RCVS attempting to introduce fines for VS on the QT

RE: RCVS attempting to introduce fines for VS on the QT

Aine Seavers — Fri, 24 Jun 2016 11:18:43 GMT

I disagree to some degree (and no I have not red starred you )- in the main the vast majority of vets do really care and do good work-I move among them and am constantly impressed by the standard of my fellow vets- sure there are cowboys-we had one set up next to us-huge pain-but just because he needed kicking(and believe you me he got more than his ass kicked by me) but the other vets around didn't need their or my ass kicked because of his behaviour- I do a minimum of 10 hours a week ced-one day per week dedicated to just reading and webinars it then odd bits and obviously a conference from time to time so what is that-at least 500+ hours and I will seriously be unhappy having to subtract time from learning hours to put time into reporting hours-and if you actually detail count what you do you will find you do way more than 70hours of accountable time- and hence you should resent having to record the bleedin obvious so that academics somewhere can feel they are helping Gps-cos the vast majority of us do incredibly well all by ourselves

RE: RCVS attempting to introduce fines for VS on the QT

Martin Atkinson — Fri, 24 Jun 2016 09:52:35 GMT

[quote user="Aine Seavers"]

Quote-Reaction: I will utilise this knowledge and consider its significance in therapy in the next relevant case.

I rest my case-any time of hours spent writing the bleedin obvious (excellent tho this sentence is Martin)is a time wasted- surely it's a given that is the whole purpose of study-'but to actually have to write it to a third party in the RCVS is akin to writing out on the teacher's blackboard 100 times- I will be a good student and not lead cause a riot in class again.

[/quote]It is bleedin' obvious to you an me Aine and any change in managing our CPD will barely affect us. Yes its a pain for us to record it more extensively as we already do it mentally but we are like Zarathusta, we have risen above the herd. There are far too many of the herd lurking out there who don't do enough and need a bit of leading if not a kick up the ass. If they are forced to plan, do, record and reflect it may concentrate their minds a little.

RE: RCVS attempting to introduce fines for VS on the QT

Aine Seavers — Fri, 24 Jun 2016 09:37:06 GMT

Aside] Dost tha' think practus 'asn't progressed in't last thurty years? I usk 'cos t'way yo paint ut, nowt 'as moved on sev fuh wot thaz don'.

Exactly- given the quantum leap in vet med since Ced introduced and by using webinars, lectures conferences-how on earth can the RCVS state these methods have not worked when they so obviously have- and to then state with no evidence that their new methods will work... we are all high IQs-so we see spin when it's there and get very worried as to what is really the motivation behind it-the vast majority of this profession is general practitioner with shortage on time as it is, let alone with being asked to swallow easily disproved generalisations and to have to work under unproven pc grass is greener with our great ideas baloney is one step too far. Time to change

Quote-Reaction: I will utilise this knowledge and consider its significance in therapy in the next relevant case.

RE: RCVS attempting to introduce fines for VS on the QT

Martin Atkinson — Fri, 24 Jun 2016 09:02:51 GMT

[quote user="Alastair Welch"]To take Mr Atkinson's example of his annual jolly to the Alps: First he must plan the CPD (he already does this), but crucially under the new scheme he will be mandated to write his plan down in advance of his trip; he then does his CPD in the usual manner; he records it as he does now but (and this is the killer) he has to reflect on it. This reflection does not mean thinking about it in a Vin chaud haze on the plane home, instead he will be mandated to write some form of reflective statement when gets home and then submit it to the college to allow them to check his homework. [/quote] OK so this is not a submission of my last jolly to the Alps that was actually printed for all to read in Vet Times May 9th 2016, Vol 46 No 19 p26.

But yesterday when I had a spare half hour in the afternoon I planned some journal reading. This is the record of that, it took me all of an extra 5 minutes. I don't envisage the new scheme will be that much different other than there will be a template to set it out rather than cramming it into the comments box.The only thing missing from this record is the plan but there will be a box for that. Do you really not already do this?

