Aston Medical School visit 2018

Visit Report on Aston Medical School

This visit is part of the new schools quality assurance annual cycle.

Our visits check that organisations are complying with the standards and requirements as

set out in Promoting Excellence: Standards for medical education and training.

Summary

Education provider

Aston Medical School

Sites visited Aston University

Programme MBChB

Date of visit 04 May 2018

Key Findings

1. Aston Medical School (the School) applied to establish a new

medical school in February 2016, and will begin the delivery of the

MBChB programme in September 2018. The School aims to recruit

60 students for the 2018/2019 academic year; the majority will be

international medical students and students recruited via the Sir

Doug Ellis Pathway to Healthcare Programme.

2. During the visit, we met with the School’s senior management

team, Leicester Medical School’s (Leicester) Phase 1 lead and

representatives from trusts and primary care placement providers.

3. The visit team identified the quality and dedication of the staff and

trainers as one of the key areas that are working well. The team

also noted that the teaching methods the School plans to use are

likely to be compatible with students’ needs. In addition, we found

24/08/2018

2

that the School has a good working relationship with Leicester, the

contingency partner.

4. However, we raised a concern about the size of the core team: a

number of staff members have taken on multiple roles, which could

impact on the effective delivery of the programme. The team also

raised concerns about the School’s permanent location and

facilities, which have not yet been finalised.

Areas that are working well

We note areas where we have found that not only our standards are met, but they are

well embedded in the organisation.

Number Theme Areas that are working well Report

paragraph

1 R2.4;

R2.8

The School demonstrates a strong and

collegiate relationship with Leicester Medical

School.

22-24

2 R5.1;

R5.3;

R1.22

The School has developed models of learning,

such as team based learning and flipped

classroom, in order to be appropriate for the

student group that the programme will

attract.

47

Requirements

We set requirements where we have found that our standards are not being met. Each

requirement is:

■ targeted

■ outlines which part of the standard is not being met

■ mapped to evidence gathered during the visit.

We will monitor each organisation’s response and will expect evidence that progress is

being made.

24/08/2018

3

Number Theme Requirements Report

paragraph

1 R1.19 We are concerned that previous plans for

teaching facilities have been changed so close

to the start of the new programme. These plans

must be finalised as soon as possible.

11-13

2 R2.18 Further clarity regarding medical representation

on Fitness to Practise panels must be included

within the School’s policy.

33

Recommendations

We set recommendations where we have found areas for improvement related to our

standards. They highlight areas an organisation should address to improve, in line with

best practice.

Number Theme Recommendation Report

paragraph

1 R1.7 The School has a very committed but relatively

small core team, many of whom have taken on

multiple roles. The School should consider how

best to mitigate this in order to successfully

deliver a full medical programme.

4-5

2 R1.19 The School’s proposed programme will have a

strong reliance on technology. The School should

provide the necessary level of support to deliver

this successfully.

14

3 R3.2 The School’s personal tutor model risks over-

burdening individual tutors with too many

students to provide effective support.

36-38

24/08/2018

4

Findings

The findings below reflect evidence gathered in advance of and during our visit, mapped

to our standards.

Please note that not every requirement within Promoting Excellence is addressed. We

report on ‘exceptions’, e.g. where things are working particularly well or where there is a

risk that standards may not be met.

Theme 1: Learning environment and culture

Standards

S1.1 The learning environment is safe for patients and supportive for learners and educators. The culture is caring, compassionate and provides a good standard of care and experience for patients, carers and families. S1.2 The learning environment and organisational culture value and support education and training so that learners are able to demonstrate what is expected in Good medical practice and to achieve the learning outcomes required by their curriculum.

Raising concerns (R1.1); Educational and clinical governance (R1.6)

1. The School has satisfactorily demonstrated its plans to allow students and staff

to raise patient safety concerns. We heard that students, educators and staff at

local education providers (LEPs) will be encouraged to raise concerns through a

single email address and telephone number at the School. The School’s Whistle

Blowing Policy contains these details and describes the process for raising

concerns for all students and staff.

2. Patient safety concerns raised about a student will be reviewed by the quality

team and the student’s personal tutor. The quality manager will review and

anonymise the details of the concern, then present it to a programme

committee for discussion and resolution. We were told by LEP representatives

that their staff understand the process for raising concerns. They also said that

having a single point of contact at the School should be very helpful, especially

for discussing low level concerns.

