Autoscores for 2012 medical specialty ST3 recruitment Page 1 of 11 Introduction Applicant self-assessment (of achievements) has been a feature of RCP-coordinated physician recruitment ever since its inception in 2009. We believe strongly that the applicant is in the best position to judge some of their own achievements. The fact that many other specialties within medicine now use applicant self-assessment is testament to the usefulness and validity of this approach. The sections below answer some frequent queries: Are the marks and marking scheme confidential? In previous years, before coordinated recruitment started in 2007 there was virtually no clarity about short-list marking. This was more because the marking scheme was not articulated clearly rather than a wish to hide this information from potential applicants. The RCP has always made the drop-downs and maximum scores available on the recruitment websites for anyone to see. This year, for the first time, we are publishing all the possible scores associated with achievements. A number of other specialties (eg foundation and ACCS) have made similar information available. Do I need to view the help text on the website when selecting the drop-downs on the application form? Whilst we have tried very hard to make the drop-downs as clear as possible and stand-alone, inevitably there is not as much space as we would like to describe every single variation possible for some of the achievements. It is strongly recommended that you view the help text when selecting the appropriate drop-downs. This will help you to avoid inadvertent under-scoring or over-scoring of your achievements. Why do different achievements get the same marks? It is appreciated that there will be debate about the relative merits of differing achievements. The fact that, for example, a PhD gains the same mark as extensive teaching achievements does not mean that we regard these two, very different achievements, as the same. It is more to allow a diverse range of applicants, some of whom may have a very academic background and some may have better skills in ‘energy’ related topics, to gain points. We would not wish one ‘type’ of applicant to exclude another ‘type’ of applicant – we appreciate that medicine needs, and benefits from, a wide range of applicants. Most applicants will not be able to record achievements in all domains. Why is there differentiation of marks for the same achievement? For example, more marks are awarded for closing the audit loop and presenting the work, than for just undertaking an audit. The abiding rule in attributing a particular score has been to award more marks to achievements which have taken more time and / or effort. How were the achievement scores devised? The marking scheme, which is based on the person specifications (viewed at http://www.mmc.nhs.uk/specialty_training/specialty_training_2012/recruitment_process/stage_2_-_choosing_your_specia/person_specifications_2012.aspx ) was agreed after extensive consultation with recruiting clinicians throughout the UK. It is designed to reward a variety of attributes regarded as desirable, and therefore produce a spread of marks for all applicants. There is no absolute ‘correct’ short-list score for an achievement, or for the level reached of that achievement.
Welcome message from author
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
Autoscores for 2012 medical specialty ST3 recruitment
Page 1 of 11
Introduction Applicant self-assessment (of achievements) has been a feature of RCP-coordinated physician recruitment ever since its inception in 2009. We believe strongly that the applicant is in the best position to judge some of their own achievements. The fact that many other specialties within medicine now use applicant self-assessment is testament to the usefulness and validity of this approach. The sections below answer some frequent queries:
Are the marks and marking scheme confidential? In previous years, before coordinated recruitment started in 2007 there was virtually no clarity about short-list marking. This was more because the marking scheme was not articulated clearly rather than a wish to hide this information from potential applicants. The RCP has always made the drop-downs and maximum scores available on the recruitment websites for anyone to see. This year, for the first time, we are publishing all the possible scores associated with achievements. A number of other specialties (eg foundation and ACCS) have made similar information available.
Do I need to view the help text on the website when selecting the drop-downs on the application form? Whilst we have tried very hard to make the drop-downs as clear as possible and stand-alone, inevitably there is not as much space as we would like to describe every single variation possible for some of the achievements. It is strongly recommended that you view the help text when selecting the appropriate drop-downs. This will help you to avoid inadvertent under-scoring or over-scoring of your achievements.
Why do different achievements get the same marks? It is appreciated that there will be debate about the relative merits of differing achievements. The fact that, for example, a PhD gains the same mark as extensive teaching achievements does not mean that we regard these two, very different achievements, as the same. It is more to allow a diverse range of applicants, some of whom may have a very academic background and some may have better skills in ‘energy’ related topics, to gain points. We would not wish one ‘type’ of applicant to exclude another ‘type’ of applicant – we appreciate that medicine needs, and benefits from, a wide range of applicants. Most applicants will not be able to record achievements in all domains.
