Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Information for Supervisors of Year 3 and 4 External SSC projects Thank you for considering supervising an External SSC (Student Selected Component) project for a third or fourth year medical student at the University of Bristol. This document provides information about the purpose of the eSSC, the role of the Supervisor, the timetable for submitting and marking the report and our expectations of the student. If you have any questions, please contact either: David Jackson (Year 3 Co-ordinator) [email protected] Professor Ann Millar (SSC Academic Lead) [email protected] Dr Santi Rodriguez (SSC Academic Deputy Lead) [email protected] The Year 3 External SSC period, 2014 The eSSC period will run from 30th June 2014 – 25th July 2014. Students are expected to undertake the project and to write up and submit their eSSC report during this period. Students are not allowed to extend their eSSC work into August. The eSSC should consist of the equivalent of four weeks’ full-time work. The Year 4 External SSC period, 2014 The eSSC period will run from 7th July 2014 – 25th July 2014. Students are expected to undertake the project and to write up and submit their eSSC report during this period. Students are not allowed to extend their eSSC work into August. The eSSC should consist of the equivalent of three weeks’ full-time work. Objectives of the External SSC project The eSSCs are designed to encourage the students to think creatively and independently; at the same time, the project MUST be academically rigorous and provide experience and learning objectives that will make the student a better doctor and ideally make them more competitive in MTAS and their early clinical career. By the end of the External SSC period, students should be able to demonstrate that they can: 1. Plan a period of independent work with achievable aims and objectives 2. Undertake a period of independent work on a specific topic, seeking expert guidance as required 3. Learn about a specific topic in greater depth than required by the curriculum 4. Acquire new or improved skills as appropriate to the type of eSSC undertaken 5. Produce a written report, to a set word count, which clearly demonstrates what they have learned 5. Meet deadlines 6. Conduct themselves throughout in a professional manner (including their interactions with their supervisors), and conforming to ethical, legal and confidentiality requirements. The eSSCs are important. There are external SSCs in Years 2, 3 and 4 of the medical curriculum, and they form an integral part of the medical programme. All marks contribute to the students’ overall marks in the programme. For further details about how the marks affect the student rankings, please see the Medical School website: http://www.bris.ac.uk/medical-school/staffstudents/student/assessments/index.html
The Role of the Supervisor Each student must have a ‘local’ Supervisor, based in the University of Bristol or the Medical School’s Clinical Academy network; this is the role which you are considering taking on. (Students who are undertaking an eSSC outside the local academy area – e.g. at an international centre of excellence, or in a non-NHS or University setting – will require a local Supervisor, who will mark the project, in addition to the Supervisor at the out-of-area centre). Supervisors are normally members of University of Bristol academic staff or NHS consultants or Principal GPs at one of the Clinical Academies. The following professionals may also act as Supervisors:
Specialist Registrars: as long as a permanent member of staff (usually the consultant with whom the specialist registrar is working) is available and prepared to mark the eSSC if the Registrar moves to another job. Registrars should also be enrolled on, or have completed, a Teaching & Learning for Health Professionals (TLHP) course or equivalent.
Other NHS health-care professionals, such as physiotherapists, nurses and occupational therapists: as long as they have a research or teaching contract with UWE or Bath University, and/or are enrolled on or have completed a TLHP course or equivalent.
Academic staff at the University of Bath or University of the West of England.
A Supervisor should not be the student’s Academic Mentor, a friend of the family or a family member. The role of the Supervisor is to:
Agree appropriate aims and objectives.
Discuss with the student the ethical aspects of the project.
Consider any health and safety aspects of the project and discuss these with the student.
Provide expert academic assistance as appropriate, to get the project started.
Agree with the student the level of supervision required for the project.
Sign off the registration form
ASSESS THE PROJECT, returning the completed MARK SHEET and FEEDBACK FORM to the Year Co-ordinator, within 7 weeks of the student submitting the report (by 15th September 2014) whether or not the student fails other units.
