{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.011566771819137749, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.56551724137931, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
The Ranzcp Membership Examination: A Review of the Relevant Literature

The design of any assessment system, as well as the way it is scored, must be intimately linked to the purpose it is to serve. Previous literature on the RANZCP membership examination has tended to focus exclusively on issues of reliability and validity at the expense of broader concerns. The present paper selectively reviews the literature on assessment in education highlighting the differences between normative and criterion referencing and their implications for the profession. Published studies of the reliability of post-graduate written and oral examinations are reviewed focussing particularly on those conducted in psychiatric settings. Finally, the arguments for and against continuous assessment are summarised. Greater familiarity with the literature may result in more informed and constructive debate about the assessment process than has hitherto been evident.