Home > PJ (current issue) > Original papers

PJ Online homeThe Pharmaceutical Journal
Vol 277 No 7419 p369-372
23 September 2006

This article
Reprint   Photocopy

PDF 50K, Acrobat Reader

Original papers

Mapping teaching, learning and assessment in the MPharm in UK schools of pharmacy

By Keith Wilson, Chris Langley, Jill Jesson and Katie Hatfield


Keith A. Wilson, PhD, FRPharmS, is professor of pharmacy practice

Chris A. Langley, PhD, MRPharmS, is lecturer in pharmacy practice

Katie Hatfield, BSc, MRPharmS, is teaching fellow in pharmacy practice

all at the School of Life and Health Sciences at Aston University

Jill Jesson, PhD, is lecturer in marketing at Aston Business School.

Correspondence to:
Professor Keith Wilson
School of Life and Health Sciences, Aston University, Birmingham B4 7ET
e-mail k.a.wilson@aston.ac.uk

Abstract

Aim
To undertake a national study of teaching, learning and assessment in UK schools of pharmacy.

Design
Triangulation of course documentation, 24 semi-structured interviews undertaken with 29 representatives from the schools and a survey of all final year students (n=1,847) in the 15 schools within the UK during 2003–04.

Subjects and setting
All established UK pharmacy schools and final year MPharm students.

Outcome measures
Data were combined and analysed under the topics of curriculum, teaching and learning, assessment, multi-professional teaching and learning, placement education and research projects.

Results
Professional accreditation was the main driver for curriculum design but links to preregistration training were poor. Curricula were consistent but offered little student choice. On average half the curriculum was science-based. Staff supported the science content but students less so. Courses were didactic but schools were experimenting with new methods of learning. Examinations were the principal form of assessment but the contribution of practice to the final degree ranged considerably (21–63%). Most students considered the assessment load to be about right but with too much emphasis upon knowledge. Assessment of professional competence was focused upon dispensing and pharmacy law. All schools undertook placement teaching in hospitals but there was little in community/primary care. There was little inter-professional education. Resources and logistics were the major limiters.

Conclusions
There is a need for an integrated review of the accreditation process for the MPharm and preregistration training and redefinition of professional competence at an undergraduate level.


Full text article PDF (50K)

Back to Top


©The Pharmaceutical Journal