Nogid Anna, Fredrickson Mary E, Barrickman Ashleigh L, Bradley Courtney L, Vascimini Angelina, Jakab Ava
Fairleigh Dickinson University School of Pharmacy & Health Sciences, 230 Park Avenue, M-SP1-01, Florham Park, NJ 07932, United States of America.
Northeast Ohio Medical University College of Pharmacy, 4209 St Rt 44, Rootstown, OH 44272, United States of America.
Curr Pharm Teach Learn. 2025 Jan;17(1):102207. doi: 10.1016/j.cptl.2024.102207. Epub 2024 Oct 7.
Optimal methods for grading students in skills-based courses within pharmacy education have not been fully explored. This research aimed to assess the current landscape of pass/fail grading schemes within pharmacy skills-based courses and explore faculty perceptions of pass/fail grading schemes.
A 29-item, cross-sectional survey was electronically distributed to the American Association of Colleges of Pharmacy Laboratory Special Interest Group. The survey collected demographics, course grading schemes, faculty perceptions of student performance, and impact of implementing pass/fail grading schemes. Survey respondents were also invited to participate in semi-structured interviews, which were summarized due to limited participation. Descriptive statistics were used for analysis of survey data.
Fifty-five participants responded to the survey, representing 23 pharmacy institutions. Most respondents (82 %) used a traditional grading system for final course grades in skills-based courses. Some respondents (40 %) used specification grading for skills assessment, and 64 % of respondents used pass/fail grading to assess specific skills. Most respondents perceived that the change to pass/fail grading either improved or made no difference in faculty workload, wellbeing, general faculty creativity, quality of feedback, timeliness of grading, grade grievances, and faculty preparation time. The main concern was decreased student motivation and engagement. Semi-structured interviews identified a need for specific, validated rubrics, importance of faculty buy-in, and lack of impact on faculty workload as a result of the change. Concerns about residency placement and student motivation were also identified.
There is variability in grading schemes used within skills-based pharmacy curricula. Faculty perceptions of pass/fail grading schemes are positive overall. Considering the limited number of institutions utilizing this grading scheme, additional research is needed.
药学教育中基于技能的课程对学生进行评分的最佳方法尚未得到充分探索。本研究旨在评估药学基于技能的课程中通过/失败评分方案的现状，并探讨教师对通过/失败评分方案的看法。
一项包含29个项目的横断面调查以电子方式分发给美国药学院协会实验室特别兴趣小组。该调查收集了人口统计学信息、课程评分方案、教师对学生表现的看法以及实施通过/失败评分方案的影响。调查受访者还被邀请参加半结构化访谈，由于参与人数有限，对访谈进行了总结。描述性统计用于分析调查数据。
55名参与者回复了调查，代表23所药学院校。大多数受访者（82%）在基于技能的课程的最终课程成绩中使用传统评分系统。一些受访者（40%）在技能评估中使用规格评分，64%的受访者使用通过/失败评分来评估特定技能。大多数受访者认为，改为通过/失败评分对教师工作量、幸福感、教师总体创造力、反馈质量、评分及时性、成绩申诉和教师准备时间要么有改善，要么没有影响。主要担忧是学生的积极性和参与度下降。半结构化访谈确定了对特定的、经过验证的评分标准的需求、教师认同的重要性以及评分方式改变对教师工作量没有影响。还发现了对住院医师安置和学生积极性的担忧。
基于技能的药学课程中使用的评分方案存在差异。教师对通过/失败评分方案的总体看法是积极的。鉴于采用这种评分方案的机构数量有限，需要进行更多研究。
