yourself to Lead Others) and 5 Gears (How to be Both Present and Productive), resources and tools offered by the international GiANT Worldwide Company are utilized.7 At their foundational core, these resources are theoretically grounded in both self-awareness and emotional intelligence, areas in which growth can be fostered throughout one's lifetime. In additional, a common leadership language is implemented (similar to the common language used in any profession) as this helps lower walls of self-preservation between facilitator and participant. LA started during orientation for first-year pharmacy students in the Class of 2021 (cohort 1). Students (n = 78) were grouped in teams of 5–6 students who participated in a self-assessment of the 5 Voices program. Student teams were formed utilizing the CATME TeamMaker© function utilizing gender, race, age, leadership role, leadership preference and big picture/detail-orientation questions.8 Matriculation demographics for the Class of 2021 are found in Table 1. There are five leadership voices that comprise our daily behaviors and tendencies, thereby impacting (both positively and negatively) communication and interaction with others. The 5 Voices include: pioneer, connector, guardian, creative and nurturer. The 5 Voices are based, in the empirical research from Myers-Briggs Theory and its 16 representative subtypes.7 Though very powerful, the Myers-Briggs Theory Step II instrument requires extensive time in order to process and apply, especially as it relates to team building and communication. For that reason, the 5 Voices assessment was selected as it provides a simpler model, making it easier to understand and apply. The 5 Voices self-assessment produces a report that ranks each participant's five voices in order of ease of accessibility. A brief synopsis of each voice:
• Pioneer – Champion of results and forward progress • Connector – Champion of relationships and strategic partnerships • Guardian – Champion of responsibility and stewardship • Creative –Champion of innovation and future-oriented thinking • Nurturer – Champion of people and relational harmony Educational activity and setting During orientation, the students participated in a three hour session. The students completed a 5 Voices self-assessment, which involved ranking each of the voices in relation to those they most closely related with and used naturally. The facilitator then presented pertinent information about each voice, including what each voice brings at its best and potential negative impacts (blind spots) of each voice. This session provided an orientation to the 5 Voices concepts. All future sessions of the LA program build on this foundational information so as to provide further discussions and activities for applying this information. The college utilized faculty, pharmacy residents and Phi Lambda Sigma (PLS) collegiate members to serve as facilitators for each team. The facilitators were responsible for learning a new “tool” each month by watching brief videos (5–40 min). Then via a web2
Currents in Pharmacy Teaching and Learning xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx
K. Brittain, et al.
Table 2 Monthly topics for Leader Academy 1.0. Month
Topic
August September October November January February March
Orientation – introduction to 5 voices & 5 gears How to bring support and challenge to those you lead Know yourself to lead yourself Five gears of productivity and power of medium (effective methods of communication) Cracking the communication code & discussion of EQi-2.0 results (emotional intelligence assessment) Push and pull (assertive vs. responsive) Self–preservation and impact on the team
based conference call, the GiANT Consultant helped identify how to discuss and utilize the tool (see Table 2) within individuals assigned to the small groups. The following week, the facilitator met in-person with their respective student team for one hour to discuss the tool, employing an approach similar to patient counseling as the facilitators would ask questions of group members, thereby drawing out their insights. This allowed real-world application of content in the context of a safe environment for group discussion. Other core components of the program included an EI assessment (EQi2.0).8 Two faculty were trained to administer the EQi2.0 for Higher Education© assessment. This is a reliable and valid assessment that can longitudinally track quantitative growth in EI factors. Though there are many EI resources available (e.g., Emotional Intelligence 2.0 by Bradberry), the EQi2.0 was selected as its multiple factors provided greater insight into specific areas for growth. Furthermore, this robust instrument provided a personalized, visual report for participants to utilize as they began to set SMART goals for their personal development. Lastly, the GiANT tools implemented throughout this program provided simple, tangible next steps that were mapped to each sub-scale, thus allowing for an easier path to desired growth. The EQi2.0 for Higher Education© compares students' results to other students enrolled in higher education.8 Therefore, this assessment targets emotional and social functioning and its impact on a student's academic, professional and personal development. The EQi2.0 provides an individualized report for each student. This report includes an overall EI score, composite scores and individual sub-scale scores. The composite areas and associated sub-scales include stress management (flexibility, stress tolerance, optimism), self-perception (self-regard, self-actualization, emotional self-awareness), self-expression (emotional expression, assertiveness, independence), interpersonal (interpersonal relationships, empathy, social responsibility) and decision-making (problem solving, reality testing, impulse control). The results are presented in the form of a quantitative score with a corresponding range of low (< 90), medium (90–110) and high (> 110). All reporting and testing is conducted within the MultiHealth Systems (MHS) assessment portal.7 Students were provided their EQi2.0 results and participated in an overview session of EI that broke down each of the components of the report. At the conclusion, students were asked to address specific areas (composite and/or sub-scale) and set SMART goals that could be tracked over the next two years. In addition, students worked in the same teams during two courses: Introduction to Pharmacy (fall 2017) and Self-Care and Complementary Medicines (spring 2018). During each course, students completed in-class, team-based activities including two outof-class projects per course. Students completed peer- and