Nominate a deputy who will agree to take over supervision and/or marking, if you are unavailable for any reason.
The Supervisor will agree to give the following guidance to the student:
1. Before registration: a face-to face meeting to discuss and decide on the topic, format, approach and title of the project, and to sign off the registration form (see below).
2. Around the start of the eSSC period, a face-to-face meeting to agree the timetable and milestones for the project and the writing of the report.
3. Later during the eSSC period, a face-to-face meeting or phone conversation, to review progress against the milestones
4. Later during the eSSC period, to read a draft report, mark the project and to give limited feedback to the student: three praiseworthy aspects that could be developed to make an excellent report, and three aspects that could drag the project down and that therefore need attention.
Please note that the aim of the project is for the student to select something of interest to them that will provide them with a useful educational experience and a solid piece of work that will show their originality, independence and critical analysis skills. Students may agree to work on a research or other project which would benefit a member of staff or Department, but they must not be pressured into taking on work against their wishes, and should not be regarded as a pair of hands to do routine work.
Registration of the eSSC Registration of the eSSC must be done by the student, but you are asked to read the registration form, agree the content and sign it off electronically. THE PROJECT WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED AND THE STUDENT PENALISED IF THIS IS NOT DONE ON TIME. The registration form also includes your contact details and those of someone you trust to cover for you if for any reason you are unable to meet your responsibilities as Supervisor; your contact details are also essential for payment to be made to your unit for having supervised the project. A copy of the registration sheet is shown in Appendix A (reference copy only). 1. Registration forms are available to the student on the Year 3 and Year 4 External SSC Blackboard sites. 2. The student needs to download and save the form before completing it and emailing it to you, asking you to
check it, fill in your own section and sign it off. You should then email the form back to the student. 3. Fully completed forms must be uploaded to Blackboard before the deadline of 12:00 on Wednesday 30th
April 2014. Registration is entirely the student’s responsibility. The University imposes penalties for late registration of course work (e.g. deduction of 10% for work registered up to a week after the deadline); we make every effort to ensure that the students are aware of this. The eSSC Report The report is required to be 3,000 – 4,000 words in length, excluding references, appendices and reproductions of questionnaires or supporting documents. Over-long or brief reports are marked down under the sections ‘critical thinking’ and ‘writing and presentation skills’. The students have been given comprehensive guidance about writing a good eSSC report (reproduced in Appendix B). As with registration, it is the student’s responsibility to ensure that the deadline is met for submitting the final report and any appended material; University penalties apply for late submission of course work. The deadline for the student to submit the report is 12:00 on Monday 28th July 2014. Marking the eSSC report The Supervisor’s marksheet is given in Appendix C (reference copy only), and the criteria against which marks are awarded are in Appendix D. A marksheet and marking criteria will be sent to you. Or it can be downloaded from Blackboard.
The marking schedule is designed to evaluate the qualities that the eSSCs aim to test (including critical thinking, originality and writing skills), together with your assessment of how the student has performed in their interactions with you – notably independence, punctuality, preparation for meetings and the ability to work effectively with a senior colleague and expert.
The marksheet also contains FEEDBACK to the student. This is something that the students greatly value, and it is only fair to give them constructive thoughts about a piece of work that will have taken them a whole month. As a minimum, we ask you to highlight three praiseworthy points and up to three areas in which the project could have been improved; if you wish to be more expansive than this, the students will appreciate it.
The project outcome does not have to be ‘successful’ (e.g. a research project might not manage to answer the question posed) for students to score well, as long as the student shows a good understanding of the topic, has thought critically about it and shows that they are aware of how their project went wrong.
Your mark will account for 60% of the total for the project. The student’s report will also be marked independently by a second marker, accounting for the other 40% of the total mark. The second marker will not be an expert in your field, and will be asked to evaluate the student’s ability to communicate the important points clearly to an informed non-expert.
The pass mark is 50%. Students who do not pass are normally required to re-sit the eSSC by re-working and re-submitting their project. As with all core parts of the medical programme, failure of a re-sit will usually mean that the student will have to leave the Medical School.