* Start date : 23/06/2016

* Primary Activity: Distance learning - on-line/informal (not assessed)

* Subject Area: Gastro-intestinal disease

* Where Undertaken: in house journal reading

* Hours: 0.5

* Notes:

'Managing chronic gastro-intestinal signs in cats and dogs', Florence Vessieres & David Walker, Vet Times June 27 2016 vol 46 No. 25 p 18.

Reflection: I learned a number of things but primarily that PLE can be differentiated from PLN as the former will have low serum Alb and Glob but the latter will have just lowered Alb. Furthermore there is an increased risk of hypercoagulability in PLE and aspirin should be given as part of the therapy.
Cats with IBD and concurrent DM or cardiac disease can be treated with chlorambucil in place of prednisolone.

Reaction: I will utilise this knowledge and consider its significance in therapy in the next relevant case.

RE: RCVS attempting to introduce fines for VS on the QT

Iain Richards — Fri, 24 Jun 2016 08:44:47 GMT

From the OP "one must first plan then do then record then reflect then repeat"

I've little problem with this, too often we do CPD because it sounds fun, rather than being what we need. So CPD should be structured and planned. Reflection, Critical Learning and Experiential Learning are the current trends for education, which the RCVS has taken to heart. If you can penetrate the jargon, it's no more than what any decent vet/scientist does daily. It can be summed up as

What happened? (Preceded by "Woo Hoo" or "Oh bother" depending on circumstances)

Why's it happened

How do we repeat/improve avoid

The "admin fee" is something I'll have to look at

RE: RCVS attempting to introduce fines for VS on the QT

J G Wray — Fri, 24 Jun 2016 06:47:56 GMT

[quote user="Michael Woodhouse"]Not all vets do the required CPD. If we start from that premise - what should be done about it?[/quote]

Well, we know what RCVS are doing about it

1. They are threatening referral to ProfCon. [F]

2. They are declaiming about our "obligations" [O]

3. They are isolating the "guilty" [G]

4. They are planning to fine [F]

FFOG, the RCVS toolkit.

None of this has worked in respect of the audit, a RCVS construct and easily mistaken for a measure of improvement in patient care..

I think this is bankrupt thinking and behaviour, not least because they are not reflecting on the results.

I think a different approach based on motivation, reward and recognition should have its time.

[Aside] Dost tha' think practus 'asn't progressed in't last thurty years? I usk 'cos t'way yo paint ut, nowt 'as moved on sev fuh wot thaz don'.

RE: RCVS attempting to introduce fines for VS on the QT

Aine Seavers — Fri, 24 Jun 2016 05:25:12 GMT

Not penalise the 99% of those of us who do the right thing. Whatever you do there will always be cowboys in any profession-treating the rest of us like delinquents will not help anything and not make the slackers be any less slack. And who is going to sit down and read all these reflective essays and then score it-ah a new market for essay markers. I am all for those who want to write these essays to write them and have them count- just dont make it so the rest of the adults have to all play the same tune-diversity of learning is the secret not punitive restrictions. And as to "outcome'based learning- if that is anything like the success or should I say dismal failure that is the Australian Education system that is going backwards since outcomes' introduced that was forced on children -then heaven help the vet profession- we should be focussed on disease and the patient not writing up 'plans'.

RE: RCVS attempting to introduce fines for VS on the QT

Michael Woodhouse — Fri, 24 Jun 2016 01:01:05 GMT

We need to be mindful that a group of vets engaging in an online discussion forum are perhaps not representative of the profession at large. There are lots of vets out there not doing the required hours of CPD. There are lots of vets out there stuck in the mud and doing things like they always have. There are lots of vets that use convenient CPD (generally drug company sponsored with food) to tick off the hours with least resistance. These are the guys that look things up in a dusty textbook they bought as a new grad 30 years ago. I hate to think what proportion of vets have any kind of journal access......

