A twelve-week runway before the RACGP AKT is enough time to build genuine, broad readiness, provided the available study modes are sequenced deliberately rather than used interchangeably throughout. The plan below sets out a phase-by-phase structure, with the reasoning behind each transition made explicit, so it can be adapted rather than followed mechanically regardless of individual circumstances.
Weeks one to three: establishing a genuine baseline
The opening phase should be dominated by Standard Mode, worked through systematically by major curriculum area rather than in a random or purely interest-led order. The purpose of this phase is not yet to fix weaknesses, since there is not yet enough performance data to know reliably where the genuine weaknesses are. The purpose is to establish representative baseline data across the full blueprint, so that later, more targeted phases are working from an honest and complete picture rather than an assumption about where problems are likely to be.
Weeks four to six: increasing volume and introducing Adaptive Mode
Once baseline data exists across most or all curriculum domains, the middle phase should increase the proportion of mixed, cross-topic questions, moving away from the strictly organised, domain-by-domain structure of the opening weeks. This is also the point at which Adaptive Mode should begin, specifically targeting whatever weaknesses have been confirmed by the baseline data from weeks one to three. Introducing Adaptive Mode before this baseline exists risks narrowing practice prematurely around whichever gaps happened to surface first, rather than the genuine, blueprint-wide weak areas.
Weeks seven to nine: retention, timing and selective reasoning support
The middle-to-late phase should introduce daily Spaced Repetition specifically for material that has already been covered but risks fading without periodic review, alongside continued timed, mixed-question blocks that increasingly resemble exam conditions. This is also the appropriate stage to begin using Tutor Mode selectively, specifically for questions involving management decisions where the reasoning, rather than simple factual recall, is the source of difficulty. Tutor Mode is most valuable applied sparingly to genuinely difficult decisions, not as a running commentary applied to every question answered during this phase.
Weeks ten and eleven: full mocks and format rehearsal
With roughly two weeks remaining, the priority should shift decisively towards full-length mock examinations, ideally more than one, attempted under conditions that replicate the real sitting as closely as possible, including the paper-based, bubble-sheet format the AKT actually uses. Remediation during this phase should be driven directly by mock results: whatever weaknesses a full-length simulation reveals should shape the remaining available study time, rather than continuing to follow a generic plan regardless of what the mocks are showing.
Week twelve: consolidation, not new content
The final week should involve minimal new content. The priority is high-yield spaced review of material already covered, alongside final pacing practice to confirm that timing strategy holds up reliably under realistic conditions. Introducing substantial new material in the closing week is rarely a good trade against consolidating and protecting what has already been learned, and risks unsettling confidence built up over the preceding eleven weeks.
Variants for different candidate circumstances
Full-time registrars, balancing preparation against ongoing clinical duties, generally need to compress each phase into fewer available study hours per week while preserving the overall twelve-week sequence and its underlying logic, leaning more heavily on Spaced Repetition to protect retention between less frequent, longer study sessions. Doctors with protected study leave have more flexibility to extend individual sessions and can afford a slightly more thorough baseline phase in weeks one to three, but should resist the temptation to skip straight to Adaptive Mode simply because more time is available; the same underlying sequence, baseline first, targeted remediation second, retention and timing third, full simulation fourth, remains the right structure regardless of how much total time is available.
Deciding when to progress between phases
Progression between phases should be driven by performance indicators, not simply by the calendar. Moving from the baseline phase into concentrated Adaptive Mode is appropriate once representative data exists across essentially all curriculum domains, not on a fixed date regardless of coverage. Moving into the full-mock phase is appropriate once domain-level performance has stabilised at a consistent margin above the most recent published cut score, rather than at a predetermined week number regardless of where performance actually stands.
What to do if week six arrives and the baseline phase is not finished
Twelve weeks is a reasonable planning horizon, but real preparation rarely follows a plan exactly, and it is worth having a contingency for the common situation where clinical workload, personal circumstances or simply underestimating the time required means the baseline phase has not genuinely finished by the point the plan assumes it should have. In this situation, the right response is usually to compress the middle phases rather than to skip the baseline work entirely; moving into concentrated Adaptive Mode without genuinely representative baseline data across the full blueprint tends to produce a narrower, less reliable picture of readiness than the plan is designed to build, even under time pressure. It is better to finish an honest baseline a week or two later than planned than to move on schedule with an incomplete one.
Tracking progress in a way that actually informs these decisions
None of this phase-based structure works well without some form of ongoing tracking that makes the relevant decisions visible rather than a matter of guesswork. A simple weekly log covering domain-by-domain accuracy, overall trend against the most recent published cut score, and a short note on which specific error types dominated that week's practice gives enough information to judge, honestly, whether the plan's assumptions are holding or need adjusting. Candidates who rely purely on a general sense of how preparation is going, without this kind of concrete weekly record, are more likely to either progress through phases prematurely or linger unnecessarily in an earlier phase after genuine readiness has already been reached.