When will pharmacy schools REQUIRE a 4 year degree?

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.

Smilescali

Almost there...
10+ Year Member
7+ Year Member
15+ Year Member
Joined
May 21, 2004
Messages
616
Reaction score
6
I have heard people talk about pharmacy schools requiring 4 year degrees for admission. Has anyone also heard of this? If this is true, then it might be wise to "hurry" and get your coursework completed.

Members don't see this ad.
 
wow smilecali, i am responding all of your post today... anyway... i do not see this happening for awhile. i def doubt this will happen next 5 years, or maybe in 10 years... the trends are def changing. more people are applying to pharmacy school w/ a degree. the focus is that if this trend continues, schools must change their pre-reqs example increasing min. credits. i think pharmacy is around 70? MD and DMD schools require 90 or more. for now if you have a degree it will be your advantage, but it will take a lot of work by others to change the whole pre-reqs accors the nation. i wouldn't worry about it if i were you.
 
Smilescali said:
I have heard people talk about pharmacy schools requiring 4 year degrees for admission. Has anyone also heard of this? If this is true, then it might be wise to "hurry" and get your coursework completed.

I actually see this changing sooner rather than later as the amount of applicants increase and the responsibilities of the pharmacist increase. It seems most schools in CA have 80-90% matriculants with degrees.

I hope this continues.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
The change is currently happening. The pharmacy profession is trying to move into the same standard as denistry and other health professions thus the BA degree. This is why more and more school are asking for 3000 level courses. I know UT-Memphis is starting that for the next school year
 
Actually, The U of MN is moving that way-if it doesn't occur in the next 2-3 years, I'd be surprised (hear anything about this, lord999? My info is a year old.) It came up in admissions mtgs at NDSU this year as well. With the surge of applicants, schools will need another item to determine who makes the cut-and this way is at least plausible. It wouldn't take an act of god to change the pre-req's-all it takes is the admissions committee at that school to vote yes.
 
So you could have a 4 year degree in history or some other liberal arts degree and be at an "advantage"?
 
bananaface said:
3000 level courses= 30th year of college? :laugh:

At Florida state schools, classes are 1000 level for freshmen through 4000 level for seniors.
 
dgroulx said:
At Florida state schools, classes are 1000 level for freshmen through 4000 level for seniors.

Dana, did St. Leo have a "48-hour rule," too? USF has one, where we have to take 48 hours of 3000+ classes in addition to our degree requirements. By this spring, I will have fulfilled all of my Biomedical Sciences degree requirements, but I will be lacking about 18 of the 48 hours, which won't allow me to have my BS in the spring as I had hoped.
 
Smilescali said:
So you could have a 4 year degree in history or some other liberal arts degree and be at an "advantage"?


Hey now, what's wrong with a history degree?
 
There is no "requirement" for a 4 year degree for most medical and dental schools. It is understood that you won't get in without one, but there is no requirement. (The actual pre-reqs are actually very similar to pharmacy for dental and med.) I don't think pharmacy will ever "require" it, but because of higher competition, an applicant won't be considered without one in the very near future.
 
As long as your history degree has the required classes to get in! There will not be a "requirement" but rather require much higher courses to get in like biochem or microbio.
 
Nothing is wrong with a history degree. I don't think I implied that, however I don't see how one with a degree in something like history or any other non science major should be at an advantage. If you have a degree in biochemistry or any of the other sciences, then I completely agree that you should be considered more qualified than someone without a degree.
Sorry if I offended anyone with a history degree. I love history... it is a GREAT degree to have!:)
 
Members don't see this ad :)
Smilescali said:
Nothing is wrong with a history degree. I don't think I implied that, however I don't see how one with a degree in something like history or any other non science major should be at an advantage. If you have a degree in biochemistry or any of the other sciences, then I completely agree that you should be considered more qualified than someone without a degree.
Sorry if I offended anyone with a history degree. I love history... it is a GREAT degree to have!:)

No offense was taken at all. I just thought it was amusing because when I interviewed for Pharmacy school I was told that I was the first person to ever apply with a history degree to their program. :thumbup: I got in, but didn't go.
 
Hi!