3. The findings show that the School’s plans and processes should enable students

and educators to raise concerns openly and safely. Based on the evidence

presented by the School both prior to and during the visit, we are pleased with

the holistic approach for raising concerns for students, educators and LEPs. The

visit team will review the effectiveness of this process during future visits.

24/08/2018

5

Appropriate capacity for clinical supervision (R1.7)

4. The School told us that progress has been made with regards to staffing. We

heard that the recruitment process has been a challenge, but the members of

staff recruited so far have successfully contributed to the development of the

programme. Some key posts still have not been filled, but the roles have been

advertised and the School is confident they will be filled before the first cohort

starts in September 2018. If the School is unable to recruit clinical teaching

fellows in advance of the first cohort, a senior nurse may be recruited or the

first semester can be delivered by the initial project team.

5. The visit team is concerned that not all required staff have been recruited but

are satisfied that a sufficient number are in place to start the programme in

September 2018. Nevertheless, the visit team noted that many of the small core

team will also take on additional roles as personal tutors. We are concerned that

individual staff will not have enough time to fulfil their different roles and could

be overloaded. The School should consider how best to mitigate this concern.

Recommendation 1 – The School has a very committed but relatively small

core team, many of whom have taken on multiple roles. The School should

consider how best to mitigate this in order to successfully deliver a full

medical programme.

Appropriate responsibilities for patient care (R1.9); Identifying learners at different stages

(R1.10)

6. The visit team was pleased to hear that the School and the GP practices have

discussed ways to differentiate the School’s students from other medical

students. We heard that many of the GP supervisors have experience of

teaching different levels of training, and have developed a standard process

whereby students will introduce themselves to all staff when they begin their

placement. Supervisors will also meet with students individually to understand

their levels of competence and abilities; this will help supervisors focus on

individual students’ needs and adjust teaching accordingly. We were told that

there have also been discussions about giving students different colour name

badges to show their current year. We are satisfied that there are plans in place

which should ensure that students will not undertake tasks beyond their

capabilities.

Induction (R1.13)

7. During the visit, LEP representatives told us that students will have an induction

at the start of a new placement rotation at each trust. The induction sessions

will cover the course structure, supervision arrangements, facilities, teaching

and trust orientation. We also heard that students will be introduced to the

supervisors and tutors who will support them during their placement. The

24/08/2018

6

School told us that the trusts will also provide information about what is

expected from students in terms of behaviours. We were told that local

inductions at GP practices will include how students will be assessed, how to

report concerns and the support they will receive during their placement.

Students will also receive mandatory health & safety training and will be taught

how to use the relevant IT systems.

8. During the visit, we raised the potential risks of the School’s decision to not

provide students with guidance on progression, harassment, and fitness to

practice (FTP) assessment during the induction week. The School told us that

this has been done deliberately because it does not want to overload students

with too much information. The School feels that this risk will be mitigated by

providing students with all relevant documentation and information through the

virtual learning environment (VLE) when the first semester begins; these will be

sign-posted during the first week of the programme.

9. The visit team is satisfied that the School and placement providers have

induction plans in place. The School has successfully shown the information it

will provide students as part of their induction and the activities they will

complete. We will not be able to determine the impact of the School’s plans for

the induction week until we have spoken to students during the next visit cycle.

Multiprofessional teamwork and learning (R1.17)

10. We heard that the School’s Personal and Professional Development lead will

develop a systematic approach to support learners to be effective members of a

multiprofessional team. The School told us that it will use Leicester’s approach

to interprofessional learning while its own is being developed. We heard that

students will begin learning about the roles and responsibilities of other health

professionals when they visit GP practices in Year 1. The School will also

introduce the ‘Patients Know Best’ software which will be run alongside Aston

University pharmacy students. This software allows students to interact and

conduct virtual online consultations and diagnoses with other healthcare

professionals. We are confident that effective plans are in place to provide

students with opportunities to work and learn with a multiprofessional team. We

will explore the effectiveness of these plans over future visit cycles.

Capacity, resources and facilities (R1.19)

11. The School had plans to build a new purpose built facility situated on the main

Aston University campus, due to be completed by 2019 and in time to

accommodate the second cohort of students. However, the senior management

team told us during the visit that the estate plans for 2019 have changed and

the School’s estate strategy is being reviewed. The School has been instructed

by the University’s executive team to delay the planned construction of the new

24/08/2018

7

purpose built building by twelve months; as a result, the new building will not

be ready by September 2019 as previously planned. We were told that the

senior management team hopes to finalise its plans for the new building and

facilities in the near future.

