Do you think they should require a minimum amount of schooling to get in?

[crossurfingers]

I don't mean pre-requisite wise. Some schools I know of have programs where you can basically apply right out of high school and after you take 2 years of pre-requisites you're automatically in. They don't even have to take the PCAT. Don't get me wrong, these students who have gotten in this way are capable of handling pharmacy school, but I feel that they should pay their dues more somehow. It doesn't seem right to me to be able to earn a doctoral degree without even being close to finishing a bachelor's and I think because of it people tend to look down on the PharmD degree because it's not even considered a graduate degree.

I think the requirements for pharmacy school should be more like the requirements for medical school (which requires at least 3 years at university level regardless if you complete a bachelor's degree earlier). Students should have a minimum of 3 years undergraduate schooling.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[PharmDr.]

I agree. Whether people want to admit it or not, there is a notion that more education = more respect. I have to disagree to a point cause I respect everyone the same at first whether they have a phd in biochemistry or if they have an associates in nursing. I dont know much about the "real world" of healthcare, but it seems as though "paying your dues" is also an integral part of the ego heads. You can go on and on about the diff. in school you went to, degree, and even what classes you took. But what does this solve? Be confident in yourself and your abilities and that is all to it. There will always be someone who is smarter, has more degrees, makes more money, etc. It is you guys who are the ones who are going to change the future of pharmacy practice and the "respect" given towards your doctorate. I work in a large hospital as a pharm tech and observe how "the world revolves inside its doors".The pharmacists get respect b/c they are hardworking, knowledgeble, and are not ego blinded. Heck..the nurses and doctors are all very nice and treat me and my minimal education like it was on par. I am there to learn and they are willing to teach me. A "thank you" and "down to earth" approach will get a person further today. Wow...I got to stop rambling. Take care

Jon N. CPhT.

 

[GaPharmGirl09]

I disagree. As long as you have the pre-reqs needed, why should you have to have three years of undergrad. I went to a community college. The first year I completed the pharmacy tech program. I am certified and have been working for the last two years, first in big retail chain pharm and now in independent pharm. After beginning the tech program, I soon realized I wanted to be a pharmacist. I just completed my 2 years of pre-reqs (gpa 3.9) and will be going to pharm school in Fall '05. Am I any less qualified to be a pharmacist than the person I'll be sitting next to next fall? I may just have to work a little harder in some of my classes than the next guy, but I'm just as qualified when I get out as him and will be no less qualified when I graduate than he is. We, after all, will be taking the same classes and the same test for licenses.

JMHO

 

[OSURxgirl]

It's not just a question of academic preparation, but also one of maturity. Without asking, you can pick out the people in my pharmacy class who did 2 years of pre-reqs from those who finished a bachelor's degree. In my state they had to change the intern licensure laws because a 6 year school (university of toledo) was issuing intern licenses to students in their pre-req years, meaning that 18 and 19 year olds were working as interns and taking verbal prescriptions over the phone. It's also a question of diversity of experiences. I would argue that someone who has taken a wider variety of courses, gotten a degree, possibly a minor, and has had more time for extracurriculars and volunteering and has maybe done some research is going to be a more well-rounded person. The well-rounded person is going to relate better to patients and possibly be a better pharmacist. I'm not saying it's impossible to be well-rounded if you do the 6 year route, but if you do it this way, there's not much time to do anything else but pharmacy. If we want to be a respected profession like medicine and dentistry, we need to consider modeling their educational processes. My school is heading toward this trend--70% of my first year class has a bachelor's degree.

 

[pharmaz88]

It's not just a question of academic preparation, but also one of maturity. Without asking, you can pick out the people in my pharmacy class who did 2 years of pre-reqs from those who finished a bachelor's degree. In my state they had to change the intern licensure laws because a 6 year school (university of toledo) was issuing intern licenses to students in their pre-req years, meaning that 18 and 19 year olds were working as interns and taking verbal prescriptions over the phone. It's also a question of diversity of experiences. I would argue that someone who has taken a wider variety of courses, gotten a degree, possibly a minor, and has had more time for extracurriculars and volunteering and has maybe done some research is going to be a more well-rounded person. The well-rounded person is going to relate better to patients and possibly be a better pharmacist. I'm not saying it's impossible to be well-rounded if you do the 6 year route, but if you do it this way, there's not much time to do anything else but pharmacy. If we want to be a respected profession like medicine and dentistry, we need to consider modeling their educational processes. My school is heading toward this trend--70% of my first year class has a bachelor's degree.

 

[GaPharmGirl09]

It's not just a question of academic preparation, but also one of maturity.

A four year degree does not automatically equal maturity. Life experiences plays a larger role in maturity than education.

In my state they had to change the intern licensure laws because a 6 year school (university of toledo) was issuing intern licenses to students in their pre-req years, meaning that 18 and 19 year olds were working as interns and taking verbal prescriptions over the phone.

There are many certified techs that are 18 that are qualified to take RX over the phone. It's not an age thing, it's a qualification issue. In our state, you cannot be an intern until you actually go to class as a P1. Kudos to your state for changing the laws.

It's also a question of diversity of experiences. I would argue that someone who has taken a wider variety of courses, gotten a degree, possibly a minor, and has had more time for extracurriculars and volunteering and has maybe done some research is going to be a more well-rounded person. The well-rounded person is going to relate better to patients and possibly be a better pharmacist.

