The Regulation and Conduct of Summative Assessment in Oxford for GP Registrars
1.         Conduct of Summative Assessment The assessment procedure will be conducted by the Summative Assessment Board, chaired by the Summative Assessment Associate Director, comprising  the Summative Assessment Examiners and GP Trainers, together with the Summative Assessment Administrator, on behalf of the Director of Postgraduate General Practice Education, based at Oxford PGMDE, The Triangle, Roosevelt Drive, Headington, Oxford OX3 7XP.       2.         Responsibilities of the Summative Assessment Associate Director: To make provision for the assessment of Registrars in General Practice in Oxford in accordance with the guidance of the National Office for Summative Assessment (NOSA), on behalf of the Joint Committee for Postgraduate Training in General Practice.   To notify Registrars and GP Trainers of the arrangements for Summative Assessment. To permit members of the examination board to notify Registrars who have undertaken summative assessment of their success or failure in each element of the summative assessment procedure, and to make known these results to the Joint Committee for Postgraduate Education in General Practice. To advise the Director of Postgraduate General Practice Education on the recruitment and appointment of examiners, and to ensure that all examiners undergo regular training and calibration in accordance with NOSA requirements. To respond to any requests for verification of the results of the assessment procedures. To appoint invigilators as required. To make an annual report to the General Practice Education Committee in Oxford. 3.         Appeals and unfair practices A Panel shall be convened as required to deal with any appeal as described below, and to enquire into any cases in which prima facie evidence of an unfair practice by a candidate exists. A Summative Assessment Panel shall consist of at least three members:           Chairman (or Representative) of Thames Valley Faculty of RCGP Director of General Practice or Deputy from outside Deanery Representative from Human Resources Thames Valley Strategic Health Authority Two nominees from Oxford Deanery GP Education Committee (one a GP Associate Director, one a GP Registrar)   No member of the Panel shall serve if he/she has previously been concerned with the Summative Assessment Board, or the conduct of the specific assessment procedure which is the subject of enquiry. 4.         Grounds for Appeal An appeal may be made against the decision of the Summative Assessment Board in respect of all four components of summative assessment on the following grounds: that the assessment contains arithmetical or other errors of fact,   that there were effects or irregularities in the conduct of the examination or in the written instructions relating thereto, which can be shown to have had an adverse effect on the candidate’s performance, that there were exceptional undeclared personal circumstances when the candidate was assessed and which can be shown to have had an adverse effect on the candidate’s performance.  In all such appeals the candidate is required to show good reason why such circumstances were not made known to the Summative Assessment Board prior to assessment.  If the candidate is unable to show good reason why exceptional circumstances were not made known to the Summative Assessment Board prior to the assessment, the appeal will be disallowed.   Note:    A candidate cannot challenge the methodology or the professional judgement of the Summative Assessment Board.   5.        Appeals Procedure A candidate who wishes to make an appeal must notify the Director of Postgraduate GP Education in writing.  Any appeal must be made within seven days of the receipt by the candidate of the notification of the result of the disputed assessment.  The grounds for appeal must be clearly stated.    Verification Stage Upon receipt of an appeal, the Director or his nominated Deputy will consult the Summative Assessment Associate Director and seek written verification that the result is free from arithmetical or other errors of fact, any defects or irregularities in the conduct of the assessment or in written instructions relating thereto were, in fact, reported to the Assessment Board, the exceptional personal circumstances reported by the candidate were, in fact, reported to the Assessment Board.  On receipt of written verification, the Director or his nominated Deputy shall take the following action: Where the verification process confirms that the result is free from arithmetical or other error of fact, the exceptional personal circumstances detailed in the appeal had, in fact, been reported to the Assessment Board, and if there were defects or irregularities in the conduct of the examinations (or written advice relating thereto) but they had been dealt with by the Assessment Board, the candidate shall be informed that his/her request for an appeal has been disallowed. Where the verification process reveals defects or irregularities in the conduct of the assessment (or in the written instructions relating thereto) that were not previously known to the Assessment Board and/or the exceptional personal circumstances detailed in the appeal were not reported to the Assessment Board, and where there is no good reason why such circumstances were not made known to the Assessment Board in advance, an Appeal Panel shall be convened. Where the verification procedure reveals arithmetical or other errors of fact, the matter shall be referred back to the Assessment Board for review. Where an appeal is disallowed, the candidate shall be informed by the Director or his deputy.  