Computer generated transcript

Warning!
The following transcript was generated automatically from the content and has not been checked or corrected manually.

OK, Brilliant. So we'll get started with the next talk. So we're incredibly grateful, um, and privileged to have Ms Markham, um, speaking for us this morning about general surgery recruitment. So Ms Markham is a consultant surgeon in Warwick and is the lead for the general surgery s t three recruitment and is also on the general surgery s A C. So I'll hand over to Ms Markham now. And if you have any questions, please put them in the chat, and then we'll come to the at the end. But welcome, Ms Martin. Thank you. Thank you very much. For as so I'm just going to share my screen a moment, and then we will make a start. Good. Uh, as Vaas says, I'm the lead for national selection for general surgery, and I'm very happy to be here today to talk to you about the system, uh, and answer any questions afterwards. So what I have prepared today, um, is a, uh, presentation, which covers the preparation for selection. In other words, what we're looking for, we're in the middle of the evidence upload window currently. So this is just to make sure that you prepared and uploaded your evidence appropriately. I wanted to talk to you about some of the pitfalls, because obviously, it's very disappointing when you put all this work into your portfolio. Um, and then things don't go as you'd hoped. Some preparation for an interview. And I'll just relay to you some top tips from a successful applicant before taking questions. So sorry about this. I'm sorry. That keeps on doing that. Um, so the changes from last year there are very few. In fact, um, the main changes are really just in terms of wording. Trying to make sure that you can see, um, how best to use the system as efficiently as possible. But mgrs medical and dental recruitment have mandated that we removed inter kelated degrees from all of the selection processes. Well, that was easy for us. We didn't have it in the first place. Um, and the only named course we had was training the trainers. So we have had to remove that. Sorry about this. Um, so obviously the self assessment questionnaire is based on the person's specification, and I'm sorry to stress this, but actually, as as medics, we've often fairly rarely done any other job applications of high stakes, and it therefore, is a little bit difficult for you to realize how important that person specifications in is. So everything in the whole selection process goes back to that person specification. So when you're thinking about what you should be presenting both in your evidence and also in your interview, what you need to be thinking of is, what does the person specifications say? I'm supposed to be showing here. So please look at the person's specification, for which I have a link on a subsequent slide. It's essential that you upload suitable evidence, which is clear and easy to follow, and that's not because we're stupid. It's because you are meant to be showing us your attention to detail and your ability to follow the instructions. So make sure that the evidence that you submit fits the instructions don't make claims, which aren't true. Obviously, there's a probity issue there, and the main purpose of that self assessment questionnaire is obviously to give you the best available score, which then means that we choose the top 320 to verify, and then that verified school forms part of your overall score. with your interview school. So here is that person specification. I'm assuming. Obviously you'll have access to the slides afterwards and this is being recorded, so I'm not going to linger on that much longer. My sweaty fingers aren't making a contact with the laptop. So basically, what does that person specifications say? What it says is that you need to be clinically sound. You don't need to know it all. We don't expect you to be at S T eight level, but we do expect you to be at the level of a trainable S d three. So in terms of the clinical questions that you'll be asked, that's the sort of level you're aiming for. We need academic skills in research and audit. We need you to know the difference between research and audit. We need you to have done some, and we also need you to have evidence of teaching. Probity is really important. Personal skills in communication, problem solving, empathy and sensitivity, team working, organization and planning. Hence the uploading situational awareness, management and leadership and achievements of outside medicine. Those are all going to be touched on in the interview process. Um and so those are the things that the interview allows you to showcase. So in terms of maximizing the points in your portfolio, please read the candidate guide. I've made sure as far as I can, that the instructions are clearer still from last year, because it was clear from the appeals last year that people didn't necessarily quite get what we were saying. So I've tried to make them even clearer. But as a principle for everything you ever apply for, try to make sure you've got something in every box and make sure you do have evidence for everything you present. So it is tragic when people self assess themselves as having 11 points, for example, in audit and actually only submit seven pieces of paper pieces of evidence. And those seven mostly, are completely inadequate. You won't get 11 points, so please make sure the evidence is presented clearly and make sure that the evidence is in the format we've requested, and I will explain what I mean by that with an example. So the majority of candidates who didn't get the score they had hoped in there, uh, process last year, The reason they didn't was because the evidence presented was either inadequate completely or was not in the format specified. So I'll give you an example straight from the candidates guide. Please provide a summary of the auditor quality improvement project A summary. Okay, a paragraph, a brief paragraph, a clear summary of what you did. A clear summary of your involvement in the project and evidence of presentation. And I'm sorry about my bold. They're clear. Evidence must be presented for this. Sectional points will not be a boarded. You'd expect that, wouldn't you? You get two points for a PhD. You get two points for a closed blue board it. So we're not going to give you those points unless that evidence is really clear. And I've said they're simple Certificates are not sufficient evidence. Lots of people submitted evidence in the form of a certificate from their postgraduate center, Which I'm sorry. Anyone who's heard me speak before. Well, no, I always refer to