Again life experiences play a huge role in diversity of experiences. I am 40, mother of three, married, work full time, volunteer with my children's activities, active in school organizations, experienced CPhT, have only two years of pre-reqs, don't even have an associates degree, but am as well-rounded as the next person. I feel I'll be able to relate well to patients, not because of my undergrad studies, but because of my life experiences.

If we want to be a respected profession like medicine and dentistry, we need to consider modeling their educational processes.

I think our profession is respected and well trusted. We continually rank VERY high in the trust category. I personally don't have the desire to be equated to doctors or dentists. I have no desire to be called Dr. I do desire to improve the quality of life for the patients I care for. I feel that my education and experiences beyond my education will allow me to do that.

My school is heading toward this trend--70% of my first year class has a bachelor's degree.

I do feel that as the competition to be admitted into pharmacy school continues to increase, you will see the class percentages (of students with BS degree) will increase. My class has less than 50% with a 4-year degree, but more than the year before. I still believe that there should be consideration of the whole person, not just the degree they begin with. A minimum 6-year degree is adequate IMHO.

 

[VCU07]

Finishing up my second year of pharmacy school I have noticed a few things. The majority of our class does have prior BS or BA degrees (incl. myself)...they tend to be better off than those students who came out with two yrs (of course there are exceptions). However, I do agree that it is a matter of respect and maturity. After all, a 80 yr old patient comes into a pharmacy with a 21 year of pharmacist working, what are the majority of them going to think? As I have stated in previous threads community practice will not continue on they way it is going forever. We need to be at the same educational level as other health care providers. That way they cannot look down upon us and more importantly to move our profession into a more clincal role. Also, with a prior degree students can come into pharmacy school taking more advanced classes; allowing us to learn more during our four years. There is much more I could say, but I have a final in an hour.

I disagree. As long as you have the pre-reqs needed, why should you have to have three years of undergrad. I went to a community college. The first year I completed the pharmacy tech program. I am certified and have been working for the last two years, first in big retail chain pharm and now in independent pharm. After beginning the tech program, I soon realized I wanted to be a pharmacist. I just completed my 2 years of pre-reqs (gpa 3.9) and will be going to pharm school in Fall '05. Am I any less qualified to be a pharmacist than the person I'll be sitting next to next fall? I may just have to work a little harder in some of my classes than the next guy, but I'm just as qualified when I get out as him and will be no less qualified when I graduate than he is. We, after all, will be taking the same classes and the same test for licenses.

JMHO

 

[VCU07]

Pharmacy is a changing profession and I hope students do research into it before applying to pharmacy school hoping to make a crap load of money to just stand behind a counter. (look at other threads on change)

A four year degree does not automatically equal maturity. Life experiences plays a larger role in maturity than education.



There are many certified techs that are 18 that are qualified to take RX over the phone. It's not an age thing, it's a qualification issue. In our state, you cannot be an intern until you actually go to class as a P1. Kudos to your state for changing the laws.



Again life experiences play a huge role in diversity of experiences. I am 40, mother of three, married, work full time, volunteer with my children's activities, active in school organizations, experienced CPhT, have only two years of pre-reqs, don't even have an associates degree, but am as well-rounded as the next person. I feel I'll be able to relate well to patients, not because of my undergrad studies, but because of my life experiences.



I think our profession is respected and well trusted. We continually rank VERY high in the trust category. I personally don't have the desire to be equated to doctors or dentists. I have no desire to be called Dr. I do desire to improve the quality of life for the patients I care for. I feel that my education and experiences beyond my education will allow me to do that.




I do feel that as the competition to be admitted into pharmacy school continues to increase, you will see the class percentages (of students with BS degree) will increase. My class has less than 50% with a 4-year degree, but more than the year before. I still believe that there should be consideration of the whole person, not just the degree they begin with. A minimum 6-year degree is adequate IMHO.

 

[emogrrrrl]

It's not just a question of academic preparation, but also one of maturity. Without asking, you can pick out the people in my pharmacy class who did 2 years of pre-reqs from those who finished a bachelor's degree. In my state they had to change the intern licensure laws because a 6 year school (university of toledo) was issuing intern licenses to students in their pre-req years, meaning that 18 and 19 year olds were working as interns and taking verbal prescriptions over the phone. It's also a question of diversity of experiences. I would argue that someone who has taken a wider variety of courses, gotten a degree, possibly a minor, and has had more time for extracurriculars and volunteering and has maybe done some research is going to be a more well-rounded person. The well-rounded person is going to relate better to patients and possibly be a better pharmacist. I'm not saying it's impossible to be well-rounded if you do the 6 year route, but if you do it this way, there's not much time to do anything else but pharmacy. If we want to be a respected profession like medicine and dentistry, we need to consider modeling their educational processes. My school is heading toward this trend--70% of my first year class has a bachelor's degree.

I completely agree with you.

 

[PharmDr.]