I don't think in order to get in to Pharm.D program, pharmacy schools going to require 4-year degree eventhough they get more and more applications each year, cos Pharm.D program is:

2-years(Pre-Pharmacy) + 4-years(Professional) = 6-years

They don't even require Associate degree, they just say that take your pre-requisites and apply. For Example, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (admission statistics says they accepted (51-Non Degree students, 68-Bechaler's degree students, 2-associate's degree, 1-master's degree) this year(Class of 2004). So, that means they accepted 51 students who didn't have any kind of degree they just took the required classes and got accepted without degree.

If they start requiring Bachelar's degree for Pharm.D, which going to make Pharm.D (8-years) program(4-years bachelar's + 4-years professional). So, then people going to think that why pharmacy? Let's be a Doctor!, cos one can be a M.D in 8-9 years and can make even more money than Pharmacist with same years of education.

Pharm.D it self is 6-years not 8-years, so I don't think they gonna required degree. But who knows what they gonna do in future.

Well, that's just my opinion!!!
 
I agree with one of the previous posts. Neither med school or dental school require a 4 year degree, but very few individuals get accepted after their 3rd undergraduate year. I believe pharmacy will not require a degree, but will turn into a med or dental school type pre req. (ie 90 semester hours).
 
npp71681 said:
Hi!
If they start requiring Bachelar's degree for Pharm.D, which going to make Pharm.D (8-years) program(4-years bachelar's + 4-years professional). So, then people going to think that why pharmacy? Let's be a Doctor!, cos one can be a M.D in 8-9 years and can make even more money than Pharmacist with same years of education.

Pharm.D it self is 6-years not 8-years, so I don't think they gonna required degree. But who knows what they gonna do in future.

Well, that's just my opinion!!!

Sorry to be technical, but you are looking at it the wrong way. First, the Pharm.D program is 4 years, just like Med school is 4 years. Also, it is becoming increasingly more difficult to complete required courses in only 2 years.

Also, continuously Pharmacy is looked at as an alternative to medicine, which u are implying. It will take me about 7 years total to do pre reqs and pharmacy school. I am far capable of going to Med school if I so desired, but I like pharmacy. Sorry, but that just irritates me.
 
npp71681 said:
I don't think in order to get in to Pharm.D program, pharmacy schools going to require 4-year degree eventhough they get more and more applications each year, cos Pharm.D program is:

2-years(Pre-Pharmacy) + 4-years(Professional) = 6-years

Many schools are changing this, though. I know that UT - Memphis and Auburn require you to have 90 hours, which include upper-level sciences. I'm sure there are other schools out there that either are doing or will be doing the same thing.

npp71681 said:
They don't even require Associate degree, they just say that take your pre-requisites and apply.

UF requires an AA prior to matriculation into their pharmacy program.

Bottom line is, I think there are very few who get in on just the bare essentials. If you just have the prequisites and someone else has 90+ hours or a BA/BS or higher, guess who'll they'll more than likely choose?
 
FutureRxGal said:
Dana, did St. Leo have a "48-hour rule," too? USF has one, where we have to take 48 hours of 3000+ classes in addition to our degree requirements. By this spring, I will have fulfilled all of my Biomedical Sciences degree requirements, but I will be lacking about 18 of the 48 hours, which won't allow me to have my BS in the spring as I had hoped.

I think it was 36 hours of 3000+ classes, but it might have been 48. I don't really remember. They have lots of easy, senior level religion classes like "Death and the Meaning of Life" and "Theological Aspects Marriage". My advisor got me out of school in 2 years, whereas it would have been 3 years at USF for the same degree. It's one of the reasons I chose Leo. Also, I didn't have to have a foreign language, or take extra liberal arts exit requirement courses.
 
dgroulx said:
I think it was 36 hours of 3000+ classes, but it might have been 48. I don't really remember. They have lots of easy, senior level religion classes like "Death and the Meaning of Life" and "Theological Aspects Marriage". My advisor got me out of school in 2 years, whereas it would have been 3 years at USF for the same degree. It's one of the reasons I chose Leo. Also, I didn't have to have a foreign language, or take extra liberal arts exit requirement courses.

