---
title: "How to write an OSCE station: the template, candidate instructions, examiner notes and SP script"
description: "The institutional OSCE station template in five parts: what each field holds, who reads it, the order to write them in, and what a review sends back."
canonical: https://studydrome.com/docs/osce/design/writing-a-station/
updated: 2026-09-27
---

# How to write an OSCE station: the template, candidate instructions, examiner notes and SP script

The institutional OSCE station template in five parts: what each field holds, who reads it, the order to write them in, and what a review sends back.

An OSCE station is written to a template with five parts: station information, information for the site organizer, candidate instructions, examiner information, and simulated patient information. Write them in that order, from the blueprint cell down to the script. Each part has one reader, and a station fails review when a fact needed by one reader sits in another reader's part.

## Why a template, not a blank page?

A station is read by five people who never meet: the person who sets up the room, the candidate at the door, the examiner inside, the simulated patient in the chair, and the board member who reads the appeal. Each needs a different slice of the same case. A template forces the writer to give each reader their slice and nothing else.

The AMEE guide on OSCE organization gives the template its shape. Its writing template has five sections, and its appendix carries a complete eight-minute asthma station written to it. The template on this page follows that shape. The wording is ours.

A template also makes stations comparable. When every station in the bank has the same parts, a reviewer can check them the same way. A committee can compare two stations on the same cell of the blueprint. An exam office can build the paperwork for the day from the same fields every time.

## What goes in each part of the template?

| Part | Who reads it | What it holds |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Station information | Blueprint working group, bank owner | Title, blueprint cell (competency and system), level of the candidate, learning outcomes assessed, station type, duration, author, version and date |
| Information for the site organizer | Exam office, site team | Room and layout, simulated patient age and sex, equipment list with quantities, consumables, set-up and reset between candidates, what the candidate may use |
| Candidate instructions | The candidate, at the door and inside | Who they are, where they are, what has already happened, what to do, what not to do, the time allowed, any data given |
| Examiner information | The examiner | Case background, the examiner's role, the objectives, what may and may not be said or given, clinical information to release on request, the marking scheme |
| Simulated patient information | The simulated patient and their trainer | Identity and background, the presenting complaint, history, ideas and concerns, what to say and not say, questions to ask the candidate, standardized answers to likely questions |

Two fields are often missing. The blueprint cell is the first: a station without a cell cannot be placed in the exam, and the bank fills with stations nobody asked for. The version and date are the second. A station changes at every review, and the exam office must know which version is in the room.

## In what order should you write the parts?

Write from the outcome down. The order matters because each part constrains the next.

1. **Start from the blueprint cell.** The [worked blueprint](/docs/osce/design/blueprint-worked-example/) has assigned this station a competency and a system, a candidate level, and a duration. Those four facts go into the station information first.
2. **Write the task.** One sentence: what the candidate must do, for whom, in how long. If the task takes two sentences, it is two stations.
3. **Write the candidate instructions.** Everything the candidate needs and nothing that gives the answer away. Read them at the speed of a nervous person with one minute at the door.
4. **Write the marking scheme.** The [marking scheme page](/docs/osce/design/designing-the-marking-scheme/) covers the choices. Each item must be observable in the room within the time allowed.
5. **Write the examiner information.** What the examiner is there to see, what they may say, and what they release only when asked.
6. **Write the simulated patient script.** The script is the longest part and the last written. It answers the questions the marking scheme expects the candidate to ask, as well as the questions a good candidate might ask that the scheme does not reward.
7. **Write the site organizer's list.** Read the whole station again and list every object it assumes is in the room.

The AMEE guide's flow runs the same way: topics, writers, station types, the writing template, marking guidance, peer review, and piloting. The station is not finished when the writer stops. It is finished when it survives the [review workshop](/docs/osce/design/station-review-and-piloting/).

## What do good candidate instructions look like?

Candidate instructions are the part most often written badly, because the writer knows the case too well. The instructions should answer five questions in this order.

- **Who am I?** "You are a final-year medical student on a medical ward."
- **Where am I and what has happened?** "Mr. Adams, 54, came to the emergency department an hour ago with chest pain. His observations are on the chart."
- **What must I do?** "Take a focused history of the pain."
- **What must I not do?** "Do not examine the patient."
- **How long do I have and what happens at the end?** "You have eight minutes. At six minutes, the examiner will ask you to summarize."

Three rules keep the instructions honest. The task verb is the one the marking scheme rewards: if the scheme rewards "explain", the instruction says "explain", not "discuss". Any data the candidate needs are in the instructions or in the room, never in the examiner's head. And the instructions never hint at the diagnosis by naming it in the title the candidate sees.

