Educator appraisal—occurrence and experience of hospital consultants in North-West England

Figures & data

Table

Practice points

Appraisal of educator roles remains uncommon but is valuable when it occurs Revalidation will include assessment of ‘teaching and training’. Appraisal will be a cornerstone of this process. Documentation to support appraisal is helpful to guide collection and recording of evidence, and formation of a personal development plan Appraisers are key to the process and should themselves be ‘selected, trained and supported’

Table 1.  Proportion having educational appraisal broken down by main educational role

Main educational role	Proportion having educational appraisal (%)
Clinical supervisors	19/199 = 9.5%
Education supervisors	59/353 = 16.7%
Educational leads	29/53 = 54.7%

Notes: Comparison of proportions having educational appraisal (Fisher's exact test, two-tailed).

Clinical supervisors vs Educational supervisors p = 0.0219

Clinical supervisors vs Educational leads p = 0.0001

Educational supervisors vs Educational leads p = 0.0004

Table 2.  Proportion have educational appraisal broken down by specialty

Specialty (grouped)	Proportion having educational appraisal (%)
Anaesthetics & Intensive Care	14/107 (13.1%)
Emergency Medicine	5/32 (15.6%)
Laboratory based specialties	4/29 (13.8%)
Medical specialties	43/187 (23.0%)
Paediatrics	12/66 (18.2%)
Psychiatry	1/7 (14.3%)
Radiology	2/27 (7.4%)
Surgical specialties (incl. O&G)	26/150 (17.3%)

Table 3.  Comparison of the proportion having educational and clinical appraisal broken down by main educational role

Main educational role	Proportion having Educational Appraisal within the past 36 months	Proportion having Clinical (NHS) Appraisal within the past 36 months	Statistical significance of two groups (Fisher's exact test – two tailed) NS = not significant
All respondents	107/605 = 17.7%	561/605 = 92.7%	p = 0.0003
Clinical supervisors	19/199 = 9.5%	178/199 = 89.4%	p = 0.2309 (NS)
Education supervisors	59/353 = 16.7%	331/353 = 93.8%	p = 0.0334
Educational leads	29/53 = 54.7%	52/53 = 98.1%	p = 0.4528 (NS)

Table 4.  Respondents’ perceptions of the meeting and subsequent documentation

How many respondents felt the meeting …	n	%
… was an appropriate length?	104	97.2
… allowed them to have their say?	105	98.1
… was conducted professionally?	106	99.1
… was conducted in a supportive manner?	107	100.0
How many respondents felt …
… they received appropriate feedback at the meeting	68	63.5
Was the feedback in subsequent documentation …
… appropriate	68	63.5
… partly appropriate	22	20.6
… not appropriate	17	15.9

Table 5.  Views of the respondents who had made use of the deanery educational appraisal documentation (n = 28)

Did you find the educational appraisal documentation … .	n	%
… helpful in deciding what evidence to collect?	27	96.4
… helpful for recording the evidence used?	24	85.7
… helpful in guiding your personal development plan?	24	85.7

Box 1 Thematic analysis of free comments about the educator appraisal process

The importance of the role of the appraiser

‘Excellent appraiser’

‘Would have appreciated more constructive criticism, it was a pat on the back and box ticked rather than really helping me develop.’

Perceived value of the process in those who undertook it

‘This was the first and very useful, felt somewhat more empowered after it, appreciated and encouraged to develop new ideas.’

‘I thought it helpful and a good idea.’

‘Would hopefully be easier second time around now that we have things in place to collect the relevant info.’

Concerns regarding the process

‘It is worth considering the impact of further forms to fill on top of normal appraisal, which are completed in our own time at present.’

‘Need to have concrete planning, training and time for these roles.’