Background and Aim:
A curriculum renewal (CR) of our PharmD program began in spring 2023 in response to evolving health‑care system needs, shifts in higher education, rising student debt, student wellness concerns, and workforce shortages that challenge traditional training models. This work describes our CR process and offers lessons and recommendations for others undertaking large‑scale curricular change.

Methods:
The CR process followed core change‑management principles: articulating the need for change, defining a strategic vision, engaging faculty and partners, and establishing a communication and project plan. An international environmental scan and a series of faculty retreats informed early planning. Discipline‑focused working groups reviewed the existing curriculum and proposed recommendations, complemented by groups focused on Student Success, Equity, Diversity and Inclusion, Pathways/Streams, and a Student Advisory Committee. Course design teams developed course outlines, supported by theme leads to promote integration. Backward design and adaptive expertise pedagogy guided curriculum development. Course content was refined through mini retreats with input from the Student Advisory Committee.

Results:
The new program structure transformed our 4 Year PharmD program into an accelerated 3 Year program. It was approved in 2024, and the new program launched in Fall 2025. Key features include an integrated course structure, block scheduling with wellness breaks, early longitudinal experiential learning, and a programmatic assessment model with longitudinal progress testing. Success was driven by early engagement of pharmacy partners and employers, cross‑disciplinary course design teams, a clearly defined design process leveraging local expertise, and a comprehensive communications and marketing strategy. Faculty development supported implementation, with sessions on Equity, Diversity and Inclusion, pedagogy, and programmatic assessment.

Discussion:
Our program successfully conceptualized and implemented achieved a large‑scale curriculum renewal within a short timeframe by capitalizing on strong momentum for change and establishing mechanisms to engage diverse students and faculty. Lessons learned relate to the importance of decision‑making and conflict‑resolution processes, effective communication and engagement strategies, and approaches to supporting faculty workload and recognition through rapid change.

Background:
University College London (UCL) School of Pharmacy (SoP) created a partnership with NewGiza University (NGU) SoP, Cairo. Embedding CR and CDM into their existing pharmacy curriculum was priority.

UCL SoP delivered four webinars to NGU academics, some whose background was not prescribing. The webinars ensured NGU academics understood both the processes of CR/CDM as well as elements of curriculum development, additionally exploring teaching and assessment strategies for CR/CDM. One webinar included change models assisting incorporation of CR/CDM into their curriculum1.

Aim:
Evaluate awareness of CR/CDM and curriculum design, both PRE and POST workshop delivery.

Method:
A self-administered electronic questionnaire (9-items) was completed PRE and POST workshop delivery. Descriptive statistics were used to analyse numerical responses.

Results:
A PRE-webinar response rate of 87.5% was achieved (n=7). Three NGU academics (43%) stated they felt confident teaching CR/CDM, while two NGU academics (29%) indicated they felt confident in assessing CR/CDM skills currently. Only one NGU academic felt confident designing curricula for CR/CDM currently. .

Results:
A POST-workshop response rate of 63% was achieved (n=5). Five NGU academics indicated they better understood the processes of CR/CDM, including hypothetico-deductive-model and dual-process-theory. 100% stated they felt confident/very confident in teaching and assessing such skills.

Positive feedback is demonstrated by the POST session questionnaire. All indicators improved to 100%. Whilst this is a one-off intervention, it was a unique opportunity for academics at UCL and NGU to consider all aspects of CR/CDM by means of horizontal and vertical alignment2.

Conclusion:
This collaboration demonstrated how an innovative structured webinar series moved beyond knowledge transmission, enabling faculty to engage in reflection, apply CR/CDM processes to their own curricula, and collaboratively trial and present curriculum and assessment innovations, including spiral design, constructive alignment and Script Concordance Testing (SCT).

1. Kotter, J.P. (1995) Leading change: why transformation efforts fail. Harvard Business Review, 73(2), pp. 59–67. Available at: https://.hee.nhs.uk/sites/default/files/leading_change_why_transformation_efforts_fail.pdf (Accessed: 7 October 2025).
2. Dahle LO, Brynhildsen J, Fallsberg MB, Rundquist I, Hammar M. Pros and cons of vertical integration between clinical medicine and basic science within a problem-based undergraduate medical curriculum: examples and experiences from Linköping, Sweden. Med Teach. 2002;24(3):280-5.

Background and Statement of Aims: Calls to innovate curricula have urged that “an ethic of responsibility must be woven deeply… (into) education at every level” [1]. Recently, the International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry launched the Guiding Principles of Responsible Chemistry, identifying systems thinking (ST) as core competency for responsible innovation. Research shows that ST strengthens students’ ability to recognise chemistry’s role in societal and environmental challenges [3]. ST commonly involves mapping components and relationships, linking production and material use with waste and impacts on social and environmental systems, to reason about implications of design formulation and human activities.