I think a bacc degree is needed for pharmacy just like other professional programs. Yes, you can matriculate into those programs with 3 yrs of schooling, but it is over 90% that have bacc.(med,dent,pod,opt). I have to agree that age does not always correlate with maturity, but there are exceptions to everything in life. I have to think that more students with degrees entering pharm school will bring better practitioners. I am not saying that those without degrees will not be good pharmacists, but having a degree does not hurt any. More education is a good thing. Having those extra yrs of school in gives students more time to think about thier career choices and they are older, so they can make more mature decisions. This would cause less pharmacists to dislike their job and thus have better PharmD's.

Jon N. CPhT.

 

[kellia]

i think that schools will soon change their policy about admission and require a B.S. i think that this is a good thing for the student and for the school. it shows the student what type of haul they are in for in pharmacy school, and it shows the school that the student is dedicated to their education. either way, it is a win-win situation. not only does the student have the opportunity to earn a degree, but they do mature in that time period and will realize what it is that they truly want out of life. i don't know about anyone else, but while attending undergrad, i changed my major three times. there are not many 18 year olds out there that actually KNOW what they want to do. upping the requirements is a good idea.

 

[ultracet]

pharmacy schools will not officially change the requirement because what is going on now is just a fad. it will not last...
and in the future when we no longer need all of these pharmacists and no one really is DYING to go to pharmacy school it would be harder to drop the requirments back..

i do think it will be an unsaid rule of BS weighted more though

 

[rLee1106]

No offense to anyone here, but a B.S. won't gain jack. Those who do go to a 4 year undergrad go because 1) they don't know what the hell they want to major in or what career they would like to pursue 2) they like to flip-flop majors 49 times and 3) they just want to take it easy and "mature" if you "call it" and "party" during those 4 years to "figure out" what they "want to do." A Pharm.D. is a Pharm.D. Go to a pharmacy school, pass the Pharmacy Board Exam. If you do plan to "work behind the counter" although residency, in my opinion, should be done...people aren't going to ask you, "hey...do you have a 4 yr. B.S. degree?" As long as you have that Pharm.D. license to practice and you know what the hell you're doing, than great! That's enough! All this talk about "go to 4 year of undergrad, then 4 more years of pharmacy, and another year of residency" is bull. If you're unsure about pharmacy..than take that path. If you're sure about pharmacy, then go for 5 or 6 yr program. Just because one has more "education" does not equate "maturity" or being "well-rounded." And doing your pre-req. for 2-3 years doesn't only require math & science courses...there are also GE courses in there...so to be "well-rounded" is such an overstatement. The End.

 

[bananaface]

I think more writing coursework is important. My classmates who did prereqs only seem to be poorer writers.

 

[WVUPharm2007]

Wow. It's actually the opposite at my school. The people who only did the 2 years of pre-reqs are the ones that sit in the front of the class, are members of Rho Chi, and stand out as 'professional.' The older folks seem to be the ones that lag behind or are just there because pharmacy was their 'backup' to med school.

 

[ultracet]

Wow. It's actually the opposite at my school. The people who only did the 2 years of pre-reqs are the ones that sit in the front of the class, are members of Rho Chi, and stand out as 'professional.' The older folks seem to be the ones that lag behind or are just there because pharmacy was their 'backup' to med school.

wow ... yeah we don't have any of those back up to med school people in my class...

 

[bananaface]

My school has no back up med ppl. The AdCom screens carefully. We also have no smokers....

 

[crossurfingers]

One of my classmates actually got into Northwestern University's med school and declined for pharmacy school. I thought that was really surprising.

No smokers? Wow.. probably at least 1/4 of our class smokes.

 

[dgroulx]

I think it will be inevitable that a 4-year degree will be necessary to get you into pharmacy school. There are too many applicants and something has to give. You don't have to have a 4-year degree to apply to medical school, but how many people get in that don't have one? Pharmacy will be the same within a few years.

The hardest classes I took in undergrad were my senior level science classes. We were required to learn the material, write research papers using medical resources and prepare power point presentations. This gave me good preparation for pharmacy school. There's a world of difference between Biology I and upper division classes.

 

[Mags]

My school has no back up med ppl. The AdCom screens carefully. We also have no smokers....

yes we do.. i know who
(back up med pp)

 

[JackBeanstalk]

No offense to anyone here, but a B.S. won't gain jack. Those who do go to a 4 year undergrad go because 1) they don't know what the hell they want to major in or what career they would like to pursue 2) they like to flip-flop majors 49 times and 3) they just want to take it easy and "mature" if you "call it" and "party" during those 4 years to "figure out" what they "want to do." A Pharm.D. is a Pharm.D. Go to a pharmacy school, pass the Pharmacy Board Exam. If you do plan to "work behind the counter" although residency, in my opinion, should be done...people aren't going to ask you, "hey...do you have a 4 yr. B.S. degree?" As long as you have that Pharm.D. license to practice and you know what the hell you're doing, than great! That's enough! All this talk about "go to 4 year of undergrad, then 4 more years of pharmacy, and another year of residency" is bull. If you're unsure about pharmacy..than take that path. If you're sure about pharmacy, then go for 5 or 6 yr program. Just because one has more "education" does not equate "maturity" or being "well-rounded." And doing your pre-req. for 2-3 years doesn't only require math & science courses...there are also GE courses in there...so to be "well-rounded" is such an overstatement. The End.