12. We heard that the senior management team and executives are confident that

there will be appropriate teaching and learning space ready to accommodate

students in Year 2, 2019. The School has been allocated a floor within the Vision

Sciences building. It will contain four tutorial rooms, four clinical skills room, a

lecture theatre and one large room which will be used for multiple purposes.

The team assured us that it is aware of the requirement to have capacity,

resources and facilities to deliver safe and relevant learning opportunities for

learners.

13. We are concerned that changes to the estate plans have been made so close to

the start of the programme, and that this may have a negative impact on

students. We are satisfied that there will be suitable and appropriate space to

deliver the programme for the first cohort in 2018. However, major issues could

arise when student numbers increase from 2019 onwards. The School must

address this as soon as possible.

Requirement 1 – We are concerned that previous plans for teaching

facilities have been changed so close to the start of the new programme.

These plans must be finalised as soon as possible.

14. We heard during the visit that the School will use the technology enhanced

learning tool Talis to support the delivery of the programme. Students will be

provided with tablets which will enable them to access the VLE (‘Blackboard’),

online papers and books in the library. We were also told that the School has

made a bid for an e-learning support staff member. The School told us that it is

aware of the resources required to support the cohort of students and would be

concerned if this bid was unsuccessful. The effective use of enhanced learning

will be significant for the successful delivery of this programme. It is important

to ensure that there are sufficient resources available so that students’ learning

needs are fully met.

Recommendation 2 – The School’s proposed programme will have a strong

reliance on technology. The School should provide the necessary level of

support to deliver this successfully.

Accessible technology enhanced and simulation-based learning (R1.20)

15. The School told us that students will have access to some simulation based

learning on campus and more advanced simulation training at local LEPs. While

the School is confident that the facilities at LEPs will allow students to meet their

24/08/2018

8

simulation learning outcomes, we heard that further work is required to ensure

that the teaching content fits the Aston specific curriculum, particularly as LEPs

deliver simulation training for other medical schools.

16. The visit team was told that the School will deliver four hours of anatomy

sessions per week in Year 1 and Year 2. This will consist of two hours of small

group workshops and two hours of lectures. We were told that a 3D ultrasound

machine has been purchased, and anatomical models and machines have been

ordered. The School told us that the dissection subjects are being re-written and

the senior management team is currently in talks with Leicester about the

School’s students using their dissection rooms within the first two years of the

programme. Although this has not been formally agreed yet, the School’s

objective is to secure a long term agreement with Leicester.

17. We are assured that the School has plans in place to ensure that students have

access to technology enhanced and simulation based learning on the

programme. We feel that students would benefit if they have access to more

advanced simulation suites on site to reduce the reliance on LEPs. As a result of

the majority of the simulation training being delivered off-site, we believe a

robust quality monitoring system will be required to ensure that students are

achieving the programme’s core outcomes. We will assess the effectiveness the

School’s plans on future visits.

24/08/2018

9

Theme 2: Education governance and leadership

Standards

S2.1 The educational governance system continuously improves the quality and outcomes of education and training by measuring performance against the standards, demonstrating accountability, and responding when standards are not being met. S2.2 The educational and clinical governance systems are integrated, allowing organisations to address concerns about patient safety, the standard of care, and the standard of education and training. S2.3 The educational governance system makes sure that education and training is fair and is based on principles of equality and diversity.

Quality manage/control systems and processes (R2.1)

18. In advance of the visit, we reviewed documentation which illustrates the

educational governance system and quality management processes for the

programme. We heard during the visit that no

significant changes have been made to the School’s approach to quality and

governance since our initial visit in June 2017.

19. The visit team heard that the School has adopted the University’s strategy for

quality and governance with the objective of serving the community, students

and business. The School told us that it has developed the quality and

governance processes to manage the programme centered on this strategy.

Based on the documents reviewed in advance of the visit and our findings from

the visit itself, we are satisfied that the School has developed the required

processes to quality manage the programme. The effectiveness of these

processes will be tested during our next visit cycle, once the first cohort of

students has started.

Accountability for quality (R2.2)

20. The visit team is satisfied that the School has established the committees and

identified the individuals who will be responsible for the governance of the

programme. The School has provided evidence which clearly demonstrates the

governance structure for the MBChB programme and the School. We will

continue to review this area over future visit cycles.

