RCPA Examinations in Anatomical pathology - Questions ... - Rcpa.tv

letter of Instructions (cont.)
As in the past we would ask you to mark each slide as ‘right’, ‘wrong’ or ‘borderline’ and once all the
marking is completed, consider the overall number of slides ‘wrong’ or ‘borderline’ and the
seriousness of errors in assessing whether an individual candidate has passed or failed. For the Part II we
• As in the past
have worked on over 3 ‘wrong’ answers (equivalent to over 20% wrong answers), or over 2 ‘wrong’ and 2 ‘borderline’ answers to be a fail grade depending on the
seriousness of the errors. Although some weighting is given to the t
seriousness of an error, we have not adopted the policy of a single 'sudden death slide'.
Normally, for those cases where a differential diagnosis can be justified, provided the candidate has
given an appropriate description and differential diagnosis, and can demonstrate that he/she would
have arrived at the correct diagnosis through appropriate ancillary ary techniques, we would consider
that answer to be at least ‘borderline’ if not ‘right’ even if the preferred diagnosis is wrong.
• If appropriate, could you please make brief comments in the column provided for each case. This helps in formulating assessment reports and allows me to review
individual slide box numbers in the event of discrepancies. Finally, for each candidate, could you give an overall opinion as to ‘pass’, ‘fail’ or ‘borderline’ based on the
above criteria.
• I hope I have not totally confused you as to the approach – much of it is commonsense although there are always those candidates dates that are ‘borderline’ no matter which
way one assesses them. Could you also make a recommendation for those borderline candidates who you think may be taken onto the orals and shown extra slides at
that time.
• This year we have given an undertaking to have the results published by the end of July and have not bowed to the pressure of publishing same earlier because of the
increase in the number of candidates presenting this year, however er we would appreciate the results back in time for Tony and myself to review any discrepancies and
have the scripts re-marked if necessary. Thus it would be appreciated if the marking g could be completed as soon as possible to enable the scripts to be sent to further
examiners as required.
• Could you please return the mark sheets to us by courier as soon as possible at the following address:-
• Chief Examiners in Anatomical Pathology Telephone: (08) 8204 4259
• C/- Anthony C Thomas, MB BS, PhD, FRCPath, FRCPA International: 618 8204 4259
• Department of Anatomical Pathology Fax: (08) 8374 1437
• Flinders Medical Centre International: 618 8374 1437
• Bedford Park, SA 5042
email:Tony.Thomas@flinders.edu.au
Tony.Thomas@flinders.edu.au
• Thank you once again for undertaking this task.
• Best wishes,
• Richard Williams
• Chief Examiner in Anatomical Pathology.