If you use the RCVS PDR for recording (and why would you not - it is so easy) then it already has a planning section - I already have a brief plan in place. I was guilty of grabbing opportunistic CPD, but having a 5 year plan makes things work much better. We already present when back at the practice what we learnt at CPD meetings and ask what could be done differently - so we are pretty much already doing this.

Planning CPD and going through a degree of reflection after CPD has gotten us much better value from CPD as a practice and brought in far more changes than used to happen where a good idea was quickly forgotten and never implemented! We all remember things better when talked about and 'reflected' as a group - rather than an individual filling information away.

The consultation document clearly states that additional CPD outside of the plan may be undertaken and useful. There is nothing to stop Martin going skiing and doing additional CPD even if nothing on the agenda is covered in his plan.

Not all vets do the required CPD. If we start from that premise - what should be done about it?

RE: RCVS attempting to introduce fines for VS on the QT

Alastair Welch — Thu, 23 Jun 2016 20:37:10 GMT

I think the practicalities of the new proposals are being missed by some contributors. I suspect that many (most?) VS are already following their own internal plan-do-record-reflect cycle but the RCVS's plan to formalise this will prove problematic.

To take Mr Atkinson's example of his annual jolly to the Alps: First he must plan the CPD (he already does this), but crucially under the new scheme he will be mandated to write his plan down in advance of his trip; he then does his CPD in the usual manner; he records it as he does now but (and this is the killer) he has to reflect on it. This reflection does not mean thinking about it in a Vin chaud haze on the plane home, instead he will be mandated to write some form of reflective statement when gets home and then submit it to the college to allow them to check his homework. The supporting documents from the CPD working party reference the compulsory 'reflective essay' that goes along with the Cert AVP and it won't be too long before one is compelled to submit 1000 words on each course/conference etc one attends. Now Mr Atkinson may not find this burdensome but for me this is too difficult.

I might be so bold as to suggest that Mr Atkinson is of an age where the bulk of his working life is behind him and entertaining himself by dreaming wistfully of the recent trip to the Alps when work is a bit slack is a past-time that he can indulge, but I don't have that sort of free time.

This change is to be resisted.

RE: RCVS attempting to introduce fines for VS on the QT

Martin Atkinson — Thu, 23 Jun 2016 16:54:53 GMT

[quote user="patrick murphy"]

yes,,,,,,,,,,, and has anyone else replied to them about the buzzword led CPD plan, and its relevance to daily life? smugly as I am not at work this week have had the time, otherwise when?[/quote]Yes I have already completed the questionnaire and said essentially what I have said on here so blame me if it all goes through.

Sadly buzzword management speak is a fact of modern life which I hate as much as the next old codger but it does at least standardise our approach and objectives. Damn that was buzzword management speak!

RE: RCVS attempting to introduce fines for VS on the QT

Neil Wheadon — Thu, 23 Jun 2016 16:40:22 GMT

[quote user="David Mills"]It's a slippery slope. How long before RCVS lays out areas or "themes" of CPD that you have to complete each year to keep your registration? Remember academia - whence this comes - love competencies, themes, areas e.g. [/quote]

Practices are unique, a skill set in one place may not work in another.

An inner city practice with a caseload of indoor cats is different to a country practice full of dogs, as a Companion Care inside pet store is full of rabbits whilst the RSPCA deal with an increased surgical load.

So who is to define the skill set required.

Surely the market works? If you're not very confident with rabbits but your case load is 20% bunnies you're going to have to find CPD on this aren't you? After all increased knowledge is increased confidence and better for all?

Neil

RE: RCVS attempting to introduce fines for VS on the QT

patrick murphy — Thu, 23 Jun 2016 16:24:37 GMT

yes,,,,,,,,,,, and has anyone else replied to them about the buzzword led CPD plan, and its relevance to daily life? smugly as I am not at work this week have had the time, otherwise when?

RE: RCVS attempting to introduce fines for VS on the QT

J G Wray — Thu, 23 Jun 2016 16:11:58 GMT

Does anyone think that if RCVS took an approach to CPD and its own internal accounting process, the audit, which was a motivational, reward and recognition led approach, rather than based on sanctions and fines, that they might see greater compliance?