No further request for an appeal under the auspices of the Postgraduate Director’s Department shall be allowed. Appeal Stage Where an appeal is allowed to proceed, the Director or his deputy shall inform the candidate in writing that an Appeals Panel will be convened to consider his/her appeal.  The letter of notification shall be sent by Registered mail to the address last notified by the candidate to the Summative Assessment Regional Office for Oxford. The Appeals Panel shall be convened as soon as possible to hear the appeal but within a maximum of one month from receipt of the application. The candidate shall file with the Director of Postgraduate General Practice Education not less than 7 days before the date fixed for the Assessment Appeal hearing: Copies of all documents or other evidence upon which appeal to rely A list of witnesses proposed to support the appeal A written statement of the case Notice of intention to be accompanied or represented by friend, colleague or legal adviser The Appeals Panel shall be attended by the Director of Postgraduate General Practice Education and/or the Summative Assessment Associate Director representing the Assessment Board, who shall be entitled to be assisted or represented by a legal representative. The candidate shall be entitled to present his/her case and to call witnesses in support of the Assessment Appeal, and such witnesses may be cross examined by the representative of the Assessment Board. The representative of the Assessment Board shall be entitled to call such witnesses as they think fit in support of the assessment, and such witnesses may be cross examined by the candidate. The candidate shall be entitled to require the Director of Postgraduate General Practice Education to call witnesses whose evidence the candidate wishes to challenge by cross examination. The Appeals Panel will review the documentation provided by the candidate, and by the Assessment Board.  Both the candidate and the representative(s) of the Assessment Board shall have the right to make private statements to the Appeals Panel, upon withdrawal of the other party. The Appeals Panel shall reach its decision by simple majority voting. The candidate shall be informed of the Panel’s decision in writing by the Chairman of the Appeals Panel.  No further appeal may be allowed against the decision of the Summative Assessment Board for Oxford on the matter in question; the JCPTGP will be notified of the outcome of the appeal. Nothing in these regulations shall affect the right of a candidate to appeal to the Secretary of State under the National Health Service (Vocational Training) Regulations 1979 (as amended) or the corresponding provisions applying to Scotland and Northern Ireland.   6.         Unfair Practices   Definition of Unfair Practice It is unfair practice to commit any act whereby a candidate might obtain for himself or for any other candidate an unpermitted advantage leading to a higher grading in the assessment procedure than his abilities would otherwise secure.  In particular, it is unfair to: introduce into the examination room for the MCQ any unauthorised form of materials such as a book, manuscript or loose papers of any kind or any source of unauthorised information (other than foreign language translation dictionaries (non-medical) provided an Invigilator checks them prior to the examination),  communicate with any other person in the examination room, except as authorised by an invigilator, copy or use in any other way unauthorised materials or the work of any other candidate, impersonate an examination candidate or allow oneself to be impersonated in any part of the assessment procedure, engage in plagiarism by using other people’s work and submitting it for examination as though it were one’s own work, claim to have carried out observations, interviews, or any form of project work or research which one has not in fact carried out or claim to have obtained results which have not in fact been obtained, have coaching or prompting of any form during the video recording of a consultation with a patient Unfair practice in work completed for Written Assignments and Assessment of consultation skills If any trainer, course organiser, Associate Adviser, examiner or any other person suspects that unfair practice has occurred in relation to work submitted for assessment, he/she shall report the matter in writing to the Chairman of the Summative Assessment Board, stating the basis for his/her concern as soon as possible, and at the latest within 14 days of the date of submission of the written assignment or the assessment of consultation skills.  Exceptionally, appeals will be considered if information is received outside this time limit. Unfair practice in the Examination Room Any invigilator who considers, or suspects that a candidate is engaging in an unfair examination practice shall inform such a candidate, preferably in front of a witness, that the circumstances will be reported and that the candidate may continue the examination without prejudice to any decision that may be taken.  