Perceptions of the impact of annual review of competence progression (ARCP): a mixed methods case study

The annual review of competence progression (ARCP) is a high-stakes assessment which all UK postgraduate trainees undertake to ensure competence progression. Previous evaluations of the effectiveness of the ARCP as an assessment have reported deficiencies in both validity and reliability, however, there has been little focus on the educational impact of the ARCP.We conducted a mixed methods case study involving questionnaire, interviews and a focus group examining the impact of the ARCP on a respiratory higher specialist training programme. Participants included both trainers and trainees.Perceptions of impact were mixed. The ARCP was reported to promote broad curriculum coverage, enable educational planning, provide educational governance and facilitate relationships with supervisors. However, participants reported that activities promoted by the ARCP may detract from learning and that issues of reliability and validity undermined the process. In some cases, this was reported to lead to disillusionment and stress for trainees. Concerns were raised that the process promoted a reductionist approach to education.This research has resulted in several changes to local training, however, it has potential implications for the ARCP as a wider process. Trainers should be cognisant of the shortcomings of assessments and their impact on trainees, training and the future of the profession.