Just askin'

RE: RCVS attempting to introduce fines for VS on the QT

Martin Atkinson — Thu, 23 Jun 2016 13:44:46 GMT

[quote user="David Mills"]Schemes, areas, compulsory targets, key competencies.[/quote]Oh no, all this management speak is doing my head in.

Has anyone received the email link to the consultation document yet that was supposed to be sent out on the 20th June? I've not.

RE: RCVS attempting to introduce fines for VS on the QT

David Mills — Thu, 23 Jun 2016 13:09:28 GMT

[quote user="Martin Atkinson"]So the million dollar question is who defines what deficiency there is in my knowledge? [/quote]

Exaaaaactly. So what do you think the RCVS, given its suspicion of GPs, will do?

That's right. Schemes, areas, compulsory targets, key competencies.

CPD companies - a nice earner for specialists and university bods, over-represented on council - currently run targeted courses on certain subjects. Who wins, dya think?

RE: RCVS attempting to introduce fines for VS on the QT

Martin Atkinson — Thu, 23 Jun 2016 12:44:00 GMT

[quote user="David Mills"]Part of the point of their new scheme is that it is reflective. This means that you first identify deficiencies in your knowledge or skill set then select CPD. [/quote]So the million dollar question is who defines what deficiency there is in my knowledge? How does anyone know whether for example I chose to go to Snowscene because I wanted to learn more about the disciplinary process and just by coincidence I saw that it involved snowsports so took along my skis and snowboard. How is it different if I decide to go to BSAVA congress because it fits in with my schedule, I know I need to learn more about say feline hyperthyrodism, so I look for what lectures are on that subject and plan to go to those. Its SFA use if I want to go to a CPD course on a subject I want to improve in and there is nothing is available or I can't get there.

RE: RCVS attempting to introduce fines for VS on the QT

David Mills — Thu, 23 Jun 2016 12:04:18 GMT

[quote user="Martin Atkinson"]Snowscene obviously is a not the best example because it is to an extent pre-selected for the location/leisure content but then you equally could say that for the ISFM congress in Malta next week or indeed any overseas conference.[/quote]

Of course. It is often these ones that aren't pre planned on a CPD level that are the most useful.

To me, there are two levels of course-based CPD:

1. You want to learn how to do something specific. Such as TECAs, learn how to be a better neurologist, or somesuch. Therefore you find a course on this and attend. This is what the RCVS want all or most CPD to be, more or less.

2. You see something that might be interesting, which you maybe hadn't thought of attending, and go along. This decision might be based on a free lunch, or some spare time, an article you come across in a jounral, its on at a conference you were at anyway, it involves skiing, you can notch off a parents visit at the same time. Whatever. This is stuff the RCVS isn't that keen on.

[quote user="Martin Atkinson"]will be of benefit to me which is already pre-selecting[/quote]

Nice try. This isn't what they're pushing, though. Part of the point of their new scheme is that it is reflective. This means that you first identify deficiencies in your knowledge or skill set then select CPD. You don't browse 'cos that's option 2.

It's a slippery slope. How long before RCVS lays out areas or "themes" of CPD that you have to complete each year to keep your registration? Remember academia - whence this comes - love competencies, themes, areas e.g.

https://www.vitae.ac.uk/researchers-professional-development/about-the-vitae-researcher-development-framework

The evidence for this? You can guess.

RE: RCVS attempting to introduce fines for VS on the QT

Martin Atkinson — Thu, 23 Jun 2016 11:49:46 GMT

[quote user="David Mills"]

You're missing the point.

The new system is:

Plan, execute, reflect.

You're supposed to identify on what area you need, or want, to do CPD. Then find a way of achieving that. Therefore is encourages selecting courses or whatever before you've learnt anything. So your Snowscene, strictly, would only meet the criteria if you'd identified that the CPD there would meet some deficiency. Can you honestly say this has ever happened? Most of the time, you've wanted to go, and looked at the CPD secondarily.

