Following the release of the exam results, the Faculty and RCoA recognised the need to offer those affected a written explanation and apology for problems with the release of the exam results. In addition, FICM committed to conducting two engagement events, one held with StR regional representatives and another with trainers, feedback from which has influenced the process of investigation. Answers to questions raised at these events were subsequently posted online.
The distress and concern felt by many was clearly articulated. The FICM Board, having reviewed feedback from candidates, trainers and both co-opted, elected, and patient representative members, sought expert statistical advice, and asked the GMC in its regulatory role to consider accepting a norm referencing approach to determine the pass rate of the OSCE. This was not because any decisive flaw had been detected in the exam which accounted for the low pass rate, but rather because the organisation wished to recognise the strong feeling expressed by those affected and their trainers, that this result was not representative of the actual ability of the candidates. However, the GMC advised us that their standards (p39, para 72) cannot support the use of norm-referencing.
Given that investigations have found no delivery error in the examination itself or any clear or single cause for the low OSCE pass rate, during our discussions with the GMC and external assessment experts, it was felt there was no justification for retrospectively changing the passing standard, or other adjustment to allow candidates to pass on the MCQ and SOE alone, nor by using any other recalculation to alter the pass mark.
The Board has concluded that, under such circumstances, there is no alternative but that the results must stand.