Why is there differentiation of marks for the same achievement? For example, more marks are awarded for closing the audit loop and presenting the work, than for just undertaking an audit. The abiding rule in attributing a particular score has been to award more marks to achievements which have taken more time and / or effort.
How were the achievement scores devised? The marking scheme, which is based on the person specifications (viewed at
http://www.mmc.nhs.uk/specialty_training/specialty_training_2012/recruitment_process/stage_2_-_choosing_your_specia/person_specifications_2012.aspx) was agreed after extensive consultation with recruiting clinicians throughout the UK. It is designed to reward a variety of attributes regarded as desirable, and therefore produce a spread of marks for all applicants. There is no absolute ‘correct’ short-list score for an achievement, or for the level reached of that achievement.
Autoscores for 2012 medical specialty ST3 recruitment
Page 2 of 11
How are the achievement scores used? The short-list score is used at the application stage to rank candidates who apply to a specialty. Interview capacity, which tends to be limited for a variety of reasons, is then allocated according to ranking. At present this is seen as the fairest way to allocate the interview slots, particularly if it is not possible to interview all applicants; also, if one particular deanery is over-subscribed, a lower-ranked candidate will then be cascaded to another of their deanery preferences. The application achievement score constitutes 20% of the final score that applicants can gain. Most of the final score is based on interview performance, which concentrates on testing the desirable achievements and attributes not marked easily at the application stage.
Why are a limited range of achievements assessed at the application stage? The range of achievements that can be marked at the application stage is necessarily limited because there are only certain domains in the person specifications
(http://www.mmc.nhs.uk/specialty_training/specialty_training_2012/recruitment_process/stage_2_-_choosing_your_specia/person_specifications_2012.aspx) that can be assessed on a written application form. Remaining domains, eg problem solving ability, communication, suitability for specialty etc, are better assessed at interview. The majority of marks are obtained at the interview, rather than the application stage.
I don’t appear to be able to score points in most of the domains, but I know I’m an effective clinician We fully appreciate that there are some very good clinicians who, for various reasons, have not been able to record some of the achievements that are assessed at the short-listing stage. For that reason we try very hard to offer an interview to all eligible applicants, because we believe that the interview is the key place for an applicant to ‘sell’ themselves. However, it will be worth looking at the various domains, eg teaching and audit / quality improvement to see if you can achieve some of the desirable attributes mentioned in the relevant person specification, which – as well as contributing to the service – should help your own professional development.
The achievement I have doesn’t fit easily into one of the drop-downs Every recruitment round we review the wording and scoring of the drop-downs in order to clarify issues raised by applicants. We realise that we can never cover every single option; however, neither could the previous clinical marking system. If you are uncertain which drop-down to use, pick the best match and be prepared to justify your choice at interview. We welcome constructive suggestions and will continue to work on this important area to improve it year-on-year.
My achievement could go in more than one domain – what shall I do? An achievement can be declared (and gain points) in only one section. It would be considered cheating if you declared, for example, an audit presented internationally in the presentation section and the same audit in the audit section. Only significantly separate achievements can be entered. If the achievements are not significantly different but you feel both are worthy of mention, you may use the related text box (accessed by clicking ‘other’) or the commitment to specialty / personal statement space.
Autoscores for 2012 medical specialty ST3 recruitment
Page 3 of 11
I have lots of achievements in one domain, why can I get credit for only one (the best) of these? The commonest example quoted is someone who has a lot of academic achievements but can use only one drop-down. We recommend using the highest-scoring drop-down that is applicable. Additional achievements in this domain can be mentioned in the related text box or in the commitment to specialty and personal statement space.
I have significant achievements that don’t fit into any of the pre-determined categories – what shall I do? If you have achievements that do not fit into any of the categories that gain automatic marks please use the commitment to specialty and personal statement space to enter details, for review by recruiters. Please note this box is for fresh information – do not repeat information that has already gained marks elsewhere
I notice the ‘other’ option in the drop-downs does not attract any marks. Why is this? It is not possible to mark every achievement at the application stage, but we do know that applicants have achievements that could be mentioned to recruiters. Information in this section is viewed and noted by recruiters, and may be explored further at interview.
