Started: 3/2/2010 2:06 PM | |  | |
|
| Pilots - proposed system..any thoughts? What does everyone think of the proposed system? I think it looks like it should be slightly fairer for students as it is worrying that some people get lots of outside help and that this could be a disadvantage for those of us that don't get help.
Slightly worried that it's another test but they have said we cant revise for it so maybe in the long run it will actually save us time.
Any thoughts?
|
|
|
|
From:
Posted: Thursday, January 28, 2010 3:41 PM
Subject: Pilots - proposed system..any thoughts?
What does everyone think of the proposed system? I think it looks like it should be slightly fairer for students as it is worrying that some people get lots of outside help and that this could be a disadvantage for those of us that don't get help.
Slightly worried that it's another test but they have said we cant revise for it so maybe in the long run it will actually save us time.
Any thoughts?
I'm sorry but I completely disagree. I don't think this is a valid or useful way to select doctors. I can fully understand the need to have a fair and transparent system, but this really is a step too far. This system only decreases the differential between students. SJT's are fine for less skilled jobs, but doctors are being hired for their brains as well. This system completely negates what has been put forward previously, especially with regards to reflective practitioners. The current system has only been in place for the briefest of times, and rather than this knee-jerk reaction to poorly informed criticism, why not try to improve the current system? Yet again, the people who will lose out will be graduating medical students, and ultimately patients. There will so precious little to differentiate between medical students that we might as well all put our names into a tombola for Foundation places. |
|
|
| Do you know that it will affect you if you are at X medical school in X deanery but want to move to Y deanery where Y medical school isn't piloting the scheme. I really want to move out of my area but worry that if my medical school is chosen to participate in the pilot that I will find it hard to match people who didn't pilot in my chosen deanery... does that make any sense?!
Thanks |
|
|
|
What does everyone think of the proposed system? I think it looks like it should be slightly fairer for students as it is worrying that some people get lots of outside help and that this could be a disadvantage for those of us that don't get help.
Any thoughts?
* * * * *
Even though it won't affect me directly as I graduate in 2011, I'm glad that weaknesses in the system are being dealt with. It's a shame that an interview system, like the one to get into medical school originally, is logistically impossible. I suppose it's debatable how useful interviews would be anyway.
The quartile system is one of my worst fears, having gone from 2nd quartile to borderline 4th in just a year. Oh well, interesting things happen when finals year counts for double. The idea of changing quartile ranking to something else is intriguing.
This is my penultimate year at med school. I'm intercalating in a subject that is almost completely unrelated to clinical medicine (I don't know if anyone's heard of medical humanities). It's going to be tricky drawing on my clinical experiences to fill in the white box questions, so I suppose an alternative is helpful in that respect.
I know that writing skills are important for doctors, but the application form for Foundation shouldn't be a creative writing exercise. Perhaps medical humanities will come in useful for me in this respect after all. |
|
|
| The pilots will not affect the current system in anyway. You will still be allocated your scores as normal and during the pilots no scores obtained by those taking part will be used to allocate any places on the foundation programme. These scores will be used for analysis only and will help determine whether the proposed system is the best way forward.
Therefore, this will not affect any decision you make to move from X medical school in X deanery to Y medical school in Y deanery.
I hope this is clear. Any questions please let me know
Amy
Communications Officer, Medical Schools Council |
|
|
| Im wondering why no one has mentioned that the powers that be who thought up this new SJT thing must be so out of touch with the real world
right - so u have descriptions of various situations and u're meant to rank what you do MCQ style? so there's going to be a "right answer" for every scenario?
Can already see that it's going to be a farce like all the rest of the crap that being proposed in medical education these days - if pple saved their money from paying pple with overinflated salaries to conduct these studies/meetings/research and screwing them up repeatedly, we might be able to afford more cleaners and better hospitals! |
|
|
| What would you do instead? If there's about 7000 grads applying for about 6500 jobs, and all the jobs are more or less the same, how do you pick the right people? Interviews won't be any better- as how do you make sure they treat everyone fairly if different interviews are done by different people?
|
|
|
| Having read the proposal for the SJT, just wanted to ask whilst this might be a fairer way marking someone. How does it tell you the competenece of the doctor to be.
I feel these SJT exam example show where the aim of these changes lie. That is primarly the current system is to time consuming and expensive.
Because whilst the current system maybe open to abuse, nevertheless, it allows the individual the express the competence in a more explicit and natural way.
I would just like to and the that quartlie only account max 45 points in the MTAS, with the difference between the first and fourth quartlie being 6 points. so the shouldn't have an effect.
One question, how soon after the pilot will the changes be implemented? |
|
|
| it sounds like another failure in the pipeline
people will react differently under different conditions for all sorts of reasons - so u cant have a prescribed set of answers
but on the other hand, if there can be a scenario where there is a right thing to do and a wrong thing (and whatever choices in between), everyone will know the "correct" answer and the exam becomes an irrelevant assessment tool
all in all, this is pretty much a knee jerk reaction to a flawed system and will make things worse |
|
Posted: 5/12/2010 2:17 PM | | | |
|
| Situational awareness is essential in medical practice. It is more important as a junior doctor with little experience in A+E, or having to make a rapid differential diagnosis.
It is an imprtant step towards judging abillity by means other than paper based exams. For too long medical students rely on their wits in the exam room.
It is about time we get tested by quantitativley being marked in a clinical scenario. It is essential that the system is accurate, fair and reproducable. I hope that this is the case. Bring it on. |
|
Posted: 5/13/2010 8:11 PM | | | |
|
| will elimination of the white box questions not discriminate against those that have pursued extra-curricular activites to maximise their transferable skills such as leadership, communication skills, initiative, teamwork etc, against those that have done nothing more than obtain their degree? this will surely lead to a decreased ability to differentiate between applicants, making the system even more unfair! |
|
Posted: 5/26/2010 12:52 PM | | | |
|
| Talking to old-timers, the system pre-MTAS worked fairly well. Consultants ended up with Juniors they trusted, and juniors ended up with consultants they liked. I've seen huge variations within hospitals, and am dreading the blind process of choosing hospitals. A random selection would work just as effectively, due to many factors.
There's no choosing the "best person" for a job with a uniform application, because jobs and demands vary widely, depending on specialty and the registrars and consultant in charge. The national rank of the junior doctor makes absolutely no difference to patient care.
The current system awards people for creative writing, which is fine if you want the best creative writers as your junior doctor. I would also suspect that much of the written work isn't solely from the applicant.
I don't know if this helps any, but it's just my 2 cents worth. |
|