[/quote]Oops you missed off repeat!

Snowscene obviously is a not the best example because it is to an extent pre-selected for the location/leisure content but then you equally could say that for the ISFM congress in Malta next week or indeed any overseas conference. I might even go to BSAVA because I want to go back to the city of my birth. OK unlikely, but there may be someone gagging to go to Brum, which when my parents were alive was actually a consideration.

I look at every CPD opportunity and decide if it is something that will be of benefit to me which is already pre-selecting. We all do this even if its not a conscious process (at least those who can be bothered with CPD), its no good looking for something which doesn't exist and no-one in their right mind is going to do something which is completely useless to them. It is just a very short step to recording this and I still have time to relax with a glass of my favorite tipple or in my case more likely go and thrash myself on my bike!

RE: RCVS attempting to introduce fines for VS on the QT

David Mills — Thu, 23 Jun 2016 11:25:10 GMT

[quote user="Martin Atkinson"]No-one is saying this will change, we have just got to justify it.[/quote]

You're missing the point.

The new system is:

Plan, execute, reflect.

The first part is the most relevant in your situation of Snowscene. You're supposed to identify on what area you need, or want, to do CPD. Then find a way of achieving that. Therefore is encourages selecting courses or whatever before you've learnt anything. So your Snowscene, strictly, would only meet the criteria if you'd identified that the CPD there would meet some deficiency. Can you honestly say this has ever happened? Most of the time, you've wanted to go, and looked at the CPD secondarily.

Can you see the craziness of this requirement now?

[quote user="Martin Atkinson"]Do you really not already do this? Keep up to date with the recording it barely taxes your brain and takes 5 minutes during your coffee break[/quote]

No, I really don't. I haven't recorded CPD for years and certainly no reflective element. I could scribble something down if required for the RCVS bods but the point is noting this stuff down isn't necessary to continued learning, and does not make learning more effective.

[quote user="Martin Atkinson"]more its sad others resent it.[/quote]

No resentment. But to think this is necessary or helpful is baloney.

[quote user="Martin Atkinson"]But as I've said before, those who say they can't find an extra few minutes a day need to take a very careful look at their workload/lifestyle. If you're that busy can you you do your job properly anyway let alone advance?[/quote]

Again, completely missing the point. Do you hate wasting time on pointless exercises? There you go.

I'd far rather relax of an evening with a glass/glasses of Bombay and tonic, friends, films, partner, lover, than write something down that I'm never going to use and is completely useless to me.

RE: RCVS attempting to introduce fines for VS on the QT

Martin Atkinson — Thu, 23 Jun 2016 10:51:39 GMT

[quote user="David Mills"]Do you go off haw-hawing on Snowscene because of the CPD or skiing, primarily? Would you go if the CPD was of little interest? I'm assuming yes.[/quote]Then you'd be wrong, I have not gone on several occasions because the CPD was not relevant but I'll admit its a close call! On the last Snowscene the internal medicine was right up my street but the RCVS disciplinary stuff looked like being a bore. In the end I learned far more from that.

[quote user="David Mills"]No-one here is arguing that people shouldn't continue to learn and update knowledge, but simply that we learn in different ways, from different sources, some of which aren't planned, but can still be very useful (sometimes the most useful). [/quote]No-one is saying this will change, we have just got to justify it. I'd be the first to admit that if the only reason I went on CITS or Snowscene was to ski and didn't attend lectures that I should not gain credit from that but lectures are universally attended by (nearly) all delegates.

[quote user="David Mills"]Enforcing this concept of planning, writing, reflecting, is to add a layer of bureaucracy that is not required[/quote]Do you really not already do this? Keep up to date with the recording it barely taxes your brain and takes 5 minutes during your coffee break.

[quote user="David Mills"]Single handed practitioners with a few clients a day may not mind the extra imposition (I suspect the former takes some weird glee in always surpassing the number of hours required after writing it all down)[/quote] You're right I do take satisfaction in justifying and recording my CPD but I don't think its weird, more its sad others resent it. But as I've said before, those who say they can't find an extra few minutes a day need to take a very careful look at their workload/lifestyle. If you're that busy can you you do your job properly anyway let alone advance?

