BPS diversity survey

Issues related to pay, contracts, Agenda for Change, the NHS, the BPS, unions, etc.
Post Reply
User avatar
miriam
Site Admin
Posts: 7858
Joined: Sat Mar 24, 2007 11:20 pm
Location: Bucks
Contact:

BPS diversity survey

Post by miriam » Mon Jun 29, 2020 12:20 am

Here are some of my comments. Feel free to use/amend if you feel similarly:

What do I think of current selection process in terms of diversity?
I think there are lots of "pipeline issues" about how people learn about CP, how they gain A level and degree grades that are competitive if facing more systemic adversity, and how people develop the right skills and experiences if they don't have personal connections or the financial position to volunteer. I don't think the form and interview process is the primary issue. But I do think having diverse panels and valuing a diversity of journeys and experiences among trainees is important.
What do I think about additional HEE places for this year?
It doesn't appear that the courses have tied this to widening access in this cohort in any meaningful way - they've just offered to the next people on reserve lists, rather than weighting any diversity factors differently for the additional places as far as I understand it
What other comments have I got for PQG/GTiCP
I think the BPS has never done a good job of publicising the profession or how to develop relevant skills and experiences to students or early career stage applicants. I spent a huge amount of time and money setting up clinpsy.org.uk forums to address this deficit and level the playing field for anyone interested in the profession. They get a million page views a month (and I've done huge numbers of form reviews for 20 years, and low cost personal and professional development days to help candidates prepare for interviews). The BPS has done nothing to support or join up with this, despite many attempts on my part to connect, except for one year in which the PQG funded me to deliver two personal development days. It has been part of a much wider issue with not being outward facing or responsive as an organisation, and having all the website content hidden away, shut behind member walls and divided into silos. I also think that many of your consultations are not meaningful, and don't impact upon plans that were already determined, meaning people don't have faith in the organisation actually listening when they do ask (see omnishambles about prescribing, for example). And with a high cost of membership and an organisation that feels conservative, regressive, risk-averse, stuck-in-its-ways, and unwilling to communicate with members you have reinforced the message that it is a closed shop and unwilling to change.
Miriam

See my blog at http://clinpsyeye.wordpress.com

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 2 guests