MDAP FARCE HITS THE HEADLINES
SAT 4th MARCH
THE TIMES
MDAP / MMC named and shamed!
posted by Medic at 5:58 PM
Friday, March 03, 2006
Previous Posts
- 3rd March - MDAP LOTTERY PHASE 2What to expect :Th...
- MDAP Lottery HQ! 480 Jobs printed out - jobs nobod...
- SCANDAL240 EU candidates gain jobs in UK118 Non-EU...
- RELEASE THE 'Lottery' SCORES! Some deaneries relea...
- EMAIL THE PRESSUnallocated future doctors!Doctor l...
- Lack of JobsACROSS THE COUNTRY - 593 students jobl...
- NewDoctor Reply - Deconstructed! Firstly, thank y...
- EMAIL SENT TO MDAP NEWDOCTOR SITE will they repl...
- DEMAND YOUR SCORE Imperial College will be issuing...
- Contact Details Modernising Medical Careers 6th Fl...
17 Comments:
Sooo looking forward to seeing this disgraceful procedure nationally outed. As the parent of a hard-working medical student let down by MDAP, I have emailed several newspapers myself. Although I work in a medical setting, my reaction as a member of the public is one of disbelief, entirely shared by my colleagues. Futhermore, I can tell you that in these days of patient-power the patients I work with would be sceptical of any medic treating them if they knew that he/she had been selected for the job in this cavalier fashion -- no interview, no assessment of academic record, clinical competence or communication skills. I hope the publicity results in a rethink at MDAP HQ, although I fear it will be too late for the 20% of 2006's final-year students who have been sold down the river.
Well done.
At last the individuals who created and designed the MDAP will have to explain themselves to the tax payers whose money funded this perverse system.
MDAP has to explain how a system so riddle with holes has managed to leave high quality medical students (whose training has been paid for out of tax payers money ) jobless while employing hundreds of overseas graduates.
Let us hope the Times article fully dissects and lays bare the MDAP and makes every one see that this is a dangerous experiment that has unfairly treated UK based medical graduates and risks the health of UK patients.
Look at the hospitals in Norfolk they have altered their procedures after being sent 'suboptimal' candidates from MDAP last year.
This is a warning of what can happen when you use an unvalidated and untested system that is based on a couple of unchecked 75 word sections marked in some instances by non medics.
MDAP must be buried -let us hope the Times artcle is the first nail in the coffin.
The Times March 04, 2006
Pick a doctor by computer 'fiasco'
By Nigel Hawkes, Health Editor and Lewis Smith
Incompetent juniors get hospital jobs they can't do
80 top specialists attack new appointments system
MORE than 80 of Britain’s most eminent doctors today condemn a medical recruitment system that is forcing them to employ substandard junior staff.
In a letter to The Times, they say that their students are angry, demoralised and confused by the online system that has done away with interviews and fails to reward academic achievement.
It comes as a survey, seen by The Times, shows that 60 junior doctors recruited under the scheme failed to meet minimum standards of medical competence. Three quarters were trained abroad and more than half could not speak English adequately. Four have already been dismissed while others have had to be retrained at great expense to cash-strapped trusts.
This year the scheme has left more than 600 young medics, some with perfect academic records, without jobs when they graduate this summer. But 208 foreign-trained students, two thirds from the European Union, have been given posts.
The system, part of a new training regime called Modernising Medical Careers (MMC), uses a form of “computer dating” to match applicants to places, without interviews. Charles McCollum, Professor of Surgery at South Manchester University Hospital, who organised the letter, said that first-class students had been turned down for jobs while others who were far less suitable had been selected.
In the first round of selection, he said, 60 out of 360 students at Manchester University had failed to get jobs, which are vital if they are to qualify fully as doctors.
The reason, he and his cosignatories believe, is that selection is made on the basis of answers to an online form from MMC that puts as much weight on nebulous issues such as ability to work in a team, or leadership qualities, as it does on academic ability. “We are very concerned,” he said. “The Department of Health has been warned, but takes no notice.”
The MMC system aims to provide a more complete, skill-based training than in the past, with a fairer system for allocating jobs. This is designed to make it easier for young doctors to get “foundation” jobs — their first two years — in places distant from the medical school where they qualified, and remove suspicions that many posts were given on the basis of “jobs for the boys”.
But Professor McCollum says that in a profession based on empathy and communication, it is impossible to select students without an interview.
