(235) National Survey to Assess Pharmaceutical Sciences Graduate Students’ Professional Development Needs

Primary Author(s)

Natalie S. Hohmann, PharmD, PhD

Assisstant Professor
Auburn University
Auburn, Alabama, United States

Co-Author(s)

MB

Marie Barnard, PhD

Associate Professor
University of Mississippi, United States
AC

Ana Castejon

Associate Dean of Graduate Programs
Nova Southeastern University, United States
TF

Theresa Filtz

Associate Dean of Academic Programs
Oregon State University, United States
TW

Terri Warholak

Dean
St. Louis College of Pharmacy, United States
TW

Taylor Watterson

Post-doctoral Fellow
University of Wisconsin-Madison, United States

Objective : To inform program development, the AACP Graduate Education Special Interest Group Colleagues in Training Committee (CITC) investigated professional development needs of pharmaceutical sciences graduate students.

Methods: A cross-sectional electronic survey was fielded from May to June, 2022. The 22-item survey was developed by CITC, pre-tested for content and face validity, and contained questions related to preferred programming topics and format, mentoring needs, and career goals. A survey invitation was posted on AACP Connect and emailed to Graduate Program Officers and Assistant Deans for Research at US pharmacy schools/colleges. Eligible respondents were trainees enrolled in US pharmaceutical sciences Master’s, PhD, or post-doc programs. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics.

Results: A total of 108 responses were analyzed. Most participants were white (51%), 34% Asian, 4% African-American or Black, and 3% Hispanic/Latino(a). Most were female (58%), with mean age 30 years (SD=6.05 years). The majority were PhD students (84%) majoring in Basic Sciences (60%) or Economic, Social, and Administrative Sciences (ESAS, 24%). Preferred programming topics included: overview of career options (72%), how to get a job in pharmaceutical/biotech companies (67%), and resume/CV development (65%). While 85% of participants reported that they had a major advisor, only 17% had a written mentorship contract. Additional mentorship sources included other faculty members, senior students, and working professionals. Forty-four percent planned careers in pharmaceutical/biotech companies, 27% academia, and 10% government agencies.

Conclusions: Future programming may prioritize strategies for pharmaceutical sciences graduate students to decide what career is the right fit and developing job application materials. Beyond AACP programming, the results are relevant for graduate school curricula as well as designing and implementing individualized development programs targeting soft skills training.