Viva / Oral exams - why?

RE: Viva / Oral exams - why?

cathal rafferty — Thu, 12 May 2016 23:12:10 GMT

The last oral exam I had was for the bsava surgery cert a few years ago. We knew beforehand it would be based on 2 of 10 submitted case reports, one we picked and one picked by them so plenty of time to prepare

it was pretty obvious from the questions that the main point was to ensure it was our own work we had submitted and it was only worth 10 %.

The main point is though that if you can't recall knowledge and articulate it to an examiner, how will you do it to a client?

most clients accept your advice but some will want a detailed explanation of what each of their dog's heart medications is doing or why they should pay more for a tta over a lateral suture for a cruciate

I think oral exams are important for testing communication skills... It's a big part of the job

RE: Viva / Oral exams - why?

Stuart Jackson — Wed, 11 May 2016 17:12:10 GMT

[quote user="Sarah Keir"]Is that kind of thing fair?[/quote]

Nope, and your exam scenario shouldn't have been allowed.

My medicine final - 2 in-house profs and one from a UK school. The two in house profs left the room after 5 mins and left me alone with this geek (I remember his name, and it is associated with a now rare feline dz).

I complained at my fail interview about this. The prof initially didn't remember but after consulting with his colleague, he admitted it was a cock up and that they had left because they had felt I'd done enough to pass, but the geek failed me in their absence. I passed the resit without an oral (all the others resits had the oral!).

RE: Viva / Oral exams - why?

Sarah Keir — Wed, 11 May 2016 17:00:59 GMT

I remember an oral exam at Vet School (can't even remember which subject) that traumatised me for weeks - a panel of four, call men, top professors; the chair I was put on was so low that my eyes were the same level as the table top; on the table between me and them was the most enormous box chocolates ever! Is that kind of thing fair?

RE: Viva / Oral exams - why?

J G Wray — Tue, 10 May 2016 12:43:51 GMT

[quote user="Hannah Wynne Richards"]I suppose 1 advantage of examiners from a different country would be that angiostrongylus might have been recognised before it became endemic if we all knew we would fail unless we were familiar with a disease which (according to my student edition of Soulsby's) occurred in "the south of France and southern states of the USA"[/quote]

Back in the day pity poor foreign grads having to know about mainly UK disease, BSE and before that feline dysautonomia

RE: Viva / Oral exams - why?

grumpyoldman — Tue, 10 May 2016 11:32:41 GMT

[quote user="Hannah Wynne Richards"]Cambridge and Glasgow were the 2 threatened with closure.[/quote]

Maybe they needed a TV show ? In a few years you may find that some of them are threatened because they cannot get the required numbers of undergrads . Not many want to borrow 80-100k then start on 25k with no or limited future in sight.

RE: Viva / Oral exams - why?

Hannah Wynne Richards — Tue, 10 May 2016 11:05:54 GMT

JGW 30 years ago Bristol was very highly rated. Cambridge and Glasgow were the 2 threatened with closure.

Wynne

RE: Viva / Oral exams - why?

grumpyoldman — Tue, 10 May 2016 11:01:21 GMT

[quote user="Hannah Wynne Richards"]1 advantage of examiners from a different country would be that angiostrongylus might have been recognised before it became endemic[/quote]

Its a good point , I was thinking of people from USA ,Commonwealth , possibly northern Europe, but that is probably old fashioned.

RE: Viva / Oral exams - why?

J G Wray — Tue, 10 May 2016 10:45:15 GMT

[quote user="Anthony Dennison"]Woah, woah, woah. Not having that![/quote]

How many years was the University in the West of England in RCVS' remedial class????

RE: Viva / Oral exams - why?

Hannah Wynne Richards — Tue, 10 May 2016 09:31:15 GMT

Grumpyoldman. I suppose 1 advantage of examiners from a different country would be that angiostrongylus might have been recognised before it became endemic if we all knew we would fail unless we were familiar with a disease which (according to my student edition of Soulsby's) occurred in "the south of France and southern states of the USA"

Wynne

RE: Viva / Oral exams - why?

