Removing Educational Achievement Points From the Foundation Programme Application System: Is This the Right Decision?

Abstract

The UK Foundation Programme Office has announced that medical students graduating from 2023 onward will not receive Foundation Programme Application System points for additional degrees or journal publications. In this viewpoint paper, we acknowledge the reasons for this decision, such as socioeconomically advantaged students having greater access to these achievements and the promotion of intercalated degrees for the sake of point accumulation. Additionally, the predictive value of these achievements with regard to junior doctors’ performance has been questioned when compared to that of other Foundation Programme Application System components. Conversely, we also highlight the drawbacks of the UK Foundation Programme Office’s decision, since this might discourage medical students from completing additional degrees and attempting to publish their work, thereby resulting in clinicians with little to no academic experience or interest. Finally, we attempt to provide suggestions for future improvements in this system by analyzing different medical schools’ approaches, such as the BMedSci Honors program offered at Nottingham University. Furthermore, promoting and supporting engagement with academia, especially among socioeconomically disadvantaged students, are the responsibility of all medical schools; such actions are needed in order to produce doctors who are both clinically and academically competent. We conclude that the aforementioned changes should only affect new cohorts in the interest of universities’ transparency and fairness to their students.

Understanding medical students’ intercalation decisions to preserve the clinical academic pipeline: a mixed-method survey

“…Furthermore, the lack of instrumentality and perceived devaluation of intercalation's career advantage could make the additional nancial commitment more di cult for students to justify, especially against a backdrop of existing nancial pressures. This could discourage early engagement in research activities (32), and risk cultivating a future cadre of clinicians that lack academic rigour (34).…”