Objective

Some students may face challenges with graduate-level reading and writing, particularly in certain active learning pedagogies, such as team-based learning or peer instruction, which require extensive pre-reading. The objective of this study is to determine the perceived utility of an academic literacy (reading/writing) test for first professional year student pharmacists (P1s).

Methods

In a collaboration between pharmacy and linguistics faculty, an academic literacy assessment tool was developed using fall P1 course materials. After pilot testing and adjustments, the revised test was administered to all P1 students by trained facilitators, then scored. Students needing literacy support were identified, met with individually to debrief on the assessment, and offered a year-long, one-on-one tutoring program. P1 faculty participated in an end-of-semester focus group session to determine whether the assessment correctly identified students who benefited from literacy support, and to decide on the impact of subsequent support. Thematic analysis was performed on the data.

Results

A total of 13 students were identified as at-risk through the assessment. Since tutoring was optional, eight students met at least once, and two students met weekly during the ensuing semester. Faculty from the end-of-semester focus group 1) stated that the assessment accurately pre-identified students who struggled with literacy components of P1 coursework, and 2) expressed a wish for earlier identification of students with required instead of optional tutoring.

Conclusions

Faculty perceived that the tool accurately identified students, but the timing and the volunteer nature of the follow-up tutoring limited the success of the assessment effort.

中文翻译：

---

药学学生学业成功工具的发展和看法

客观的

一些学生可能会面临研究生水平的阅读和写作挑战，特别是在某些主动学习教学法中，例如基于团队的学习或同伴指导，这需要大量的预读。本研究的目的是确定专业一年级学生药剂师 (P1s) 的学术素养（阅读/写作）测试的感知效用。

方法

在药学和语言学教师之间的合作中，使用秋季 P1 课程材料开发了一种学术素养评估工具。在试点测试和调整之后，由训练有素的辅导员对所有 P1 学生进行修订后的测试，然后进行评分。确定需要扫盲支持的学生，单独会面以听取评估报告，并提供为期一年的一对一辅导计划。P1 教师参加了学期末的焦点小组会议，以确定评估是否正确识别了从扫盲支持中受益的学生，并决定后续支持的影响。对数据进行专题分析。

结果

通过评估，共有 13 名学生被确定为有风险的学生。由于辅导是可选的，因此八名学生至少会面一次，其中两名学生在接下来的学期每周会面一次。学期末焦点小组的教师 1) 表示，该评估准确地预先确定了在 P1 课程的读写能力方面存在困难的学生，以及 2) 表示希望更早地确定需要辅导而不是可选辅导的学生。

结论

教师认为该工具准确地识别了学生，但后续辅导的时间安排和志愿者性质限制了评估工作的成功。