Undergraduate pharmacy students’ perspectives on personal stress associated with learning, teaching and assessment in dispensing: a qualitative study

White, S.; Potter, J.; Brennan, M.

Abstract

Anecdotal reports abound among UK undergraduate pharmacy students of dispensing, particularly dispensing examinations, being more stressful than other elements of the
MPharm course. However, there appears to be a lack of
research exploring this issue, as studies of undergraduate
pharmacy students’ stress do not seem to have explored stress
associated with specific areas of the course other than clerkships.1
Hence, this study aimed to explore students’ perspectives on experiencing stress in dispensing. This was the first
stage of a wider action research study aiming to improve
students’ learning experience in dispensing (an appropriate
approach where practitioners combine research with action to
improve students’ learning experience).
Qualitative focus groups were used because this technique is suited to exploring the range, complexity and points
of agreement or disagreement in participants’ perspectives.
Following institutional ethical approval, an invitation email
was sent to two cohorts of students who had completed the
dispensing course. The first author conducted six focus
groups with 25 students who volunteered. Group sizes
ranged from 3 to 5 students. The sample included participants with different characteristics to represent a broad range
of views. The interview guide was developed to address the
aim of the study. Broad topics included stress in dispensing
compared to other parts of the course, perceived effects of
stress on learning and performance, and perspectives on
stress reduction strategies. Focus groups were audiorecorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed by framework
analysis.2
Many students seemed to view the dispensing examination as being more stressful and a singularly unique, major
challenge compared to other parts of the MPharm course.
This appeared to be accentuated by students sharing stories
of failures for apparently minor errors. Particular stressors
included the ‘major fail’ rule (where single errors likely to
harm a patient result in examination failure), negative
marking, perceptions of there being more ways to fail than in
other examinations and uncertainties about how marks could
be lost according to the indicative marking criteria (for
reasons including perceived inconsistencies between lecturers’ marking). Other factors included pressure of time, being
required to dress professionally and formal examination conditions. Students’ key concern in dispensing appeared to be
how to pass the examination and hence their learning
appeared to focus more on avoiding losing marks than on
deepening understanding. It seemed that students wanted
something akin to coaching to pass the examination, including practice at coping with stress, although stress appeared to
have positive effects (e.g. checking work more thoroughly)
as well as negative effects (e.g. behaving differently to
normal and so making mistakes). Suggestions for reducing
stress concerned more coaching, rather than changing the
nature of the assessment or providing sessions on stress
self-management.
These findings suggest that students are likely to find
the dispensing examination highly stressful, partly for valid
reasons to be expected as a consequence of a high-stakes
examination and partly for reasons based on inaccurate perceptions that may possibly be corrected. Dispensing assessments should be developed to eliminate avoidable stress,
whilst still ensuring safe and effective practice.

Citation

White, S., Potter, J., & Brennan, M. (2013, May). Undergraduate pharmacy students’ perspectives on personal stress associated with learning, teaching and assessment in dispensing: a qualitative study. Presented at Health Services Research & Pharmacy Practice Conference, University of Central Lancashire, Preston, UK

• Presentation Conference Type: Speech
• Conference Name: Health Services Research & Pharmacy Practice Conference
• Conference Location: University of Central Lancashire, Preston, UK
• Start Date: May 9, 2013
• End Date: May 10, 2013
• Deposit Date: Jun 13, 2023
• Publisher URL: https://academic.oup.com/ijpp/article/21/Supplement_1/1/6102038