» submit an item · an event

???

Internal News - 15 May 2008

University of Bath’s MPharm gains reaccreditation for five years

At its last meeting on 1 May 2008, the Education Committee of the Royal Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain accepted a recommendation from the accreditation team to reaccredit the University of Bath’s MPharm for a full period of five years.

The conditions and recommendations are as follows:

Conditions:

Recommendations:

The accreditation team made two additional statements:

First, concerning accommodation, particularly pharmacy practice accommodation, the accreditation team noted that there were plans for developing the pharmacy footprint, currently without timelines and without formal agreement from the University that the plans can proceed.

This being the case, the team wished to emphasise the urgent need for refurbishing and reconfiguring existing teaching spaces for pharmacy practice which were, currently, limited and barely fit for purpose.

The team agreed to recommend to the Society’s Education Committee that the Society be informed once plans are firm and, also, if they deviate significantly from the plans shared with the team during the present visit.

The Society’s Education Committee agreed it would be necessary to be informed of plans and significant deviations from plans.

Second, regarding matters relating to regulations. During the visit, the accreditation team’s views were sought on a number of issues relating to proposed changes in the University’s regulations, which are aimed at harmonising regulations.

The Department wished to derogate from the proposed changes in two respects:

With respect to the first point, the accreditation team accepted the Department’s argument for core modules being designated ‘essential’ but considered that the case was not so strong for optional modules.

With respect to the second point, the accreditation team noted that requiring higher pass marks in professional areas was common, in recognition that the emphasis in such areas was predicated on the risk to patients. However, the team noted it was not the marks per se that was the issue but the standard of work they represented.

The Society’s Education Committee endorsed these comments.

Commendations:

The accreditation team commended the Department on the following:

topˆ