Nutrition for Pharmacists Education Program:

Program Planning Analysis and Critique By: Lap Kei Chan EDER631.06
Program Overview Designed and presented as a education program for pharmacy managers at an Ontario-based pharmacy chain Full day, live presentations from dieticians and pharmacists, outsourced from the Ontario Pharmacists Association (OPA) Held during the annual general meeting at a local hotel conference area Self-administered post-test with results sent to a third party for certification Mandatory attendance for all pharmacy managers Context & support Upper management decision to equip all pharmacists with ability to answer nutritionrelated questions A means to increase business, by differentiating services from other chains and to keep up with increased competition Lack of consultation with user groups Power dynamics is evident, and ethics of restricted access No consultation with learners Restricted access, based on position rather than by learning need or interests Availability only to managers, mostly due to cost & convenience due to coinciding with managers meeting Attendance mandatory, unable to refuse Transfer of Learning Plans Assumed very standard patient populations, with similar interests and food requirements. No ethnic food discussions, or cultural requirements No plans were made for transfer of learning practice/application post-program, nor were comfort with application assessed/coached; it was assumed that transfer would occur naturally No follow-up assistance would be offered post-program except for a binder of presentation slides from the day Few transfer of learning techniques used even though learners expressed confusion with purpose of program and no clear ways to support learners with application in practice Evaluation Plans Evaluation of the program was limited to a feedback survey of speakers after the fact Data was collected but no plans were made to analyze them beyond making a report about user satisfaction Could have used various techniques to improve program planning, delivery, and achieving learner outcomes Evaluation of the learning was done via an online, openbook multiple choice test after the program. It assessed basic knowledge and some application of the knowledge to case scenarios Learning evaluation was used for certification purposes Program Objectives & Instructional Plans Main program objective was taken to be to enable pharmacists to be knowledgeable about nutritional counselling at a basic level Other program objective was to allow company to market nutrition services by trained pharmacists Management met with OPA to give general direction of objectives; OPA were asked use their network to gather qualified speakers and compile a program. Individual presenters were asked to present on a few topics. Each presenter worked on their own individual topic/presentation. They were given free reign on what they felt were important, how to present, and to what questions were included on the post-test no unifying theme Head office did not provide feedback except on a final read through of the material It was assumed that all learners have the background to understand nutritional evidence; no assessment was done about learner needs, cultural or past experiences Communications of Results Upper management reviewed the speaker evaluations and filed the data for future reference There was little interest in analyzing the data & modifying the program based on quality improvement Data shared with speakers & OPA for their own internal QA Learner test data was received to ensure everyone had completed the program as directed. Neither set of data was disseminated to store level staff, nor was specific points discussed with regards to the program Format, Schedules, Staff Needs Program was held entirely within a full day sitting to coincide with the annual managers meeting for cost & least disruption to store level operations Captive audience Facilities already reserved in advance, group discounts available for venue The format was a large group, mostly didactic lecture style with PowerPoint presentations, designed and delivered by a series of presenters following a number of set topics Easiest to arrange Least technical & logistical issues to work through Most comfortable format for presenters to work with learners of unknown backgrounds & experiences Lack of active learning, participation limited, may not be suitable for all learner types Staffing & Budgets Hotel staff would be responsible for catering, food and other hospitality related needs Management hired OPA for the program, who contracted out external consultants & speakers who were given the task of developing each lesson module, and the presentation itself. These speakers were a mix of pharmacists, physicians and dieticians Budgets were inclusive based on a set fee claimed by OPA and were negotiated in advance Overruns were not expected in either hotel or OPA, as an overall package was considered Costs were considered as investing in potential future services to be provided to customers. No projections were made how these services would play out. Marketing Since this was an internal program, all managers were informed that this program was being held during their stay at the managers meeting via interoffice emails. No details about the program were given to any participants beforehand. Management felt that this was unnecessary, as no preparation and no cost was required on the part of participants. Learners were unsure of what to expect in terms of process or content Importance of the program was only communicated in brief beforehand, and more in detail during the program date. Very little customer-oriented focused marketing Event coordination Two Head office representatives were designated program coordinators to deal with ensuring deadlines met, directing various stakeholders, payments, booking of equipment, etc. Most of the event hosting was coordinated through the hotel staff. Audio/Visual set up Table set up Registration was piggy-backed onto managers conference details which already had prepared lists, protocols, etc.

Summary Management needs to balance business interests with learner goals and access to program Learners should be consulted on content, experience, backgrounds and be linked to creation of the instruction plan or transfer of learning plans Program (instruction plan, evaluations, transfer) should be more specific to intended audience, with corresponding techniques used to optimize learning & transfer Access to program should be more open Format of program & marketing should allow learners to make informed decisions and take advantage of learning opportunities Feedback and evaluation planning should be more robust

Program Ideas, Sorting & Prioritization Consultations were held with the OPA who represented the presenters about program ideas, but no discussions were held with learner groups Ideas were fairly high level; topics were not planned to be specific to pharmacist practice Little time was spent on prioritization; left mainly up to OPA (content organizers) to figure it out. Priorities were never clarified beyond that of the companys interests (e.g. increased services leading to sales). It was assumed that individuals would be able to come up with uses of the info on their own. Expectation that learners will apply learning to some yet-to-be-determined clinical initiative