Contact
Log in Log in

New Fellowship Program FAQs

On this page:

Key takeaways for trainees and Fellows

This work is about designing the next Fellowship program, not changing the rules for current trainees. The aim is to future-proof psychiatric training, so it remains fair, rigorous, and aligned with real-world practice. 

Fellows’ experience and professional judgement are central to getting it right. This is about producing a curriculum that focuses on developing the skills that are necessary to manage the clinical challenges you will face in the future so as you can thrive in your careers in Psychiatry. It’s also about creating a curriculum that is fit for purpose and meets the needs of the populations and communities we serve.  

While change takes time, early engagement from trainees and Fellows is essential.

Trainee FAQs - July 2026

Assessment, examinations and progression

1. What is meant by an “external clinical exam” in the draft protoype? Is this an OSCE?

Further detail is still being developed. The intent is to ensure any external clinical assessment is clear, fair and aligned to the capabilities expected of a new Fellow. The format, timing and relationship to existing assessments will need to be confirmed through further design work and consultation.

2. Will the NFP reduce the burden of assessment?

Reducing unnecessary burden is a key design consideration. The aim should be to strengthen assessment quality and educational value while avoiding extra paperwork or repeated evidence collection where it does not add value. Trainee feedback about assessment load will be important in testing future options.

3. Will the NFP address barriers to progression?

This is an important issue for the NFP to consider. Any future model should make progression requirements easier to understand, track and act on. Further work is needed on how systems, reporting and support processes could help trainees and supervisors identify progress, gaps and next steps earlier.

4. Will there be clearer support for trainees who are unsuccessful in examinations?

The Taskforce has heard that trainees would value clearer and more consistent support after unsuccessful exam attempts. This could include access to study groups, individual mentoring, progression planning and more useful feedback. Further work is needed to determine what supports would be feasible and how they would link with existing training structures.

5. Should there be targeted coaching or mentoring for trainees who are delayed, stuck, in rural or regional settings, or lacking continuity of supervision?

This has been identified as an important area for further consideration. A targeted longitudinal coaching or mentoring model could support trainees who are experiencing delays, limited continuity of supervision, rural or regional training challenges, or other barriers to progression.

6. How will scholarly, psychotherapy, reflective and professional development capabilities be assessed in the new program?

Further design work is needed to clarify how these capabilities will be assessed, inclujding what it would look like if these capabilities are assesed through a more integrated model rather than standalone tasks. This could include workplace evidence, portfolios, supervisor feedback, specific tasks or other mechanisms.

For psychotherapy and scholarly capability, the aim should be to preserve educational value while reducing unnecessary burden and ensuring assessment is fair, feasible and aligned to expected Fellow outcomes.

7. How will flexibility and equity be embedded into progression, assessment and entry to advanced training?

Flexibility and equity should be explicit design principles for progression, assessment and advanced training entry requirements. Further work is needed to define what this means in practice across different trainee circumstances, training sites and jurisdictions.

8. Will the Taskforce consider assessment reliability, assessor training and moderation?

Assessment reliability, assessor training and moderation should be included in future Taskforce recommendations. These areas will be important to ensure assessment decisions are consistent, fair and educationally meaningful.

9. What is the purpose and frequency of progression panels in the redesigned program?

The purpose and frequency of progression panels should be reviewed as part of the redesign. Further work is needed to clarify how panels would support progression, identify concerns early and avoid unnecessary duplication or administrative burden.

Advanced training and subspecialty experience

1. Should advanced training certificates occur during Fellowship, after summative assessment completion, or primarily post-Fellowship?

This remains a key design question. The Taskforce are continuing to explore whether Certificates of Advanced Training are best completed during Fellowship, after summative assessment completion, or primarily after Fellowship.

Trainee feedback strongly supports the need for protected, meaningful subspecialty development, and this will need to be considered alongside broader program goals and workforce needs.

2. How will the NFP balance generalist training with subspecialty capability?

The NFP will need to define the capabilities expected of all new Fellows while also supporting pathways for deeper subspecialty development. This balance has not yet been finalised. Feedback from trainees, supervisors, services and Faculties will be important in shaping a model that is both educationally sound and practical.

Mandatory experiences and clinical exposure

1. Will child and youth psychiatry remain a mandatory experience?

The final set of mandatory experiences has not yet been confirmed. The value of child and youth psychiatry exposure is clearly recognised in trainee feedback. Further design work will need to consider how any mandatory experience is defined, protected and supported so that it provides meaningful learning.

