Midwifery Education Standards
Midwifery Education Standards
This domain examines how midwifery programmes are designed, delivered, accredited and evaluated against competency standards. Exam questions often ask whether a curriculum, assessment method or faculty arrangement can be expected to produce safe, competent midwives.
Core rules and concepts
- Programmes are built around defined exit competencies, typically mapped to the ICM Essential Competencies, and every learning outcome, placement and assessment should trace back to them.
- Accreditation reviews governance, resources, faculty qualifications, clinical placement capacity, assessment rigour and student support. It is not the same as routine teaching evaluation.
- Faculty should include midwife teachers with current practice and teaching preparation; clinical preceptors need training in supervision, feedback and competency sign-off.
- Clinical practice must be supervised, hands-on and sufficiently varied. Simulation is valuable for emergency drills, teamwork and deliberate practice, but it supplements rather than automatically replaces supervised care of real women.
- Assessment must be valid, reliable and fair: direct observation, OSCE, portfolios, reflective writing and sign-off of competencies, with feedback and remediation.
- Registration is the start of lifelong learning; reflective practice and continuing professional development maintain competence.
Worked example
A school proposes replacing 30% of clinical placement hours with virtual simulation. Each competency is mapped to either simulation or clinical experience. Should the programme be approved? Simulation is strong for repeated practice of shoulder dystocia, neonatal resuscitation and team communication. However, competencies such as supporting normal labour, perineal repair and newborn examination require supervised real-world experience. Approval depends on evidence that every competency still has adequate supervised clinical exposure and valid assessment. The trap is treating hours or simulation as automatic proof of competence.
Traps that cost marks
Assuming more hours always equal better competence; using uncalibrated assessors; letting unqualified staff sign off competencies; confusing student satisfaction with programme quality; failing to close the feedback loop after assessment.