This presentation reports on the integration of ST within a final-year pharmaceutical science unit (BPS3061-Industrial Project). In an intensive, industry-facing curriculum, over 150 students worked in multidisciplinary teams to design, formulate, and present a cosmetic range, including a skincare brand, applying concepts from formulation chemistry, regulatory science, and product design.

Methods: Following instruction in Systems-Oriented Concept Map Extensions (SOCMEs), students visualised lifecycle and design decisions for their products in relation to sustainability. SOCMEs were used to examine material sourcing, manufacturing, end-of-life considerations, and alignment with green, sustainable, and responsible chemistry principles. These maps formed part of final presentations at a Cosmetic Expo judged by industry professionals. The SOCMEs were analysed using qualitative and quantitative approaches.

Results: Findings indicate that students meaningfully connected formulation and design concepts to sustainability challenges and demonstrated emerging systems-level reasoning. However, most did not deviate substantially from the initial map scaffold of sub-systems provided, suggesting ongoing uncertainty in independently being able to extend system complexity.

Discussion and Conclusion: While implemented through a cosmetic formulation project, this presentation will outline how the ST-oriented pedagogical framework is designed to be transferable across pharmacy contexts, including supply chains, patient use and environmental impact.

[1] Mahaffy PG, Garcia-Martinez J. From What Chemistry Can Do to What Chemists Should Do. Journal of Chemical Education. 2025 Nov;102(11):4661-5.
[2] IUPAC, Guiding Principles of Responsible Chemistry. Accessed December 2, 2025. https://iupac.org/responsible-chemistry/
[3] Mahaffy PG, Matlin SA, Holme TA, MacKellar J. Systems thinking for education about the molecular basis of sustainability. Nature Sustainability. 2019 May;2(5):362-70.

Background/Statement of aim(s): Standards for the initial education and training of pharmacists require digital skills development for improving patient outcomes.1 This is reiterated in the International Pharmaceutical Federation Development Goals (for example, ‘5: Competency Development’ and ‘20: Digital Health’).2 The work, undertaken from 2023 to 2025, aimed to review programme content, identify digital literacy and/or AI related gaps and required changes, and implement these.

Methods: Programme content was reviewed by the Directors of Education for the Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences programmes, in tandem with the Senior Lecturer (Digital Education). Digital frameworks were employed 3,4 and digital technologies used in practice ascertained through stakeholder meetings. Gaps and proposed changes were subsequently discussed and new activities introduced.

Results: Digital literacy-related activities that were evident in the programmes included digital competency (with Microsoft Office, science-based packages, and dispensing software), digital search skills, digital communication skills, critical thinking, e-poster and video creation. Implementation of a virtual learning environment and digital capture of teaching, coupled with the appointment of a ‘digital education’ academic and ‘laptop for loan’ scheme, supported the digital culture. Gaps (which were addressed) included training in cyber security and information governance, AI training including assessing AI-generated content, and the development and implementation of other innovations. These related to an e-portfolio and tracker for experiential learning, digital diagnostic devices workshop, digital patient records, a virtual patient, and virtual reality sessions. Learner experience was assessed through user testing, and module evaluation and student experience surveys. The Pharmacy (MPharm) accreditation outcome, linked to the Standards,1 was positive.

Discussion/Conclusion: This work, conducted at one institution only, highlights the level of input (including from the university, national frameworks, digital education organisations and employers) and expertise required to successfully embed digital education. Regular evaluation and further development are required given the vast and evolving nature of the field.

References:
1. General Pharmaceutical Council. Standards for the initial education and training of pharmacists (2021). Available: https://www.pharmacyregulation.org/
2. International Pharmaceutical Federation. Development goals (2020). Available: https://developmentgoals.fip.org/
3. Framework for digital transformation in higher education (2023). Available: https://www.jisc.ac.uk/guides/framework-for-digital-transformation-in-higher-education
4. The framework for NHS action on digital inclusion (2023). Available: https://www.england.nhs.uk/long-read/inclusive-digital-healthcare-a-framework-for-nhs-action-on-digital-inclusion/

Background and Statement of aim: Health care is among the top four emitters of greenhouse gases and medicines contribute to 20% of these emissions. Climate change results in healthcare disruption from floods, heatwaves and wildfires, which significantly affect safe and effective medication management. Pharmacy education programs must incorporate planetary health into curricula, but this has not occurred at the University of Saskatchewan. The aim of this study was to assess pharmacy students’ interest and ability to incorporate planetary health into the patient care process, prior to being given instruction on the topic.