Anthony Dennison — Tue, 10 May 2016 09:20:55 GMT

[quote user="J G Wray"]third rate university in the West of England[/quote]

Woah, woah, woah. Not having that!

RE: Viva / Oral exams - why?

Alastair Franklin — Tue, 10 May 2016 04:32:06 GMT

Oral exams always have been, and always will be a contentious issue for many. I think some great points have been raised in this thread. In particular, what works for one person may not work for another. Some people do tend to clam up in oral exams, conversely some people struggle with written components but excel with verbal exams. Exams ideally should have multiple components, as mentioned by grumpyoldman above.

Multiple choice questions seem to be the popular choice nowadays, however setting good versions of them is challenging (from memory, Punt and Dennis did a good sketch on this - can't find it on youtube yet though). Its very easy to set crap multiple choice questions.

Whilst oral exams definitely have the potential to be subjective, appropriate design of exams can eliminate some / most of this. However, subjectivity can be to a candidates advantage - a holistic assessment as part of a marking scheme can account for the 'do they actually know what they are talking about' versus the candidates that just get verbal diarrhoea and 'shit-shotgun' answers in the hope that one answer in the many will be correct.

Like Tim, I didn't realise the enormous task involved in setting exams until I was on the other side of the table. Setting challenging but fair exams is tricky. I examine in a different country, but the rules and regulation sound quite similar. Our exams (orals included) are reviewed by all examiners, then by an independent reviewer from the same subject, and then by members of board of experienced examiners from different subjects. All questions, including orals, have an answer key (not necessarily a 'model answer' but rather one that covers most likely avenues) and marking scheme. An observer from a different subject sits in on the exam to ensure it is fair (no breaches of protocol etc) and to ensure that all candidates get the same questions and details - ie everyone gets the same cues etc). The examiners mark independently, then marks collated - more often than not, examiners are within a small % range of each other (usually <5% difference), suggesting that individual examiner bias is less likely.

One of the biggest problems to my mind though is the issue of the people setting the exams. Most vets (including many in university roles) do not have experience of setting exams (though plenty of sitting them). Conversely, the 'academic' vets, whilst having lots of experience setting university exams, may not have that much experience of practice outside of the university setting. Getting the right balance is the tricky bit. To that end, our system has for the past few years had training seminars for examiners (ie in how to set questions), which I feel has improved quality and 'fairness' significantly.

Having impartial, 'completely unknown' examiners is great in theory, but largely impossible to achieve. It is a very small profession (even smaller in my part of the world) so everyone has a connection somewhere (even when we have brought overseas examiners in). Nevertheless, I think if the exam is set well, most (but certainly by no means all) bias will be eliminated.

No examination system is ever perfect, however I think Michael and Iain have hit the nail on the head with the comments about most of our jobs being verbal communication anyway, and so an oral exam being appropriate. Yes there are disciplines with potential for limited human contact (pathology, radioholiday) where this does not apply, but the vast majority of vet work involves verbal communication.

RE: Viva / Oral exams - why?

Michael Woodhouse — Mon, 09 May 2016 23:48:21 GMT

[quote user="grumpyoldman"]The examiners should also be completely unknown to the candidates ,hopefully from a another country or continent.[/quote]

Sort of impossible in this small vet community. There are so many regional and country variations that I'm not even sure that would work. I had met all 4 of the people who examined me, but I wouldn't say I was really known to any of them.

RE: Viva / Oral exams - why?

grumpyoldman — Mon, 09 May 2016 23:16:33 GMT

Asking people questions in as many different formats as possible is probably fair : An exam should be multi choice ,short answers ,and essays with practical and theory components , With face to face orals . There should also be complete transparency in the way they are marked . The examiners should also be completely unknown to the candidates ,hopefully from a another country or continent. There is inevitably an inclination to give familiar friendly students the benefit of the doubt, it went on 30 years ago and probably still goes on now, I would be amazed if it did not .

