This site is intended for health professionals only

At the heart of general practice since 1960

Read the latest issue online

Gold, incentives and meh

Report this comment to a moderator

Please fill in the form below if you think a comment is unsuitable. Your comments will be sent to our moderator for review.

Report comment to moderator

Required fields.

Headline

RCGP accused of discriminating against ethnic minority candidates in MRCGP legal case

Comment

re quality of undergraduate training: - there is still a sense of medicine being more academic in some countries and vocational here. I think that the UK system prepares better GPs (I suspect a more academic system prepares better professors of medicine etc). re elapsed time between qualifying and sitting the CSA. I am sure that makes a difference. People 'learn' to be lazier as time goes by. This is often being more efficient but does not fit with preparing for an exam. I think a degree of maturity (1 or 2 years between F2 and GP1 years) actually helps candidates but 6 years trying to get on a surgical program probably does not help. With regards to quality of candidates I agree that has a part to play. The selection centre is far less accurate / comprehensive as the combination of the CSA and AKT. It also assesses candidates overall rather than trying to separate academic and communication skills. When I did it there were only 2 communications skills assessments. All passing selection centre is far from saying all are good enough to complete training - otherwise there would be no need for any more exams ever. In fact you could extrapolate that getting into med school is enough to get through, getting through medschool is enough to get through specialty training and so on.

Posted date

08 Apr 2014

Posted time

10:18pm

required
required
required