How to improve the recruitment system?

Last month I wrote a piece with Barry Cockcroft on how dentistry has changed through the years and what we can learn from the history of dentistry.
I discussed how much foundation training has changed – how it went from there being no form of training at all, to the large training scheme we have today across the UK. Despite being extremely grateful for the opportunity to have a training year, I still wonder – is the recruitment process the best and fairest it can be?

In November I had the interview component of my foundation training application. I prepared a lot, bought my new outfit and turned up to West Bromwich Football Ground feeling pretty nervous to say the least. To say the whole experience was pretty gruelling may be an understatement. Foundation training is highly competitive, both amongst UK dental students and those from abroad and the pressure was huge.

Currently, we have to do a Situational Judgement Test, which could be argued is to a large part subjective, and an interview.

The interview component is made up of a Communication station and a Professional, Management and Leadership (PML) station. These three components mean we are tested broadly on all the important things that will make us a good foundation dentist. I do appreciate that we have a far fairer recruitment process than in the past and for that I am grateful. However, I feel that pinning down our success on to a foundation training course on a 20-minute snap shot of us and a situational judgement test that even tutors have said they all can’t agree on answers in, doesn’t give a good representation of us as candidates.

I myself, prepared well, and found the communication station played to my strengths. However, the nerves most definitely got the better of me in the PML station and I came out feeling a little deflated that I hadn’t shown off what I knew and what I could bring to a practice as foundation trainee. I feel that pinning everything on one interview could be overcome by taking into account what we do and how we do throughout our five years training.

Medical students do things slightly differently and in a way that I think represents candidates better than the way we do it in dentistry. They look at the achievements of the student throughout their five years at university; not only their exam results and honours points, but extra curricular things they may have done (i.e volunteering or writing for a journal for example). Alongside this they also do a Situational Judgement Test. There are far more medical students a year than there are dental, so perhaps this seems the only feasible way, as interviewing every single one of them would be tricky.

I am also sure that the medical students feel that – in some way – their process is unfair. However, by looking at the students’ progress and achievements over five years, rather than a 20 minute interview, I feel that the employers get a far more accurate representation of the student and their capabilities. Perhaps this may be employed in the Dental Foundation Training process in the future? I’m not sure.

Despite my criticism, I’m glad we have foundation training in the UK, and grateful that a system has been put in place to make it as fair as possible. Money and contacts can’t get you a foundation job anymore! I completely appreciate that there will never be a perfect recruitment process, and everybody will always have something to say about a system in place. I just wonder if it can be improved further to make it even better for future candidates?