MRCPsych exams

R. A. Faruqui

Charing Cross Scheme & Imperial College London, Charing Cross Hospital, Fulham Palace Road, London W6 8RF, UK

I read with interest the informative editorial on the MRCPsych examination by Dr Tyrer and Professor Oyebode (2004). I agree with the authors’ view that examinations require continuous assessment and refinement and also note their admission that political and external factors are likely to drive further changes.

However, I am still puzzled to note their ambiguity over defining the direction of change in the future. They give three examples of potential future directions: modularisation of courses with assessment at the conclusion of modules; continuation of high-stakes tests; and regrading of the record of in-service training (RITA) as an exit examination at the completion of higher specialist training. However, their description of these examples is vague.

This is an era of heightened societal expectations, increased regulatory control and external scrutiny of professionals. There remains at least a theoretical possibility of external quality assurance standards and mechanisms being imposed on the medical Royal Colleges, including the Royal College of Psychiatrists.

Eraut (1994) has argued that a professional’s competence has at least two dimensions, scope and quality. Scope concerns what a person is competent in – the range of roles, tasks and situations for which their competence is established or may be reliably inferred. Quality concerns judgements on the quality of that work along a continuum. Determining the acceptable and measurable cut-off points on the quality dimension for senior house officers, specialist registrars and consultants remains an important task for the profession.

Schön (1987) has argued that if professions are blamed for ineffectiveness and impropriety, their schools are blamed for failing to teach the rudiments of effective and ethical practice. Greater emphasis on the processes of training, reflective practice, training the trainers, continuing professional development, relevant educational research and interprofessional learning would help to sustain and enhance the profile of psychiatry in the society. The profession requires a clear direction from its leaders.

REFERENCES

Eraut, M. (1994) Concepts of competence and their limitations. In Developing Professional Knowledge and Competence, pp. 163-181. London: Falmer.

Schön, D. A. (1987) Preparing professionals for the demands of practice. In Educating the Reflective Practitioner, pp. 1-21. San Francisco, CA; London: Jossey-Bass.

Tyrer, S. & Oyebode, F. (2004) Why does the MRCPsych examination need to change? British Journal of Psychiatry, 184, 197 -199.[Free Full Text]


 

Authors’ reply

S. Tyrer

University of Newcastle upon Tyne, Royal Victoria Infirmary, Newcastle upon Tyne NE1 4LP, UK

F. Oyebode

South Birmingham Mental Health NHS Trust, Queen Elizabeth Psychiatric Hospital, Mindelsohn Way, Edgbaston, Birmingham B15 2QZ, UK

Declaration of interest

S.T. is the immediate past Chief Examiner of the Royal College of Psychiatrists and F.O. is the present Chief Examiner and is a member and examiner of the Professional Licensing Assessment Board of the General Medical Council.

We have noted Dr Faruqui’s comments on our editorial. Dr Faruqui believes we should be more specific about recommendations for psychiatry examinations in the future, and argues that we have been ambiguous in not defining the format for future psychiatry examinations in more detail.

The Royal College of Psychiatrists is not able independently to direct the course of examinations in the future. The Postgraduate Medical Educational and Training Board has indicated what principles should hold in postgraduate examinations, and the Royal College of Psychiatrists follows these as well as observing the practices of the other medical Royal Colleges.

There is a move to include workplace assessments as part of the panoply of assessment of competence. The methods to achieve this have not yet been fully described or, indeed, evaluated. The degree to which this kind of assessment will form part of the assessment of a candidate in a future MRCPsych examination has not been made explicit.

This is the present state of affairs. We are not expressing our own opinions in this part of the editorial; we are indicating the present state of play. We believe that competence is judged by public examinations and that performance is measured by workplace assessments that approximate to what occurs in the real world. Quality of work is not assessed in examinations and we do not believe that this is part of the remit of examination boards.





This Article
Full Text (PDF)
Submit a response
Alert me when this article is cited
Alert me when eLetters are posted
Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Email this article to a friend
Similar articles in this journal
Similar articles in PubMed
Alert me to new issues of the journal
Download to citation manager
Google Scholar
Articles by Faruqui, R. A.
Articles by Oyebode, F.
Articles citing this Article
PubMed
PubMed Citation
Articles by Faruqui, R. A.
Articles by Oyebode, F.


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Psychiatric Bulletin Advances in Psychiatric Treatment All RCPsych Journals