For students undertaking a group/joint project, each member of the group must produce their own original report, which will be evaluated separately. Timetable for marking the eSSC report You should receive an e-mailed copy of the report from your student(s) by noon on 28th July 2014. We ask you to please send the marksheet and feedback to the relevant Year Co-ordinator via email. We’ll send out reminders to all Supervisors as the deadline for the return of marks and feedback approaches. We’ll need your completed marksheets back within 5 weeks, please, i.e. by Monday 15th September 2014. If you are unable to undertake this please contact your deputy. If there is a problem, please contact Ann Millar.
Do you need extra resources for your project? Access to relevant, current and authoritative Library resources provides students with essential background and research information for their SSC project. Supervisors are responsible for contacting the medical subject librarians before the start of each academic year, to agree and update SSC reading lists and ensure that reading list items can be purchased for the Library before the start of the academic year. For contact details see the Library subject resources page (medicine) for academic staff at http://www.bris.ac.uk/library/support/subjects/medicine/academics/. Reading lists are accessible through the Library button on MB ChB Blackboard courses. Access to relevant, current and authoritative Library resources provides students with essential background and research information for their SSC project. SSC supervisors have an important role in facilitating this: by providing the medical subject librarians with advance information of SSC topics in your area of expertise, you can help to ensure that the Library has the right resources in place, at the right time, to meet student needs. Before the start of each academic year, you should contact the relevant subject librarian to identify yourself as a supervisor and discuss forward planning of SSC reading list requirements. For contact details see the Library subject resources page (medicine) for academic staff at http://www.bris.ac.uk/library/support/subjects/medicine/academics/. The subject librarian may suggest titles to include on reading lists, and will arrange for books and other materials to be purchased for the Library. Resources can include textbooks, monographs, reference works and freely available websites. You may also wish to recommend specific journals or journal articles; although where these are not freely available or where we do not already subscribe, subscriptions are subject to approval through the annual Medical Libraries Liaison Committee journals review process. MB ChB reading lists are maintained by the subject librarians and are accessible through the Library button on any MB ChB Blackboard course. Details of SSC reading list items can be added to Unit and Element reading lists or included in a separate reading list.
Appendix A (reference copy only)
University of Bristol - FACULTY OF MEDICINE & DENTISTRY - MB ChB Programme REGISTRATION FORM FOR: YEAR 3 and 4 SSC 2013/14
*Make sure you keep a copy of your Registration Form for your records*
*Forms must be typed and uploaded to Blackboard, including section E, by the deadline of Wednesday 30 April 2014 at 12noon* None submission applies to incomplete forms.
*Download & save to your personal drive before completing* A: Student Contact & Project Details
Student Name: Telephone Number: (mobile if possible)
University email: @bris.ac.uk Student year:
Brief Title of Project:
Aim(s) of Project:
Objectives of Project: 1. 2. 3. 4.
B: Supervisor Information Name of Supervisor: Position of Supervisor: (e.g. Consultant, ST, GP, etc): Department or directorate: Academy/Trust: University or NHS Name of Practice (GPs Only): Email (compulsory): Work Phone (compulsory): Mobile phone: Name of Supervisor’s Deputy (to cover in case of absence): Email: Work Phone: Mobile phone:
C: Ethics & Legal/Data Protection Issues I confirm that I will not store or process any identifiable personal information away (eg at home or University)
from the Trust/organisation where it was collected. Check for yes: NHS ethics permission is not required for this project OR NHS ethics approval has been applied for OR has been granted University ethics permission is not required for this project OR University ethics approval has been applied for OR has been granted
I am aware of the following ethical, legal/data protection issues:
1. 2. 3 To minimise or eliminate risk I will:
1. 2. 3
D: Health & Safety
Location of SSC (eg Radiology Dept, BRI or ABC Surgery, Bath):
I am aware of the following health & safety risks:
1 2. 3. To minimise or eliminate this risk I will:
1. 2.