Considering impact on learners of policies, systems, processes (R2.3)

21. The visit team was pleased to hear that the School will have Patient and Public

Involvement (PPI) representatives on its committees. The School has also

provided pre-visit documentation which shows that a patient forum is part of the

24/08/2018

10

School’s committee structure. We will explore the effectiveness of the School’s

plans for PPI over future visit cycles.

Evaluating and reviewing curricula and assessment (R2.4); Sharing and reporting

information about quality of education and training (R2.8)

22. The School will deliver the programme using the updated Leicester curriculum

which was launched in 2016. We heard that the major changes made by

Leicester were focused on the structural reorganisation of the delivery and

timing of various blocks. The School has developed and adapted the delivery of

the programme based on the updates provided by Leicester. The School also

told us that it is working to align the School’s assessment body and content with

that of Leicester; this will help facilitate contingency arrangements should these

be required.

23. The visit team was pleased to hear that there are regular meetings and a

continuous dialogue between Leicester and the School’s senior management

and operational teams. The School plans to share its evaluation of the

curriculum with Leicester, and concerns around curriculum delivery will also be

shared as part of the ongoing communication between the two schools. The

visit team believes that both schools have developed a good understanding of

each other’s requirements, which the School should find beneficial as it

continues to develop the programme.

24. The discussions we held with Leicester and the School suggest that there is a

good working relationship between the two organisations. As a result of the

effective communication and continuous dialogue, the School has been able to

successfully review and adapt the Leicester curriculum to suit its planned cohort

of students. The visit team is confident that the schools will continue to develop

their collaborative relationship. They have both shown that they will continue to

share information about the curriculum and assessments in the short and long

term.

Areas that are working well 1 – The School demonstrates a strong and

collegiate relationship with Leicester Medical School.

Collecting, analysing and using data on quality and on equality and diversity (R2.5)

25. The School told the visit team during our previous visit (in 2017) that it plans to

analyse student data to monitor any variances relating to equality, diversity and

protected characteristics. During the 2018 visit, the School told us that it will be

difficult to analyse the data, including assessment results, due to the small

number of the first cohort. Nevertheless, the School does plan to collect and

analyse data over several years: we heard that when student numbers increase,

the School will be able collect enough data to draw valid conclusions. We

24/08/2018

11

understand the challenge the School may experience in the early stages of the

programme, and are satisfied with the plans to collect and analyse data over

several years.

Systems and processes to monitor quality on placements (R2.6)

26. The School has demonstrated that it has service level agreements (SLAs) with

LEPs, and we heard that there are plans to sign more SLAs with GP practices.

However, the School is confident there is sufficient placement capacity to

accommodate the Year 1 cohort. The SLAs define the School’s obligations to

provide appropriate information about students to the LEP, and the LEPs’

obligation to ensure teaching is delivered to the required standards. We heard

from the Sandwell and West Birmingham Hospital Trust representative that

Aston Medical School students will be taught the same way as those from

Birmingham Medical School, whilst ensuring that the different learning outcomes

are achieved.

27. Through co-ordinating with Birmingham Medical School, the School has

allocated students to placements when there will be no or very few students

from other medical schools onsite. The senior management team told us that

students will benefit from having the opportunity to undertake placements in a

number of different LEPs; this this will expose students to a wide range of

clinical experiences.

28. The School told us that it was granted Higher Education Funding Council for

England funding from 2018. It was awarded 20 places in 2018 and an additional

80 students will start in 2019. As a result the School will now be able to align

with the national tariff for student placements.

29. We are satisfied that the required arrangements have been made for student

placements. Through the discussions we had with the placement providers

during the visit and our review of the signed SLAs we believe that LEPs are

committed to providing the required level of education and training to the

School’s students during their placements. They have shown the readiness to

contribute to the School’s programme and demonstrated their agreement to

deliver the School’s learning outcomes. Despite this, the visit team is concerned

about placement providers meeting the different learning outcomes of two

different medical Schools. Whilst we are reassured that there has been careful

planning of local clinical placements, potential overlaps with other medical

schools and the impact on clinical learning opportunities will need to be closely

monitored.

