I'd also challenge the notion that you need experience of the sort you describe to get onto a DClinPsy. It is the case with some programmes but not all. Those programmes who are looking for diverse cohorts are well aware that potentially wonderful trainees are just as plentiful in roles outside clin...

Geishawife wrote: ↑

Sat Oct 24, 2020 6:38 pm

But, without wishing to be controversial, I don't recommend applying with maximising your chances of getting on as a main driver. I would focus instead on where you feel you'd be happiest training.

I think this is just very good advice and not at all controversial.

It can be a hard sell to get a university to think that university qualifications aren't the most important bit of an individual's capital - easy to see why.

To my memory, nobody we've ever interviewed while i've been in post hasn't had a masters, because having one scores you extra 'points' I had a wonderful conversation with a trust today about moving away from using this points for privilege approach in order to stop reinforcing the structural inequa...

Ahh, thank you, Miriam. So it's not explicitly stated that these extra places need to be offered specifically with diversity in mind. Hopefully that can be achieved in the future if the funding continues. That's because programmes would walk head first into the equality act if they had to do that. ...

My general thoughts on the matter rather than comments on any specific programmes would be that when you hear anything would depend on what they decide to do and how they decide to do it but in the knowledge that the commissions are for trainees to start this year. I cannot imagine any programmes wi...

I think that clarity may vary from region to region. Can I ask, do you know when we may receive clarity around this from the North West courses!? Do you think it will be days or weeks?! I can't tell you anything about how Liverpool and Manchester might be choosing to deal with extra commissions I'm...

I think that clarity may vary from region to region.

I'm surprised that they weren't already doing photo ID checks.

Spatch wrote: ↑

Wed Feb 26, 2020 10:38 pm

Ultimately, how much of this conversation is about building a system that picks the best clinical psychologists, or just building a system that picks us?

You should sticky that post somewhere

Nice explanation Spatch, thanks.

Sorry to jump on this but these posts don't go away, they are still here next year when another group are doing tests and I want our applicants to perform to the best of their abilities.

You may be correct about not having done well. However your assertion about the test is factually incorrect and has the potential to harm the performance of others.

They haven't. I've not sent anything out except to people who didn't actually finish the tests.

Lancaster (tests done) – Absolutely no way deductive test went well! - Realised too late that the main thing seemingly being tested here was how to take tests – the key was to get an answer WRONG once you were doing well… Instead, I tried to answer the question, which when up against a clock and, c...

I'm guessing this is the SHL test as I'm not aware of anyone else using deductive reasoning for DClinPsy shortlisting. In SHL's case, scores are calculated using a model which combines hit rate (number correct), work rate (number answered), and question level (which changes dynamically for each ques...