Preceptor tips for navigating generational differences with introductory and advanced pharmacy practice experience students

Main Article Content


Education, Pharmacy, Students, Pharmacy, Internship, Nonmedical, Preceptorship, Learning, Intergenerational Relations, Age Factors, United States


Ideally, precepting during introductory and advanced pharmacy practice experiences should be tailored to meet the individualized needs of learners. Understanding generational similarities and differences that exist between both learners and educators will facilitate meaningful interaction and improve learning outcomes. A common pitfall among preceptors is to judge the values of their pharmacy learners based on the stereotypes of the generations. This tends to be more evident when the preceptor’s generation differs from the generation of the learner. The following article describes generational attributes that influence experiential learning with general tips for how preceptors can use this information to enhance their interactions with learners. By comparing and contrasting the predominant generations in the current pharmacy education landscape (Baby Boomers, Generation X, and Millennials), the article will demonstrate how multi-generational interactions impact pharmacy education. As Millennials are the majority of experiential learners, the focus will be on their learning preferences and how preceptors can help engage these learners. Practical advice and tools on engaging Millennial learners will be reviewed. Case vignettes will demonstrate how to identify ways to tailor precepting to meet the needs of the learner, avoid common pitfalls, facilitate meaningful interaction, and, ultimately, improve learning outcomes.


Download data is not yet available.
Abstract 625 | pdf Downloads 380


1. Dimock M. Defining generations: where millennials end and Generation Z begin. Available at: (accessed Oct 22, 2019).
2. Macaulay S, Cook S. Learning & development: across the generations. Available at: (accessed Oct 22, 2019).
3. Fry R, Igielnik R, Patten E. How millennials today compare with their grandparents 50 years ago. Available at: (accessed Oct 22, 2019).
4. Reeves T, Oh E. Generational differences. In Spector JM, Merrill MD, van Merriënboer J, Driscoll MP, eds. Handbook of research on educational communications and technology (3rd. ed). New York: Routledge; 2008.
5. Stillman J. 5 myths about millennials that have been completely debunked by science. Available at: (accessed Oct 22, 2019).
6. Niemczyk M. Improve your learning and performance in the classroom: strategies for success. Kearney, NE: Morris Publishing; 2009.
7. Magnacca M. A guide to millennial learning. 2018. Available at: (accessed Oct 22, 2019).
8. Cohen SA. Instructional alignment: searching for a magic bullet. Educational Researcher. 1987;16(8):16-20.
9. Hammill G. Mixing and managing four generations of employees. Available at: (accessed Oct 22, 2019).
10. Vogels EA. Millennials stand out for their technology use, but older generations also embrace digital life. Available at: (accessed Oct 22, 2019).
11. Bart M. The five Rs of engaging millennial students. Faculty Focus, November 16, 2011. Available at: (accessed Oct 22, 2019).
12. Price C. Why don’t my students think I’m groovy? Available at: (accessed Oct 22, 2019).
13. Fjortoft N. The Selfie Generation and Pharmacy Education. Am J Pharm Educ. 2017;81(4):61.
14. Letassy NA, Fugate SE, Medina MS, Stroup JS, Britton ML. Using team-based learning in an endocrine module taught across two campuses. Am J Pharm Educ. 2008;72(5):103.
15. Bleske BE, Remington TL, Wells TD, Klein KC, Guthrie SK, Tingen JM, Marshall VD, Dorsch MP. A Randomized Crossover Comparison of Team-based Learning and Lecture Format on Learning Outcomes. Am J Pharm Educ. 2016;80(7):120.
16. DiVall MV, Alston GL, Bird E, Buring SM, Kelley KA, Murphy NL, Schlesselman LS, Stowe CD, Szilagyi JE. A Faculty Toolkit for Formative Assessment in Pharmacy Education. Am J Pharm Educ. 2014;78(9):160.
17. Bowers R, Tunney R, Kelly K, Mills B, Trotta K, Wheeless CN, Drew R. Impact of Standardized Simulated Patients on First-Year Pharmacy Students' Knowledge Retention of Insulin Injection Technique and Counseling Skills. Am J Pharm Educ. 2017;81(6):113.
18. Petrov M, Rogers GE. Using gaming to motivate today’s technology-dependent students. J STEM Teach Educ. 2011;48(1):7-12.
19. Keller JM. Development and use of ARCS model of instructional design. J Instruct Develop. 1987;10(3):2-10.
20. Cain J, Romanelli F, Smith KM. Academic entitlement in pharmacy education. Am J Pharm Educ. 2012;76(10):189.
21. Hammond DA, et al. Perceived Motivating Factors and Barriers for the Completion of Postgraduate Training Among American Pharmacy Students Prior to Beginning Advanced Pharmacy Practice Experiences. Am J Pharm Educ. 2017;81(5):90.
22. Cain J, Policastri A. Using Facebook as an informal learning environment. Am J Pharm Educ. 2011;75(10):207.
23. Chickering AW, Gamson ZF. Seven principles of good practice in undergraduate education. Available at: (accessed Oct 22, 2019).
24. Cain J, Fink JL. Legal and ethical issues regarding social media and pharmacy education. Am J Pharm Educ. 2010;74(10):184.
25. Taglieri CA, Crosby SJ, Zimmerman K, Schneider T, Patel DK. Evaluation of the Use of a Virtual Patient on Student Competence and Confidence in Performing Simulated Clinic Visits. Am J Pharm Educ. 2017;81(5):87.