## What do the examiner notes and the SP script need?

The examiner's part answers three questions. What is this station testing, in one sentence? What may the examiner say (usually only the scripted prompts, such as the summary request at six minutes). What information does the examiner release, and only when the candidate asks for it? A results sheet the examiner hands over on request is a common example.

The simulated patient script is written to be played the same way forty times. It needs the facts of the case, the person's manner and concerns, and explicit lines for the questions that decide the marks. It also needs the answers to questions the writer did not expect. A short section, "if asked about anything else," with the rule "say you do not know," prevents improvisation from changing the station between candidates.

Standardization is why the script is long. The AMEE guide notes that one estimate puts the adequate amount of simulated patient training at up to 15 hours. The script is the document that training uses for rehearsal. A thin script means a different station for each candidate. That is a fairness problem before it is a psychometric one.

## What does a review send back?

The common faults, in the order reviewers report them:

- A task that cannot be completed in the time. Eight minutes for a full history and an examination is two stations.
- Items in the marking scheme that no examiner can observe: "understands the differential" is a thought, not an action.
- Candidate instructions that give away the diagnosis or omit the data the task requires.
- An examiner part that lets the examiner decide what to say.
- A simulated patient script with no line for the question that decides the critical item.
- An equipment list that assumes the room, rather than describing it.

The station QA questionnaire in the AMEE guide's second appendix turns these into a form. The review page carries a version of it as a checklist.

## Tools for the writing

Two free tools fit this template. The [OSCE station template](/resources/templates/osce-station/) is a spreadsheet with a complete starter station: sections, observable items, one critical item with its fail threshold, a global rating and a worked scoring scale. The [OSCE checklist builder](/tools/osce-checklist-builder/) builds or validates a marking scheme step by step and flags the faults the literature warns about, such as a scale with a single level or an item without a label. Neither replaces the review workshop. Both catch the mechanical errors before it.

## Limits

A template does not make a station valid. It makes a station complete. Validity comes from the blueprint cell the station fills and the evidence the exam collects afterward. The 2018 "twelve tips" paper on OSCE development applies Kane's validity framework to that whole chain, from design to decision. The template is one of the links in it.

The template also assumes an observed station with a simulated patient. Unobserved stations, technology-enhanced stations, and linked pairs adjust the parts. The [station types page](/docs/osce/design/station-types/) says how.

## Frequently asked questions

### How long does it take to write an OSCE station?

A first draft of all five parts takes an experienced writer a few hours. The simulated patient script is the longest part. Add the review workshop, the rewrite it produces, and a pilot, and a station takes several weeks from first draft to bank. That is why the planning timeline starts station writing months before the exam.

### Should candidate instructions be posted outside the room or handed over?

Both are common. Posting them outside the door lets the candidate read during the change-over minute. A copy inside the room lets them re-read the task. The instructions must be identical in both places, and the site organizer's list should specify how many copies each room needs.

### Who should write OSCE stations?

Clinicians who teach at the candidate's level, working from a blueprint cell they were given. A writer who chooses the topic writes to their own interest rather than the exam's need. Pair a new writer with a reviewer for the first station, and give every writer the template and a worked example.

### Can one station test more than one competency?

It can, but the marking scheme has to score each one, and the blueprint has to record both cells. A history station that also scores communication is normal. A station that tries to test history, examination, and management in eight minutes tests none of them well. Split it.

### Do examiners need a script too?

They need a short one. The examiner part lists the prompts the examiner may give, the information they release on request, and what they must not do. Without it, examiners help candidates unevenly, which later shows up as examiner variance in the results.

## Sources

**Sources**

1. [Khan KZ, Gaunt K, Ramachandran S, Pushkar P. The Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE): AMEE Guide No. 81. Part II: organisation and administration](https://doi.org/10.3109/0142159X.2013.818635) (Medical Teacher, 2013)
2. [Daniels VJ, Pugh D. Twelve tips for developing an OSCE that measures what you want](https://doi.org/10.1080/0142159X.2017.1390214) (Medical Teacher, 2018)
3. [Nyangeni T, ten Ham-Baloyi W, van Rooyen DRM. Strengthening the planning and design of objective structured clinical examinations](https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11369580/) (Health SA Gesondheid, 2024)

> [!TIP]
> **In practice**
> A station written to this template imports as an ordered checklist with section headers, a scoring scale and critical items. To see how StudyDrome stores stations, scales and the blueprint cell, read the section's bridge page at /docs/osce/design/in-studydrome-blueprint-and-stations/.