I take it that you don't have a degree? Your first two condescending reasons for going to an undergrad have some validity. I went to a university unsure of what career path I wanted to take and did change my major a couple of times. This is part of the education process and I chose it as such because my other option is to be an auto mechanic. Nothing wrong with that. Your third reason shows your inappreciation for the efforts some of us go through to get to where we are. This coming from an individual who hasn't even walked the path. Party you say, yes, you are right, but also alot of work. Education isn't free, beyond the strive to acheive respectable grades, alot of us also work to pay for our education ourselves. Just the education itself might not make you more mature, but the process in lieu of your education does. 40+ hours a week for four years while still maintaining good grades builds character and I am in no means aberrant. As someone said earlier, you can pick out individuals who don't possess a degree, and you are such a case. I just read your post three times and am still trying to make sense of your bantering.

 

[ultracet]

there is something to be said for experiencing college life....

i mean it was a whole lot better than phamacy school for me...

and no i don't have a degree.. but i did do my undergrad work at a very large party university..... and i had a whole lot more fun then than i do here

 

[pharmer_john]

Interesting discussion, a few thoughts on 6 year programs, (ie. high school entry) that I think are being overlooked:

1) As far as less respect for not having a BS, some of the 6 year programs include a BS confered after year 4, usually achieved by taking the right electives or maybe taking a class or two over the summers. Since most of the student accepted to these programs are top HS students, many have 20-30 hours college credit from HS honors programs that may round out their BS anyway.

2) There are several Med Schools that have been doing the 6 year thing for 30 years or so, I don't see them changing.

3) Several schools that were traditional 3-5 year programs have recently added the 6 year options, seems unlikely they did that only to change again real soon. Many of these programs accept about 25% right out of HS with a guarantee of admit to P1 (3yr for example) if they maintain grades etc. I fail to see how this is any different than taking the pre-reqs and applying. If you are in HS, sure of your choice, and can get accepted why would you not take advantage of this and save yourself the stree of applying later?

4) There is something to be said about "background experiences" one might have if they get a BS before entering Pharm school, but most 6 year programs are on or near major college campus, so they can get some of the same experiences.

5) As I mentioned before HS students, particularly at college-prep HS can earn probably all the credits they need to enter a 4 year program anyway. For instance my cousin started college with 60 hours and pre-admited to law school. Just finished her 2nd year of college, gets her BS, enters law school this fall.

So I don't think 6 year programs are going away. The major down side I see to them is a person really needs to know what they want to do out of HS, and I think it is possible for some people to be that locked in, but that is probably a samll percentage of HS seniors. If you are one of those HS students though, I think its a great option, focused study, PharmD at age 24, we should all be so fortunate.

 

[Anubis84]

I think all it takes to be an excellent pharmacist is a good education and a good personality. It's no different than being a physician or veternarian or optometrist, etc. You need the smarts to get into professional school, and if you can get in, and then finish, and then pass your licensing exam(s), you're in! Whether or not you have a completed undergraduate degree probably bears little relationship to your ability to practice as a competent pharmacist.

HOWEVER, there are a few things having 2 degrees, an undergraduate and a PharmD, do to make your education a little more complete.

First, completing an undergraduate degree creates a safety net for you in case you don't finish your PharmD degree. What happens if, let's say, after 3 years of college and 2 years of pharmacy school, you drop out, for whatever reason? What do you have? Five years of school, 3 undergraduate, and 2 professional, no degree, and lots of debt. If you finish a BS/BA, in whatever discipline, then go on to pharmacy school, at least you will have a BS degree if you drop out of pharmacy school (or get kicked out!).

Second, having a BA/BS degree will more likely than not, but not necessarily, provide you with a sound and eclectic educational base. You'll probably be a better writer, reader, and thinker. You'll have a more well-rounded education outside of the sciences, and will be exposed to more intellectual pursuits while getting your undergraduate degree. True, some of the classes will be "wastes of time and money", but not all. True, you don't need to know that Rembrandt was a painter, not a toothpaste; however, it's a good thing to enhance your intellect rather than just pursue one field.

Third, having a BS and PharmD justifies the PharmD being a professional "doctorate" rather than a first professional degree that is a glorified BS or at best, a master's degree. If you have 7-8 years of schooling, in any field, you deserve the title doctor. If you have 6 years of school, you're at best, equal to a master's degree, in the scheme of things. I know that doesn't mean much, but it sure would make pharmacy consistent with medicine, osteo med, dentistry, vet med, law, podiatry, and even optometry. I think only chiro and PT schools (granting DPT degrees) only require, or allow applicants to have 60-90 credits before entering the professional program.

It might be a pain in the ass, but I think getting a BS/BA first, prior to a PharmD, is a good thing.

Just my thoughts. Yes, I'm only a student, but this is just my opinion.
Jared

 

[ultracet]

plus you can do stuff off of your BS like teaching, masters etc.

by teaching i mean secondary schools

perhaps you could go with more backup plans with a BS??

 

[DrugMan]

As long as there is a demand for pharmacist, the requirements are going to stay the same. Remember, a lot of our pharmacy schools are being sponsored by cooperate-America (retail chains) with the incentive of putting out "well-rounded" pharmacist right away (hence...UOP Thomas J. "LONGS" SOP). Another thing you have to look at is the number of schools opening up across the country and the ones in the planning stages. However, this subject raises major concerns for me as well, but we have to realize that a lot of whats going on in healthcare is very political. As long as competitive applicants are paying tuition...they'll take our money.

