Started: 5/10/2012 5:13 PM | |  | |
|
| Points allocations - SJT worth 75% of all points Hi,
I was wondering why the system uses a 100-point scale when in fact the scale spans 67 points? Being in the lowest decile for the EPM would give you a score of 33 points - meaning that these 33 points are awarded to every single student in the system.
This seriously impairs transparency - while it appears that the SJT is worth 50% of the points, it is in fact worth 75% of the available points. This seems entirely ridiculous. |
|
Posted: 5/17/2012 5:14 PM | | | |
|
| Thank you for your enquiry.
The ISFP Steering Group accepted students’ strong arguments that 4 – 6 years in medical school should be reflected in the allocation of points. It was also agreed that because students cluster around the mean, there should not be too great a difference in marks between the first and last decile.
SJT pilots demonstrate a normal distribution along a bell shaped curve, such that the majority of applicants will score within a small range of points with the outliers occupying the most extreme high and low SJT points, thus reflecting their performance on the SJT and demonstrating their attributes in meeting the person specification. The scores to one decimal place provide the differentiation between applicants. Overall, there is a very similar weighting between the SJT and EPM component for the average applicant – but for those applicants who do score particularly well or particularly poorly on the SJT, the SJT has a greater effect on their overall rank position than with the EPM.
Will Riddington, Improving Selection to the Foundation Programme.
|
|
Posted: 7/15/2012 7:00 PM | | | |
|
| You don't seem to have adddressed the original question which was regarding trasparency.
The use of the 100 point scale makes it seem that the EPM and SJT are weighted equally when in fact 50 are available to distinguish between the highest and lowest scorers on the SJT whereas there are only 16 points between the highest and lowest scorers of the EPM.
Surely transparency should be a key feature of such an important process? |
|
Posted: 7/15/2012 7:06 PM | | | |
|
| As an additional point, please consider the follwoing analogy:
In a 100m race, everyone who turns up (thus meeting the minimum requirements for racing) is given a 34m headstart.
Why bother? |
|