Marking process for March 2021

Due to the large number of candidates sitting the March Diplomate Exam, (and limited availability of examiners due to the pandemic), the Faculty Education Committee approved the use of single marking with moderation, rather than double marking, for the March 2021 sitting. Following a calibration process, two markers shared the marking of each question. As in previous exams, the marks are collated and reviewed by the Faculty’s Educational Advisor, who has provided guidance to the examination board on this method. The papers of candidates whose marks are close to the pass mark will be reviewed by a second examiner. This marking method means that about 25% of the scripts will be assessed by two examiners. In all other ways, for example determining the pass mark by standard setting, there has been no change in process.

Standard marking process (Please refer to the above text for March 2021):

Papers are anonymised and marked by examiners working individually.

The process of marking Diplomate examination questions and reaching agreement as to the final mark on each question for each candidate is as follows:

• For Paper I, two examiners each mark two questions, that is pair A mark questions 1 & 2, pair B mark questions 3 & 4, etc.

• For Paper II, two examiners each mark Paper IIA and two different examiners each mark Paper IIB.

A total of 14 examiners are therefore involved in marking the examination scripts from each sitting of the Part A. This process ensures that each script is double marked.

Each examiner marks their allotted scripts independently. Questions in Paper I are each marked out of 10, while each section (A & B) of Paper II is marked out of 50. Examiners mark against the mark scheme and initially 'blind' to the pass mark and their colleague examiner's mark.

Only once both examiners have completed their marking are they supplied with (1) the pass mark for each question marked and (2) the marks of their co-examiner.

The paired examiners then discuss and compare their results in order to reach a set of agreed marks for each script. The two agreed marks from each examiner are averaged to derive the final mark for that question for each candidate.

Before submitting their agreed marks, examiners need to ensure that their two separate marks comply with certain rules:

• In Paper I, the two marks may not differ by more than two points (eg. a five and a seven is satisfactory but not a five and an eight).
• In Paper II, the two marks may not differ by more than five points (10%).
• In either paper, the two marks may not constitute a difference between a pass and a fail, ie. they must both be either pass marks or fail marks, eg. 3 & 4, or 5 & 6, but not 4 & 5  (where the pass mark was 5, as an example or in Paper II: 23 & 24, or 25 & 26, but not 24 & 25 (where the pass mark was 25, as an example).

If their individual marks do not meet these rules, the examiners discuss how they reached their marks on those candidates' papers. This may sometimes lead to one or both of the examiners agreeing to change their mark(s) to ensure the rules are met (either by increasing or decreasing), or they may agree to re-mark that candidate's paper. Re-marking is often carried out when the results span the pass/fail borderline. The results following re-marking are again compared and any remaining discrepancies are re-discussed. This process continues until the rules are met, which is usually achieved within two reviews.

The final mark on each paper for every candidate sitting the examination is individually discussed and agreed at the Examinations Board meeting. Candidates must pass both Paper I and Paper II separately in order to pass overall. For further details see the Diplomate marking algorithm used by the Executive Examiners.

Candidates may complete the extenuating circumstances form to inform FPH of serious circumstances that occurred in the three weeks up to and including the date of the Diplomate examination (DFPH) or Final Membership examination (MFPH)  and that have adversely affected their examination performance. This information will be made available to the relevant Chair of Examiners.

Please note that marks/results will not be altered to reflect individual circumstances.The only available outcome as a result of a successful submission is that the attempt can be discounted.

It is the candidate's responsibility to complete and return this form to arrive at the FPH no later than three days after the examination date.

Types of adverse circumstance that FPH may consider:

• The death or critical illness of a dependent or close relative.

• A severely debilitating illness during most of the revision period or examination.

• The loss, due to circumstances beyond your control, of more than 10 minutes of examination time.

Circumstances not normally considered:

• Planned house removals.

• Work-related contingencies (eg. shift work).

• Normal pregnancy.

• English as a second language.

Examination results will be sent as a PDF to the email address given on the application form during the week following the Results meeting. More specific details will be provided in the candidate pack for the sitting.

A pass list and results summary will also be published on the FPH website on the second Monday following the Diplomate examination (DFPH) results meeting. Examination results will not be given over the telephone. Results are not posted in the FPH premises.

The result for all candidates will be sent to Faculty Advisers and Programme Directors.

All candidates who are unsuccessful in the examination will receive feedback on their examination performance in the form of marks as well as examiners' general comments about overall question performance. Candidates will not receive detailed individual feedback.

It is possible to 'bank' papers at the Diplomate examination (DFPH). This means that if the candidate does not pass the examination but has passed an individual paper, this result can be banked so that the candidate need not sit this paper again. This is feasible due to the explicit separation of knowledge and skills between Papers I and II.

Please note the following:

• An individual paper (I or II) may be banked only when it has been passed.

• As of January 2017, FPH no longer stipulates that candidates who bank a paper at a sitting must then sit the remaining paper at each subsequent examination. The limit on holding a banked paper is now one year (two sittings). For example, if a candidate banks a paper in June 2019, they can miss the following January 2020 sitting and resit their remaining paper in June 2020.

• The banked paper will still be valid if the candidate fails the remaining paper again, as long as they keep sitting for the remaining paper either in every subsequent exam or every other subsequent exam. This is limited to six attempts in total.

• If the candidate requires longer than a year to resit the remaining paper they should submit a statement from their educational supervisor or training programme director which will be considered by the Chair of Diplomate Examiners. This is because any longer than a year is likely to impact on training progress.

• There will be no change in the examination fees for sittings of individual papers.

• Candidates must continue to take both parts (papers) of the examination at the same sitting, unless a paper has been banked previously.

Candidates who wish to appeal against their examination results should consult the appeal procedures and guidance document.

Please note that marks/results will not be altered to reflect individual circumstances.

Latest Results

October 2021

Please note that the results table has been adjusted from previous sittings to add clarity to the pass rate. Previously the overall pass rate was published for both papers. The table now shows the pass rate by paper which more accurately reflects the number of candidates sitting and passing the exam.

March 2021

November 2020

January 2020

June 2019

January 2019 

June 2018  

Examination date: January 2018

Diplomate examination (DFPH) Marking Algorithm

Diplomate Exam Monitoring and Performance

In parallel with the introduction of modified Angoff standard setting of our Diplomate examination in January 2017, the Diplomate exam team also introduced robust exam review by an independent external educationalist at each diet (sit).  This has allowed the Chair/deputy Chair and Board to understand at an exam and question level, how the examination is performing at that diet, which is over and above simple monitoring of pass/fail rates.

Please click here for the full report.

June 2017

January 2018

June 2018

January 2019

June 2019

January 2020

March 2021

October 2021