these as I was good at the doctor today. Certificates? They basically just say Joe was good. Joe was a good boy or girl. Um, they don't say what you did. Doesn't have a summary of your involvement. Doesn't have a summary of the quality improvement project or audit, and neither does it have evidence of presentation. So the really good candidates put in a table of contents. If they had lots of audits or or lots of pieces of evidence under a particular heading, they had a clear, brief summary of what the project was. A clear, brief summary of what they had done and evidence of presentation. And then they, usually in that evidence of presentation, would put something like the six slides to a page of their Power Point presentation. And they would put a letter from the audit lead. And that meant that it was extremely easy to give them the points. And if it's a closed loop audit, explain how and why it is a closely poured it by showing us the initial audit and what you then did and how it then was closed. The loop was closed, so clarity is absolutely essential here. So, for example, my second point on this slide verifies can't be expected to search through literally pages. So last year we had people submit exactly the same evidence in every category, so every time we would open a box to be for question to, for example, it would have all of the evidence for questions 1 to 11. Um, so that isn't helpful. Please put the evidence for question two under question to please put the evidence for question three under question three. It's extremely unlikely that the same evidence is going to be useful for more than one question if it is re upload it and explain why you've re uploaded it. But it is rare that that domains have crossover of evidence. In addition to that, if you have a publication, please don't just put the pub med I'd you do need to put the pub med. I'd But we also need a copy of the paper. And that is particularly important when you are a collaborative author at the end of that publication that you're very proud of because you collaborated on it. There will be five pages of names of collaborative authors, potentially in one of the big collaborations, and in that there will be the, uh, the alphabetically ordered trusts with under each trust the alphabetically ordered contributors. Please, at least highlight your name. If you're submitting that because I have tried and tried sometimes to find the name of the candidate in order to be able to give them the point for that collaborative paper. And I have been unable to do so because basically, your eyes go squirrelly by the end and I can't find your name. It may be in a different format, so highlight it, please. So I'm going to leave evidence for now. But I'm happy to take questions in the chat, which currently I can't see. Um, the structure of the interview is virtual again this year. Um, that's not our choice. That's the choice of mgrs. And like all of the selection leads except Vascular, oddly enough, we're desperately trying to get back to a face to face interview. Personally, I don't think it's going to happen, but your feedback will be very, very important in that, um, the virtual interview consists of three domains and therefore three stations. Each station has got school sheets, which are written on the basis of the person specification, so each room we're using a slightly different system. This year we're not using teams were using something called couple calm. Each room has got to interviewers in it, and you will be moved from room to room so that you're seen by a different two clinicians in each room. There's obviously lay representation just to make sure things are fair and they will pop I/O of the rooms. If you see a lay member in your room, don't panic. They're marking us, not you. Before the clinical and the management stations, you will have five minutes of reading and thinking time, and then you will actually have the clinical management stations. So you do have time to think we don't have your portfolio. Sorry, we don't have your portfolio in front of us when we are undertaking the portfolio station. What we have is the knowledge that your portfolio was good enough to get you an interview in verification. And so what we need you to do is no your portfolio really well, because we will ask questions about your portfolio and the questions about your portfolio will relate. Remember what I said about the person specification. We've got the score sheet in front of us for portfolio, which relates to your person to the person specification, and it's up to you to think about how you highlight your portfolio which shows the key issues that were meant to be marking you against in terms of that person's specification. So, in terms of preparing for the interview process, make sure you've got the cameras and set up comfortable to use. Um, make sure that you've got a good WiFi connection. Choose a good place to sit with a suitable background. The reason I say that is, you know, suitable background. Don't put the Lego Star Wars background down. It doesn't look wildly professional. Um and, you know, make sure that what it is in your background doesn't interact with what you're wearing. Sometimes if you're wearing something with busy patterns, it can make the camera a bit bonkers. So check against your background that what you're wearing doesn't interact with that and choose something which is both comfortable but also smart. We know that people actually, um, slightly, uh, play what they what they see. So in terms of turning up in your tracksuit, your pajamas, you know that that doesn't look great, But it also doesn't make you feel good. And I know that you're all sitting there thinking, Why would I ever do that? You joke. You think I joke? I'm not joking. Okay? So don't set up the camera in the doctor's mess. That did happen last year. It's not a good idea. Um, and do make sure that you're wearing something that makes you feel professional makes you feel like the registrar that you want to be. That's really what I'm saying. It's not that we're marking your fashion sense. Um, so when you're preparing for that interview content, I know I've labored that this repeatedly, but I'm laboring it for a reason. Make sure that you've thought about that, uh, that candidate guide, that that person specification When it comes to the clinicals, make sure that you've practiced presenting clinical cases and getting your consultant to ask you questions. By all means. Practice with other registrars. Practice with other S H O s. That's all good getting your tongue unstuck from the roof of your mouth and even recording yourself answering those questions. I can help you