self-assessments during each course utilizing the CATME system.9 At the completion of the fall semester, overall general feedback from the students was used to identify content that would help them grow and subsequently was then incorporated into each monthly LA meeting. Facilitators conducted monthly feedback sessions and discussed on-going operations of the program with the program directors. In year two of this program, the now P2 students (cohort 1) are facilitating LA 1.0 for the P1 class (cohort 2). The advantage of this program and its tools is that they are easily taught to others. In addition to facilitating the P1 LA, the P2 students (cohort 1) continue to meet with an individual facilitator (faculty, pharmacy resident, PLS collegiate member) during their P2 year so as to learn additional skills and tools to enhance their own leadership and professional development. This allows the college to continue to integrate leadership and professional development training throughout the curriculum, thereby helping to meet ACPE - Standard 4, specifically as LA provides multiple, intentional opportunities for students to begin the process of reflection as they develop a lifelong process of continuing personal development.1 Findings The initial EQi2.0 assessments were administered in fall 2017. Student specific scores were extracted from individual student reports and de-identified. Overall student emotional intelligence data was analyzed using descriptive statistics. Table 3 outlines each composite, individual attributes and scores for the class of 2021 (cohort 1). Sub-scale scores are used to calculate the composite score. The investigators reviewed all composite and sub-scale scores to identify those areas with the lowest score average. On average, students scored lowest in the sub-scale areas of assertiveness (97), stress tolerance (100), emotional expression (100) and independence (101). The lowest overall composite scores were self-expression (100) and stress management (101). Despite identifying specific areas of lower scoring, it should be noted that all averages are considered mid-range (medium). Additionally, individual student reports were flagged utilizing the MHS assessments portal. MHS assessments utilize a report flagging system to indicate individuals who may benefit from additional intervention. This included results for students that are outside of the normalized range set by MHS. These students were offered additional in-person counseling and review of their reports. The EQi2.0 will be administered again to the same cohort of students in the spring of 2019. At that time we will be able to analyze 3
Currents in Pharmacy Teaching and Learning xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx
K. Brittain, et al.
Table 3 EQi2.0 student EI baseline scores (cohort 1). Composite and score (Mean ± SD)
Individual attribute score
Score (mean ± SD)
Self-perception 105 ( ± 13)
Self-regarda Self-actualizationa Emotional self-awareness Emotional expression Assertiveness Independence Interpersonal relationshipsa Empathy Social responsibility Problem solving Reality testing Impulse control Flexibility Stress tolerance Optimisma
104 ( ± 13) 105 ( ± 12) 102 ( ± 14) 100 ( ± 15) 97 ( ± 15) 101 ( ± 15) 102 ( ± 13) 106 ( ± 13) 105 ( ± 11) 102 ( ± 13) 103 ( ± 12) 103 ( ± 16) 102 ( ± 17) 100 ( ± 13) 102 ( ± 12) 105 ( ± 13) 104 ( ± 12)
Self-expression 100 ( ± 14) Interpersonal composite 105 ( ± 11) Decision making composite 104 ( ± 13) Stress management 101 ( ± 12) Well-being indicator Total emotional intelligence
EQi2.0 scale: low-range < 90; mid-range 90–110; high-range > 110. a Individual attributes that contribute to well-being indicator.
the change in EI scores from first-professional (P1) year to the end of the second professional (P2) year, during which time students will have completed both LA 1.0 and LA 2.0. Cohort 1 students were surveyed at the conclusion of LA 1.0 (spring 2018). An anonymous survey asked students to address the value and relevance of the GiANT Worldwide tools introduced, how often they used the tools and if they had taught a tool to someone else. The survey also asked students to indicate the effectiveness of the facilitator in their growth. Survey results are documented in Table 4. A majority of students (94.5%) agreed or strongly agreed that the tools used in the program were valuable. Most of the students (95.9%) felt that the tools were relevant to their life. However, students indicated that they were less likely to have used the tools regularly and/or taught the tools to someone else. Most of the students (95.9%) agreed that their facilitators helped them grow throughout the program. Discussion LA provides a novel approach for students to build both leadership and communication skills starting in the first-year of the professional curriculum. Students indicate that they find the tools valuable and relevant to their life. The group facilitator approach has allowed the students to not only grow throughout the program but also has helped empower the students to take a greater role in their own personal development. The layered model involving co-curricular team activities paired with in-class curricular team activities allows the students to apply the skills they are learning in real time within their teams. This design also allows course instructors and co-curricular instructors to assess peer-assessment data (from CATME) and subsequently design discussions with specific tools based on areas in which the student teams are struggling. LA 2.0 will build on cohort one's ability to facilitate discussion around the tools with the subsequent expectation to teach others the tools. This enhancement to the program will address the fact that students indicated that they were less likely to have used the tools regularly and/or taught the tools to someone else. EI data will also be used longitudinally to assess the cohort of students over time, starting with the initial assessment in the first year compared to the assessment at the completion of the second year. Baseline EI data has been helpful to note that as a whole the class does not have primary areas of low emotional intelligence scoring. However, baseline EI data has highlighted students who may be struggling in one or more of the specific composite areas or sub-scales. There are specific areas of focus where we can continue to build skills in self-expression (emotional expression, assertiveness and independence) and stress management (flexibility, stress tolerance and optimism). Students will also track their individual growth in EI by monitoring their SMART goals. Table 4 Leader Academy 1.0 (cohort 1) end-of-year survey (n = 74).
