This study identified the clinical placement and supervisory models used within 45 speech-language pathology professional preparation programs in seven English-speaking countries and the drivers influencing the adoption of these models. University personnel completed an on-line survey about the placement and supervisory models used in their programs, their opinions regarding the effectiveness of the models in developing student competency, and the factors influencing the adoption of different models. Responses from the survey were analysed through descriptive statistics and thematic analysis. "Traditional" placement models such as block and weekly placements, as well as traditional supervisory models utilizing a speech-language pathologist as supervisor in a 1:1 student-to-supervisor ratio were the most widely used in the clinical education of speech-language pathologists. "Non-traditional" models, where the overall structure of the practicum experience or the delivery of supervision within the practicum experience has been altered from the traditional models, were used with differing frequency across countries. The major influences on the adoption of non-traditional models included attitudes about the effectiveness of the models, availability of placements, standards of professional associations, and student learning outcomes, particularly in relation to exposure to clinical sub-groups. Further evidence regarding the effectiveness of both traditional and non-traditional placement and supervisory models needs to be developed. To develop this evidence, consistent terminology and a shared understanding of terminology needs to be established.
Article titleImpact of placement type on the development of clinical competency in speech language pathology students AbstractBackground: Speech language pathology students gain experience and clinical
Objective To investigate students' perceptions of the impact of coronavirus SARS‐CoV‐2 on rural and remote placements facilitated by 16 University Departments of Rural Health in Australia in 2020. Design A mixed‐method design comprising an online survey and semi‐structured interviews. Setting Australia. Participants Allied health, nursing and medical students with a planned University Departments of Rural Health‐facilitated rural or remote placement between February and October 2020. Intervention A planned rural or remote placement in 2020 facilitated by a University Departments of Rural Health, regardless of placement outcome. Main outcome measures Questionnaire included placement outcome (completed or not), discipline of study (nursing, allied health, medicine), and Likert measures of impact to placement (including supervision, placement tasks, location, accommodation, client contact and student learning) and placement experience (overall, support, supervision, university support). Semi‐structured interviews asked about placement planning, outcome, decisions, experience and student perceptions. Results While coronavirus SARS‐CoV‐2 reportedly impacted on the majority of planned placements, most students (80%) were able to complete their University Departments of Rural Health‐facilitated placement in some form and were satisfied with their placement experience. Common placement changes included changes to tasks, setting, supervisors and location. Allied health students were significantly more likely to indicate that their placement had been impacted and also felt more supported by supervisors and universities than nursing students. Interview participants expressed concerns regarding the potential impact of cancelled and adapted placements on graduation and future employment. Conclusions The coronavirus SARS‐CoV‐2 pandemic was reported to impact the majority of University Departments of Rural Health‐facilitated rural and remote placements in 2020. Fortunately, most students were able to continue to undertake a rural or remote placement in some form and were largely satisfied with their placement experience. Students were concerned about their lack of clinical learning and graduating on time with adequate clinical competence.
ObjectivesTo explore and synthesise the evidence relating to features of quality in rural health student placements.DesignScoping review.Data sourcesMEDLINE, CINAHL, Embase, ProQuest, Informit, Scopus, ERIC and several grey literature data sources (1 January 2005 to 13 October 2020).Study selectionThe review included peer-reviewed and grey literature from Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development listed countries that focused on quality of health student placements in regional, rural and remote areas.Data extractionData were extracted regarding the methodological and design characteristics of each data source, and the features suggested to contribute to student placement quality under five categories based on a work-integrated learning framework.ResultsOf 2866 resulting papers, 101 were included for data charting and content analysis. The literature was dominated by medicine and nursing student placement research. No literature explicitly defined quality in rural health student placements, although proxy indicators for quality such as satisfaction, positive experiences, overall effectiveness and perceived value were identified. Content analysis resulted in four overarching domains pertaining to features of rural health student placement quality: (1) learning and teaching in a rural context, (2) rural student placement characteristics, (3) key relationships and (4) required infrastructure.ConclusionThe findings suggest that quality in rural health student placements hinges on contextually specific features. Further research is required to explore these findings and ways in which these features can be measured during rural health student placements.
Introduction: As the coronavirus pandemic unfolded during 2020, widespread financial uncertainty emerged amongst university students across the globe. What is not yet clear is how Australian health students were financially impacted during the initial stages of the pandemic and whether this influenced their ability to undertake planned rural or remote placements. Objective: To examine (a) financial concern amongst health students during COVID-19, (b) the financial implications of changes to planned rural or remote placements and (c) the impact of these factors on students' ability to undertake placements during the pandemic. Design: Mixed-methods design involving an online survey (n = 1210) and semistructured interviews (n = 29). Nursing, medical and allied health students with a planned University Department of Rural Health-facilitated rural or remote placement between February and October 2020 were invited to participate.Findings: 54.6% of surveyed students reported financial concern during COVID-19. Financial concern correlated with both changes in financial position and employment, with 36.6% of students reporting a reduction in income and 43.1% of students reporting a reduction in, or cessation of regular employment.Placement changes yielded a range of financial implications. Cancelled placements saved some students travel and accommodation costs, but left others out of pocket if these expenses were prepaid. Placements that went ahead often incurred increased accommodation costs due to limited availability. Financial concern and/or financial implications of placement changes ultimately prevented some students from undertaking their rural or remote placement as planned. Discussion: Many nursing, allied health and medical students expressed financial concern during COVID-19, associated with a loss of regular employment and How to cite this article: Jessup B, Hoang H, Podubinski T, et al. 'I can't go, I can't afford it': Financial concern amongst health students undertaking rural and remote placements during
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.