What if I can’t provide evidence for my achievements? If you are claiming an achievement which attracts a score, it is imperative that you provide some evidence for this. If your achievement cannot be verified, your application may be disqualified. The exact nature of the evidence to supply is at your discretion, we are unable to specify all possible options in advance. If you feel you are unable to provide satisfactory evidence for an achievement you are welcome to mention the achievement in the ‘other’ box or mention it in the commitment to specialty and personal statement space, where it will be viewed and noted by recruiters, and may be explored further at interview.
Surely some applicants will ‘over sell’ themselves or even cheat? Honesty is regarded very highly in medicine. It is absolutely vital that patients and colleagues can trust us and know that we are acting honestly. We would rather recruit an honest doctor with fewer achievements than one who appears to have great achievements but who has been dishonest. It has always been possible, whatever method of marking used, for an applicant to over-sell, or even lie about their achievements. Applicants are required to confirm their application is truthful in the declaration section; all recruiters rely on an honest self-assessment at the application stage but they do check all claims made. If you are uncertain about which drop-down to use, it is wisest to choose the lower-scored drop-down. If you are unable to justify your choice of a drop-down at interview, you may be penalised or even withdrawn from the recruitment round. Serious probity issues may be reported to your supervisors and the GMC. It really is not worth risking your application for the sake of a few extra points at the application stage. You will have opportunity at the interview stage to present yourself, and your achievements, in the best possible light, and amplify on various points.
Autoscores for 2012 medical specialty ST3 recruitment
Page 4 of 11
What should I enter into the ‘commitment to specialty and personal statement’ space? Please view the attributes listed in the ‘desirable’ sections of the Person Specification to guide your entries in the application form. If you have achievements that do not fit into any of the categories that gain automatic marks please use this section to enter details, for review by recruiters. Please note this box is for fresh information – do not repeat information that has already gained marks elsewhere. Some suggestions:
any specific specialty level skills eg practical skills (cardiac ultrasound, bronchoscopy, joint aspiration skills etc)
any specific specialty or related specialty experience or training (eg posts, specialist clinics, taster sessions, work abroad, etc)
research commenced or grants applied for that have not yet resulted in presentations or publications
presentations, papers etc in preparation or submitted, awaiting review
explanations / detail about items (publications, audit etc) that you did not have room for elsewhere
evidence of management and leadership eg rota organiser, arranging / contributing to induction, trainee representative on committees / organisations
evidence of team-working, communication
evidence of commitment might include membership of specialtist or related societies
evidence of non-medical /clinical skills/experience which have provided transferrable knowledge / skills / behaviour relevant to your application.
These are just a few examples to guide you, you may think of others.
How many points do I need to score to get into my first choice deanery for interview? It is not possible for us to be able to give you this information until the round is closed, and we know how many applications have been sent to the deaneries in question. However, we can suggest a very approximate estimate based on last year’s application patterns and short-list scores. It is suggested you estimate your own shortlist score, based on the autoscore table; then inspect last year’s short-list score ranges http://www.st3recruitment.org.uk/documents/round_1_sl_scores.html to assess how you compare with last year’s candidates. Please note we do not have historical information for specialties not coordinated by the RCP in 2011 (dermatology round 1, ID, rehabilitation medicine and rheumatology). Last year, when back-up applications were allowed for all the RCP-hosted specialties, eligible candidates who were in the top quartile generally obtained an interview. Those in the second quartile were very likely to gain an interview, unless they applied to a very competitive specialty / deanery, eg cardiology in London. Candidates in the third quartile obtained an interview if they were applying to a less competitive specialty / deanery. Candidates in the lower quartile were less likely to obtain an interview. This year, with the introduction of the single cascadable application (SCA) for some of our specialties, we very much hope that all candidates with scores in the first, second and third quartiles will be offered an interview for these specialties. Some of the SCA specialties may even be able to interview all eligible applicants. However, it is inevitable that some candidates with lower scores will have their application cascaded to their second, third or even fourth-choice deanery.