2. What other mandatory experiences are being considered?

This remains under consideration. Possible mandatory experiences will need to be assessed against the intended capabilities of a generalist psychiatrist, feasibility across training settings, and the risk of adding fragmented or poorly supported requirements. Further consultation will help clarify priorities.

3. What will happen to psychotherapy requirements such as the PWC?

No final position has been reached. The importance of longitudinal psychotherapy experience is recognised, but there may be opportunities to review how learning is demonstrated and assessed. Any changes would need to preserve the educational value of psychotherapy while reducing avoidable bottlenecks where possible.

Educational coaching and supervision

1. What is the proposed role of an educational coach?

The educational coach concept is still being developed. The intended role would need to be clearly distinguished from supervision, Directors of Training and formal assessment processes. Further work is needed to define the purpose, boundaries, authority and practical supports for this role.

2. Will coaching lighten the load for trainees or create another requirement?

The aim of any coaching model should be to support trainees, not add another administrative requirement. Further design work should clarify frequency, timing, documentation, confidentiality and links with existing training supports so that coaching is useful and practical.

Implementation and transition

1. How will transition scenarios be managed for trainees at different stages when the New Fellowship Program commences?

Transition scenarios will need to be mapped for trainees at different stages of training. This should include clear guidance on recognition of completed requirements, remaining obligations, timelines and support during implementation.

2. What supervisor training, resources and implementation supports will be needed?

Implementation planning should identify the supervisor training, resources and supports needed to deliver the redesigned program consistently. This may include guidance materials, training for assessors and supervisors, and practical tools for services.

Supervisor feedback and workplace-based assessment

1. Will supervisors be expected to provide more written feedback?

This will need careful consideration. More detailed feedback can support learning, but only if it is feasible and meaningful. The NFP should consider how to improve feedback quality without increasing supervisor burden in ways that reduce time for supervision or clinical teaching.

2. Could feedback come from people other than supervisors?

Broader feedback sources could be considered as part of a more holistic view of trainee practice. Any approach would need to be purposeful, culturally safe, practical and clear about how feedback is gathered, used and discussed with trainees. Further consultation is needed before any model is confirmed.

Taskforce FAQs

1. What is the New Fellowship Program Taskforce?

It is a time-limited working group established by the RANZCP Board in mid-2025 to lead a whole-of-program redesign of the College’s Fellowship training program. The Taskforce’s purpose is to set the vision, guiding principles and high-level design for a new, future-focused program. At its core it is about building trust in the new Fellowship Program with the Fellows and communities through widening stakeholder engagement.

New Fellowship Program FAQs

2. What is the New Fellowship Program and why should I care?

The New Fellowship Program is a major redesign of RANZCP training that will shape how future psychiatrists are trained, assessed and supported. While current trainees will continue under the existing program, the decisions being made now will influence supervision models, assessment approaches and expectations for the profession over the next two decades.

3. Why is a new Fellowship program needed?

The last redesign was in 2012 and so it is timely to develop a new curriculum as workplace challenges have altered, workforce challenges shifted and the role and identity of the psychiatrist is continually changing. Moreover, the Taskforce concluded that incremental updates are insufficient. The scale of changes needed to keep pace with modern psychiatric practice, workforce needs and advances in medical education calls for a comprehensive redesign.

4. What the new Fellowship program is NOT

The purpose of the new Fellowship program is not to criticise current trainees or supervisors. It is not a cost-cutting exercise or a sudden change to the rules of training. It will not require existing Fellows to retrain.

5. How does this link to broader workforce needs?

By strengthening generalist foundations while supporting diverse advanced practice pathways, the new program seeks to produce psychiatrists better prepared to respond to changing health system demands, community expectations and workforce distribution across diverse settings.

6. What are the core goals of the new program?

The new Fellowship program aims to develop psychiatrists who are:

  • compassionate, culturally safe, collaborative and patient-centred clinicians
  • equipped with leadership, digital literacy and systems understanding
  • prepared to meet community and workforce needs across Australia and Aotearoa New Zealand
  • trained under a curriculum with clear alignment between competencies and assessment.
  • able to thrive in challenging workplaces and be supported with approaches that help meet ensure wellbeing needs are met.

