Training review

At the June Trainers’ Workshop we discussed the additional formative assessments that have been in place in Bromley for many years in light of the new nMRCGP Assessment Process commencing for all Registrars on 1^st August 2007.  The question was ‘Is there still a place for the Bromley Formative Assessment?’ PB circulated a paper which was reviewed at our September Away day and now reflects the conclusions agreed at that Meeting. 

v  Those present felt that there was a role for a formative assessment type procedure carried out by a visiting trainer.  I think in essence it was the role of the visiting trainer that was considered essential both for educational reasons, but also as an informal ‘audit’ of Bromley Trainers.  The suggestion, therefore, was that the role of the visiting trainer should be retained. 

The following were agreed: (Please do correct me if I have misrepresented anyone’s views!)

1        A visiting trainer would still undertake a ‘review’ at around six months into the GPR year.   The nMRCGP requires a minimum of six cased based discussions, (cbd), 6 consultation observed tools (cot) and one multi-source feedback (msf) by this mid way point.  The Workshop agreed that the visiting trainer would watch a video of a consultation and undertake one of the COT assessments and perhaps compare marks with the same consultation assessed by the GPR’s own Trainer.

In addition the GPR would present a case for discussion in advance.  The CBD would then be undertaking by the visiting Trainer with the GPR’s own Trainer as an observer.  The feedback would be in the form of a brief report highlighting any relevant issues.

2        It was felt that a personal statement from both the Trainer and GPR should be retained because this provides a narrative account of how the registrar feels about their progress to date.  It is a reflective process, and more about how they ‘feel as a training GP’ and how they are settling in to their practice, rather than a summative process.  The prime elements of this would be a reflection on the last six months considering what went well and what went less well, any problems encountered to date and the individual strengths and weaknesses.

3        Exeter rating scales/log diary, audit discussion and PDP would be dropped. It was noted that there was a type of PDP within the e-portfolio and this could be reviewed if necessary.

CONCLUSION

v  Workshop should continue to adopt the role of the visiting trainer to undertake a shortened formative assessment at or around six months. 

v  This would consist of a discussion and review of personal statements, a CBD and a COT carried out by the visiting trainer.

v  The visiting trainer would write a brief report as at present.

v  It is anticipated that the whole process should be shorter and simpler than our current arrangement.  The actual meeting itself would probably be between one and two hours (allowing for the CBD and COT assessments).  A report would need to be written up following the meeting.

v  The recommendation is that the visiting trainers continue to be remunerated from the Trainers’ Workshop funds as at present.  The current rate of £180 would seem to be appropriate but this could be reviewed once the new process has been tried and we have a better understanding of how long it takes.

v  If we agree these proposals, the aim would be to introduce them in time for the GPRs starting in August, using the new nMRCGP assessments.  This means the first formative assessment would be due round about February 2008.

It was noted that the visiting trainer must keep some form of record of the process and the Workshop wanted to explore the possibility of entering this information on the GPRs e-Portfolio.  We were unclear whether this was possible. 

Outstanding discussion also surrounds whether this review would be the formal review in the e-Portfolio by ‘the Educational Supervisor’ as required or entirely separate from that.

PB October 2007