We’re all agreed that widening access to the profession of clinical psychology is a GOOD THING but it can be difficult to identify the barriers that stand in the way. Over the last two years we have been evaluating the selection process at Surrey by looking closely at the data we have for the applicants who apply, those who are interviewed, and those who are offered places.

This year we decided on a dramatic shake up of our process – we have removed the selection tests that applicants would have previously sat to be offered a place at interview. In the ‘old’ version of our process, all applicants that met our basic eligibility criteria would be offered the chance to sit a Situational Judgement Test and a Research Methods multiple choice test. Places for interview would be offered to the top-scoring candidates.

For the 2022 intake, we have chosen to examine application forms in more detail; we are focussing on the programme values and the person specification for the role of a trainee clinical psychologist.

But why take the tests out? There are several reasons for this.

The data suggests that the tests were slightly favouring applicants who self-identified as white British, and were therefore forming a potential barrier to other applicants. We became aware through discussions in widening access forums and in aspiring clinical psychologist groups that the tests were aversive to people from backgrounds historically under-represented in clinical psychology (along dimensions of difference including race, ethnicity, disability, SES and class). This was putting some applicants off of applying for the Surrey programme and potentially reducing the diversity in our candidate pool. We also became aware that the performance on the tests was not necessarily predicting success on the training programme. Our research team felt strongly that while ability is important, specific research skills can be taught and enthusiasm and passion for the area was a better indicator for success than in-depth statistical knowledge. Lastly, it is important to the programme team to meet candidates in person. To enable this to be a useful experience, we needed to find staff hours to carry out the number of interviews that are needed for increased cohort sizes. Removing the tests meant that hours of time spent preparing, invigilating and marking the tests and the testing process could be used for in-depth shortlisting and interviews instead.

This year is a pilot of our new process. We will continue to examine the data and make sure our process is evidence-driven. To do this effectively, we need to know more about the applicants who apply to us, and we are now looking at how we can increase the numbers of applicants who complete the Equal Opportunities Monitoring Form that is part of the application process…. But perhaps that’s something for another blog post!