3.
*Download & save onto your ‘K’ drive and then email this form to your supervisor to complete section E*
E: For completion by supervisor: I have seen the information contained in the SSC Supervisors Information Sheet (delete as applicable) Y/N
I have identified a deputy who is willing to help out if I am unavailable. (delete as applicable) Y/N
I have had a satisfactory discussion with the student regarding the aims, objectives, conduct, ethical issues and health & safety aspects of the project. (delete as applicable)
Y/N
I will have a mid point meeting with the student. (delete as applicable) Y/N
I agree that I am willing and able to mark this student’s project by the 15 September 2014. (delete as applicable)
Y/N
In lieu of a signature, please check this box
Date:
Data Protection Information: This information will be held and processed by the Medical School Curriculum Office to enable supervisors to be contacted regarding any queries regarding the marking or supervision of the students SSC. It will also be used to provide numerical information to the University of Bristol, local NHS Workforce Development Confederations and Clinical Academies regarding where SSC supervisors are employed – this information will be aggregated and no information regarding individual staff will be identifiable. Academy Medical Deans will be supplied with the details of staff supervising SSCs in their Academy only.
Additional notes after discussion with Supervisor This from will not be accepted if your supervisor has not completed section E.
Appendix B
Guidance to the student on writing a good SSC Report
These guidelines are not proscriptive but suggestive, and designed to assist not to constrain! 1. Introduction (~ 300 words) This should define the topic and aims of your SSC, including any deviations from original plans (these should also be referred to later in your essay), as well as a brief outline of the structure of your report. 2. Why did you choose this topic for your SSC? (~ 400 words) What is important about your topic to you and generally to medicine? You might include references to major literature/articles on the topic if these do not occur later in the report. 3. Main body of report (~ 1500 words) a. Description of the process/activity you undertook, which might be: The search methods you used for a literature review Description of research, including laboratory-based research (e.g. numbers, location, general description of
questions, etc) Description of experiential learning (e.g. where, for how long, what kind of patients, interactions with staff) Description of how you went about producing learning materials, e.g. e-learning tutorial, information for
patients Description of teaching (e.g. no. of sessions, how taught, other students, etc); how did this affect your own
ability to learn?
b. Results of activity could be: A description of your literature review, with your critical analysis Discussion of audit or research findings, including laboratory-based research (pull out the most important
results: don’t just include all your findings) Evaluation of your tutorial, etc. This could be by your target audience, or practical examples of your tutorial
etc, with your own discussion/reflections Case studies from experiential learning either of individual patients or experiences with classes or groups
(includes Peer Assisted Learning). Note that all clinical cases must be fully anonymized. Practical examples of what you learnt on a taught course, with your own critical analysis of the benefits and
limitations of the teaching. 4. Reflect on the strengths and weaknesses of your project (~ 500 words) What went well, and what didn’t? What have you learned from the project’s good and bad aspects? How would you do things differently? 5. Reflect on your new knowledge and skills (~ 500 words) Were they the same as you originally thought? In which ways are you better equipped for your career in medicine? 6. Conclusion (~ 300 words) Bring out the main points presented to close the paper, and include any recommendations for practice and/or further research (if relevant). 8. References (not part of word count) A good bibliography is obviously critical for a literature review – and is also important to show that you’ve made an effort to understand that others have already done in the field, no matter what your topic or activity, You must refer to existing work in the field, review it critically, and cite the references properly. 9. Appendices, if appropriate (not part of word count) Appendices should be referred to in the text. These could include the following: - Audit guidelines - Examples from your tutorial etc. - The questionnaire you used (do not place this in the main body of the text) - Detailed results from your audit/research (fully anonymized; do not include the original data)
Appendix C (reference copy only)
Year 3 and 4 External SSC: supervisor’s marksheet and feedback form
Please return by email to: [email protected] for year 3 projects
or [email protected] for year 4 projects by Monday 15th September 2014
Student:
Supervisor:
Project title:
Fail Pass Good Excellent Student Interaction with supervisor
• Professionalism 0 4 6 8
• Motivation & interest 0 3 4 6
• Independence 0 3 4 6
Total (out of 20)
Quality of the project
• Scope & aims 0 3 4 6
• Achievements 0 2 3 4
• Originality & creativity 0 2 3 4
Quality of the report
• Explanation of background 0 2 3 4
• Critical thinking 0 3 4 6
• Writing & presentation skills 0 3 4 6
• References 0 2 3 4
• Reflection & insight 0 3 4 6
Total (out of 40)
Student’s total mark (out of 60):
Supervisor’s feedback to student
Three impressive features about your project and report:
1.
