Graduate entry medicine: selection criteria and student performance.

BACKGROUND: Graduate entry medicine raises new questions about the suitability of students with different backgrounds. We examine this, and the broader issue of effectiveness of selection and assessment procedures. METHODS: The data included background characteristics, academic record, interview score and performance in pre-clinical modular assessment for two years intake of graduate entry medical students. Exploratory factor analysis is a powerful method for reducing a large number of measures to a smaller group of underlying factors. It was used here to identify patterns within and between the selection and performance data. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Basic background characteristics were of little importance in predicting exam success. However, easily interpreted components were detected within variables comprising the 'selection' and 'assessment' criteria. Three selection components were identified ('Academic', 'GAMSAT', 'Interview') and four assessment components ('General Exam', 'Oncology', 'OSCE', 'Family Case Study'). There was a striking lack of relationships between most selection and performance factors. Only 'General Exam' and 'Academic' showed a correlation (Pearson's r = 0.55, p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: This study raises questions about methods of student selection and their effectiveness in predicting performance and assessing suitability for a medical career. Admissions tests and most exams only confirmed previous academic achievement, while interview scores were not correlated with any consequent assessment.

What influences student experience of Graduate Entry Medicine? Qualitative findings from Swansea School of Medicine.

BACKGROUND: The Graduate Entry Programme (GEP) in Medicine delivered by Swansea University (currently in collaboration with Cardiff University) accepts students from a diverse range of academic backgrounds with no restriction in relation to the field of first degree. There is a growing body of literature, predominantly quantitative in nature, regarding the influence of academic background on student achievement but little published information on students' views. AIM: To examine students' views regarding the extent to which previous higher education and wider life experience influence their student experience on the GEP course. METHOD: Recruitment from three student cohorts and group interview data followed by descriptive thematic analysis of anonymized data. RESULTS: Data themes were: (1) previous study experience and its impact on present student experience; (2) the impact of life experience; (3) the impact of the present study on life experience; (4) skills, status and difference; (5) characteristics and expectations of the course; (6) finances and (7) next steps. Previous study experience had little impact on present student experience. However, previous life experience, with time between first degree and GEP, clearly enhances the learning experience. Added maturity and early clinical contact enables students to manage the challenges of the course and the NHS environment despite financial strain and heavy coursework. CONCLUSIONS: Analysing students' views is informative and provides richer insight into experience and expectations than that accessible from quantitative data alone.