Autoscores for 2012 medical specialty ST3 recruitment
Page 5 of 11
The word count is too short to include everything I want to mention We appreciate that you may have a lot of achievements to write about. However, being able to write concisely and prioritise the key points is an important skill to demonstrate. It is not possible for recruiters to read a lot of information, bearing in mind that there may be hundreds of applications to a particular deanery / specialty. You may be given the opportunity to expand further on a particular point at interview.
Can I add future achievements? You must only use the drop-downs associated with a score for achievements that you have at the time of the submission of the application, and that you can provide evidence for. The rule of ‘achievements obtained by the close of application date’ is then used by everyone who is applying, and is therefore fair to all. If you are on track to gain an achievement (eg you are writing a paper, or are due to give a presentation in the future), you may wish to click ‘other’ and mention your planned achievement in the text box. Alternatively you could enter the detail in ‘commitment to specialty’ / ‘personal statement’ if you felt that was a more appropriate place.
Autoscores for 2012 medical specialty ST3 recruitment
Page 6 of 11
Breakdown of scoring per section
(Qualifications) Additional achievements max
score 10
(info)
National prize related to medicine 10 This means that all medical undergraduates and postgraduates in the country of training are eligible for the prize in question
Award for primary medical qualification (e.g. honours or distinction typically given to only the top 10%)
8 If more than 10% of the year receive honours / distinction etc, then it no longer marks you out as exceptional in this category
More than one prize or distinction or merit related to parts of the medical course
6
One prize or distinction or merit related to parts of the medical course 4
Scholarship or bursary or equivalent awarded during medical course 2
Other: please specify 0 This space is for you to mention anything else you think is of relevance that cannot be categorised above
(Qualifications) Additional undergraduate degrees and Qualifications max
score 10
Degree obtained during medical course e.g. intercalation, BSc BA etc. – 1st class honours
10
Undergraduate degree prior to starting medicine – 1st class 8
Degree obtained during medical course e.g. intercalation, BSc BA etc. – 2.1 7
Undergraduate degree prior to starting medicine – 2.1 5
Degree obtained during medical course e.g. intercalation, BSc BA etc. – other 2
Undergraduate degree prior to starting medicine – other 2
Other: please specify 0 This space is for you to mention anything else you think is of relevance that cannot be categorised above
Autoscores for 2012 medical specialty ST3 recruitment
Page 7 of 11
(Qualifications) Postgraduate degrees and qualifications max
score 10
PhD or DPhil Doctor of Philosophy 10 You undertook full time research involving original work, usually of at least 3 years duration and ideally resulting in one or more peer reviewed publications
MD Doctor of Medicine - 2 year original research-based 8 You undertook full time research involving original work, usually of at least two years duration and ideally resulting in one or more peer reviewed publications
MPhil Master of Philosophy 6
MSc 5 A Masters course, usually lasting a year
MD Doctor of Medicine - dissertation 4 You undertook a dissertation (ie writing about a subject not using your own original research) with a relatively small amount of research content and usually 1 year or less in duration
Other relevant postgraduate diploma or certificate (NB do not enter MRCP(UK) or other qualifying PG exam here)
3 eg Diploma of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene, Teaching Certificate
Other: please specify 0 This space is for you to mention anything else you think is of relevance that cannot be categorised above
Autoscores for 2012 medical specialty ST3 recruitment
Page 8 of 11
(Supporting information) Presentations max
score 6
Presentations (an oral presentation, with or without slides, in front of an audience) can be of anything related to medicine, typically a case or case series, research or other topic. You must not include any audit presentations here, use the specific audit section.
I have made an oral presentation or I have shown more than one poster at a national or international meeting
6 National means that participation is routinely extended to, and accepted by, anyone within the country
I have made an oral presentation at a regional meeting 4
Regional means that the participation is confined to, for example, the county, or strategic health authority or a recognised cluster of hospitals extending beyond a city. If you have presented one poster internationally you may use this drop-down
I have shown a poster at a national or regional medical meeting 3 If you have contributed to a poster presented internationally but were not first author and have not used another drop-down to claim this achievement you may use this drop-down
I have presented or shown a poster at a local meeting on one or more occasions 2
Local usually means participation is confined to a local hospital or University setting If you have contributed to a poster presented regionally but were not first author and have not used another drop-down to claim this achievement you may use this drop-down
I have made no presentations nor shown any posters 0
Autoscores for 2012 medical specialty ST3 recruitment
Page 9 of 11
(Supporting information) Publications max
score 8
Peer reviewed means that your article has been independently reviewed by an expert in the field, and the publication should normally have a PubMed reference (unless in press). Cochrane reviews can be regarded as equivalent. Use the associated text box to cite the article(s).
