The February 2005 issue of Psychiatric Bulletin contains several articles about the future of psychiatric training.
A specialist should not only be competent in the day-to-day clinical aspects of a specialty. We should have knowledge of the underlying science from which new ideas might develop, the social system in which we practise, and aspects of related medical and non-medical fields. These should co-exist in the individual. How easy will it be for an educational supervisor to assess these?
May I propose a novel competency-based assessment? We could have a target such that trainees (call them candidates) are expected to have a breadth and depth of theoretical knowledge and to be able to apply this to clinical situations in an appropriate manner. This could be assessed by a mixture of written answers to set questions and a series of simulated clinical situations. This process could be called an ‘examination’.
How easy will it be for supervisors to ‘fail’ a trainee who, although adequate in the job does not have these other qualities? The College has rightly taken a lead on institutional racism. A central examination system (perhaps with some on-the-job assessment) may be a better safeguard against discrimination and recrimination than a relationship-based assessment – and protect both the assessor and the candidate from false accusations.
Medicine is practised in stressful situations, with limited time and competing needs. Perhaps an examination is not a bad test of this.
Incidentally trainees with extensive clinical experience in addition to theoretical knowledge are likely to succeed, those whose training has been too superficial may not.
eLetters
No eLetters have been published for this article.