Methods: Planetary Health was incorporated into the Patient Care Process taught at the University of Saskatchewan in 2025 by adding ‘Planetary Health’ to the ‘Therapeutic Alternative Worksheet’ (TAW) students use to compare and contrast medication options to resolve drug therapy problems. The curriculum will be revised to instruct students how to do this in 2026. Students in years 1-3 completed a care plan assignment as part of normal course work in September-December 2025 and were instructed to complete the TAW planetary health information on a voluntary basis. Students were encouraged to provide information based on previous knowledge and/or experience about planetary health and how it could impact drug therapy decisions. Care plans were evaluated to determine student interest and ability to accurately incorporate planetary health into the TAW and in making drug therapy decisions in the care plans.

Results: Many students completed the planetary health TAW section of the care plans (27% year 1, 100% year 2, 43% year 3). Inaccurate information was included in some submissions (24% year 1, 1% year 2, 8% year 3). Information included in TAWs directly influenced drug therapy decisions in many care plans (38% year 1, 29% year 2, 50% year 3).

Discussion: Students were willing and motivated to consider planetary health in their drug therapy decisions, despite not being required nor taught how to do it. The lack of instruction was evident in that many included inaccurate information. This study supports that planetary health instruction is needed in the curriculum and that the upcoming change will likely be well-received by students.

Background and Aim:
Assessment practices are increasingly shifting towards approaches that emphasize learning, feedback, and longitudinal development rather than high-stakes summative grading. Programmatic assessment (PA) supports this shift by integrating multiple low-stakes data points to inform holistic progression decisions; however, its application within pharmacy curricula has been limited. This work describes the design and early implementation of a PA framework within a newly developed accelerated three-year PharmD program and examines initial outcomes related to assessment structure, learner experience, and performance monitoring.
Methods:
A PA framework was implemented across Year 1 of a newly developed accelerated three-year PharmD curriculum, incorporating frequent low-stakes assessments, longitudinal progress testing, and structured student feedback, with holistic progression decisions overseen by a Student Progress Committee (SPC). Assessment scheduling was redesigned using an integrated, block-based course design. Learner performance indicators, including assessment completion, assessment grades, attendance patterns, and cross-course performance trends, were synthesized using predefined criteria to inform progression and targeted remediation. Faculty development supported implementation through training in assessment design, including the use of artificial intelligence tools to support multiple-choice question development.
Results:
Full implementation of the PA framework was achieved in Year 1, including progress testing and regular SPC review cycles. The redesign of assessment scheduling resulted in a more than 50% reduction in the number of discrete assessments compared with traditional four-year models. Early implementation data indicate that this approach improved visibility into longitudinal performance patterns and enabled earlier identification of learners requiring academic support. Student feedback highlighted greater clarity regarding performance expectations and reduced assessment-related stress relative to prior high-stakes examination structures. Psychometric analysis demonstrated acceptable reliability of assessment instruments, supporting their use in longitudinal performance monitoring.
Discussion And Conclusion:
Early evidence suggests that programmatic assessment can be successfully implemented within an accelerated PharmD curriculum while reducing assessment burden and supporting student well-being. While longer-term outcomes related to learner capability and practice readiness are still being examined, this model offers a viable and scalable approach for accelerated professional programs by shifting assessment from episodic judgment toward continuous learning and informed progression decisions.

Digital health tools are reshaping diabetes care by supporting real-time, data-driven clinical decisions. As these tools become integral to patient management, pharmacy students must develop firsthand familiarity with their capabilities and limitations. Design thinking, a human-centered and structured approach to problem solving, offers an effective framework for integrating technical competence with empathy-based learning. This study evaluated the impact of a design thinking module on students’ ability to optimize diabetes care in the digital era.
Methods:
First-year pharmacy students (N = 158) participated in a six-week module structured around the five stages of the design thinking framework. Students wore a continuous glucose monitor (CGM) for two weeks, analyzed personal glucose patterns in relation to nutrition/exercise, and delivered diabetes education to simulated patients (empathize and define). They then worked in teams to design a CGM-based clinic (ideate and prototype) and presented their prototype to a partner team, receiving feedback (test). At the end of the module, students completed a reflection exercise and a design thinking survey on a 5-point Likert scale (1=strongly disagree and 5=strongly agree). Reflections were analyzed using Braun and Clarke’s framework and quantitative data were analyzed descriptively.
Results:
Average scores across all design thinking stages were high: empathize (M = 4.38/5), define (M = 4.32/5), ideate (M = 4.34/5), and prototype/test (M = 4.34/5). Students rated the utility of the course (M = 4.40/5) and its applicability to future practice (M = 4.47/5) favorably. Thematic analysis identified four key domains: empathy through lived experience (77%), systems and workflow awareness (53%), technical and usability literacy (45%), and empowerment through real time data (27%). Reflections also noted challenges such as device discomfort, alarm fatigue, and data overload.
Discussion and Conclusion:
Integrating a design thinking framework into a diabetes care module enhanced pharmacy students’ empathy, digital health literacy, and innovative problem-solving.