24/08/2018

12

Managing progression with external input (R2.12); Assessing GMC outcomes for graduates

(R5.5)

30. During the visit, the School explained how it will assess students on the

programme at appropriate points in order to ensure students meet all learning

outcomes. We heard that the School’s assessment strategy mirrors that of

Leicester. Year 1 will consist of two rounds of summative assessments, (two

written papers in each with single best answer and short answer questions) with

the first assessment completed at the end of teaching period one and the

second in teaching period two. Students must pass all summative assessments

and the professionalism aspect of the programme each year in order to

progress; the senior management team told us that students will have one resit

opportunity if they are unsuccessful at the first sitting. We are satisfied with the

School’s approach to managing learners’ progression: it has shown how

students will be assessed at appropriate points to determine their level of

understanding and inform on their progress. We will explore the effectiveness of

the School’s plans over future visit cycles.

Managing concerns about a learner (R2.16)

31. Ahead of the visit, the School provided us with the code of practice for the

support and concerns process, which explains the process for raising concerns

about student professionalism. The document describes two separate groups,

the support group (the student’s advocate) and the concerns group (the

patient’s advocate). The document therefore outlines not only the disciplinary

element of the concern group but also the support that will be offered to the

student during the process. The concerns group can refer students to the

Board of Examiners, the University Disciplinary Committee, or the Fitness to

Practise Committee. These committees will have the option to dismiss a concern

altogether, write a formal warning or start the process of expulsion.

32. We were told that attendance monitoring will be scrutinised using the existing

university system and Top Hat where applicable. The School will analyse the

data collected using this system to identify and provide bespoke support to

students who are struggling with attendance. We heard that low-level concerns

such as poor attendance will be referred to the support and concerns process

for review. The students with concerns raised about them will be referred to the

student support team in addition to their personal tutor to provide support

throughout the investigation process. The visit team is satisfied that the School

has developed a process which should enable them to manage and resolve

concerns. We will follow up the implementation of this process over future visit

cycles.

24/08/2018

13

Requirement for School to investigate and take action when there are concerns about the

fitness to practise of medical students (R2.18)

33. During the visit, the senior management team told us that the School will be

using the University’s FTP policy, with the Director of Medical Education (DME)

acting as the investigating officer (unless there is a conflict of interest). We

heard that there will be a clinical professional on the FTP panel when concerns

about a medical student are referred to it, and that the School has contacted a

clinician about the prospect of being on the panels. Despite this, the visit team

is concerned that the FTP policy does not include a requirement for panels to

include a medical representative. The School must amend the FTP policy to

include this requirement.

Requirement 2 – Further clarity regarding medical representation on

Fitness to Practise panels must be included within the School’s policy.

Recruitment, selection and appointment of learners and educators (R2.20)

34. We are satisfied that the School has effective plans to ensure that the

recruitment, selection and appointment of learners and educators is open, fair

and transparent. We heard during the visit that the Mini Multiple Interviews

(MMIs) have been developed and used by a range of stakeholders (such as lay

personnel, patients and students) alongside clinicians and School staff. The

senior management team told us that it provided extensive training to these

assessors, including unconscious bias awareness, to ensure a fair admissions

process; feedback is collected from assessors as well as applicants to help drive

improvement.

35. All MMIs have now been conducted, and the School is satisfied with both the

reliability of each station (the data has been aggregated due to small numbers)

and the number of offers made to applicants. We were reassured to hear that

the School has held discussions with the University to plan for over-recruitment;

in this instance the University will be able to provide the necessary additional

resource.

24/08/2018

14

Theme 3: Supporting learners

Standard

S3.1 Learners receive educational and pastoral support to be able to demonstrate what is expected in Good medical practice and achieve the learning outcomes required by their curriculum.

Learner's health and wellbeing; educational and pastoral support (R3.2)

36. In advance of our visit, the School provided evidence which illustrates how

students will be provided with educational and pastoral support. The Curriculum

Guide and Code of Practice states that students will be offered tutorial support

as well as personal development planning and guidance on career management.

37. During the visit, the senior management team told us that it aims to foster an

inclusive environment within the School. The visit team heard that there are

plans to integrate domestic students (including widening participation) and

overseas students. We will follow up on how this works in practice over future

visit cycles. The School told us that the induction week has been specifically

designed to support students in their adjustment to life in a UK University.

There will be group discussions that focus on the structure of the NHS, equality

and diversity requirements, and important aspects of UK culture. Personal tutors

assigned to students will be able to provide them with additional information

and support to help to adjust to their new environment. We are confident that

the School has developed policies to provide students with health, education

and pastoral support.