 

[ilovepharmacy]

Second, having a BA/BS degree will more likely than not, but not necessarily, provide you with a sound and eclectic educational base. You'll probably be a better writer, reader, and thinker. You'll have a more well-rounded education outside of the sciences, and will be exposed to more intellectual pursuits while getting your undergraduate degree. True, some of the classes will be "wastes of time and money", but not all. True, you don't need to know that Rembrandt was a painter, not a toothpaste; however, it's a good thing to enhance your intellect rather than just pursue one field.

Well said!

I had the choice of going to pharm school before completing my BS - but i deferred a year for the above reason. My undergrad school taught us to not only pursue depth in our area of study, but also achieve breadth. I don't want to go about life living in a bubble and only knowing pharmacy! I want to know what else is out there. Business.. law.. politics.. history.. communications.. old people.. poor people.. spanish.. computers.. music.. Man, there's so much to know about this world and you've only got one life - take advantage of it - all this information is out there for a reason. Knowledge is power! 90% of it probably won't apply to pharm school, but most of it will come up when you're out of school.. when you start a business or are being sued or when you find that 75% of your patients are spanish speaking or are 65+ or even when your son or daughter comes home from school and asks "mommy/daddy what happened to Social Security?"

Ok I'm done with my shpeel.. can you tell I'm a big advocate of education?

 

[Sosumi]

Just my thoughts. Yes, I'm only a student, but this is just my opinion.
Jared

Very good post. Most of my class have their bachelor's degree already, and it's very noticeable the difference. Each incoming class seems to have increased the percentage with Bachelor's, and as the selectivity has increased, so have the class GPA's, leadership and participation in school and extracurriculars, and just overall quality of the students.

The class before us believes our class have the strongest group of leaders ever and the cutoff for Rho Chi increased from 3.6 their year to 3.7 our year. The class after ours has the highest overall GPA ever, and I'm impressed with most of their students. I think as pharmacy school has become more popular and with participation in PharmCAS, more students are coming in with bachelor's degrees and the few that don't are because they're deemed exceptional.

 

[Aznfarmerboi]

I am one of those students that was accepted into a Pharmacy Program after High School.

I go to St. Johns University in New York and we produce a LOT of New York's pharmacists. It is a 6 year program, with 2 years of undergraduate and 4 years graduate. Once we finish our 2 years of Co-Requisite, we are automatically accepted into pharmacy without any minium GPA requirement (As long as you don't go below 2.3 which is failing for the pharmacy program) or PCAT.

First, most of our credits are transferable. Second, we do get an undergraduate degree for pharmacy after 4 years. Most of my classmates are top in their High School with competitive SAT scores. The program is more focused toward pharmacy and even though it has a lot of liberal arts classes, it really does throw away a lot of stuff that we wont be needing. (We take Biochemistry in our 2nd year).

Concerning the grades, if you are going to be entering 3rd year with a 2.3 GPA, you might as well drop out anyway. Concerning PCAT, it is just a test that tells pharmacy schools that you are a scholar that is capable of understanding the basics that you need. The program does not need PCAT scores as they know that their students understand the basics and if not, they wouldn't be staying anyway. There are students who go onto 3rd and 4th year with a crappy GPA but they wont be there for long. A waste of money in my opinion.

Anyway. . . just my 2 cents.

 

[museabuse]

I think if pharmacy schools made a bachelor degree a prereq there would still be enough students to pick from. This would help make the profession more "professional". It would also help the admission people.

As for getting into pharmacy school right out of high school I think that is scary. How many people knew exactly what they wanted to do right out of high school?

I think that more important than a bachelor degree, a prereq to pharmacy school should be working in a pharmacy as a technician for one year. That way everyone entering pharmacy school would know that this is a career that they could not only handle but also enjoy to some extent.
How do you know for sure that this is the career for you without some exposure to it? It would be a waste of time and money to go through all this schooling and then realize that you hate working in a pharmacy.

It happened to me... got degree in computers... got job in computers... realized sitting on my ass all day in front of a computer in a tiny cubical is not for me.

 

[ilovepharmacy]

I think that more important than a bachelor degree, a prereq to pharmacy school should be working in a pharmacy as a technician for one year. That way everyone entering pharmacy school would know that this is a career that they could not only handle but also enjoy to some extent. How do you know for sure that this is the career for you without some exposure to it? It would be a waste of time and money to go through all this schooling and then realize that you hate working in a pharmacy.