RE: RCVS attempting to introduce fines for VS on the QT

David Mills — Thu, 23 Jun 2016 09:26:17 GMT

[quote user="Martin Atkinson"]Or you could accept our responsibility to be accountable and prove that we are learning and progressing. [/quote]

Do you go off haw-hawing on Snowscene because of the CPD or skiing, primarily? Would you go if the CPD was of little interest? I'm assuming yes. If so, you'd be caught out under the new system, or would have to lie about the CPD provided by Snowscene being in your "plan". Geddit?

The whole thing, as JGW says, comes from a suspicion from RCVS that some - a nebulous concept - do not comply with CPD. No-one here is arguing that people shouldn't continue to learn and update knowledge, but simply that we learn in different ways, from different sources, some of which aren't planned, but can still be very useful (sometimes the most useful).

Enforcing this concept of planning, writing, reflecting, is to add a layer of bureaucracy that is not required and will not achieve the aims of catching the few who don't, and will inconvenience the many. Single handed practitioners with a few clients a day and academics who don't practise may not mind the extra imposition (I suspect the former takes some weird glee in always surpassing the number of hours required after writing it all down), but the scheme proposed - cumbersome, divorced from reality, box-ticking - does not necessarily - or even remotely - seem to offer assurances on making our learning better or more effective. Reflective writing is a la mode in education currently, but the evidence for its efficacy is so weak as to be laughable (if you think vet med evidence is lacking, take a trip to the social sciences). Of course this is glossed over, and doctors' learning etc presented as evidence for efficacy, and the sly undercurrent of "its what every other profession is doing" - so what?

RE: RCVS attempting to introduce fines for VS on the QT

Martin Atkinson — Thu, 23 Jun 2016 09:01:13 GMT

[quote user="Alastair Welch"]

Phone them up they are pretty easy to find, email them, if you see them at a conference walk up them, shake their hand introduce yourself and bend their ear.

[/quote]Or you could accept our responsibility to be accountable and prove that we are learning and progressing. This is not even a storm in a teacup, its everyone trying not to pour the tea in the first place. What is you problem folks?

RE: RCVS attempting to introduce fines for VS on the QT

Alastair Welch — Thu, 23 Jun 2016 07:42:58 GMT

Phone them up they are pretty easy to find, email them, if you see them at a conference walk up them, shake their hand introduce yourself and bend their ear.

RE: RCVS attempting to introduce fines for VS on the QT

J G Wray — Thu, 23 Jun 2016 07:25:29 GMT

[quote user="Alastair Welch"]My advice: find an RCVS councillor and lobby them hard. [/quote]

How?

The only person at RCVS that I know of that might be prepared to get involved is Mr Stace and he's not a councillor.

If anyone gets an answer from a councillor that'll be impressive, but an answer is no guarantee of representation of your view, let alone getting this kicked into touch.

If anyone tries, why not let this forum know?

RE: RCVS attempting to introduce fines for VS on the QT

Evelyn Barbour-Hill — Wed, 22 Jun 2016 17:40:17 GMT

[quote user="grumpyoldman"]Its expensive to keep going away and doing things, and the on the trip home you dissect the perils of wisdom handed down, find that actually you needed the last 5 minutes of each presentation and ,if your honest a day on Pubmed reading abstracts on the subjects covered would probably have yielded the same net gains,[/quote]

There is no need to keep going away and doing things. I have a recorded assurance from none other than Dr. Bradley Viner that you can fulfil all your CPD requirements without ever going to a lecture.

The point is, at this time CPD can (quite rightly) be all sorts of stuff including perusal of journals and textbooks. Compulsory "planning" and "reflection" if the CPD is going to count, are just going to discourage people from being adventurous or unconventional or even thoughtful outside their own little box.

And, did I mention, fines by any name would be illegal.