RE: Viva / Oral exams - why?

Michael Woodhouse — Mon, 09 May 2016 23:15:52 GMT

[quote user="David Mills"]I suspect the cow exams are more straightforward - I mean we know f'all about why they get what they get anyway.[/quote]

Had to give you a 1 star for that!!!

There's a damn sight more to cows than cardiology!

Would you not expect a certificate holder to be able to have a sensible conversation, in their chosen area, on most topics with a referral clinician? You also don't have to get everything right to pass - I understood they are looking at your general approach. I also understood that a component was knowing your limits and therefore "refer to a specialist for further investigation" is a perfectly appropriate answer. I would expect you have a good theoretical knowledge of the indications for a pacemaker or the surgery for tetralogy of fallot, but likely haven't done them. You might know you want colour flow doppler to assess the case, but not have it available to you in practice. That shouldn't be a barrier to you gaining a cardiology cert.

RE: Viva / Oral exams - why?

David Mills — Mon, 09 May 2016 21:48:52 GMT

[quote user="Michael Woodhouse"] It was recorded[/quote]

[quote user="Tim Charlesworth"] There is also an observer and the exams are recorded for similar reasons[/quote]

They are only recorded to ensure exam protocol has been followed, not to be retrospectively used in the event of an appeal. Indeed, in the RCVS CertAVP exams no right of appeal exists on grounds of unfair marking or inappropriate questions. You can only appeal in the event of a breach of protocol. An independent observer is present at some (normally, universities) but they are not essential or ubiquitous. From speaking other candidates, a common complaint is the exams being run by referral clinicians who have done their obligatory 1-2y in first opinion practice and the gulf in expectation - this isn't meant to be referral clinician bashing, just reporting what other have said.

I suspect the cow exams are more straightforward - I mean we know f'all about why they get what they get anyway.

RE: Viva / Oral exams - why?

Michael Woodhouse — Mon, 09 May 2016 20:45:24 GMT

I think they are pretty much essential for the CertAVP system. The rest of the coursework can be done at home and could be fabricated, done with excessive help, even written by someone else etc.

If you can't stand up in front of a group of your peers and hold your own in your subject then you ought to be found out. My viva was eminently fair. It was recorded. I had 4 examiners - 2 from the university, 1 external examiner and one cattle vet as a RCVS observer. Two of them were recognised specialists and now a 3rd one of them is. The questions were fair but challenging. I really enjoyed the experience.

90%+ of my contact with clients is verbal - I can't see a better way of examining such things.

RE: Viva / Oral exams - why?

Iain Richards — Mon, 09 May 2016 19:41:45 GMT

There is no ideal examination style. Just as there is no ideal learning style or teaching style, simply what happens to work for you. If it doesn't work then you have to find a way to manage it. I like orals and practicals in comparison to written, but that's my style. I do however feel the advantage of oral is that it is a test of your knowledge by your peers (taking out subjective issues) and is not dissimilar to the reality of a consulting room/yard/farm. Admittedly the anti-vaccine ejit can't fail you!

RE: Viva / Oral exams - why?

J G Wray — Mon, 09 May 2016 18:57:43 GMT

[quote user="Neil Wheadon"]Chip on shoulder time[/quote]

There is a story, who knows if it is true, about how protesting at examiners conduct in vivas came back to haunt a vet 30 years later.

It goes like this. A small group of second years at a third rate university in the West of England went to the Pre Clinical head because of the distress caused to a number in their year by the confrontational style of vivas. Feathers were ruffled.

Fast forward and one of those lecturers became the senior luminary of a well know organisation.

The leader of the group that protested was also part of that organisation by then and an accusation of misconduct had been made against them. The group leader's conduct was investigated by solicitors and lots of people with tenuous connections to the group leader were interviewed. One of them was the senior luminary who in their statement brought up this trouble making, 30 years later.

