| · Registration
exam (2)
· Pharmacist prescribing
· Agenda for change
· New contract (3)
· Retention fees (2)
· Statins
· Levothyroxine
· The Journal
Letters to the Editor
|
Registration exam
Examination should be abandoned
From Mr R. N. Longshaw, MRPharmS
The letters columns of the PJ often contain comment concerning the preregistration
year, the competencies to be achieved in the period and the examination
at the end of it. This year there has also been a Broad spectrum article (PJ, 13 November, p712) on the topic. Perusal of the examination results
reveals that there is always a low number of preregistration trainees
who fail at the first attempt and a much lower number who fail at the
third and final time.
It is clear that there is some confusion over competence to practise
and the registration examination. Mr Dajani states: “… it is
extremely condescending that a candidate can pass a degree course but
is then deemed incompetent to practise”. First, one wonders how
candidates who pass a pharmacy degree course can fail the registration
examination three times — once may be carelessness, but three times
indicates a failure to learn lessons from the previous attempts. I do
not believe that this examination is of a significantly higher academic
standard than the current MPharm or the BPharm that preceded it. The
second point relates to the difference between academic achievement and
the ability to link this knowledge with clinical and other skills to
provide a consistently safe service to patients. I doubt that I am alone
in acknowledging that academic performance is not an infallible guide
to professional competence. Personally, I have no problem in separating
academic achievement from competence and accepting that a degree provides
only one of the tools towards becoming competent. Fitness to practise
has always been the purpose of the preregistration year, even though
the formal requirements for confirming this have changed over time. The
registration examination is a relatively late addition to these requirements.
Notwithstanding these comments, I, too, have had concerns about this
examination for some time. The most important of these was that an end
of year examination could change the ethos of the preregistration year.
Regretfully this has happened, with a large minority of students concentrating
far too much on the examination to the detriment of the broader picture.
It seems that, for these preregistration trainees, the year has become
the “final year” of their academic life rather than the first
of their professional development. This can, and does, lead to issues
for tutors around fitness to practise, since there may be a “block” for
individual trainees in understanding what is truly required.
Perhaps it is time that the Society re-evaluated the purpose of the preregistration
year. I would suggest that it is to assess basic competence (which could
include a calculations module, although this would be better done at
college), to provide a wider range of experiential learning in the sector
chosen and to inculcate a professional approach. The examination, in
my view, detracts from this and should be abandoned at this particular
time in a graduate’s career. A far better approach would be to
ensure that, in whatever branch of the profession a pharmacist worked,
progress was linked to formal, relevant training programmes. Such developmental
programmes would lend themselves to examination since fitness to practise
would no longer be the main issue.
R. N. Longshaw
Newcastle upon Tyne
Examination provides a focus
From Miss C. O’Doherty, MRPharmS
I registered as a pharmacist at the beginning of August after passing
the “irrational and no longer practical” examination referred
to in the Broad spectrum article (PJ, 13 November, p712). It is certainly
tiresome having yet another examination after four years of them at university,
and indeed stressful. The preregistration year brings together what has
been learnt at undergraduate level and puts it into context. The examination
at the end of the year, however, gives you something to focus on and
makes you learn. I think that without the examination preregistration
trainees would not have the motivation to study the ‘British National
Formulary’, the ‘Medicines, Ethics and Practice’ guide
and other core texts to the same extent. In the article, Sultan Dajani
wrote: “A candidate can pass a degree course but is then deemed
incompetent to practice.” I have a first class MPharm degree but
I honestly do not think I felt confident, competent or knowledgeable
enough to take on the role of a community pharmacist until a few weeks
before the examination. There is a big difference between the theory
studied at university and practice-based learning.
Catherine O’Doherty
Belfast
|
The
Pharmaceutical Journal