I FULLY agree with this. It irritates me when people go into something they have never experienced! And so many of them become disillusioned after they realize "oh THIS is how it is??" Then they go around spreading the word that pharmacy is terrible and you're crazy if you go into it. Sorry, I come from a family of pharmacists and half of them accidentally wound up in the profession when they really shouldn't have if they had asked around and shadowed a pharmacist or volunteered/worked at a pharmacy just once

 

[PharmacyStud]

I am a pharmacy student from LIU that is part of the six year PharmD program, students comming out of high school. I don't know if it is me, but the posts in this thread seem to be attacking a lot of pharmacy students without degrees.
Most six year PharmD programs filter students before they go ointo the 3rd year professional program (i.e: LIU, Buffalo, and etc). In other words, they don't just take people out of a hat, but they carefully select students into the professional phase. Who are the people that make the cut? The ones that actually studied for tests and tried to figure out organic chemistry. Once in pharmacy program, the weak ones of the program will most likely drop out or get kicked out. This year's LIU graduating class was only half of what it started out with.
The difference between a person with a bachelor degree and a high school student? Sure, I can agree with the idea that a person with a degree might have more experience and more mature, but a person comming out of high school doesn't mean they are clueless. Are the high school students underdogs? Yes, but by the time they graduate, they will be at least 24, which mean they will be equally as mature as students carrying bachelor degrees. In addition, the workload in pharmacy school tends to make the students to stop partying and study harder, which will make them more mature.
In my opinion, I don't think it matters if you have a degree or not, because I don't think that will necessarily make a good pharamcist. A student with a degree and a student comming out of high school will both ultimately have a PharmD degree, meaning both would have learned the same material. But what makes a good pharmacist? It is not how mature you are or how experienced you are, it is about how sharp you are. The horrible interns that work in my pharmacy for roations are usually not very sharp, and some of these interns have degrees, while others don't. Some people will have a hard time making it than others.
It doesn't matter if you come into pharmacy school with a degree or not, what matters is how much you make of the four years of schooling. Sure, the degrees with help a student learn physiology and medicinal chem easier, but ultimately the difference lies in a student's dedication.
I mean, it seems like you guys are just jumping into conclusions that students without degrees are not cut out for it. In my school, all the students come together to help each other out. There are study groups in the libraries that study till midnight. My classmates don't care about the degrees that they might hold, what they care about is that they are in pharmacy school together and learning the same material and that they have to ace the next test. No matter what, they will still study together. Degree holders and non-degree holdrers can mingle together and get good grades together.
BTW, it doesn't matter if you sit in the back or not, cause its all aobut the dedication! My friend got a 4.0 this semester and he sat in the back.

 

[museabuse]

I think if pharmacy schools made a bachelor degree a prereq there would still be enough students to pick from. This would help make the profession more "professional". It would also help the admission people.

Just to clarify, I wasn't attacking students w/o bachelor degrees. A bachelor degree has nothing to do with your own individual professionalism. It doesn’t determine someone is smarter or more mature either.

I was trying to make two points. One, there is almost a logarithmic increase in pharmacy applicants; this would be one way to slow it down.

Second, my point was that whenever you add a requirement for more knowledge or more testing or more certification you are improving the credibility of your profession. For example, before PharmD was mandatory, the majority of pharmacists got a bachelors degree. Once they made PharmD mandatory, the credibility of the profession increased. Do you think the salaries only increased due to the fact that we are in high demand? It is also due to the fact that we are now more knowledgeable and experienced.

By requiring a bachelor’s degree it would only help our profession increase its credibility and "professionalism".

Most if not all medical schools require a bachelor degree.... why not pharmacy? It’s another reason you can give when someone says, "You get paid that MUCH for counting pills!!?!?!!"

 

[aubieRx]

I think the 3 year reqs are good.

At Auburn they have some sort of biomedical degree (I always find out about these things at the last minute) that allowsyou to fufill pharm reqs and get a 4 year degree. Same thing with the vet school...finish the first 3 years of ani sci pre vet degree and do well and you have a chance of getting into vet school.

I sometimes wish i had a degree right now, going in.

 

[MDgirl76]

I dont agree. Medical school is too inefficient. Pharm D actually taught me sooo much of the stuff I really needed to know and I fell in love with pharmacy. Sorry if you feel people need to "pay dues" just cuz you feel it. I think all education should be efficient as long as the task is accomplished well, which I feel it was in my pharm D experience - I think I recieved a very well rounded pharm D education and it was very focused, I felt like an expert. I went into med school because I loved how focused pharm was and I loved learning. But medical school and rotations is sooo random and unfocused. Education is nice but efficiency makes sense.

I don't mean pre-requisite wise. Some schools I know of have programs where you can basically apply right out of high school and after you take 2 years of pre-requisites you're automatically in. They don't even have to take the PCAT. Don't get me wrong, these students who have gotten in this way are capable of handling pharmacy school, but I feel that they should pay their dues more somehow. It doesn't seem right to me to be able to earn a doctoral degree without even being close to finishing a bachelor's and I think because of it people tend to look down on the PharmD degree because it's not even considered a graduate degree.

I think the requirements for pharmacy school should be more like the requirements for medical school (which requires at least 3 years at university level regardless if you complete a bachelor's degree earlier). Students should have a minimum of 3 years undergraduate schooling.

 

[PharmDat22]

i think that schools will soon change their policy about admission and require a B.S. i think that this is a good thing for the student and for the school. it shows the student what type of haul they are in for in pharmacy school, and it shows the school that the student is dedicated to their education. either way, it is a win-win situation. not only does the student have the opportunity to earn a degree, but they do mature in that time period and will realize what it is that they truly want out of life. i don't know about anyone else, but while attending undergrad, i changed my major three times. there are not many 18 year olds out there that actually KNOW what they want to do. upping the requirements is a good idea.

Go Gators!