I am first author in more than one peer reviewed (PubMed cited) original research publications
8 ‘First author’ also includes ‘joint first author’ (this is specified in the publication)
I am co-author in more than one peer reviewed (PubMed cited) original research publications
7
I am first author in one peer reviewed (PubMed cited) original research publication
6 ‘First author’ also includes ‘joint first author’ (this is specified in the publication) If you have written a whole book (published) related to medicine (in its broadest sense) you may use this drop down
I am co-author in one peer reviewed (PubMed cited) original research publication
5
I am an author in more than one peer reviewed (PubMed cited) other publication
4 Editorials, reviews, abstracts, case reports, letters etc can be included here If you have written a chapter for a book (published) related to medicine (in its broadest sense) you may use this drop down
I am first author in one peer reviewed (PubMed cited) other publication (eg case report, letter)
3 Editorials, reviews, abstracts, case reports, letters etc can be included here. ‘First author’ also includes ‘joint first author’ (this is specified in the publication)
I have published one or more abstracts or non-peer reviewed articles 2 I have no publications or abstracts 0
Autoscores for 2012 medical specialty ST3 recruitment
Page 10 of 11
(Supporting information) Teaching experience max
score 10
help text
I have designed and organised a regional medical teaching programme (consisting of more than one session) and have undergone formal training in teaching methods
10
Regional means that the teaching participation extends beyond a local hospital or University setting - for example, the county, or strategic health authority or a recognised cluster of hospitals, extending beyond a city. You devised the programme, arranged speakers / teachers. You have undergone formal training, more than the usual short (1 or 2 day) course offered to many postgraduates and more than an on-line module
I have designed and organised a regional medical teaching programme (consisting of more than one session) and have evidence of formal feedback
9 Formal feedback means that you have either evidence of senior observation / feedback (eg Teaching Observation Tool) or that there has been independent collection / analysis of participants’ feedback forms
I have designed and organised a local medical teaching programme (consisting of more than one session) and have undergone formal training in teaching methods
8 You have undergone formal training, more than the usual short (1 or 2 day) course offered to most postgraduates and more than an on-line module
I have designed and organised a regional medical teaching programme (consisting of more than one session)
8
I have designed and organised a local medical teaching programme (consisting of more than one session) and have evidence of formal feedback
7 Formal feedback means that you have either evidence of senior observation / feedback (eg Teaching Observation Tool) or that there has been independent collection / analysis of participants’ feedback forms
I have designed and organised a local medical teaching programme (consisting of more than one session)
6
I have had a regular medical teaching slot on the same programme over at least 3 months
5
I teach health professionals and /or medical students at least weekly 3 I have taught health professionals and /or medical students occasionally 2 I have no experience of teaching health professionals or medical students 0
Autoscores for 2012 medical specialty ST3 recruitment
Page 11 of 11
(Supporting information) Clinical audit max
score 10
I have designed & led an audit or quality improvement project leading to a documented change in practice, and I have presented it at a meeting
10 You devised the question to be asked, designed the proforma, collated the data, developed relevant conclusions, suggested a change in practice, documented (ie re-audited) the change and presented the work
I have led an audit or quality improvement project leading to a documented change in practice
8 As above, but the work was not presented by you
I have designed, led and completed an audit or quality improvement project and I have presented my findings at a local meeting
6 You did not complete the audit cycle ie no re-audit
I have designed, led and completed an audit or quality improvement project 4 You did not complete the audit cycle ie no re-audit I have helped others undertake one or more audit or quality improvement projects
2
I am currently undertaking an audit or quality improvement project 2 I have not participated in an audit or quality improvement project 0
(Qualifications) MRCP PACES (includes equivalent or alternative entry exams) Score
Full exam 14 Only qualifying postgraduate exams (equivalent and alternative PG qualifications which are specified individually on the application form) can gain points
Related Documents
