Unstandardized and Defective Evaluation Practices in the Examination System in Pharmacy Institutes of Pakistan

To the Editor. An ideal examination system determines approaches to both teaching (what and how teachers teach) and learning (what students learn).^1,2 Apart from student assessment, examinations help teachers modify their teaching methodologies or adopt new ones to impart the desired academic outcomes. A fair and uniform examination process is important, but many attempts to standardize the process remained fruitless until the late 1990s when the Pakistani government began reforming the examination process. Stringent measures were imposed, and some success was achieved to bring uniformity and eradicate malpractices in the examination system, especially at secondary and higher secondary levels.^3,4 Thus far, there is no report of such attempts at reforming the examination system at the graduate and postgraduate levels. The same problems were encountered while reviewing the pharmacy examination system in Pakistani institutes.

At present, a number of pharmacy institutes in both public and private sectors are practicing 2 types of examination systems – semester and annual. The mode of assessment is different in these 2 systems and is causing uneven academic outcomes. Surprisingly, different institutes practicing the same system are not uniform in terms of grading, which can deprive capable students of obtaining jobs since in government and the private sector, candidates are short-listed based on their grades in pharmacy school. Hence, there is a real need to standardize the examination system in all pharmacy institutes of Pakistan.

In comparing semester and annual grading systems, the former is found to be easier, less time-consuming, and more economical; however, the sole internal assessment is making the fairness of this system hazy due to a higher probability of malpractices by examiners themselves, or because of the influence of students, parents, politicians, and institutional heads. Inconsistency is most problematic in the private sector where teachers often try to remain in good favor with their students by showing leniency in evaluation, and in good stead with the administration of the institutes by showing good results.

In the annual evaluation system, assessment is conducted externally for the theoretical examination and internally for the practical examination. While this system seems fair, in fact it raises serious concerns including the methods used to appoint the external examiners, the non-standardized grading system used, and the cost and inefficiency of the system. Students often are concerned and inquisitive about the grading criterion used (eg, why they received a grade of 50% to 60% on a question they attempted to answer completely) and delays in receiving their grades. These are sensitive areas requiring the focus of academicians and authorities controlling the examination process.

The methods of administering and grading practical examinations are also ambiguous and un-standardized. The process is conducted by 1 external and 4 internal examiners in a strange way because there are no standardized examination equations. This is worth noting in the case of viva, a part of the practical examination, in which more consideration is given to theory and not just practical aspects. This part of the examination is one of the most un-standardized parts in terms of the types of questions given, the number of questions per student, the grading scheme per question, and the number of examiners and their approach to grading. The practical examination is also given at different times, which adds another variable. Unlike theoretical examinations, the record of viva assessment is not maintained professionally so students are not able to check their paper if they are not satisfied with the evaluation. If students are not satisfied with the evaluation they may check their paper. Students often fear viva assessments, complaining of less time to review the syllabus and the evaluation process. After the examination, they remain uncertain until grades are posted. In one of the universities where only students with the highest grades are admitted, the failure rate is more than 60%, and those who pass have marks in the range of only 50%-60%. The newspaper The Daily Dawn has reported that students fear examinations, and upon failing, some have committed suicide.⁵ It is a serious concern because students are blaming the higher failure rate on 2 things: the monetary benefits that the examiners receive for conducting supplementary examinations, and the university's desire to keep students submissive. There is no official/unofficial body to analyze and correct these problems with examinations, which is an important matter to academia not only for improving teaching and learning but also to produce professionally and psychologically sound pharmacists to serve humanity.

Suggestions

There is a dire need to adopt a uniform examination system and standardized grading system in all institutes of pharmacy. The appointment of an official body may be helpful in bringing uniformity in examination among all institutes. Likewise a critical analysis of students' results may be another solution. This study suggests that the internal assessment equal 30% of the grade, and the external assessment equal 70% of the grade (with the examination content consisting of 20% practical and 50% theory). The examiner might be required to submit the correct answers/solved questions along with the grading scale to standardize the grading. The time involved in external evaluation may be improved by encouraging grading/evaluating onsite at the university. Viva should be asked about the practical aspects of pharmacy, and to make the test more transparent and uniform, a list of questions along with answers should be compiled with equal numbers of questions carrying equal marks Standardized record-keeping for each part of the examination is crucial for critical evaluation, standardization, and to improve teaching and learning.

Khalid Hussain, PhD^a,b
a University College of Pharmacy, University of the Punjab, Lahore, Pakistan
^b School of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Universiti Sains Malaysia, Pulau Penang-11800, Malaysia