Yeah, with a BS, I don't have to take a foreign language. However, part of our degree requirement consists of 2 Major Works & Issues and 1 Lit & Writing course. I'm taking one of my Major Works and Issues this summer (an upper-level ethics course). I was going to take another one in the fall, but the one I want to take happens to be a Gordon Rule course, and I'm not about to do that along with Cell Biology, Determinative Bacteriology, Calculus, and working. ;)
 
i do not know how long it will take us to convince others that pharmacy is not 6 year program! this really pisses me off sometimes. why can't we just say it is 4 years of professional school just like others? is that because we do not have higher credit requirement than others? perhpas we should increase those credit requirements RIGHT NOW, well maybe in couple years but hopefully soon.
 
I honestly don't think that in the near future admissions will require a bachelors degree, but from my own experience in applying and interviewing as well as from informal surveys of the pharmacists / residents I work with it appears that the majority succesful applicants to pharmacy schools have previous degrees. Therefore, I would encourage any potential applicants to research the statistics for their school of choice, as it appears that pharmacy schools are getting more and more competetive and that not having a degree may be a liability at time of application.
 
npp71681 said:
If they start requiring Bachelar's degree for Pharm.D, which going to make Pharm.D (8-years) program(4-years bachelar's + 4-years professional). So, then people going to think that why pharmacy? Let's be a Doctor!, cos one can be a M.D in 8-9 years and can make even more money than Pharmacist with same years of education.

So what you're saying is that if we make standards difficult, why not put forth the effort and become a doctor? I don't know if you realize this, but Pharmacy and Medicine are two very different scopes of practice. Most choose one of the two for the desire of it. As I had mentioned before in other threads, pharmacy is not a back up plan. If your not good enough for med school, apply to DO school or something. I would say that DO school is about as difficult as pharmacy to get into at the current time. It is not required to have a degree, but you will need to complete your Pre-reqs. At the current time, most schools are pushing to make upper level courses as part of the required undergraduate work before you can start pharmacy school.
 
cognito said:
I honestly don't think that in the near future admissions will require a bachelors degree, but from my own experience in applying and interviewing as well as from informal surveys of the pharmacists / residents I work with it appears that the majority succesful applicants to pharmacy schools have previous degrees. Therefore, I would encourage any potential applicants to research the statistics for their school of choice, as it appears that pharmacy schools are getting more and more competetive and that not having a degree may be a liability at time of application.

I agree with you (with the premise that the applicants have science degrees), but some of the most competetive schools out there don't give ANY preference to people with degrees (like UW Madison). Maybe this will change in the future. I know that The University of Southern Nevada is reviewing their admission criteria this month and who knows what they may change due to competition.
 
I would say that DO school is about as difficult as pharmacy to get into at the current time. It is not required to have a degree, but you will need to complete your Pre-reqs.

There are many MD/DO schools that require a degree and will not accept anyone with under 90 credits. It is assumed with the other schools that you will not drop out upon acceptance. At my school it is required that you have at least a Bachelor's prior to matriculation. I was amazed to find out how many actually have graduate degrees.
 
Thanks for all of the input. I am just going to stick with my plan of finishing my prereq's on my way to UCSD applying to Pharm School as a go. If I get in without a 4 year degree GREAT! If not, then I continue on.:)
 
MNnaloxone said:
Actually, The U of MN is moving that way-if it doesn't occur in the next 2-3 years, I'd be surprised (hear anything about this, lord999? My info is a year old.) It came up in admissions mtgs at NDSU this year as well. With the surge of applicants, schools will need another item to determine who makes the cut-and this way is at least plausible. It wouldn't take an act of god to change the pre-req's-all it takes is the admissions committee at that school to vote yes.

For UMN, Old Man Weaver has publically stated his wish for that to happen. I think UMN can make it a practical reality, considering just how difficult it is already to get into UMN.

I believe it is already a reality in CA Conservatively, at least a good 60-70% of the matriculants are SB or AB. I also see the SB in Pharmaceutical Sciences, trained in everything but patient care, becoming a popular major someday.

The only problem with this is where will the residents and pharmaceutical researchers come from? Pharmaceutics and Pharmacokinetics have traditionally relied on pharmacy students for recruitment, and because residencies aren't required for employment, more of us will shun them for time constraints.

Ah well, I sorely miss the undergraduate SB pharmacy. Given the choice, I would pick the 5-year SB, as many of the people who had a choice between Pharm.D. and SB did.
 
Top