3.8 Article

Lessons learned pivoting to a virtual OSCE: Pharmacy faculty and student perspectives

Journal

CURRENTS IN PHARMACY TEACHING AND LEARNING
Volume 13, Issue 11, Pages 1498-1502

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.cptl.2021.06.046

Keywords

OSCE; Virtual; Assessment

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study discusses the process of redesigning a Capstone OSCE for third-year pharmacy students at the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, successfully transitioning from in-person to virtual assessments and making necessary adjustments to the evaluation process.
Background and purpose: In-person Objective Structured Clinical Examinations (OSCEs) are used as assessments in most pharmacy programs, however, reports of virtual OSCEs and skills assessments are limited. With a pivot to virtual OSCEs necessitated by the COVID-19 pandemic, it is important to consider core competencies assessed as well as logistics, technology, and other factors. Educational activity and setting: The virtual redesign of a Capstone OSCE for third professional year pharmacy students at the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic. Findings: Core components of pivoting an in-person Capstone OSCE to virtual included an initial assessment of what was planned, what competencies were being assessed, and how this could be accomplished in the virtual realm. Key stakeholders such as students, testing and evaluation services, and faculty were included in the planning process. In addition to changes in OSCE delivery, grading processes and remediation were also modified. Summary: This Capstone OSCE merged virtual education and skills-based assessments together out of necessity and provides an example of flexibility and nimbleness in times of great change. Although further assessment is needed, processes used and lessons learned are helpful for future, intentional planning of virtual or partially virtual skills assessments. (C) 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available