Table 1 Candidate responses to open ended questions regarding their perceptions of the selection process (n = 886)

71 (8%)

Candidates’ experience of the NAC provided insight and understanding into the requirements of general practice training.

“I received a wider knowledge of common issues in GP practice in Australia”.

58 (7%)

Candidates perceived there to be inadequate information provided prior to attendance at the NAC.

“There was a lack of references available or a guide to the type of preparation required”.

“Little information beforehand re. format of the day”.

“Very real scenarios allowing me to know what to expect from GP. I now have an understanding that some scenarios require quick decision making skills”.

“Little more material for preparation especially SJT as quite a specific MCQ style not everyone would be familiar with”.

384 (43%)

Candidates valued the face to face interaction with interviewers during the MMI and the opportunity to demonstrate their experience and skills.

“Face to face MMI was good as it provides an opportunity to explain answers and discuss”.

380 (43%)

Candidates expressed concern about inadequate time to complete the SJT and difficulty in interpreting questions.

“English is not my first language so there was not enough time in the SJT to read lengthy paragraphs”.

“Able to highlight past skills and experience”.

SJT questions were “incredibly vague”, “ambiguous”, and “confusing”.

“….allows me to show clear clinical judgement and reasoning”.

“SJT – difficult because no opportunity to justify answers”.

62 (7%)

Candidates valued the opportunity for assessment of areas other than knowledge and clinical skills.

“It assessed me on different skills both personal and professional”.

83 (9%)

Candidates found it difficult to respond to the MMI questions due to lack of relevant experience.

“Very GP focused in some ways. Not all of us have had GP rotations yet!”

“Allows me to speak for myself and show my personality traits, not just on paper”.

“Not yet having experience in GP and many of the MMI questions referred to a GP scenario”.

186 (21%)

Generally, the candidates found the NAC selection process to be fair and equitable.

“Fair across all criteria and all states”.

189 (21%)

Candidates had difficulty in interpreting the MMI questions – or the style of the interviewer. They were unsure what some questions were asking, and needed more guidance.

“I had difficulty with clarification of questions during the MMI”.

“It did not appear to matter the level at which one is working ie. Intern vs more senior”.

“For one of the MMI stations the examiner started to use closed questions almost immediately without letting me explore the situation. Given that, I felt thrown off guard”.

“SJT is anonymous - takes out role of interviewer bias when it comes to candidates”.

“Some questions were not very clear, so it’s hard to address solutions”.

32 (4%)

Although applicants felt that the process provided a suitable ranking method to inform RTPs, they reflected on expectations about feedback on their performance.

“Allows ranking for RTP's and finds suitability”.

52 (6%)

Candidates found it difficult to gauge their own performance. They expressed a desire for some kind of immediate, formative individual feedback.

“The MMI stations were vague with no immediate feedback.”

“Allows differentiation between candidates”.

“Interviews are always stressful - hard when you don't get any feedback.”

“Get an idea about the issues faced at the GP practices. Also get feedback for further improvements in areas which you are not familiar”.

“No feedback regarding our performance (often subtle feedback is given even at the most formal college interview processes)”.

“Face to face examination allows assessment of communication skills and immediate feedback from examiner, to ensure complete answering of questions”