2.
3.
Three areas that could have been improved and why:
1.
2.
3.
Any other comments:
Thank you!
Appendix D
Year 3 and 4 SSC: guidelines to the supervisor’s marksheet
Fail Pass Good Pass Excellent Professionalism (communications, time management, preparation, interactions with you)
Disrespectful. Late or didn’t turn up. No plans or preparation apparent. Ignored advice.
Polite, punctual, with summary of progress & plans. Took advice.
Polite, punctual, well prepared with plans and summary. Welcomed advice
A pleasure to work with. All meetings well prepared; you looked forward to them. Welcomed advice.
Motivation & interest Little or no detectable interest or enthusiasm
Just enough to finish the project on their own
Found out enough to be able to discuss the topic in some depth
Acquired knowledge that impressed you; stimulated your own enthusiasm.
Independence Expected to be spoon-fed; couldn’t have done the work without you
Just enough to scrape through on their own
Comfortably planned and executed the work; little input from you
Could have done the project without you. Came up with ideas that you would have been proud of.
Scope & aims Incoherent; no clear rationale; aims vague or pointless
Aims and rationale reasonable and clear if unexciting
Rationale convincing. Aims ambitious but feasible; clearly stated
Entirely convincing. A project that could be submitted for publication.
Achievements Aims mostly unfulfilled. Not clear how they spent their time. No obvious learning value.
Most aims met. Some educational value and new skills evident
All aims met. New knowledge and skills evident
All aims comfortably met. Project exploited effectively for new knowledge and skills, with added value
Orginality & creativity Dull regurgitation of standard sources (textbooks, reviews or Wikipedia)
Some originality detectable beyond standard sources
Refreshing flashes of novelty throughout the project
Many truly new insights, surprising for a student project. Worthy of publication.
The background Incoherent. No obvious effort to understand or explain existing knowledge
Background to the project explained clearly but without excitement
Clear, in-depth and interesting explanation of the background
Well researched account; fluent, balanced but punchy and a pleasure to read. Could be submitted for publication.
Critical thinking No obvious attempt to process background knowledge or interpret own findings
Draws basic conclusions from own findings, relates some to existing knowledge
Well argued analysis of strengths and weaknesses in existing knowledge and own findings
Consistently excellent analysis throughout. Worthy of publication.
Writing & presentation Sloppy. Many errors in spelling, grammar and punctuation. Careless layout of text, figures or tables
A few errors in spelling, grammar and punctuation. Layout clear but dull
No grammatical or other errors. Attractively laid out
Completely error free. Laid out attractively and with imagination. Camera-ready publication standard.
References References scanty and/or only standard sources (e.g. textbook, reviews, Wikipedia). Some incomplete or wrongly cited
All references properly cited (in Harvard or Vancouver). Enough to cover the project
All citations correct. Most key arguments properly supported by original references
All citations correct. All key arguments supported by well chosen, original references. Could be submitted for publication.
Reflection & insight Not clear if learned anything new or gained new skills. No understanding of the project’s shortcomings or their own gaps in understanding
Identified new knowledge and skills gained, and the project’s main shortcomings
Clear description of new knowledge and skills and the project’s limitations; also, convincing ideas of how these could have been improved
As for ‘Good Pass’, but also with sound ideas about how any future work on this topic could be guided by the results of the project.
