Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-dh8gc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-05T13:52:29.387Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Examination, Accreditation or Inspection?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2018

R. E. Kendell
R. E. Kendell*
Affiliation:
University of Edinburgh
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

What is the best way of maintaining and raising the quality of ‘higher’ (i.e. senior registrar) training, and the best way of ensuring that aspiring psychiatric specialists are competent to undertake the tasks ahead of them? Basically, three alternatives are available—examination, or ‘accreditation’ of individual trainees, or inspection of training posts—and my purpose is to discuss the advantages and disadvantages of these alternatives.

Type
Training of Psychiatrists: Prospects and Alternatives
Information
Bulletin of the Royal College of Psychiatrists , Volume 5 , Issue 4 , April 1981 , pp. 66 - 68
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BY
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright
Copyright © Royal College of Psychiatrists, 1981
Submit a response

eLetters

No eLetters have been published for this article.