As can be seen in the above link the IPEM guidance seems rather 'loose' and looks like pretty much anything performed in our role is acceptable if recorded. In contrast the ART CPD guidance is far more concise and includes a scoring system. One would hope technologists can maintain one record of CPD to meet criteria for both bodies.
What are your thoughts on how to record CPD? Clearly the IPEM option seems much easier to comply with though difficult to quantify if no scoring system is attached to it.
For the past year I have been using this form on the RCT web site to record my training and development activity http://therct.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/RCT-Summary-of-CPD-Activity1.docx on the assumtion that IPEM say this is the evidence sheet they require for their CPD program so I assume it will be good enough for the RCT. I'm not sure what the ART prgram asks for, but this is what is on the RCT website. Maybe Andy Mosson can clarify; I'll ask him to post something here.
As far as RCT goes, you are entitled to follow any CPD scheme you wish. The requirement for registration is that CPD is carried out. It only becomes an issue if you are selected for audit and then evidence must be provided. Either the IPEM template or the ART scheme should satisfy this requirement so anyone already using a scheme to monitor their CPD should be able to continue with that scheme.
RCT recommend a scheme using the IPEM templates because it is fairly straightforward to use and then audit. It is more subjective than the ART points based scheme but it is still a good methodology. It also has a very good list of practical CPD examples. The important thing though, is to record your CPD NOW! We all consider we are keeping abreast of our technology but there must be evidence and in 6 months time it will be harder to recall.
(Sorry, no pic. It would destroy my youthful image)
From an ART point of you should be using the ART CPD scheme. However, as Andy says as long as you are following an accredied scheme It does not matter. In the future the ART scheme may have to be alligned to the IPEM scheme, but we shall have to wait and see.
From A personal point
Just think what will you do if a letter drops through the post and says you are required to provide a 500 word essay on how you are complying with Continous professional development, and you have n't got a clue of when you did your last training session or where did I see that interesting person lecturing on a thingy mi bob.
Here keeping a CPD record up to date is one of the criteria set at appraisal time so all staff have a record folder. These things can be quite easily put to the back of the priority list. Including an annual department review not only keeps things ticking along but can also highlight how tight it can be reaching the magic ART ‘20 points’ if staff don't remember to log details.
The IPEM list definitely highlights further options to bolster the evidence in areas that we previously may not have considered.