Progression through the programme

Formal monitoring of progression of students through the programme is the responsibility of the Board of Examiners, which meets once a year. Generally, it reviews all candidates’ programme work, confirms marks and determines candidates' progression to the second and final year of training. If a trainee has not fulfilled the requirements at the end of the academic year, the Board of Examiners may recommend that the trainee does not proceed to the next year until all requirements have been met. The programme director would inform the trainee that they would not progress. If they subsequently pass all outstanding required work they would rejoin the programme, normally with a subsequent cohort at the appropriate point.

The Board of Examiners that meets in July of the final year of training normally makes decisions about whether a trainee has passed the requirements for award of the DClinPsy. If, by the July Board of Examiners, a trainee has not passed all requirements, a final date for completion of outstanding work will be set and an extraordinary meeting of the Board of Examiners convened-this means that it is not possible for the Programme Director to communicate to HCPC that a trainee has passed and is eligible for registration until all assessed work is complete which will have implications for your employment status. To gain the award of DClinPsy, all assessments must be finally passed. The trainee will be informed of the Board’s decision. The marks and decisions of the Examining Board require confirmation by the Faculty Board.

If, at any time, trainees have concerns about their progress through the programme, they should discuss this with their appraisal tutor and/or the appropriate member of staff. Equally, if members of the programme team have concerns these will be raised with the trainee by the appraisal tutor. The appraiser and trainee should reach agreement on what needs to be done to prevent or resolve the difficulties and this agreement recorded in the appraisal notes.

Details of the relevant procedures  are in the Ethical and professional issues section but in the event that concerns about progress or performance in any aspect of the programme are unresolved or become more serious, this will be reported to the programme director and  if progress remains unsatisfactory a final statement of action will be issued which will normally be that the trainee’s continued university registration will be terminated.

Programme criteria for assessed work

 ThesisClinical assessmentsComments
Pass No further work required, trainee has passed the thesis No further work required, trainee has passed the assessments No further work required, trainee has passed the piece of assessed work
Minor Amendments Readily manageable changes required: e.g., re-writing small parts of the work or presentational changes, or small changes to analyses. Internal Examiner can grade resubmitted thesis, a Pass, or if unsatisfactory then can offer a further 4-weeks to make the amendments, or a Fail. Competence is good enough for this stage of training providing that learning needs identified are attended to in the next placement period; and/or experience is satisfactory in most domains, but some experiences require attention in next placement period. Readily manageable changes required: e.g., presentational changes or manageable changes to a few areas of the work, or small changes to analyses. Changes to be submitted to marker within 4 weeks of trainee receiving feedback. Changes must be to satisfaction of marker for the work to Pass
Major Amendments First submission shows significant flaws. Trainee re-submits revised thesis. Internal and External Examiner can grade resubmitted thesis, a Pass, or if unsatisfactory then can offer a further 4-weeks to make the amendments, or a Fail. Competence has not reached the level expected for a trainee at this stage of training and an action plan is required for next placement period; and/or there are significant concerns in one or more experience area(s) and an action plan is required for next placement period First submission shows substantial flaws. Trainee either revises and re-submits, or in the case of a category iii submits a new piece of work. In either case, this is the final submission. Final submission is marked as Pass, Minor Amendments or Fail only.
Resubmission First submission shows significant and substantial flaws. Trainee required to resubmit substantial amendments (this could include a new piece of research). Internal and External Examiners can grade resubmitted thesis, with optional viva, as Pass, Minor Amendments, Major Amendments, or Fail (a viva will be required if either a Major Amendment or Fail is recommended).N/AN/A
Fail The piece of work is judged so flawed as to irredeemable on the final submission. Serious professional misconduct on any placement will lead to an automatic placement fail. The piece of work is judged so flawed as to be irredeemable on the final submission.
Conditions for Programme Failure

Programme failure due to Clinical, Academic, and/or Research Assessments:

Trainees are required to pass all categories of work subject to summative assessment, so a Fail on any summative assignment will normally result in a recommendation of Programme Failure by the Board of Examiners*.

Also, if a trainee has received ANY TWO of the following, then a recommendation for Programme Failure will normally be made:
· A Clinical Referral
· An Academic or Research assessment receiving a Major Amendment category iii mark.
· A Thesis receiving a Resubmission for DClinPsy (Category D on the marking criteria)

*Please note, the Thesis is examined by an Internal and External Examiner, who together form the Board of Examiners for the Thesis component of the DClinPsy. If the Internal and External Examiners recommend ‘no degree be awarded’ (Category E on the marking criteria), then this will normally result in a recommendation of Programme Failure to the University.

Programme failure due to serious professional misconduct:

The Programme Director and Director of Education will normally recommend to the Faculty Board that a trainee fail the programme if, following investigation, the trainee has been found to have engaged in serious professional misconduct – that is, conduct that seriously infringes the current HCPC Codes, the BPS Code of Ethics and Conduct, or the Division of Clinical Psychology Professional Practice Guidelines. Any actions taken would be carried out in consultation with the employing NHS trust.

 

What happens if the Programme Board of Examiners Recommends a Programme Fail?


In the event that a trainee met one or more of the conditions for programme failure, the programme Board of Examiners would recommend that the trainee fail the DClinPsy. It is not the responsibility of the Board of Examiners to make recommendations about the consequences of programme failure. This reflects a legal judgement that processes of assessment should be clearly separated from those concerning consequences of failure. The Director of Education and Programme Director, after due consultation within the School, can submit a recommendation to the Faculty Board that the trainee fails the programme. If the Faculty Board accepts this recommendation, then the trainee will normally immediately be de-registered as a student of the University and their employment with Taunton and Somerset NHS Trust would normally be automatically terminated, as per the employment contract.

What happens if the Thesis Board of Examiners Recommends No Degree Awarded?


If the thesis Board of Examiners (i.e., the Internal and External Examiners) recommends Category E (‘that no degree be awarded’), then this recommendation is submitted to the Faculty Dean of Postgraduate Research. If the Faculty Dean of Postgraduate Research accepts this recommendation, then the trainee will normally immediately be de-registered as a student of the University and their employment with Taunton and Somerset NHS Trust would normally be automatically terminated, as per the employment contract.

Appeal Procedures


If a trainee thinks that they have grounds for appeal against the recommendation of the Board of Examiners, then the trainee should follow the University Student Academic Appeals Procedures: http://www.exeter.ac.uk/staff/policies/calendar/part1/otherregs/appeals/ These University appeal procedures would also apply in the case of a Programme Failure.