6, 12, 18, 24 month educational reviews

 

What is it?

The trainee organises a session with their Educational supervisors (ES) to undergo a structured review meeting every 6 months.  ES assesses progress on the basis of workplace-based evidence collected by the trainee and recorded in the e-portfolio.  This generates a learning plan and can be used to identify trainees in difficulty.

 

What isn't it?

-          An opportunity to be told what you need to do

-          Opportunity for ES to criticise trainee

-          A tutorial

 

What is its purpose?

-          To address learning needs

-          To highlight strengths and weaknesses

-          To review curriculum

-          To review competencies

-          To plan future learning requirements – PDP!

-          ES to provide guidance to the trainee

-          Pastoral care

-          To review the educational component of the job

-          Necessary for completion of job

 

Who is it for?

-          The TRAINEE!

-          The programme director

-          The ARCP

-          The College

 

Who does it?

-          The Trainee

-          The ES

 

What is the process?

-          Trainee aware of continual assessment

-          As a trainee keep up to date with assessments that need to be completed before the 6 month review

-          Trainee first conducts a self-assessment

-          Approach the tutor before the completion date for the 6 month review to organise a session: Try to meet with the ES in month 4/5, so that the ES can advice you whether you need to do any final things before the end of 6 months; also to ensure the ES is available before the end of 6 months.

 

Who's responsibility is it?

-          Overall it is the trainees responsibility

 

When is it done?

-          To be done before the end of 6 months; but ideally month 4 or 5.

 

How should it be organised?

-          Un-interrupted session in an appropriate environment with the trainee and ES

-          Minimum ½ hour session. Maximum 2 hour session

-          Requires internet access

 

What happens in it?

-          Identify learning needs

-          ES assess whether the trainee has shown evidence for the 6 core competencies

-          ES reviews whether your learning experience is enabling you to cover the RCGP curriculum

-          Progress judged: satisfactory, unsatisfactory and panel opinion requested

-          Create a learning plan at the end of the session

 

What should have been done before the meeting takes place?

-          Completed the assessments necessary at 6 months

-          Have reflected on the curriculum

-          Keep e-portfolio up to date

-          Self assessment

 

Any tips?

-          Reflected on experiences so that you can discuss it during the review

-          Complete the e-portfolio weekly

-          Likely to be asked about supplementary evidence on your learning and progress, including audits, presentations, complimentary letters, complaints, sickness.

-          Be aware that the review of your progress is made in comparison to ST3 level i.e. needs further development, competent, excellent.

 

What is the ARCP panel?

Annual Review of competence progression panel.

Panel made up of associate director, experienced trainer, lay member, programme director and RCGP assessor.

Review e-portfolios and assess competency.

 

Deanery Panels to record the outcome of each review

Annual Review of Competence Progression

Deanery

 

 

Date of assessment:

 

Programme (scheme)

 

 

PMETB Programme Approval Number

 

 

Name of trainee (with email)

 

 

GMC number:

 

National training number

 

 

Panel

Panel members

Designation

 

 

 

Period covered

first date of ST year:

last date of ST year:

Phase of training programme (ST year)

 

List post information for posts up to current period - dates with % FT/PT

Post & Hospital:

Start date:

Finish date:

% FT/PT:

 

 

 

 

Documentation taken into account (and known to the trainee) in addition to e-portfolio and workplace-based assessments:

 

 

 

Attach copies of documentation if available

Academic progress to date (if appropriate)

 

 

 

 

 

Recommended outcomes (tick required box)

Satisfactory progress

Achieving progress at the expected rate

 

Has gained all the required competencies for the completion of training (Final Review- ST3)

Unsatisfactory progress

Development of specific competences required - additional training time not required

 

Inadequate progress by the trainee - additional training time required

 

Released from training programme with or without specified competences

 

Incomplete evidence presented - additional training time may be required

Outcomes for trainees out of programme or not in run-through training

Out of programme experience for approved clinical experience, research or career break

 

Fixed-term specialty outcome - competences achieved identified above

 

Top-up training (outcome should be indicated in one of the areas above)

Signed by:

 

Chair of panel (on the day of the panel)

 

Trainee

 

Date:

Date:

date of next review

 
             

For trainees with unsatisfactory outcome only:

Detailed reasons for recommended outcome

 

 

Mitigating circumstances (if any)

 

Competences which need to be developed

 

Recommended actions

 

Recommended additional training time (if required)

 

Academic recommendations (if appropriate)

 

Date for next panel review

 

Signed by:

 

 

Chair of panel (on the day of the panel)

 

Trainee

Date:

Date:


Are there any differences between ST1 and 2?

 

-          ST2 don’t need to do a Multi-source Feedback

-          ST2 level – should be more critical regarding areas of weaknesses and looking on how to improve them.

ST2 assessments should reflect that they are more competent.

 

This Document was written by the ST 1and 2 Trainees January 2008