The MJDF Portfolio is a collection of evidence where you reflect on your professional development in five core clinical and management skill areas, along with evidence of the clinical management of patients.
The Portfolio of Evidence assesses aspects of knowledge, application of knowledge, and provides workplace-based assessment of competencies across the foundation training curriculum. Completion of the Portfolio is a requirement for the award of the MJDF qualification.
The purpose of the Portfolio is to demonstrate understanding and attainment in each core skill and in the clinical management of patients.
Among the aims of the Portfolio are:
The Portfolio consists of five parts:
Whereas the MFGDP(UK) Coursework Module required completion of seven key skills, the requirement for MJDF is for evidence to be provided of five core skills, three of which must include the General Dental Council (GDC)'s mandatory areas for continuing professional development. Candidates may then select a further two from the options provided.
Mandatory core skills:
Two further core skills must be selected from:
Note: This information was updated on 27 July 2007. Some core skills listed here previously have been incorporated into the final core skill areas listed above and as detailed in the Guide to the MJDF Portfolio of Evidence.
A requirement of this part of the portfolio is the completion of a clinical audit or research project, and providing evidence of clinical skills through a clinical case presentation, a community or secondary care case-based clinical presentation or study, or a record of assessment of workplace-based competences. The record of assessment of workplace-based competencies is based on four commonly used workplace-based assessment methods:
The Guide to the MJDF Portfolio of Evidence document provides detailed information for candidates when preparing the Portfolio.
View the Guide to the MJDF Portfolio of Evidence
Candidates may also find it helpful to refer to the Guide to the Coursework Module of the MFGDP(UK) and the Key Skills in Primary Dental Care e-learning package.
A summary of information in the Guide to the MJDF Portfolio of Evidence is given below.
You will need to collect effective evidence showing your attainment of the core skills and clinical skills in your Portfolio of Evidence. You should include elements of the principles of evidence-based practice, which are:
The Portfolio should contain diaries, logs and various artefacts that provide the 'evidence'.
The core skill areas have been selected because they are important in the practice of dentistry. In order to gain credit for the Portfolio:
More information on providing evidence of the five core skills, such as suggested evidence items and questions to ask yourself, is detailed in the Guide to the MJDF Portfolio of Evidence.
Portfolios should:
Regarding layout, it's important that:
The correct layout is:
View the complete Guide to the MJDF Portfolio of Evidence document
From January 2008, the way in which the MJDF Portfolio of Evidence is assessed has changed. The onus has switched to local assessment under a new system.
A small proportion of candidates will still be asked to submit their portfolios centrally as part of our quality assurance procedures. Full details on the local assessment of portfolios are in the Guide to the Local Assessment of the MJDF Portfolio of Evidence. Summary information is given below.
Guide to the Local Assessment of the MJDF Portfolio of Evidence
Where candidates are working on the MFGDP(UK) Coursework Module (either for the award of MFGDP(UK) or MJDF under the transitional arrangements), they should also note that the Coursework Module can now also be assessed under these arrangements. All submissions in the MFGDP(UK) Coursework Module format should be made by the end of 2008.
Find out more about the transitional arrangements in the Information for Candidates document
The main change in the new system is that each component of the Portfolio may be signed off by a local assessor. This may be one person who is in a position to verify all parts of the Portfolio, but equally may be a number of different assessors who can vouch for that part of the Portfolio. For example, different parts of the Portfolio may be completed at different times in different training environments.
The MJDF Portfolio of Evidence Submission Form should be completed to cover the requirements of local assessment. A separate submission form is provided for the slightly different requirements of the MFGDP(UK) Coursework Module.
The submission form should be accompanied by a fee of £50.00 to cover the costs of administration and quality assurance. Vocational dental practitioners are exempt as long as the form is submitted within three months of the end of participation in their scheme.
The assessor must be a dentist registered with the GDC, and either hold a postgraduate qualification or have appropriate experience in postgraduate education, training and assessment. The following are considered suitable. If any candidate wishes to use an assessor not falling within the categories below, but who may have equivalent skills and experience, please contact the MJDF office for advice by emailing [email protected] or on 020 7869 6762.
Approved assessors (UK-based candidates) are:
Non UK-based candidates should contact the MJDF office for information on locally approved assessors.
Both candidates and assessors need to be aware of their professional responsibility to only sign off work if it has been completed to the required standard in accordance with the Guide to the Local Assessment of the MJDF Portfolio of Evidence.
Following experience since the introduction of local sign-off for the Portfolio of Evidence at the beginning of 2008, this statement provides additional guidance on completion of this part of the MJDF.
The faculties understand that there may be confusion concerning whether those assessing the portfolio are assessing the standard of, or verifying completeness of, the Portfolio of Evidence. There is an important distinction between these which requires clear guidance.
The portfolio is an important component of the MJDF as it provides evidence of completion of experience appropriate to foundation years training (or equivalent).The compilation of the portfolio is also an important learning process which assists candidates in preparation for Parts 1 and 2 of the MJDF examination. It also provides the basis for a portfolio practitioners can add to throughout their career and use for other purposes, such as GDC revalidation.
The portfolio is not an examined component of the MJDF examination, but evidence of satisfactory completion of a portfolio is required.