I find the tools valuable. The tools are relevant to my life. I use the tools regularly. I have taught a tool to someone else. The facilitators have helped me grow.
Strongly agree n (%)
Agree n (%)
Disagree n (%)
Strongly disagree n (%)
28 47 10 10 46
42 24 44 36 25
4 (5.4) 3 (4) 19 (25.6) 26 (35.1) 3 (4.1)
0 0 1 2 0
(37.8) (63.5) (13.5) (13.5) (62.1)
4
(56.7) (32.4) (59.4) (48.6) (33.8)
(0) (0) (1.4) (2.7) (0)
Currents in Pharmacy Teaching and Learning xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx
K. Brittain, et al.
Summary Overall, the facilitators saw significant growth in team interactions and communication within the teams. While some of the students did not believe they learned anything from the experience, it was apparent that their behaviors had changed significantly throughout the experience. This evidence is based on both self and peer evaluation. That being said, it is often a challenge to understand and see one's personal growth in these specific areas that may change slowly over time. For that reason, this initiative extends beyond a single year as lasting development occurs over time. When it comes to personal development, more is not necessarily better. Adult learners of today are informationally overloaded and time poor. Therefore, a simple model is needed that will stick, leading to more lasting personal transformation. Lastly, given the pace of health-care (and society), adult learners of today require something they can immediately apply. This model captures all these key ingredients in that it is simple, scalable and sustainable. As such, it is the authors' hope this model can be shared with our profession as we continue to meet the challenges in advancing our profession. Author statement Author verification occurred prior to implementation of requiring an Author statement. Disclosure(s) When this study was conducted, Alan Spies served as Professor and Kennedy Chair at the Kennedy Pharmacy Innovation Center at the University of South Carolina College of Pharmacy. Declaration of competing interest None. References 1. Accreditation Standards and Key Elements for the Professional Program in Pharmacy Leading to the Doctor of Pharmacy Degree. Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education. https://www.acpe-accredit.org/pdf/Standards2016FINAL.pdf. Published February 2015. Accessed 4 December 2019. 2. Ward A, Hall J, Mutch J, Cheung L, Cor MK, Charrois TL. What makes pharmacists successful? An investigation of personal characteristics. J Am Pharm Assoc. 2019;59(1):23–29 (2003). e1. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.japh.2018.09.001. 3. Nelson MH, Fierke KK, Sucher BJ, Janke KK. Including emotional intelligence in pharmacy curricular to help achieve CAPE outcomes. Am J Pharm Educ. 2015;79(4) https://doi.org/10.5688/ajpe79448. 4. Romanelli F, Cain F, Smith KM. Emotional intelligence as a predictor of academic and/or professional success. Am J Pharm Educ. 2006;70(3) https://doi.org/10. 5688/aj700369. 5. Maxwell WD, Grant AD, Fabel PH, et al. Impact of the Birkman method assessment on pharmacy student self-confidence, self-perceptions, and self-awareness. Am J Pharm Educ. 2016;80(9) https://doi.org/10.5688/ajpe809148. 6. Smith MJ, Wilson J, George DL, Laster K, Filippo C, Spies A. Emotional intelligence scores among three cohorts of pharmacy students before and after completing the University of Oklahoma College of Pharmacy’s leadership degree option program. Curr Pharm Teach Learn. 2018;10(7):911–917. 7. GiANT Worldwide. https://giantworldwide.com Accessed 4 December 2019. 8. Multi-Health Systems (MHS) Inc. The EQi 2.0 Model. https://legacytap.mhs.com/EQi20.aspx Accessed 4 December 2019. 9. CATME SMARTER Teamwork. https://info.catme.org/ Accessed 4 December 2019.
5