Pharmacy students’ views on the objective structured clinical examination (Osce): Findings from two malaysian universities

Abstract

Objectives: To investigate and compare the views of undergraduate pharmacy students in two Malaysian pharmacy schools (one private and one public) regarding the organisation, quality, and objectivity of Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE). Methods: A cross-sectional study was undertaken among penultimate and final year students in two Malaysian pharmacy schools between October to December 2019 (International Islamic University Malaysia [IIUM] and University of Cyberjaya [UoC]). A questionnaire was developed, tested, validated and then distributed to study participants through online Google forms. Results: A total of 221 undergraduate pharmacy students participated in the study. Students from the public university disagreed with the allocated time for the OSCE stations (IIUM 63.9% and 48.7% vs UoC 11.6% and 14.3%). Relatively few students agreed that OSCE is a less stressful type of assessment compared to other traditional methods (IIUM 7.2% and 10.3% vs UoC 39.5% and 23.8%). Both groups of students disagreed that OSCE marks were likely to be affected by the student’s gender (IIUM 73.2% and 66.7% vs UoC 67.4% and 78.6%). Private university students agreed more than their counterparts in public university that the OSCE scores were valid indicators of the students' skills (UoC 79% and 64.3% vs IIUM 39.2% and 30.8%). Conclusion: The majority of participants had positive views on the organisation, quality, and objectivity of OSCE, with several differences between students in public and private universities. There are few areas to be further considered to ensure more positive OSCE experience for students such as revision on the time allocation for every station and on the provision of timely constructive feedback.