Where appropriate, the invigilator shall confiscate and retain evidence relating to any alleged unfair examination practice, so that it is available to any subsequent investigation.  The invigilator shall as soon as possible report the circumstances in writing to the Chairman of the Summative Assessment Board. Suspected Unfair practice detected during or subsequently to the marking period Any examiner, GP Trainer, Course Organiser, Adviser or Associate Adviser who, whether in the course of marking or subsequently, considers or suspects that a candidate has engaged in an unfair practice, shall report the matter in writing to the Chairman of the Summative Assessment Board as soon as possible, and within 14 days at the latest.  The Chairman shall retain any relevant evidence which shall be stored for three years.   Further action to be taken by Chairman of the Summative Assessment Board (or Deputy) On receipt of a report concerning an allegation of unfair practice, the Chairman or Deputy shall convene a meeting of the Assessment Board to determine whether, in the light of all the circumstances, and on the basis of written reports received, a prima facie case of unfair practice has been established.  If satisfied that such a case exists, the Chairman of the Board (or Deputy) shall report the case in writing to the Director of Postgraduate General Practice Education (or Deputy) and shall send to the Director copies of all relevant supporting evidence. If it is decided by the Summative Assessment Board that a prima facie case of unfair practice does not exist, then the candidate shall be informed in writing that the matter is closed.   Appointment of Enquiry Panel If the Summative Assessment Board determine that a prima facie case of unfair practice has been established, the Chairman of the Assessment Board shall request the Director of Postgraduate GP Education to convene a Panel of Enquiry as soon as possible.  The composition of the Panel shall be as stated above (para 3). The candidate shall be notified in writing that an allegation of unfair practice is to be considered by the Panel.  The candidate shall also be sent copies of any statements and documents which are to be placed before the Panel; he/she shall be notified of the time/place of the meeting of the Panel of Enquiry.  The candidate must indicate if he/she intends to attend the hearing of the Panel, and whether or not he/she will be accompanied.  If the candidate is to be accompanied by a lawyer, the Panel must be given notice of this fact.  The Chairman of the Assessment Board (or Deputy) will reserve the right to be represented by a legal advocate.  In addition, the Appeal Panel may be advised by a legal adviser who may be present throughout the hearing.   The functions of the Enquiry Panel are as follows: to consider the evidence submitted to it on the allegation of unfair practice; to determine whether the allegation has been substantiated; to determine, in appropriate cases, the further action to be taken. Procedures during the meeting of the Enquiry Panel   The Chairman of the Summative Assessment Board shall present the case against the candidate, and call such witnesses and present any evidence that is relevant. The candidate shall have the right to hear all evidence brought against him/her and to question any witnesses, and to present any other evidence.  Witnesses shall only be concerned with evidence relating to the allegation and shall withdraw after questioning.   When submission of evidence and the questioning of witnesses has been completed, all persons other than members of the Committee and its adviser (if present) shall withdraw.  The Panel shall consider whether the allegation has been substantiated.    If the case is substantiated, the Committee shall consider further action as follows:  In the case of a substantiated allegation in respect of a component of the assessment procedure, the candidate’s marks for that component shall be cancelled (without prejudice to further attempts at that component by the candidate); the Joint Committee for Postgraduate Education in General Practice shall be informed of the Panel’s findings; that the candidate has not passed the assessment at that attempt, and that the reason for failure was unfair practice by the candidate as determined by a local Panel of Enquiry.  It will thus be possible for this information to be taken into account by the JCPTGP in its decision whether to award a Certificate of Completion of Vocational Training. In the case of a substantiated allegation of unfair practice, the Panel shall determine if the circumstances demonstrate a sufficient lack of professional probity on behalf of the candidate such as to warrant referral of the matter to the General Medical Council for further investigation. No appeal against the decision of the Summative Assessment Enquiry Panel on a matter of unfair practice will be allowed in respect of the Summative Assessment procedure conducted in Oxford.   7.         Appeals against the refusal of the Joint Committee for Postgraduate Education for General Practice to issue a Certificate of Prescribed or Equivalent Experience   The statutory appeal procedure is described in the NHS Vocational Training Regulations, 1979.  Appeals must be made to the Secretary of State within the specified time limit.   June 1999 (updated November 2004)