38. We also explored what support personal tutors will be expected to provide

students (including assessment feedback and pastoral support). The School

aims to limit the number of students assigned to each personal tutor to a

maximum of 20 over a five year period. It is hoped that in practice the number

may be less than this, but due to lower faculty numbers this may not be

possible for the 2018/19 academic year. As such, the visit team is concerned

that there may not be enough resources available for tutors to fulfil their role

and provide students with the pastoral care they will need. We will monitor this

area over future visit cycles to ensure the School is providing adequate support

to students.

Recommendation 3 – The School’s personal tutor model risks over-

burdening individual tutors with too many students to provide effective

support.

24/08/2018

15

Information on reasonable adjustments (R3.4)

39. The School has demonstrated that it has procedures and processes to make

reasonable adjustments. The senior management team told us that the

University already has a lot of experience of reasonable adjustments and has

good support systems in place. Students that require reasonable adjustments or

who have declared a disability will be directed to the University’s enabling team

to receive the required support. The University’s enabling team is responsible

for providing every student with a disability or learning need with advice,

information, and support to meet individual needs. This team will make

recommendations about appropriate adjustments to the School’s DME, who is

responsible for agreeing any adjustments. The visit team is satisfied that the

procedures and processes to meet this requirement are set out in principle. The

visit team will review their effectiveness during future visits.

Information about curriculum, assessment and clinical placements (R3.7)

40. The School is in the process of finalising the information that students will need

about the programme when they start. There are also plans to consult with

representatives of the School’s student body regarding the educational

performance measure during the 2018/2019 academic year.

41. The visit team noted that some of the pre-visit documents still contain

references to Leicester Medical School. During our visit, we were told that the

School is currently in the process of updating these documents and changing

the logos. The School is confident these changes will be completed before the

programme starts in September 2018. We are assured that the School aims to

provide learners with all the required information about the programme before

the first cohort begin. We will not be able to determine if this aim is achieved

until we have spoken to students during the next visit cycle.

Feedback on performance, development and progress (R3.13)

42. The School has demonstrated that it has plans in place to provide students with

feedback about their progress. Teachers will use a system called Top Hat which

will enable students to receive real time feedback for class quizzes and team

based learning. We heard that personal tutors will meet with students regularly

to discuss their performance on the programme and their professional conduct

during primary care placements.

43. The School told us that a multi-professional form is currently being developed to

record feedback about students from multiple sources during their GP

placements. The form will also contain a section about FTP, which should enable

concerns about student’s performance to be identified. We are satisfied that

there are plans to provide students with regular and meaningful feedback which

should help them with their studies. We will speak to students during future

24/08/2018

16

visits to assess the quality of the feedback they receive and the effectiveness of

the process.

Career support and advice (R3.16)

44. The School told us that students who may wish to exit or cannot meet the

requirements of the programme will be provided with support and advice from

their personal tutor. They will also be signposted to the University’s independent

advice and representation service, counselling, and careers services as

appropriate. Students may be eligible to receive alternative exit awards if they

do not complete the programme. The visit team is satisfied that students who

exit the programme will receive appropriate advice and support about

alternative career or qualification options available to them.

24/08/2018

17

Theme 4: Supporting Educators

Standards

S4.1 Educators are selected, inducted, trained and appraised to reflect their education

and training responsibilities.

S4.2 Educators receive the support, resources and time to meet their education and

training responsibilities.

Induction, training, appraisal for educators (R4.1)

45. The School told us that staff will be provided with training and guidance to

support widening participation and overseas students. We heard that the School

will implement personal and professional development plans to support staff. In

addition, all MMI assessors have received extensive training in areas such as

equality and diversity. Aspects of different cultures were discussed during the

training sessions with assessors in order to reduce unconscious bias. We will

seek further details of these plans during future visit cycles.

Time in job plans (R4.2)

46. The School explained how it will ensure trainers have enough time in their job

plans to meet their educational responsibilities. We heard that the Phase 1 lead

will contribute to the delivery of other lectures on other programmes, but that

no staff member will be responsible for whole modules or blocks in other

programmes. We were told that two postgraduate programmes are currently

being developed within the School; however, these will not involve the early

year medical programme teachers. We will review the effectiveness of time in

job plans when we speak to educational staff during future visits.

24/08/2018

18

Theme 5: Developing and implementing curricula and assessments

Standard

S5.1 Medical School curricula and assessments are developed and implemented so that medical students are able to achieve the learning outcomes required by graduates.