 

[firefighter9015]

I feel that as a student who only did 2 years of undergrad before pharmacy school, I was more prepared for the work load in pharmacy school. Completing the prereqs in 2 year requires dedication and a work ethic. This also requires maturity. I feel that automatically saying that people with 4 year degrees are more mature is not a fair statement. Some of the people in my class which are the most immature are the ones who have received a 4 year degree.

 

[WVUPharm2007]

I wouldn't say it requires maturity....I did the course work in 2 years and I am terribly immature.

 

[PharmDstudent]

I wouldn't say it requires maturity....I did the course work in 2 years and I am terribly immature.

You just got lucky . I wouldn't be surprised if you were dragged out of a bar to take a final.

Congrats on finishing, though. Did you take the Naplex and law exam already?

 

[PharmDat22]

Go Gators!

I am a Gator fan, at least until I find out they reject me this year.

 

[mike36]

From what I have seen after finishing my first semester in the P1 year, most of those with four year degrees are better prepared for the rigorous schedule they throw at us. I think this could be because those with four-year degrees have completed many more upper division courses, so they know what to expect and how to better prepare for upper division exams.

At least, this is what I saw this past semester.

 

[Hels2007]

My sample is not representative, based on two schools, but I would prefer students with a couple years in the real world. Don't tell me about exceptions - we all know they exist. However, judging by the average of the groups of about 100 +/- 20, a group with mostly older students (about 80% had bachelor's degree) was a lot more active during discussions, not afraid to pitch in with their opinions during lectures, and overall participated in class more, while group with mostly straight-out-of-high school kids behaved just like in high school, after being in college for three years. As in, no one would speak up without being called on, and then mumble and stumble, and in lecture I felt like I was talking at walls. On a scale of one to ten with ten being best, I would rank the bachelor-predominant group as 7 or 8, and high-school-predominant group as 5. I am a big fan of students participating in class, and for me it is a deciding factor. It doesn't matter if you memorize books, we aren't computers nor trained monkeys, it matters whether you can digest the information and communicate it back. Oh, where I went to pharmacy school, A started with 96%, and these kids have A starting at 90%. Where is justice?

Though interviewing for the next fellow, though, I would say we have an even mix among people we are bringing on site - some have a degree and real-world experience before pharmacy school, some don't. It's not what matters on the individual level - though on average, it does.

 

[WVUPharm2007]

How the hell do you know which ones were straight out of school and which weren't?

I've never found lecture to be worthwhile, personally. 19/20 times it's some guy reading powerpoints to me. Some of them think they are clever and add **** to their lectures outside of the notes...or even more annoying, they put blanks ______ in their notes you have to fill in. What the hell is the point of that? To thumb your nose at the kids who are in pharmacy school just to learn the ****, move on, and participate as little as humanly possible? Worse, they like to think of it as "effective teaching." I just got the notes from the Rho Chi kids....what I call "effective studying". Those Rho Chi kids are wonderful enablers, I'll tell you what.

I'm not sure if I have a point really....other than that clinical pharmacy nerds...in my experience....really suck at lecturing. Bland, uninspired...no, not everyone is as fascinated by Osteoporosis as you. There's a reason why you remember a movie like The Departed and forget ****ty movies like Dude Where's My Car. There needs to be a level of showmanship in lectures....don't blame the students if you make them apathetic to your boring ass lectures. That's what professors don't seem to get. If you're not going to entertain me or make the **** interesting, just give me the damn notes to memorize and leave me the hell alone....

 

[Hels2007]

How the hell do you know which ones were straight out of school and which weren't?

You are kidding, right? That information is perfectly available for those who know where to look.

To thumb your nose at the kids who are in pharmacy school just to learn the ****, move on, and participate as little as humanly possible?

And what the hell are you going to learn without participating? How to read books? I thought even in this country most kids are able to do that by the age of 10.

I'm not sure if I have a point really....other than that clinical pharmacy nerds...in my experience....really suck at lecturing. Bland, uninspired...no, not everyone is as fascinated by Osteoporosis as you. There's a reason why you remember a movie like The Departed and forget ****ty movies like Dude Where's My Car. There needs to be a level of showmanship in lectures....don't blame the students if you make them apathetic to your boring ass lectures. That's what professors don't seem to get. If you're not going to entertain me or make the **** interesting, just give me the damn notes to memorize and leave me the hell alone....

And I can't help but agree that most do - but having had one professor who was awful at general chemistry and absolutely wonderful at analytical chemistry, I asked him, why such a drastic difference. He replied that in general chem, with 200+ pairs of eyes either scared or disinterested looking at you, there is absolutely no stimulus to be a good teacher. Six years later, when I dabbled in teaching myself, I realized how right he was. I get absolutely no kick out of talking at empty space. Please do realize that school is not for your entertainment. It is for ours. Afterall, YOU don't have to be there. WE do. And if you ain't going to be involved and participating, it's not going to be entertaining for you regardless of what I do. Even if I strip while bellydancing out there.

And I most certainly hope you are never taking care of anyone I even remotely like, if you think pharmacy is about memorizing stuff. At least, I know for certain you aren't after my job.

 

[Priapism321]

From what I have seen after finishing my first semester in the P1 year, most of those with four year degrees are better prepared for the rigorous schedule they throw at us. I think this could be because those with four-year degrees have completed many more upper division courses, so they know what to expect and how to better prepare for upper division exams.

