Objectives. To assess undergraduate and postgraduate pharmacy students' perceptions of plagiarism and academic honesty. Methods. A questionnaire was administered to undergraduate and postgraduate pharmacy students to determine their levels of awareness of university policy concerning academic honesty; attitudes to plagiarism by rating the acceptability of a range of plagiarizing and cheating practices; and choice of appropriate penalties for a first and second occurrence. The choice of behaviors in response to a scenario about the preparation of a reading-based written assignment and the strategies that students would be prepared to use in order to submit the assignment on time were also assessed. Results. Findings indicated widespread deficiencies in student knowledge of, and attitudes towards, plagiarism. Students did not perceive plagiarism as a serious issue and the use of inappropriate strategies for sourcing and acknowledging material was common. Conclusions. The study highlights the importance of achieving a balance among the 3 dimensions of plagiarism management: prevention, detection and penalty.

Successful small-group learning in problem-based learning (PBL) educational programmes relies on functional group processes. However, there has been limited research on PBL group problems, and no studies have been conducted on problems as perceived by both students and tutors in the same educational context. The authors investigated PBL group problems in a graduate-entry medical programme, and report the most common group problems, and those that hinder students' learning the most. The possible causes of individual quietness and dominant behaviour, and potential influences that group problems may have on the tutorial process are summarized in an exploratory model of PBL group dysfunction that could be used to guide further research. Specifically, there is a need for further evidence on which to base guidelines for tutors and students to effectively manage group problems.

Objectives. To investigate whether pharmacy students' anonymous peer assessment of a medication management review (MMR) was constructive, consistent with the feedback provided by an expert tutor, and enhanced the students' learning experience. Design. Fourth-year undergraduate pharmacy students were randomly and anonymously assigned to a partner and participated in an online peer assessment of their partner's MMR.Assessment. An independent expert graded a randomly selected sample of the MMR's using a schedule developed for the study. A second expert evaluated the quality of the peer and expert feedback. Students also completed a questionnaire and participated in a focus group interview. Student peers gave significantly higher marks than an expert for the same MMR; however, no significant difference between the quality of written feedback between the students and expert was detected. The majority of students agreed that this activity was a useful learning experience. Conclusions. Anonymous peer assessment is an effective means of providing additional constructive feedback on student performance on the medication review process. Exposure to other students' work and the giving and receiving of peer feedback were perceived as valuable by students.

The findings have implications for the effective design and delivery of e-learning environments for professional practice, in terms of equipping participants with requisite clinical knowledge and skills and facilitating the development of attitudes congruent with professional practice.

Objective: To examine the relationship between medical school applicants’ performances in the Graduate Australian Medical School Admissions Test (GAMSAT) and structured interviews and their subsequent performance in medical school. Design: Students in Years 2–4 of two graduate‐entry medical programs were invited to complete two previously validated tests of clinical reasoning. These results and their Year 2 examination results were compared with their previous performance in GAMSAT and at interview. Setting: The graduate‐entry programs at the Universities of Queensland and Sydney. Participants: 189 student volunteers (13.6% response rate). Main outcome measures: Students’ test results on a set of Clinical Reasoning Problems (CRPs) and a Diagnostic Thinking Inventory (DTI) and their Year 2 examination results. Results: There was no association between performance in GAMSAT and performance in the CRPs; there was a weak negative correlation between performance in GAMSAT and the DTI (− 0.05 > r > − 0.31, P = 0.03). The correlation between GAMSAT and examination results was weak (r < 0.24, P = 0.02). The correlation between GAMSAT and interview scores for each school was weakly negative for University of Queensland (r =  − 0.34, P < 0.01) and weakly positive for University of Sydney (r = 0.11), with a combined significance level P < 0.01. Conclusions: We did not find evidence that GAMSAT and structured interviews are good predictors of performance in medical school. Our study highlights a need for more rigorous evaluation of Australian medical school admissions tests.