7. Why not just improve the current program instead of redesigning it?

The Taskforce found the changes needed, particularly around assessment, learning outcomes, and alignment with modern practice, are too significant for incremental updates. A full redesign allows the College to address long-standing concerns more coherently rather than layering fixes on to an older framework.

8. Is the current training program being scrapped?

No. The existing Fellowship Program will continue until the new program is introduced. Until then, ongoing quality improvements to the current program will be managed by the Education Committee. However, selected changes may be limited to avoid disruption before the new program is introduced.

The Taskforce is working in parallel on a future program, recognising that large-scale reform takes time and careful planning to avoid unintended consequences for trainees.

9. Will this make training easier or harder?

The aim is not to lower standards or increase burden, including excessive assessment or duplication, but to make training more educationally sound, transparent and clinically and socially relevant for the future. The focus is on producing psychiatrists who are confident, capable and well prepared for contemporary practice.

10. What educational framework will the new program use?

In keeping with other vocational Fellowship programs, it will be based on a competency-based medical education (CBME) framework. This moves beyond purely time-based training to focus on clearly defined capabilities and real-world performance. CBME should not be about continuous testing. The intention is to use better-designed assessments, with clearer expectations and stronger support for supervisors to make sound, defensible judgements about progress.

The program will continue to be designed so that most trainees are able to complete training in around 5 years, reflecting the expected time needed to develop the required capabilities in contemporary psychiatric practice. Progression will be guided by demonstrated capability and readiness for practice, rather than time served alone, while recognising that individuals may progress at different rates.

Importantly, this does not mean rushing training or extending it unnecessarily. It means greater clarity, fairness, and better alignment between learning, supervision, and assessment within a structured, time-bound program.

11. How will assessment be structured?

The proposed hybrid assessment model is likely to blend high stakes and low stakes assessments including:

  • workplace-based assessments
  • external clinical examinations
  • written examination components.

This mix is designed to assess both practical competence and academic knowledge.

12. What is the timeline for development?

  • 2026: The Taskforce will deliver a high-level prototype, a conceptual design outlining vision, principles and structure.
  • Mid-2026: Broad consultation will occur with members and stakeholders.
  • Post-2026: Development of the curriculum by the Education Committee, the Education Department, and implementation groups.
  • By 2030: The new Fellowship program is expected to be implemented.

This is a staged process designed to protect trainees while enabling meaningful reform.

13. How will this affect trainee wellbeing?

Trainee experience and wellbeing are explicit considerations. Consideration is being given to type and sequencing (or timing) of assessments, as well as looking at what other Colleges are doing both nationally and internationally, to reduce unnecessary stress while maintaining rigor. There are two trainee representatives on the Taskforce who provide a voice for trainees on this issue. We recognise unless wellbeing needs are met, learning cannot happen.

14. Will Fellows be affected by the new program?

Existing Fellows will not be required to retrain. However, Fellows, especially supervisors and educators, will play a key role in shaping, supervising and assessing the future program. The new program will also influence how the profession defines competence and readiness for independent practice.

15. What about flexibility, part-time training and diverse career paths?

The redesign is an opportunity to better accommodate:

  • part-time and interrupted training pathways
  • diverse practice settings (including rural and regional)
  • broader career roles such as leadership, research, teaching and systems work
  • flexible approaches to ensure trainees’ psychological and cultural safety
  • flexible approaches to support trainees with disability
  • flexible approaches to allow those who do not complete, to leave with recognition of their training.

Flexibility is seen as essential to workforce sustainability.

Consultation FAQs

16. How is the Taskforce developing its proposals?

Design is informed by:

  • recent surveys and member feedback
  • curriculum evaluations
  • external reviews
  • benchmarking with other specialist medical colleges nationally and internationally
  • consultation with members in 2026.

17. How will members and trainees be involved?

Input from members and trainees has been sought through the RANZCP Consultation Hub, surveys and feedback. Early input helped inform the development of the draft prototype. Feedback on the draft prototype is now being collected via the Consultation Hub.

Once the final prototype and recommendations are provided to the Board, further consultation can be expected as the Education team, led by the Dean of Education, and the Education Committee commit to implementation and program development. Engagement will occur through surveys, written submissions, targeted forums, and existing College engagement channels.

Related links

Contact

newfellowshipprogram@ranzcp.org

Last updated 22 July 2026