Standard 5 - Curricula and assessment

This requirement requires clear mapping and alignment of the RCVS and programme specific outcomes across the qualification. This is usually presented in a spreadsheet format. It is imperative the RCVS Day One Competences, Skills and Professional Behaviours are fully mapped to the relevant modules or units.

Additionally, HE programmes must include mapping to the most up to date QAA Subject Benchmark Statements for Veterinary Nursing.

Evidence of stakeholder engagement must be provided, demonstrating the AEI’s consideration of industry requirements and expectations. Evidence-based amendments and updates to the qualification should be clear, following this engagement process. Stakeholders can include students, TPs, the RCVS, and the public. Additionally, the external examiner can often provide a
unique insight, with consideration of their own experience as well as AEI specific requirements.

All feedback provided from other regulators, such as educational regulatory bodies, can be included here as evidence of programme development in line with guidance and legislation.

Curricula, and the attributed assessments, must undergo regular review, with updates implemented as per Requirement 5.2. This process should be detailed and ensure that the student veterinary nurses completing the qualification will be effectively trained for working in practice as an RVN. Whilst the history of the profession is important, it is not expected that student veterinary nurses
are taught or trained on techniques that are no longer utilised, such as manual x-ray processing.

The qualification should ensure that contemporary developments are also covered, for example, breed specific legislation, antimicrobial resistance, and refugee pets. An awareness of the wider healthcare community is also expected, such as vaccine development and the workforce crisis.

Contemporary assessments are also expected, ensuring student veterinary nurses are well equipped for their future roles, with a consideration of generative artificial intelligence and communication skills (see Requirement 5.6).

The module/unit weighting must be clear and relevant to the type and size of the attributed assessment(s). This will also correlate to the type of qualification, and the AEI specified approach to weighting of modules/units and assessments.

The curricula must provide a clear progression onto and through the relevant academic levels, such as development of student’s capability from GCSE level up to Level 3, or from A-Level up to Level 6. The modules/units should be structured and sequenced in such a way that students are supported to develop their academic skill throughout the qualification, with the required clinical practice hours considered at a relevant point and level.

The learning outcomes must be at an appropriate academic level for the module/unit and type of programme; for example, it should be clear that due consideration has been given to Bloom’s taxonomy and this is reflected in the wording.

Due consideration must be given to the assessment scheduling, ensuring that student veterinary nurses are not overwhelmed during specific assessment windows, or that the assessment requirements are overly burdensome.

The pathway for progression must also be clear; pre-requisites or co-requisites may be used to ensure that student veterinary nurses have the required knowledge, understanding and skill to progress onto the next module/unit or academic year. Trailing of modules/units should only be considered in exceptional circumstances.

All learning outcomes must be fully and effectively assessed, with an appropriate assessment methodology. There is no prescribed approach as to what the assessment methodology should look like; it is expected that a variety of approaches will be utilised, considering the contemporary requirements of clinical practice.

The reflection of Bloom’s taxonomy in the learning outcomes is also considered within the assessment methodology, i.e. that the wording indicates the appropriate academic level which can be assessed via the chosen approach. For example, the term ‘demonstrate’ could be considered for Level 3/4 practical assessments, whereas the term ‘defend’ could be used for a Level 6 oral assessment, such as debating.

The summative practical assessment must assess the student veterinary nurse’s ability to work at the minimally competent level for contemporary practice.

There are a number of different ways to deliver an OSCE or practical examination. AEIs must ensure that the design of the examination includes a circuit of stations testing a broad range of the RCVS Day One Skills under examination conditions. The length of the examination, number of stations and mark scheme design can be decided by the AEI, but the design must be defensible. In order to minimise bias (see requirement 5.11) and increase validity it is usual to have a different examiner marking each station. Where the examination is designed with fewer examiners then extensive evidence is required to demonstrate that the examination is valid.

