Abstract
The AMEE Guide to Selection for medical school is a welcome addition that provides much sound advice and guidance. It employs a comprehensive framework and a number of innovations, international case studies, for instance. There are also some omissions that a future revision could usefully address. The key ones concern the evidence base for assessment of personal attributes by questionnaire or interview; conflation of two separable stages in selection, meeting minimum requirements for suitability, and discriminating between suitable candidates; how best to provide feedback to candidates; and the question of what counts as a fair, equitable approach to selection. Nevertheless, the new AMEE Guide (No 153) is well-aligned with the most recent Ottawa consensus statement on selection, and will make a good contribution to the development or revision of selection systems in medical schools.
Keywords:
Acknowledgements
The author is grateful for critical comments on a first draft from Celia Brown and Rachel Greatrix.
Disclosure statement
The author chairs the UK Medical Schools Council Selection Alliance, and has carried out consultancy work for the Australian Council for Educational Research.
Notes
1 Including eligibility where entrance is restricted by some factor, e.g. residence, educational capital or qualification.
2 Also relevant is how an additional criterion is used. For instance, adding an admissions test to PEA could be done by weighting each and using the combined score, or used separately, in succession, can result in the second measure having a disproportionate impact on selection.
Additional information
Funding
Notes on contributors
Paul Garrud
Paul Garrud, Honorary Associate Professor, School of Medicine, University of Nottingham; Chair, Selection Alliance, Medical Schools Council.