Problems arose at Norfolk and Norwich Hospital and at James Paget Hospital in Great Yarmouth when a number of newly-appointed junior doctors were deemed to be unable to do their jobs. Two doctors were dismissed at Norfolk and Norwich and £100,000 had to be spent on retraining other recruits. A spokeman for the hospital said: “The doctors did not meet competencies.”
The Department of Health said this was an isolated incident involving 30 doctors and that the trusts involved had been quick to act. The doctors were given further training and, in all but four cases, then proved competent.
Many student medics have lost confidence in the system, which they say is ripe for abuse.
“It’s all about how well you fill the form in,” said Robert Lord, from Blackburn, a student at Manchester University.
“We were told people would get audited to see if what they said on the forms is true. But it hasn’t happened. People could have lied and there is no way it could have been checked.
“Lots of people haven’t got the jobs they merited, and there should be some accountability. It’s a complete lottery.”
The Times March 04, 2006
Online selection of new doctors 'grossly unfair'
By Nigel Hawkes Health Editor
RADICAL changes to medical training, introduced by the Department of Health, aim to train a new generation of doctors in the skills of communicating and working as a team.
Traditionally, junior doctors have served a form of apprenticeship, selected and mentored by senior figures who have guided their careers. Suspicious of what it saw as an “old boy” network, the department has introduced a scheme that aims to select and distribute medical students to their first posts by an entirely different system.
Modernising Medical Careers (MMC), as the programme is called, has been organised by a small group led by Professor Alan Crockard, a neurosurgeon. He was not available yesterday to reply directly to the criticisms made by medical students and clinical academics, but MMC provided answers through a spokeswoman at the Department of Health.
Medical training involves a five-year course followed — in the new system — by two years of foundation training in hospitals. The selection of students for these two years, called F1 and F2, has caused the row.
To avoid charges of favouritism, selection has been centralised and doctors are matched to jobs by a computer.
The applicants fill in a form online. It is divided into six sections, with each requiring two answers of up to 75 words each. The sections cover achievements (academic and, separately, non-academic), the “New Doctor” guidelines, reasons for applying for a particular post, examples of teamwork in which the applicant has participated and examples of leadership experience.
This means that passing exams counts for only one sixth of the total possible score, and is valued equally with, say, how convincingly an applicant can argue that he or she matches the General Medical Council’s Principles of Good Medical Practice (the “New Doctor” section) or how persuasively he or she can pretend to leadership or teamwork qualities.
Critics say that the form is “a bullshitter’s charter”, with academic achievements such as A levels and undergraduate qualifications being valued too little and the ability to talk a good story being valued too much. No interviews will be conducted, nor will answers be checked.Once the points have been assessed by a panel including doctors, a computer is used to match applicants with jobs. The lower the score, the less likely an applicant is to get the job that he or she sought.
In the first round, this year, 6,035 doctors applied and all but 660 were placed in jobs. The others learnt of their fate by logging on to a website.
They can apply in a second round, which began yesterday. “We know that a little over 400 of these applied for the most popular jobs, and they will undoubtedly get jobs in the next round,” the MMC said.
The problem is, said Charles McCollum, Professor of Surgery at South Manchester University Hospital, that some of the least talented students were appointed to jobs, while some of the best were not.
“It’s driving us spare,” he said. “We have high-flyers who will make excellent surgeons who have been rated as failures by this process, despite being excellent students. They are desperate. Some have been told they will have to be assessed to see if they are even fit to be doctors, and there is nothing we can do to help them.”
His letter to The Times protesting against the system was circulated, and within days was signed by 84 clinical academics. Some students are considering suing MMC over a process they consider grossly unfair.
The department says that it is confident that all applicants who pass their final exams this summer will get jobs.
The Times March 04, 2006
'Heartless test is open to fraud'
CATHERINE TAYLOR is an outstanding student in the view of Charles McCollum, but she has been told that she needs further assessment because her score on the test was low.“I’m gutted,” she said. “I’ve passed all my exams, only to be told I haven’t got a job.”
She believes the form-filling method of selecting doctors is “heartless and unfair” — the reason for applying for a post carries as many points as passing all exams with distinction.
Robert Lord, another Manchester student, said: “People could have lied on the forms and there’s no way anybody could have checked.”
Susannah Moles, from Colchester, is a student at Imperial College in London. She has a BSc and will have completed six years’ studying to be a doctor when she takes finals in the summer. She, too, has been denied a post so far. “I’ve passed every exam I have ever taken, while lots of people who have failed exams and had to take them again got jobs. I’m astonished they have a system so open to fraud.