Now that's a chip turned into something malevolent, because it had absolutely no relevance to the matter in hand, but it became a matter of record

Graduated in March . I think they were pleased to get rid of me.

RE: Viva / Oral exams - why?

Neil Wheadon — Mon, 09 May 2016 18:36:05 GMT

Chip on shoulder time

Large animal medicine. The lecturer (I'm not going to name him) knew I knew a lot about cattle, so asked 'What are the 5 commonest diseases in dairy cattle in Canada? !!! ' 20 minute for the entire viva, I got 3 of them but they refused to move on. I failed medicine by 1% and had to retake. I've never forgiven the RVC for that, it was awful and the only exam I have ever failed.

To this day I am reminded by my qualification date being October

Done properly I'm sure they are useful and I agree with Wynne, I could cope with a hostile examiner now, but not then.

Neil

RE: Viva / Oral exams - why?

Hannah Wynne Richards — Mon, 09 May 2016 18:19:41 GMT

Certainly at undergraduate level there seemed to be an enormous variation in the attitude of the examiners. These days I'd cope with a hostile examiner , but then (believe it or not) I was terribly timid, so my mind went blank if thge examiner seemed aggressive.

By contrast, I can remember 1 brilliant viva (finals) when the examiner started by saying that my casebook was very interesting, especially a series of cases of live anthrax - the farmer had had some building work done, and we thought had dug up an anthrax grave. He said "You've seen more live anthrax before you qualify than most do by the time they retire - you've certainly seen more than I have" He then went on to ask how the cows had compared to textbook descriptions. The conversation then drifted to other causes of sudden death. After the viva, I realised I'd been given a real grilling on metabolic and clostridial disease, but I was so relaxed by then, it didn't matter.

That examiner wanted to know what students did know - others seemed determined to prove you didn't know anything - even if you actually did.

Wynne

RE: Viva / Oral exams - why?

Tim Charlesworth — Mon, 09 May 2016 18:05:58 GMT

Oral exams are not great but they are done as fairly as possible. I am one of the examiners for the CertAVP at the moment and a huge amount of work goes into ensuring that the questions asked are fair. The sample answers are scrutinised by all the examiners and the organising committee and modified accordingly in the run up to the exams and all answers are marked by all examiners to try to ensure that the process is as fair as it can be. There is also an observer and the exams are recorded for similar reasons. Yes, some people find them stressful but practicing oral exams beforehand can be very useful in helping overcome these nerves. I'm not defending oral exams as being brilliant but it was only when I became an examiner that I realised how much effort went into setting the questions etc.

RE: Viva / Oral exams - why?

David Mills — Mon, 09 May 2016 16:52:47 GMT

They're still done for CertAVP exams?

Experiences vary. I've had two. One good, one awful. Latter was quite confrontational. Unfortunately it was a tick box exercise not dissimilar to GCSEs and was nigh on irrelevant to general practice. C'est la vie.

RE: Viva / Oral exams - why?

Sammy82 — Mon, 09 May 2016 16:50:56 GMT

Almost all exams at Vetschool in Hannover were oral. I felt excactly the same about them, very subjective and dependant on luck to get a nice professor and pick the right questions. In most exams you would pick a card or two at random and this would be your topics Usually quite an open question, so you could tell anything you knew about that disease or whatever it was. This I would see as an advantage. Then the examiner would asked a few more questions about things you left out or mixed up. Sometimes nice questions, sometimes nit picking reducing some people to tears. I know that some students really struggled with anxiety/nerves as this was just so different from school, although you got used to it after a while. One of my friends finished with a rather low mark overall because she was always so nervous in exams and struggled to recite the things she knew. And from revising together I felt that she had the best memory of all of us and knows a lot. I think she is a really good vet now and deserved a much better mark, but the exam system failed her.