Impact of Transitioning a Senior Seminar Capstone Course to an Intensive Hybrid Course

Abstract

Objective. To compare outcomes (grades, resources, and perceptions) from a weekly in-person seminar capstone course (pre-revision group) to an intensive hybrid course design that included a two-day, in-person conference (10- and 25-minute student presentations) and asynchronous seminar skills sessions (post-revision group).Methods. Students' scores on seminar presentation rubrics were compared before and after the course revision. Between the groups, we compared resources, such as number of faculty and hours of involvement, and student time away from advanced pharmacy practice experiences (APPEs). We also assessed student and faculty satisfaction and perception. Comparisons between groups were made using statistical tests, and descriptive statistics were used to summarize student performance and survey responses.Results. The study included 370 students, 205 in the pre-revision group and 165 in the post-revision group. No significant difference was found in mean overall scores for the 25-minute presentation between groups; however, the post-revision group had significantly lower subscores for objectives and slides and significantly higher subscores for critical analysis. The survey was completed by 82% of faculty and 43% of students from the class of 2018. Most students (80%) found all of the asynchronous sessions helpful, and 70.6% preferred the intensive hybrid course format. Compared to the weekly format, all faculty reported student presentations were similar or better in quality and workload was similar or decreased with the intensive hybrid format.Conclusion. Changing the senior seminar capstone course to an intensive hybrid design reduced faculty workload and decreased student time away from APPEs while maintaining similar presentation grades and quality.