Development of the Student Practice Evaluation Form—Revised (Second Edition) (SPEF‐R2): The first action research cycle

Abstract

Introduction The Student Practice Evaluation Form—Revised Edition (SPEF‐R) is used by all Australian universities to assess the capability and performance of occupational therapy students on block practice placements. The occupational therapy landscape in Australia has evolved significantly since the SPEF‐R was developed. This study aimed to review the SPEF‐R and develop a revised edition, the SPEF‐R2. Methods The first cycle of an action research process involved four phases: (a) mapping the SPEF‐R to the Australian Occupational Therapy Competency Standards 2018 (AOTCS); (b) development of the SPEF‐R2; (c) national consultation through an online survey with clinicians, university staff and students; and (d) reflection and further amendments. Results In phase 1, good alignment was found between the AOTCS 2018 and the SPEF‐R. In phase 2, the SPEF‐R2 was developed to further enhance alignment, including expanded content related to culturally responsive practice, reflective practice and clinical/professional reasoning, resulting in two items being added to the tool. Further wording adjustments were made to improve clarity, reduce duplication and improve relevance to the contemporary occupational therapy landscape. In phase 3, survey results indicated that the SPEF‐R2 was well received overall, with most participants viewing it as an improvement on the SPEF‐R. Cultural content and reflective practice additions in particular received positive feedback. Concerns were raised by some participants, including perceived repetition, the length of the tool and time required for completion, and addressed by further amendments in phase 4. Three items were removed or consolidated elsewhere, and three items became core items. Conclusion The Australian occupational therapy community considers the SPEF‐R2 to be a timely and much‐needed development. Piloting of the SPEF‐R2 and final revisions prior to release are planned for subsequent action cycles and amendments will be made to the online platform and associated training resources.

Development of the Student Practice Evaluation Form – Revised (Second Edition) (SPEF‐R2): The second action research cycle

“…Convenience sampling was used to recruit participants. The survey used in the previous action research cycle (Caine et al, 2020), which focussed on perceptions of the draft SPEF‐R2, included a question to identify practice educators interested in piloting the tool. Those who indicated interest were contacted and offered the opportunity to register for participation in the pilot of the SPEF‐R2.…”

“…Examples under each item are more specific to practice …” (Participant 13). Some free text comments about the amount of repetition and duplication favourably compared the pilot version of the SPEF‐R2 to the earlier version reviewed in Cycle 1 (Caine et al, 2020). For example, participants stated the SPEF‐R2 was “a better document with less duplication” (Participant 7), “there seemed to be less doubling up of information” (Participant 2), and “items in each domain are more succinct and some domains are ‘tighter’ (less items now)” (Participant 22).…”

“…In keeping with earlier stages of the project, the rating scale was not amended or re‐evaluated as part of the pilot. This decision was based on prior research (Rodger et al, 2016; Turpin et al, 2011) and explained further in the paper describing Cycle 1 (Caine et al, 2020). A proportion of pilot participants mentioned difficulty differentiating between points on the rating scale.…”

“…As such, the decision was made not to directly involve students in this cycle of the research. Although this remains a limitation of the SPEF‐R2 pilot, the student perspective was incorporated through nationwide consultation in Cycle 1, in which 63 students shared their perspectives on their experiences of the SPEF‐R and the initial draft of the SPEF‐R2 (Caine et al, 2020). Further research examining student perspectives of the SPEF‐R2 in practice placements would provide an additional perspective beyond those provided by practice educators in this pilot.…”

“…The SPEF‐R2 project was undertaken across two action research cycles. The first cycle was described by Caine et al (2020) and focussed on mapping the competency standards against the SPEF‐R, identifying essential amendments, conducting a national survey regarding a draft version of the SPEF‐R2, and finalising the 36‐ to 37‐item SPEF‐R2 for piloting. The first cycle found good alignment between the SPEF‐R2 items and the 2018 competency standards and was well received by the Australian occupational therapy community as an improvement on the SPEF‐R.…”