go back and think about how you might change your approach. Be structured. But there is something about the fear, and this is certainly something that I've got from speaking to successful candidates. Previously, um, they say particular consultant. You don't know terribly well, get them to ask you questions because it helps to mimic the fear. And it's not that the clinical scenarios that we're going to come up with a particularly unusual or strange or odd those scenarios are things that you might expect to be asked about. But it's just practicing doing it, thinking like a registrar. The reason I've put that there is because remember that what we're trying to select is S T three s, so don't answer like a foundation doctor. Don't sort of think you've got to gabble through every single thing of the of the ABC. Of course, use the ABC structure, but try to be selective about it. Think about how the best S t three you know, behaves when they're dealing with a really complex patient. So make sure that you know the criteria and keeping that court a R C P checklist in mind is is a good start. Um, and and keep on thinking about how you prepare for the interview. I'm going to stop there. I'm going to stop sharing my screen so that I can see you. Well, I've said stop share ng. Thank you, Ms Markham. I'll read through some questions, but in the interest of time, we may just have to get through as many as we can because there's quite a few questions. Uh, but the first one is, Can I use the same evidence for sections 123, months in medicine, months in gen Surge month and other specialties, Or should I upload the same contracts three times? So if those are the best pieces of evidence for all three questions, then please upload them three times. If there is something slightly better, which will show something better about your months in general surgery, for example, for that question, they're not. Load that as well. Okay, thank you. Um, so someone said they presented their research. So this council questions two and three, right? So, as I said, if it's the best evidence to answer that question, then not upload it twice if it's if they're not, upload that instead. Thank you. Um, another question is for for just for clarification. If someone's written, if someone has a written summary of activity and I s e c P assessment of audit and then certificate of presentation from an organization such as the A s G B I. Would that be acceptable for evidence? Yes. If If If What you have uploaded says a summary of the audit what you did in the audit and then what you're describing. Sounds like evidence. Presentation, then? Yes. Upload all three. All right, Thank you. Um, another question is, do we need to give the power point presentation as evidence of the audit, or is a letter from the consult with a brief summary sufficient? I think that as long as your brief summary is very clear, then that should be fine. And the letter from your consultants saying that you have presented it is fine. I don't think there's any harm in doing the sixth slide purview. Um, as as an adjunct. Um, but you know that that's your choice. As long as you can evidence in it what you did in it and that it was presented, then that's fine. You don't need to Additionally, add the slides, but you may feel that it helps you. Amazing. Thank you. Um, so there are a few questions about just appealing. Um, so I'm not sure if you'd be able to answer those, but I Someone said they submitted two pieces of evidence which attracted to points, um, each last last year. But this year, they went unrecognized. Is there? Do you have any advice with regards to if they should appeal? I'm really a bit confused about this, because the verification process doesn't take place until the eighth of robberies. So there is no appeal process until verification. And so therefore, I'm unclear as to why that appeal How you feel. You're in an appeal process. Um, general surgery verification doesn't take place until the eighth of February. And until that happens, there is no appeal, and the evidence hasn't been considered. Now, if what you're saying is that you've not been long listed, then that's a matter for the Oriole team. And so I strongly suggest that you contact the Oriole team on the helpline and ask why that is Okay. Thank you. Um, so a couple of questions about collaborative authorship is a result summary from Pub Med. Sufficient evidence for collaborative order. Uh, you would want to limit the evidence that you present to just the results summary. I would have thought that you submit your pub med I d you submit the paper, Uh, and you highlight your name within that paper. The result summary will be within the paper. Um uh, and you can highlight your name if it appears in the result summary. But the more clear your evidence is, the better. I don't think we're trying to save paper here. Thank you. Okay. Another question is, if for the audit section is equality improvement project also acceptable. Uh said when I read it out and showed you a direct quote from the applicants s a Q. Yes. It says audit all quality improvement improvement project. Okay. Thank you. Another question is, if you have any evidence that does not directly score points for the self assessment but does match the selection criteria on the person Spec. Would you include this when uploading evidence? I think that's difficult, because I think that's more about you, making sure you've got that evidence really clearly in your own mind when it comes to us asking you about your portfolio in the interview. Um, if it doesn't relate to any of the questions any of the domains that we are score ing on, we won't be able to score in points for your portfolio. That doesn't mean that it doesn't score. You points when you're talking about yourself in the portfolio station of the interview. That's why we have both the uploaded evidence for the portfolio and also the interview as well. So keep it to mind, Keep it to hand and make sure you know it so that when we ask you the relevant question, you can really make it work. Okay, Awesome. Thank you. And we, as we've we've made time now. So unfortunately, we won't be able to answer all of the other questions. But are you able to stay in the and answer some questions? Yeah, that would be really useful. Yeah. Thank you. Come back in again, But I'll stay in the chat and I'll answer some questions for the next few minutes. That's absolutely brilliant. Thank you so much. Thanks for your time, Ms Markham. That was amazing. Thank you. All the applicants and you know, we really want you to succeed. We want the best candidates in general surgery, obviously. Thank you. Thank you very much.