“I would love to be interviewed, but nobody’s ever talked to me. The whole process is so worrying that for the first time it’s made me question if medicine is my future.”
Brilliant!
Front page of The Times
List of senior Consultants and academics against scheme
Letter in correspondance section
Lead Editorial
Funny enough those who thought up this process were unavailable for comment-left it to some spokesperson at DoH to issue a bland statement.
Lets hope the story runs and run until they are shamed into aborting this farce of a job selection process.
MDAP FIASCO ALSO ON BBC NEWS WEBSITE
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/4773264.stm
MDAP fiasco reported BBC NEWS 24
See quote below from BBC website article-link above
But the Department of Health says the system "reduces waste and bureaucracy''
What liars-the money wasted to set up computer system and money wasted on training doctors who may become unemployed.
The one of the key thing which should come across more - is that UK grads have been displaced by overseas grads in the first round.
Whose checking their application forms to check if they are correct and also if they have an adequate grasp of english to work in a hospital. Look at Norfolk Hosp problem last year as an example.
stop whinning, its all so annoying.
5th year medic with a job
How empathetic is that? And if you can't spell "whining" how are you going to cope with "oligodendroglioma" or "desferrioxamine"?
So the person who left the rather 'sly' comment above is obviously worried about his form / info being audited and validated!
Something to hide?
Don't reckon you'd get a job with an interview? I guess an unfair lottery system benefits people like yourself!
Well done you!
To 5th year medical student with a job-if you so bright and clever post your application form.
If you posting is anything to go by your an example of someone who got a job who shouldn't have.
I don't know if there are any others out but here's a petition that's just started...
http://www.ipetitions.com/campaigns/Thedoctorlottery/
TIMES ONLINE RESPONSES TO THE DOCTOR FIASCO ARTICLES (4th March)
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,8122-2071562,00.html
In Today's Times, page 4 and letters.
Page 4 article quotes Sir Nicholas Wright (Bart's & the London):
" I, and, I am sure a considerable number of the heads of medical schools in this country, to say nothing of the students, have lost faith in the people and the system that has introduced such an appalling instrument. If I were in that position, I would indeed resign".
Article goes on to mention that heads of all London Medical Schools have written to Professor Winyard complaining that the system is unfair to London graduates. It may appear on web later - look at timesonline.co.uk
The Times March 07, 2006
Allocating training posts to junior doctors
Sir, Your leading article and reports (Mar 4; letters, Mar 6) and the letter signed by 86 eminently qualified and practising consultants illustrate yet again the ineffectiveness of large IT system developments aimed at business process improvement in the NHS and other public services.
Of all the professions medicine needs to be practised by the highest calibre of individuals available, as patients undergoing life-threatening surgery are entitled to expect that their surgeons obtained more than just a 40 per cent basic pass mark in their medical examinations. They have every right to expect them to be competent in theatre and fit for the job.
This can hardly be said of the Department of Health officers who released this new system on an apparently reluctant medical profession. More than 25 years spent managing complex IT development projects has taught me that a good definition of the requirements for the system, a well-tested development phase followed by in-depth user testing by those who will depend on the system for the practice of their day-to-day activities is the only way to achieve the business benefits expected.
So my questions are: who signed off the requirements for the MMC scheme, who authorised the software development, and who finally released the system for use by real candidates? My follow-up question is therefore: who will be fired as a result of this ridiculous system and the associated waste of public funds?
Sadly, I suspect that the answer is, yet again, “no one”.
MARTIN HOUGHTON
Devizes, Wilts
Sir, I was a pre-registration house officer (the precursor to foundation trainees) in a Midlands teaching hospital 20 years ago. There was no interview or formal selection process. I was offered the post by the supervising consultant after a student attachment to his firm. Was this any more fair than the current system?
KATE PALMER
Consultant Paediatrician
University Hospital of North Staffordshire
Sir, I find it astonishing that new graduates are required to compete against oversees applicants for these jobs. House jobs, or the foundation years as they are now known, are an essential part of completion of medical training before full registration as a doctor. That the NHS should spend hundreds of thousands of pounds on training, only to require doctors to compete for these positions with oversees graduates to complete their training is lunacy. It is akin to requiring medical students to reapply for each year as an undergraduate.
DR TOBY GARROOD
Reigate, Surrey
Post a Comment
<< Home