Assessment Centre

Dr Jane Kidd

Warwick Medical School

Assessment Centre Process

History and collaboration

Process

Outcomes

History and Collaboration

Medical Schools Council

Department of Health

Work Psychology Partnership

Barts

Competencies

Communication skills

Effective learning style

Empathy

Initiative and resilience

Insight and integrity

Organisation and problem solving

Team working

Why did we take the plunge?

Graduate Entry Programme

Relatively new medical school

Unease about then current process

- supplementary application form

- value of interviews

- effectiveness at assessing competencies expected by GMC

Prior to attendance at Assessment Centre: Candidates

UCAS statement

- Achieved or predicted to achieve a 2i or 1st in the biological, health, natural or physical sciences

- Academic reference

- Personal statement

- reviewed by 2 assessors

UKCAT score

Process

Each Assessment Centre runs for half a day

Each candidate completes 3 tasks

Observed by 3 different assessors

Rated on competencies specific to the task

The three tasks

Video-based exercise

(CS, EM, INI, IR, LS)

Group working exercise

(CS, OPS, TW, IR)

Written exercise

(EM, OPS, TW, INI)

Timetable for candidates

Registration

Candidate briefing

Task 1

Task 2

Break

Task 3

Research and Evaluation Questionnaire

Candidate debriefing

Timetable for Assessors

Attend training - Certificate of Attendance

Attend briefing

Allocated to task for the session

Observe and record behaviours

Classify behaviours

Evaluate behaviours

Determine overall exercise rating

Participate in “wash up”

Data analysis

Competencies weighted

Total score calculated

Offers made

Administrative support

With 48 candidates per session

- 21 assessors

- 4 task facilitators

- At Warwick we have chaperones for the video-based interview (1st year students)

- Leads for Admissions

- Administrators and clerical (registration, photographs, data checking)

Candidates views of process

Acceptability

Educational impact

Validity

Future outcomes

Predictive validity of the process

Unintentional advantage to specific groups of applicants

Review the research and evaluation data

Questions?