ESSENTIAL SELECTION CRITERIA ACADEMIC CLINICAL FELLOWSHIP – Section Criterion 0 points 1 point 2 points 3 points 4 points Score Evidence of No evidence of Evidence of Evidence of above 2 Clinical relevant minimum average relevant average /3 experience clinical relevant clinical clinical experience clinical experience experience experience Evidence of Evidence of No evidence of Evidence of minimum above 2/3 Academic relevant average relevant relevant average /3 experience academic academic academic academic experience experience experience experience Ample, clear Commitment No evidence of Weak evidence Limited but clear Ample and and 2/3 to a clinical commitment to of commitment evidence of clear comprehensive /4 academic this career to this career commitment to evidence of evidence of career path path this career path commitment commitment Demonstrates Clear and concise No evidence of competence in Whole Language use of appropriate competence in and reasonable /2 form Skills written English written English use of written English No evidence of Provides some Provides evidence reasoned / evidence throughout of analytical relevant to reasons for Reasoned / Whole approach to clinical applying, and Analytical /2 Form applying for academic clearly links Approach the post in training, linked experience to the completing to position post being applied form applied for for Total for essential criteria (Maximum = 14) Note to shortlisters Desirable selection criteria – In order to ensure the most appropriate allocation of marks, shortlisters should take in to account the stage of the career at which they are applying, and - where a specific applicant’s entry level has been assigned to the Academic Clinical Fellowship applied for - the appropriateness of their academic career progression to the level of training. This is particularly important in relation to criteria relating to section 3 of the application form. The aggregate score for desirable criteria should be regarded as indicative rather than absolute in the shortlisting process. For instance, one applicant may achieve a higher total score than another candidate because they are further on in their career. However, the more junior applicant may demonstrate more potential despite the lower level of overall achievement. Shortlisters should, therefore, take account of the profile of the desirable criteria in the context of the level of application, together with the essential criteria results, in reaching their decisions. In all cases, marks awarded and decisions should be based on the evidence provided by the applicant.
ESSENTIAL SELECTION CRITERIA – ACADEMIC CLINICAL FELLOWSHIP Section Criterion 0 points 1 point 2 points 3 points 4 points Score 2 Clinical experience No evidence of relevant clinical experience Evidence of minimum relevant clinical experience Evidence of average relevant clinical experience Evidence of above average clinical experience /3 2/3 Academic experience No evidence of relevant academic experience Evidence of minimum relevant academic experience Evidence of average relevant academic experience Evidence of above average academic experience /3 2/3 Commitment to a clinical academic career No evidence of commitment to this career path Weak evidence of commitment to this career path Limited but clear evidence of commitment to this career path Ample and clear evidence of commitment Ample, clear and comprehensive evidence of commitment /4 Whole form Language Skills No evidence of competence in written English Demonstrates competence in and reasonable use of written English Clear and concise use of appropriate written English /2 Whole Form Reasoned / Analytical Approach No evidence of reasoned / analytical approach to applying for the post in completing form Provides some evidence relevant to clinical academic training, linked to position applied for Provides evidence throughout of reasons for applying, and clearly links experience to the post being applied for /2 Total for essential criteria (Maximum = 14) Note to shortlisters – Desirable selection criteria In order to ensure the most appropriate allocation of marks, shortlisters should take in to account the stage of the applicant’s career at which they are applying, and - where a specific entry level has been assigned to the Academic Clinical Fellowship applied for - the appropriateness of their academic career progression to the level of training. This is particularly important in relation to criteria relating to section 3 of the application form. The aggregate score for desirable criteria should be regarded as indicative rather than absolute in the shortlisting process. For instance, one applicant may achieve a higher total score than another candidate because they are further on in their career. However, the more junior applicant may demonstrate more potential despite the lower level of overall achievement. Shortlisters should, therefore, take account of the profile of the desirable criteria in the context of the level of application, together with the essential criteria results, in reaching their decisions. In all cases, marks awarded and decisions should be based on the evidence provided by the applicant.
acf_shortlisting_scoresheet.docx