Further detailed information for candidates to ensure satisfactory completion has been provided through the links below. These should be read alongside the Guide to the MJDF Portfolio of Evidence.
Candidates are asked to seek verification from those eligible to sign off the elements of the portfolio. Those eligible to sign off the portfolio (or its elements) should only verify that the portfolio has been completed in accordance with the detailed guidance contained in the Guide to the MJDF Portfolio of Evidence, and the additional guidance.
The following links provide descriptors that candidates should use as a guide to completing elements of the portfolio, and should also be used by those involved in local sign off to verify completeness:
Further guidance is also given here on reflective writing, an important part of the portfolio approach. Two further pieces of guidance are also provided one on important administrative issues, and guidance for non-UK based candidates:
The following statements are intended to help assessors decide if the evidence of core skills in the Portfolio of Evidence has reached required standards. These should be used in conjunction with the Guide to the MJDF Portfolio of Evidence.
The core skills evidence is disorganised and difficult to navigate. Is this acceptable?
No. The core skills evidence should be organised with a contents page, page numbers and labelled tabs.
There is inadequate reflection and discussion of the core skill(s). Does this matter?
Yes. Assessors should consider adequate reflection and discussion as the most important demonstration that the candidate understands the core skill.
The candidate should discuss and reflect on both how their practice successfully complies with the key issues in each core skill and how any perceived inadequacies have been addressed.
There is inadequate cross-referencing to other core skills and evidence items. Is it necessary to cross-reference?
Yes. Evidence items relating to each core skill should be readily found. Adequate cross-referencing also reduces the number of unnecessary evidence items.
There are a significant number of required evidence items missing and some are blank rather than filled-in examples. Is this satisfactory?
No. All required evidence items should be present, current and relevant to the candidates own work place.
There is evidence of plagiarism. What action should be taken?
The assessor should indicate that this is a serious breach of the assessment regulations and draw the attention of the candidate to the Candidate's Probity Statement.
Must original contemporaneous anonymised clinical notes accompany the case presentation?
Yes, this is a mandatory requirement.
Must I include original study models and radiographs?
Quality copies are best. Both items should only be taken if appropriate for the clinical care and must comply with published guidelines.
What is most important the quality of the operative dentistry or the logic of the clinical care?
The logic of the care and how the patients contact with the practitioner has benefited the overall heath of the patient is most important.
Is any clinical case too complex or too easy for presentation at this level?
Yes, choose something that is within your capability and has at least two disciplines. Referral for some of the care or specialist opinion is satisfactory provided that the candidate has carried most of the clinical care.
Does the clinical care have to follow accepted 'best practice'?
Yes, unless there is an overriding reason for not doing so.
What happens if the patient declines some aspect of the suggested treatment plan?
Only the care that a patient is prepared to undergo can be provided. However, patient-led treatment provision which is outside normal parameters is inappropriate.
How should informed consent be demonstrated?
As treatment options, provided both in the case presentation and in the clinical notes, along with supporting evidence, e.g. a signed treatment plan or FP17DC if a UK NHS patient.
Is the 2000 word count important?
The word count serves as a guide to the depth required for the written presentation. The most important thing is that the candidate is able to demonstrate the logic of the clinical care that has been provided and the clinical benefit to the patient.
The following statements are intended to help assessors decide if an audit project has reached required standards. These should be used in conjunction with the Guide to the MJDF Portfolio of Evidence.
The audit topic chosen has no relevance to patient care or risk reduction. Is it suitable?
No, all projects should show benefit to patient care.
A reference standard of 80% has been chosen. Is this always correct?
This is acceptable if it is referenced to an external standard or marker, i.e. the FGDP(UK)s publication Standards in Dentistry or peer review. A higher initial standard may indicate that the audit topic is unnecessary because performance in that area is already reasonable.
No pilot of the capture was done to test the audit methodology. Is this acceptable?
Yes, providing the audit meets accepted standards.
The data capture sheets are not included, but graphs/charts of the results are in the written project. Is this acceptable?
No, the original date capture sheets must be available.
Some changes were implemented resulting from the first audit cycle, but the second cycle of audit was not presented. Is this acceptable?
No, this is not audit but research. The second cycle is mandatory.
There is no evidence shown of any changes being made after the first cycle. Is this acceptable?
No.
The second cycle shows little improvement. Is this acceptable?
No, this would indicate that the audit has not achieved any positive gain for patient care or safety. This may be due to inappropriate topic selection, poor methodology, or poor communication or compliance of any proposed changes after cycle.
Note: The audit must be the candidates original work. If the original work has been completed as part of a group exercise, all participants must be named and confirmation given that their participation in the same audit project was contemporaneous.
Click on the links below for a submission form. Ensure that your form is accompanied by a fee of £50.00, which covers the costs of administration and quality assurance. Vocational dental practitioners are exempt as long as the form is submitted within three months of the end of participation in their scheme.
MJDF Portfolio of Evidence Submission Form
MFGDP(UK) Coursework Module Submission Form.
Note: Both forms include an Equal Opportunities Monitoring Form.
If you have any question or queries, please contact the MJDF Examination Department by emailing [email protected] or on 020 7869 6762.