...
首页> 外文期刊>Journal of surgical education >Selection matters-a regional survey of UK consultant opinion on selection into postgraduate surgical and medical training.
【24h】

Selection matters-a regional survey of UK consultant opinion on selection into postgraduate surgical and medical training.

机译:选择很重要-对英国顾问对研究生外科和医学培训选择的意见进行的区域调查。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Recent changes to postgraduate training in the United Kingdom have led to considerable debate regarding selection processes for specialist training (ST) positions. A survey of the opinion of a group of consultants on the relative importance of selection criteria for entry into the first year of specialist training (ST 1) was conducted. METHODS: An electronic questionnaire was sent to the e-mail addresses of all consultants at 4 hospitals in London with a request to rank order the importance of specific selection criteria when assessing (1) a candidate's suitability for entry into ST 1, (2) the fairest shortlisting mechanism, and (3) whether an interview should be a necessity for appointment. RESULTS: Of 657 consultants successfully contacted, 212 (32%) replied. Previous specialty-specific experience gained during foundation (intern-level) training was considered the most important criteria in assessing suitability for entry into ST 1 with additional research degrees second most important. A conventional curriculum vitae (CV) was considered the fairest way of shortlisting candidates, whereas a nationalized final undergraduate examination (Final MB) was least favored. Ninety-five percent of respondents felt that an interview was essential for appointment to ST 1. CONCLUSIONS: Consultants place the most emphasis on previous specialty-specific experience and additional research degrees when considering selection for ST 1, bringing into question the generic nature of foundation training. Consultants preferred to maintain some subjective controls over purely objective markers in the selection process. Thus, there is little support for a nationalized ranked examination as a shortlisting tool, and an interview is recognized as essential for appointment to ST 1. There is a need to build on these preliminary findings by conducting further investigations before changes to selection methodology are implemented.
机译:背景与目的:英国研究生培训的最新变化导致有关专家培训(ST)职位甄选过程的大量争论。对一组顾问关于选择标准进入第一年专业培训(ST 1)的相对重要性的意见进行了调查。方法:将电子问卷发送到伦敦4家医院的所有顾问的电子邮件地址,要求在评估(1)候选人是否适合进入ST 1(2)时对特定选择标准的重要性进行排序。最公平的入围机制;以及(3)是否应任命面试。结果:成功联系了657位顾问,其中212位(32%)回答。基础(实习级)培训期间获得的以前的特定专业经验被认为是评估是否适合进入ST 1的最重要标准,其次是其他研究学位。传统的简历(CV)被认为是候选人入围的最公平的方式,而国民化的最终本科考试(最终MB)则最不受欢迎。 95%的受访者认为面试对于任命ST 1是必不可少的。结论:在考虑选择ST 1时,顾问最着重于以前的专业经验和额外的研究学位,这对基金会的通用性提出了质疑。训练。顾问倾向于在选择过程中对纯客观标记保持一些主观控制。因此,几乎没有人支持将全国排名的考试作为入围工具,面试被认为是任命ST 1的必要条件。在改变选择方法之前,有必要通过进一步调查来建立这些初步调查结果。 。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号