If you continue without changing your settings, we’ll assume you’re happy to receive all cookies from the BMA website. Find out more about cookies
When you visit any web site, it may store or retrieve information on your browser, mostly in the form of cookies. This information might be about you, your preferences or your device and is mostly used to make the site work as you expect it to. The information does not usually directly identify you, but it can give you a more personalised web experience.
Because we respect your right to privacy, you can choose not to allow some types of cookies. Click on the different category headings to find out more and change our default settings. However, blocking some types of cookies may impact your experience of the site and the services we are able to offer.
These cookies are necessary for the website to function and cannot be switched off in our systems. They are usually only set in response to actions made by you which amount to a request for services, such as setting your privacy preferences, logging in or filling in forms.
You can set your browser to block or alert you about these cookies, but some parts of the site will not then work. These cookies do not store any personally identifiable information.
These cookies are required
These cookies allow us to know which pages are the most and least popular and see how visitors move around the site. All information we collect is anonymous unless you actively provide personal information to us.
If you do not allow these cookies we will not know when you have visited our site, and will not be able to monitor its performance.
These cookies allow a website to remember choices you make (such as your user name, language or the region you're in) and tailor the website to provide enhanced features and content for you.
For example, they can be used to remember certain log-in details, changes you've made to text size, font and other parts of pages that you can customise. They may also be used to provide services you've asked for such as watching a video or commenting on a blog. These cookies may be used to ensure that all our services and communications are relevant to you. The information these cookies collect cannot track your browsing activity on other websites.
Without these cookies, a website cannot remember choices you've previously made or personalise your browsing experience meaning you would have to reset these for every visit. In addition, some functionality may not be available if this category is switched off.
Our websites sometimes integrate with other companies’ sites. For example, we integrate with social networking sites such as Twitter and Facebook, to make it easier for you to share what you have read. These sites place their own cookies on your browser as a result of us including their icons and ‘like’ or ‘share’ buttons on our sites.
Medical schools are being urged to make end-of-year exams fairer, as students argue some candidates are put at an unfair advantage.
In OSCEs (objective structured clinical examinations), students are assessed on their performances at different clinical ‘stations’, with real or simulated patients.
However, some students are unhappy that candidates taking the exam later in the day or week might be privy to information about the stations from those who have already taken the exam.
Some medical schools opt to ‘quarantine’ candidates so this does not happen, but others do not, maintaining that isolating students does not affect the overall grades.
BMA medical students committee joint deputy chair Samantha Dolan (pictured right) called for universities to ensure fairness in OSCEs and other assessments.
She said: ‘It is dismaying to hear that students feel like the OSCE exam process is being undermined by some current university protocols — we urge those schools to consider addressing their students' concerns.
‘I believe all medical students are in no doubt about their professional responsibilities during the examination period.’
One St George’s University of London student said coursemates felt the current OSCE system — which did not involve quarantining students — was unfair and wanted the process to change.
A St George’s spokesperson said students could be reassured there was ‘no advantage or disadvantage’ related to when they sat their OSCEs and there were no plans to change the system.
The spokesperson said: ‘We have more than three years' data showing that there has never once been a systematic improvement in the performance of any group of students in a later session in an OSCE or on a subsequent day.
‘Students are informed not to discuss these exams with others — they have to demonstrate the skills being tested, as just knowing a diagnosis, for example, is only a tiny proportion of the marks.’
A Newcastle University spokesperson also said its lack of quarantining did not have an impact on marks.
The spokesperson said: ‘We do acknowledge some students may perceive that those taking the assessment in the afternoon could potentially have an advantage over those taking it in the morning.
‘We have looked at the results over a number of years and have not seen any difference in performance, depending on whether the student is assessed in the morning or afternoon.’
She said students were given ‘a very clear’ briefing about the exam and standards of professionalism.
She added: ‘They are not just putting themselves at a disadvantage, if they share the content of the history stations with other students — what they hear from others taking the exam may not necessarily be correct.’
However, Norwich Medical School course director Richard Holland said student concerns over disclosure and fairness in exams had prompted the school to introduce quarantine for OSCEs in all study years, not just finals.
Professor Holland said the medical school considered this improved exam fairness.
Its not a question about OSCE marks its a question over probity of medical students against GMC guidelines. Its basically saying if you cheat its ok because it does not effect the results. It is silly to suggest that it doesn't effect results as you can never know who was privy to the information before or their OSCE.
Considering that just a few hrs of extra practice could allow an unprepared candidate to learn the skills to a sufficient extent and for a prepared candidate to perfect the skills for the set stations in OSCE.. even if it only benefited those who leaked and shared the tested scenarios (thus not resulting in a significant difference in performance over the cohort), it would still be grossly unfair. Granted, though schools try to moderate the entire situation.. Using different patients and examiners for different stations/groups (who may lack cultural understanding) in itself poses a degree of unfairness already. The measures taken to counter unfairness should instead serve to remind us that such unfairness exists in the first place, and that there probably is no means of examination that is a 100% fair. I would love to see how the medical schools assess and derived their said fairness in exams. Unfortunately, in light of the amount of effort needed to plan and coordinate OSCEs, I do not foresee any change coming.
These are more option to how to show control panel,just now one a single click here this site controlpanelwindows10.com in window 10,first type in cortana box "control panel" then see open the control panel and more result,so friends you can easy to change you pc name and other setting help this tool.