S5.2 Postgraduate curricula and assessments are implemented so that doctors in training are able to demonstrate what is expected in Good medical practice and to achieve the learning outcomes required by their curriculum.

GMC outcomes for graduates (R5.1); Undergraduate curricular design (R5.3); Supporting

improvement (R1.22)

47. The School told us how it has developed and planned the delivery of the

curriculum to enable students to meet the GMC outcomes for graduates. This

requirement will be achieved through the use of teaching models such as the

flipped classroom method, where students will read the lesson material in

advance of teaching sessions, allowing for more in depth discussions in the

classroom. This style of teaching will be trialled in Year 1 and developed further

in Year 2. We heard that lectures will be recorded and made available for

students to watch before teaching sessions, which should enable them to test

their understanding. A team based learning approach will also be used to

develop students’ learning skills. These teaching models have been chosen to

benefit the overseas and widening participation students the School will recruit.

This shows that the School has considered the requirements of its cohort and

chosen a suitable delivery method to enable the students to meet the

requirements of the programme.

Areas that are working well 2 – The School has developed models of

learning, such as team based learning and flipped classroom, in order to be

appropriate for the student group that the programme will attract.

48. The senior management team told us that it has developed plans for the

student selected component (SSC) of the curriculum. These will run in Years 3,

4 and 5, and cover a range of activities. All students will undertake a group

based project in Year 3, have a different choice for the SSC in Year 4, and

complete an elective in Year 5. The School will deliver a leadership course (the

completion of which allows the School to award students a Postgraduate

Certificate in Healthcare Leadership) based on work done in the SSCs in Years 3

and 4 and with additional projects in Years 4 and 5. All students are encouraged

to undertake this course but will have the option to run an audit or quality

improvement project instead. We were encouraged by the School’s plans, and

will explore these in more detail with staff and students over future visit cycles.

24/08/2018

19

Undergraduate clinical placements (R5.4)

49. We were told that the School has moved the date when students begin their

clinical placements in Year 1 to week six rather than in week one as stated in

the Leicester curriculum. We heard that this approach has been chosen because

the majority of students in the first cohort will be from overseas, and the School

believes that starting clinical placements at a later stage should give these

students some time to prepare and settle in the UK. A personal and professional

development theme will be running during these five weeks which will cover

health and wellbeing, an introduction to clinical practice, and the ethics of

consent.

50. We heard from the senior management team that students will be sent to their

placements in pairs, and that the School hopes that the local students will act as

guides for the overseas students. The aim is to place all students in placements

within an hour of the University and to provide a public transport orientation

before the placement starts. We are satisfied with the School’s rationale for

starting students’ GP placements in week six. We will assess the effectiveness of

this approach when we speak to students during future visits.

Assessing GMC outcomes for graduates (R5.5)

51. We were pleased to hear that the School is putting together a formative

assessment strategy. The School told us that students will complete formative

assessments under exam conditions, and will receive feedback. They will also

complete an eight station formative objective structured clinical examination

(OSCE) in Year 1. We are confident that the School has effective plans to assess

students against the learning outcomes required for graduates at appropriate

points. The School confirmed that the formative assessment in Year 1 will take

place approximately three weeks before the Christmas break. It believes that

this format will allow students extra time to review their feedback before they

take the summative assessment.

52. We heard that the School is contributing to the Medical Schools Council’s

common content question bank and the widening participation element of the

Medical Schools Council Assessment Alliance (MSCAA). The common content

question bank will be used in Year 5 for summative assessments.

Fair, reliable and valid assessments (R5.6)

53. The School told us what it has done and what it plans to do to ensure that it

sets fair, reliable and valid assessments. The School and Leicester are hoping to

develop OSCE stations together, with plans still under discussion; AMS will also

run station writing workshops. We heard that the School has not yet decided

whether to share OSCE stations with Leicester, but hopes to do so when

completed. Safeguards will be put in place to ensure that the schools do not use

24/08/2018

20

the same stations at the same time. Both schools are planning to have further

discussions in the future to finalise the plans.

54. The team was pleased to hear that the School has given thought to how it will

standard set its assessments to ensure fairness and validity: the senior

management team told us that the School will use the borderline regression

method for OSCEs, and the Angoff method for written assessments. We will

explore the implementation and effectiveness of these standard setting tools

over future visit cycles.