At least, this is what I saw this past semester.

Are you honestly trying to tell me "The Meat We Eat" and "Geography of Africa" my last semester didn't prepare me for courses such as "Pathophysiological Basis of Disease" in Pharmacy school? Go figure.

 

[WVUPharm2007]

You are kidding, right? That information is perfectly available for those who know where to look.

If you actually wasted the time to look it up, you are nuts. Further, if you spent the time to memorize the 100+ people and their personal academic history, you are crazy. Literally crazy. Personally, I think you are embellishing the truth a tad.

And what the hell are you going to learn without participating? How to read books? I thought even in this country most kids are able to do that by the age of 10.

After the first sentence, none of this makes any sense.

And I can't help but agree that most do - but having had one professor who was awful at general chemistry and absolutely wonderful at analytical chemistry, I asked him, why such a drastic difference. He replied that in general chem, with 200+ pairs of eyes either scared or disinterested looking at you, there is absolutely no stimulus to be a good teacher. Six years later, when I dabbled in teaching myself, I realized how right he was. I get absolutely no kick out of talking at empty space. Please do realize that school is not for your entertainment. It is for ours. Afterall, YOU don't have to be there. WE do. And if you ain't going to be involved and participating, it's not going to be entertaining for you regardless of what I do. Even if I strip while bellydancing out there.

See, therein lies the problem. I paid the school to give me information and
the proper rights to sit for a board exam. Nothing more. That's your job. And giving me information in an easier to understand or memorize fashion increases the quality of the service. Why the hell should it center around the lecturer? That's idiocy. It's that very atmosphere that academia perpetuates that it really shouldn't. It's like you pay people to torture you and pad their ego. Great speakers can make anything interesting. Our law professor was a professional public motivational speaker and a lawyer. He made everything a story you want to hear...no matter how mundane it really was. I was thrilled to go learn about the controlled substances act. You have the blind leading the blind in how to give lectures in clinical pharmacy. I can only think of *1* clinical pharmacy professor that had any idea how the hell to lecture. That's it. Out of two years of pathophys/therapeutics. And you have these folks teaching new residents how to lecture...yikes. But that still doesn't change my point....don't bitch about the kids that don't participate. It's your fault they aren't.....don't pawn it off on them.

And I most certainly hope you are never taking care of anyone I even remotely like, if you think pharmacy is about memorizing stuff. At least, I know for certain you aren't after my job.

Yeah....sure it is. Memorizing guidelines....drug actions...blah blah blah. If it's not all about memorizing stuff, it's at least mostly all about memorizing stuff. There's nothing wrong with that though. I mean, you can only do one of two things, a science or an art. Break everything down to their basic essence and that's it. Art is interpretive and science is based upon cold hard facts and procedure. And pharmacy is way more science than art. If you think it's more of an art than science, frankly, I don't want you around anyone I remotely like, either.

 

[twester]

My school has no back up med ppl. The AdCom screens carefully. We also have no smokers....

Really? The adcom let me in and I was a smoker at the time - a secret smoker - had no idea I hid it so well. Of course, I ended up going somewhere else.

Life is better as a non-smoker.

Don't want to hijack the thread, so I think a baccalaureate should be required, but not for reasons of screening out students or for ensuring a certain maturity level. I think it should be required so more advanced coursework in biological sciences can be completed (yes, I think Biology with a minor in chemistry should be the required major (or something along those lines)).

At my school, we spent the first year "getting everybody on the same page". If everybody had arrived on approximately the same page in the first place, we wouldn't have wasted so much time. We also wouldn't have had to cram so much into fall semester of P2 year that everyone pretty much lost their minds.

Thank heaven that's over.

 

[PharmDstudent]

And I can't help but agree that most do - but having had one professor who was awful at general chemistry and absolutely wonderful at analytical chemistry, I asked him, why such a drastic difference. He replied that in general chem, with 200+ pairs of eyes either scared or disinterested looking at you, there is absolutely no stimulus to be a good teacher. Six years later, when I dabbled in teaching myself, I realized how right he was. I get absolutely no kick out of talking at empty space. Please do realize that school is not for your entertainment. It is for ours. Afterall, YOU don't have to be there. WE do. And if you ain't going to be involved and participating, it's not going to be entertaining for you regardless of what I do. Even if I strip while bellydancing out there.

We pay professors with tuition. Period. Therefore, they are there to serve students.

If you require someone else to motivate you at YOUR job, find another job.

 

[kbv]

Having a bachelor doesn't make one better than those having an associate or none at all. Passing the NAPLEX and state law is all that matter.

I dislike lecturers who read directly/ almost directly from their Power Point Presentation, slide by slide. I really hate those who make their students fill in the blank while lecturing non-stop the new materials. Who do they think their students are? While they're talking non-stop, their students suffer: time to digest the new materials, time to listen, time to think to jot down the notes, time to read slides from both projector and handout to keep up with their pace. Yet they make us fill in the blank, not once, but numerous, even give us multiple choice questions and thus make the 3-slide per page, 2-sided, handout too long for a 1 hr 50 min lecture.

So, how can you participate in a lecture like this? If I did, I would have to sacrifice my notes. Then, who's going to help me with it?

Oh, I hate them too much.

WVUPharm2007, I couldn't agree with you more.