Only 41% of students taking the exam in September – the second sitting of the General Pharmaceutical Council’s (GPhC) revamped assessment – passed, the regulator announced last week (October 28).

In comparison, 95% of June’s candidates passed, the highest proportion in four years.

Posting on the C+D website, community pharmacy professional Arun Bains said the “inconsistency” between the pass rates of the two exams is “shocking to say the least”.

"How can one organisation write one paper that has a 95% pass rate, then another paper three months later that has a pass rate of 41%?" Mr Bains asked.

The GPhC’s board of assessors pointed out that the September sitting of the exam generally has a lower pass rate, because of the numbers of students taking it for the second or third time.

Students sitting September 2016’s exam performed “significantly weaker” on the calculations paper than the June cohort, it noted in a report on the exam.

Pharmacy professional Geoffrey Gardener accepted that September pass rates tend to be lower than June sittings, but questioned how this September's pass rate could be so low compared to the same sitting in other years. “There is obviously a problem, and as people’s lives and futures are at stake, [it] needs sorting,” he posted.

The student reaction

Students who sat September’s exam also weighed into the debate to offer their views on the situation.

Jessica Cooper, a fourth year pharmacy student at the University of East Anglia, tweeted: "It is interesting considering this is only the second time using the new format and we've gone to both extremes so far."

"[Is it down to] inconsistency in the paper or the cohort? Or both?" she asked.

A pre-registration pharmacist posting as Pharmer for Life said they had passed the exam, but the nature of the calculations made it “very difficult” to check if they were correct.

Student Jonathon Churchill said he had “comfortably” passed, but branded the exam “truly awful”. “The calculation questions were far too wordy and I finished with seconds to spare,” he posted on the C+D site.

Student Yemisi Usher said that the GPhC’s suggestion that the low pass rate was due to a weaker cohort was “disgraceful”.

“Has there ever been a 40% pass rate in the history of registration assessments?” they asked.

However, a C+D reader posting as Chris Pharmacist pondered whether the exam was significantly more difficult than in previous years.

Some candidates may not have been “capable” of passing due to some universities lowering entry standards and the variable quality of pre-reg placements, he suggested.

The Twitter reaction

This is a very low pass rate I feel a pity for all the students who gave came so close to becoming a pharmacist and fail this exam. https://t.co/yGWWVkpDVA

— Bradleyspharmacy (@BradleysPharm) October 29, 2016

Interesting considering only second time using new format and we've gone to both extremes so far; inconsistency in paper or cohort? Or both? https://t.co/bM277K53x0

— Jessica Cooper (@PharmaontheFens) October 30, 2016

@Babir1981 I read the report and thought it was ok. The questions shown were examples of the two exams to show comparison, I thought??

— Cathy Cooke (@Cleverestcookie) October 29, 2016

Is there any justice in this world ? we are almost 10 of us failed by 0.25%=0.1mark !! @ChemistDruggist @TheGPhC pic.twitter.com/7l0CihW08W

— M Azzi (@Muhamma96725807) October 30, 2016