55. During our visit we heard that both schools will possibly select their individual

exam questions from a common pool of questions, but this is still in discussion.

In order to prevent question leakage, the schools will follow the same process

that will be used when developing practical assessments: they will share and

review their chosen questions and agree to select alternatives if they pick the

same questions. The School’s long term objective is to develop its own question

bank.

56. The School is currently exploring possible e-assessment systems which students

will use to complete their assessments. The School is preparing paper based

assessment as a backup while the e-assessment system is being tested and a

final decision made. We will follow this up during our next visit cycle.

57. The visit team is satisfied that the School is making appropriate plans to develop

assessments which will be fair, reliable and valid for the programme. It currently

has a lot of support from Leicester, and there are plans for the School to

develop its own assessments for the future.

Examiners and assessors (R5.8)

58. The School told us that it is currently planning the recruitment of external

examiners who will be used to review the School’s assessments and make

comments on how these can be improved. The MSCAA will be used to identify

potential external examiners with the appropriate expertise. We heard that the

School plans to recruit one biomedical scientist and one GP as external

examiners in Year 1. They will be provided with the appropriate training so that

they understand the context of the School’s aims, curriculum and assessments.

The visit team is satisfied that the examiners the School recruits will have the

appropriate expertise in their field, and will receive the appropriate training and

support once recruited.

24/08/2018

21

Team leader Professor Alastair McGowan

Visitors Dr Steven Burr

Professor Deborah Murdoch-Eaton

Dr Catherine Swales

GMC staff Kabir Kareem (Education Quality Analyst)

Lucy Llewellyn (Education QA Programme Manager)

24/08/2018

22

Response to Visit Report on Aston Medical School May 2018

Thank you for the quality assurance report on Aston Medical School. We found both the visit and the

report helpful and informative.

We were pleased that the GMC recognises areas are working well including our strong and collegiate

relationship with Leicester Medical School and our models of learning.

Number Theme Requirements Report

paragraph

1 R1.19 We are concerned that previous plans for teaching

facilities have been changed so close to the start of

the new programme. These plans must be finalised

as soon as possible.

RESPONSE: The teaching facilities for the 2018/19

cohort have not changed from the original plans.

The University is undergoing an Estates review and

from 2019 the Medical School will be housed

temporarily for 2-3 years in a dedicated area of the

Main Building. This will provide teaching, study and

social space with facilities to match those designed

for the Medical School Building, and staff offices will

be co-located.

11-13

2 R2.18 Further clarity regarding medical representation on

Fitness to Practise panels must be included within

the School’s policy.

RESPONSE: The University Fitness to Practise

policy has been updated to state explicitly that when

MBChB students are being investigated, at least one

member of the panel must be a senior doctor,

registered with the GMC and with a licence to

practise.

33

Number Theme Recommendation Report

24/08/2018

23

paragraph

1 R1.7 The School has a very committed but relatively small

core team, many of whom have taken on multiple

roles. The School should consider how best to

mitigate this in order to successfully deliver a full

medical programme.

RESPONSE: AMS recognises that its core team is

small and, as such, staff carry multiple roles. The

School is continuing to recruit staff, including 4

additional CTFs, 0.4 Primary Care, and a further 2

support staff and, thus, to spread the roles more

widely. We have also set up a Programme Executive

which meets weekly to develop resilience in terms of

shared knowledge and experience. This will be an

on-going process.

4-5

2 R1.19 The School’s proposed programme will have a strong

reliance on technology. The School should provide

the necessary level of support to deliver this

successfully.

RESPONSE: The University is in the process of

appointing a dedicated Teaching and Learning

Technologist who will support the School in its

technological needs. The School will continue to

monitor.

14

3 R3.2 The School’s personal tutor model risks over-

burdening individual tutors with too many students to

provide effective support.

RESPONSE: We acknowledge the concern raised

and will continue to monitor this situation. The

School is implementing a model of personal tutoring

where each cohort is spread across a number of.

tutors. Thus, in 2018/19 most tutors have only 3

tutees each (range 2-4). As further cohorts come on

stream, we aim to ask the tutors to take on another 2

or 3 year 1 students annually to a maximum of 10-15,

once all 5 years of the programme are operating. All

tutors have been trained and are supported by the

36-38

24/08/2018

24

Finally, thank you again for a supportive and positive visit. As a school, we found the process thought-

provoking and constructive.

Regards

Helen Cameron

Dean of Medical Education

Head of Student Support.