The summative examination should consolidate the RCVS Day One Skills assessments which take place in clinical practice. As such the completion of these assessments must be a prerequisite for examination entry.

The practical assessment of student veterinary nurses must be observed and documented accordingly. It is expected that students also reflect on these practical experiences, as per Requirements 3.7, 3.13 and 5.13. This is likely to be reflection on skill progression in the clinical practice setting, or reflection on their practising of the RCVS Day One Skills in readiness for the summative practical assessment (see requirement 5.7).

Validity refers to the extent to which an assessment measures what it is intended to measure. AEIs need to have documents in place to show how the level of validity and robustness (reliability, fairness, and generalisability) is determined. This process will normally result in the production of a report or a number of documents confirming:

• how well the assessment contents align with the learning objectives;
• the process for designing new assessments including piloting or trialling;
• how training and standardisation of examiners, IQA staff and EEs is undertaken;
• any reviews or updates of the assessment method based on educational research, feedback from stakeholders and analysis of data;
• the data analysis or statistical methods used to analyse assessment data for reliability and validity. This could include item (question) difficulty, discrimination indices and internal consistency of the assessment.
• the invigilation processes;
• the security processes in place to ensure that academic integrity is maintained; and,
• methods for setting the pass mark.

The process for setting the pass mark is up to the AEI but it needs to be defensible. Where a standard pass mark is in place for all assessments the AEI needs to have strategies in place to ensure that the pass mark genuinely reflects minimal competence in the subject matter. For example, where the pass mark for an examination is 40% there must be a mechanism for checking that students passing the examination have reached the safe or minimal level of competence in the subject matter.

Moderation processes are normally included in the AEI assessment procedures. Evidence should be available showing how this is applied to the different types of assessments being used. Examinations such as the OSCE are often not considered in generic AEI policies and therefore these may need to be documented separately.

Clear sampling plans should be drawn up showing how and when moderation will take place (pre-assessment and post assessment) and who will be involved.

The scope of the moderator needs to be clear especially where there is a discrepancy in the marks attributed.

This requirement covers the need to ensure that students’ work is assessed fairly, and external factors do not interfere with the outcome of the assessment. Consideration should be given to the number of people involved with marking the assessment. Where anonymised (blind) marking is not possible then other mechanisms need to be considered such as standardised marking rubrics, double marking, increased moderation activity and calibration exercises.

Requirement 1.10 outlines the need for a reasonable adjustment policy and Requirement 2.9 looks at how this is communicated to students. This requirement looks at the evidence of reasonable adjustments applied for assessments undertaken within the education and clinical environment.

Reflection is an essential element of veterinary nursing practice, with consideration of the care provided to individual patients and ongoing skill development. Reflection is also a mandatory component of RCVS-registered professionals’ CPD requirements.

It is imperative that student veterinary nurses are taught this important skill during their training. Students should be encouraged to revisit areas for improvement and be able to demonstrate improved outcomes following the reflective process.

Student veterinary nurses must, therefore, be provided with effective feedback via both formative and summative mechanisms, including examinations and assignments (see Requirement 3.15). This may be in individual or group tutorials, or more formal feedback forms following assessment. Encouraging students to include reflective considerations at reassessment can also help to develop this skill.

This requirement covers both intra- and inter-module/unit compensation considerations, in other words, student veterinary nurses must pass all elements of their qualification that address the RCVS Day One Competences, Skills, and Professional Behaviours. Where a module is not mapped to the RCVS requirements, compensation is permitted.

AEIs may require a derogation from the academic regulations in order to facilitate this requirement.

Each module that is mapped to the RCVS Day One Competences must contain at least one unseen assessment methodology. It is imperative that student veterinary nurses can demonstrate their ability to work without the aid of textbooks, journals, or the internet to work as an RVN.

Unseen, in this context, does not necessarily mean ‘written examination’, there are other unseen assessment methodologies that can effectively assess a student veterinary nurse’s ability to apply knowledge, critique evidence or defend a moral standpoint.