Skip to main content
×
×
Home

Peer observation in simulated CASC events and its effects on learning

  • Isabel McMullen (a1), Ken Checinski (a2), Susan Halliwell (a3), Michael Maier (a4) (a5), Oyepeju Raji (a6) (a7), Gianetta Rands (a8) (a9) and Ranga Rao (a10)...
Abstract
Aims and method

Passing the MRCPsych Clinical Assessment of Skills and Competencies (CASC) is a significant challenge for trainee psychiatrists. We describe the process of setting up a new educational intervention of a simulated CASC examination incorporating peer observation, and report the findings from these events.

Results

The training events involved a series of simulated scenarios followed by personalised feedback from examiners. Peer observation was a fundamental part of the events and was viewed positively by the trainees with perceived improvements in knowledge and skills. Differences in self-rated and examiner-rated competence were observed more often in those who subsequently failed the CASC.

Clinical implications

Simulated CASC examination as a training event with a strong focus on observing and learning from peers provides a useful learning experience and supports trainees who are preparing for the CASC examination.

  • View HTML
    • Send article to Kindle

      To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

      Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

      Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

      Peer observation in simulated CASC events and its effects on learning
      Available formats
      ×
      Send article to Dropbox

      To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

      Peer observation in simulated CASC events and its effects on learning
      Available formats
      ×
      Send article to Google Drive

      To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

      Peer observation in simulated CASC events and its effects on learning
      Available formats
      ×
Copyright
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Corresponding author
Isabel McMullen (isabel.mcmullen@kcl.ac.uk)
Footnotes
Hide All

Declaration of interest

None.

Footnotes
References
Hide All
1 Thompson, CM. Will the CASC stand the test? A review and critical evaluation of the new MRCPsych clinical examination. Psychiatrist 2009; 33: 145–8.
2 Royal College of Psychiatrists. Specialist Training in Psychiatry: A Comprehensive Guide to Training and Assessment in the UK for Trainees and Local Educational Providers (Occasional Paper OP69). Royal College of Psychiatrists, 2010.
3 Royal College of Psychiatrists Examinations Unit. MRCPsych CASC Candidate Guide. Royal College of Psychiatrists, 2012 (http://www.rcpsych.ac.uk/examinations/about/mrcpsychcasc.aspx).
4 Wallace, J, Rao, R, Haslam, R. Simulated patients and objective structured clinical examinations: a review of their use in medical education. Adv Psychiatr Treat 2002; 8: 342–8.
5 Hodges, B, Regehr, G, Hanson, M, McNaughton, N. Validation of an objective structured clinical examination in psychiatry. Acad Med 1998; 73: 910–2.
6 Tyrer, S, Oyebode, F. Why does the MRCPsych examination need to change? Br J Psychiatry 2004; 184: 197–9.
7 Hodges, B, Regehr, G, McNaughton, N, Tiberius, R, Hanson, M. OSCE checklists do not capture increasing levels of expertise. Acad Med 1999; 74: 1129–34.
8 Naeem, A, Rutherford, J, Kenn, C. The MRCPsych OSCE workshop: a new game to play? Psychiatr Bull 2004; 28: 62–5.
9 Vassilas, CA, Kuruvilla, T, Gupta, V, El-Nadeef, M. Preparing trainees for the MRCPsych examinations. Adv Psychiatr Treat 2007; 13: 239–50.
10 Pryde, I, Sachar, A, Young, S, Hukin, A, Davies, T, Rao, R. Organising a mock OSCE for the MRCPsych Part 1 examination. Psychiatr Bull 2005; 29: 6770.
11 Whelan, P, Lawrence-Smith, G, Church, L, Woolcock, C, Meerten, M, Rao, R. Goodbye OSCE, hello CASC: a mock CASC course and examination. Psychiatr Bull 2009; 33: 149–53.
12 Hussain, A, Husni, M. Preparing for the MRCPsych CASC – an insight based on experience. BJMP 2010; 3: 314.
13 Royal College of Psychiatrists Examinations Unit. MRCPsych CASC Pass Mark. Royal College of Psychiatrists, 2011 (http://www.rcpsych.ac.uk/examinations/about/mrcpsychcasc.aspx).
14 Bateman, A. MRCPsych Examinations Cumulative Results 2008–2010. Royal College of Psychiatrists, 2011 (http://www.rcpsych.ac.uk/pdf/MRCPsych%20Cumulative%20Results%20Report%20-%20August%202011.pdf).
15 Bandura, A. Social Learning Theory. General Learning Press, 1977.
16 Ormrod, JE. Human Learning (3rd edn). Prentice-Hall, 1999.
17 Royal College of Psychiatrists. MRCPsych CASC Blueprint. Royal College of Psychiatrists, 2011 (http://www.rcpsych.ac.uk/examinations/about/mrcpsychcasc.aspx).
18 Shortland, S. Peer observation: a tool for staff development or compliance? J Further High Educ 2004; 28: 219–28.
19 Hammersley-Fletcher, L, Orsmond, P. Reflecting on reflective practices within peer observation. Stud High Educ 2005; 30: 213–24.
20 Gough, HG, Hall, WB, Harris, RE. Evaluation of performance in medical training. J Med Educ 1964; 39: 679–92.
21 Kegel-Flom, P. Predicting supervisor, peer and self ratings of intern performance. J Med Educ 1975; 50: 812–5.
22 Arnold, L, Willouby, L, Calkins, V, Gammon, L, Eberhardt, G. Use of peer evaluation in the assessment of medical students. J Med Educ 1981; 56: 3542.
23 Thomas, PA, Gebo, KA, Hellmann, DB. A pilot study of peer review in residency training. J Gen Int Med 1999; 14: 551–4.
24 Kirkpatrick, DL, Kirkpatrick, JD. Evaluating Training Programs (3rd edn). Berrett-Koehler Publishers, 2006.
25 Howard, R, Brittlebank, A. The future of workplace-based assessments for core trainees. Psychiatrist 2010; 34: 114–5.
26 Sikdar, S. WPBA or CASC/OSCE: where is it going wrong? Psychiatrist 2010; 34: 72–3.
27 Sugand, K, Palod, S, Olua, K, Saha, S, Naeem, A, Matin, S, et al. Systematic review of workplace-based assessments in psychiatry: surgical dissection and recommendations for improvement. Psychiatrist 2011; 35: 419–24.
28 Hodges, B, Regehr, G, Martin, D. Difficulties in recognizing one's own incompetence: novice physicians who are unskilled and unaware of it. Acad Med 2001; 76: S879.
29 Davis, DA, Mazmanian, PE, Fordis, M, Van, HR, Thorpe, KE, Perrier, L. Accuracy of physician self-assessment compared with observed measures of competence: a systematic review. JAMA 2006; 296: 1094–102.
30 Baxter, P, Norman, G. Self-assessment or self-deception? A lack of association between nursing students' self-assessment and performance. J Adv Nursing 2011; 67: 2406–13.
Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

BJPsych Bulletin
  • ISSN: 1758-3209
  • EISSN: 1758-3217
  • URL: /core/journals/bjpsych-bulletin
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×

Metrics

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 17 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 33 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between 2nd January 2018 - 17th July 2018. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Peer observation in simulated CASC events and its effects on learning

  • Isabel McMullen (a1), Ken Checinski (a2), Susan Halliwell (a3), Michael Maier (a4) (a5), Oyepeju Raji (a6) (a7), Gianetta Rands (a8) (a9) and Ranga Rao (a10)...
Submit a response

eLetters

No eLetters have been published for this article.

×

Reply to: Submit a response


Your details


Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *