Teaching and learning speech and language therapy skills: The effectiveness of classroom as clinic in speech and language therapy student education

Abstract

Background: Terms such as 'clinical intuition' have often been applied to the practice of speech and language therapy. Various authors have aimed to make the process of therapy practice more explicit, and it is argued that recently developed descriptive/analytic frameworks have the potential to engender the critical mindset necessary for student speech and language therapists to become good reflective practitioners, with the potential for enhancing clinical education. Aims: To investigate whether and how aspects of clinical skills education could be usefully addressed in an academic, as opposed to a clinical, setting. The study aimed to address the question of whether use of an interaction analysis system, in conjunction with video observation, and 'practice simulation' in a teaching-learning programme could be shown to have a positive impact on: (1) students' perceptions of their own understanding and practice of therapy, and their perceptions of themselves as self-reflective practitioners; and whether (2) this was borne out by students' ability to observe and interpret therapeutic interaction, as measured by (i) an objective written assessment; (ii) an objective video observation assessment; and (iii) assessment of their abilities in clinical practice. Methods & Procedures: Thirty-six students from City University took part in an experimental, placebo-controlled study using a deferred intervention design. Assessments designed to reflect changes resulting from the teaching-learning curriculum were carried out pre- and post-intervention with experimental and control groups. Quantitative and qualitative results were obtained. Outcomes & Results: The intervention programme was found to have had a significant impact on students' perceptions of their understanding of therapy, but not on their perceptions of their practice of therapy. The experimental group scored significantly better on a written assessment of 'interpretation of therapy interaction', but were no better than the control group on a 'Video observation' assessment. Owing to attrition and the poor quality of videos submitted for assessment, it was not possible to measure changes in actual clinical practice. Qualitative feedback from the teaching-learning programme suggests that students generally found the approach to be beneficial. Conclusions: While there were some encouraging results, it is still uncertain whether addressing the actual practice of therapy in an academic setting gives 'added value' to the work carried out on clinical placements. However, there is no doubt that bringing this type of programme under the umbrella of an academic institution would greatly increase the consistency of teaching and the range of experiences available to students.