The recent exams on 16/06/2026 have raised significant concerns among examinees due to a noticeably high number of overly difficult questions in both paper 1 and paper 2. This seems inconsistent with the expected standards of GPhC assessments and has caused distress among those who took the exam. Typically, exams are designed to evaluate knowledge and skills expected at the level of competence, allowing candidates to exhibit their understanding effectively. However, this particular exam appeared to deviate significantly from the norm, introducing complexity and challenges not previously encountered in similar assessments.

Many candidates, myself included, have sat for these exams multiple times and feel that the papers did not align with past experiences in terms of difficulty and content. As the stakes are incredibly high, given their impact on professional qualifications and future career opportunities, it is crucial that examination standards and fairness are maintained consistently.

We propose a thorough review of the exams structure and content by an independent panel of educational experts and practicing clinicians to ensure that this is resolved in a fair and equitable way. Additionally, we urge for transparency in this process. 

We respectfully request that the examination board review the concerns raised and take appropriate measures to address the issues identified, in order to ensure fairness and consistency across the assessment process.