Abstract
Purpose The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of the supervision-questioning-feedback (SQF) model of supervision on critical thinking in graduate students studying speech-language pathology. The researchers hypothesized that students who were provided with the SQF model of supervision would score higher than students who received the non-SQF (NSQF) style of supervision on the selected critical thinking measures. Method Seventeen out of 24 first semester graduate students in speech-language pathology completing their on-site university-based clinical practicum experience consented to participate in the study. Of the 17 participating first semester students, 9 were randomly assigned to 1 of 3 SQF trained supervisors, and the other 8 were randomly assigned to 1 of 2 NSQF trained supervisors for the duration of 1 semester. Additionally, 3 out of 24 fourth semester graduate students completing their off-site externship experience and their supervisors consented to participate in the study. Four additional study participants served as independent SQF-trained raters charged with the task of analyzing video recorded student-supervisor conferences to determine whether the SQF model of supervision was being implemented. Prior to and at the conclusion of the clinical experience, all participating students completed two measures of critical thinking: (1) California Critical Thinking Skills Test (CCTST) and (2) two Simucase® clinical simulations. At the conclusion of the clinical experience, seventeen out of 20 participating students (11/12 SQF students and 6/8 NSQF students) completed a post-survey rating their supervisory experience . Results For participating first semester students, there were no overall statistically significant differences between SQF and NSQF groups as measured by pre to post completion of (1) CCTST (p=.544) and (2) two Simucase® clinical simulations (p=.781). The 3 participating fourth semester students who received the SQF model of supervision also showed no statistically significant differences on pre to post completion of the (1) CCTST (p=.827) and (2) two Simucase® virtual cases (p=.879). Results from SQF ratings revealed variability in the implementation of the SQF model across supervisors with a moderate level of inter-rater agreement. Results from post surveys completed by students showed that students preferred the SQF model of supervision over the NSQF model (p=.044). Conclusion Results from this preliminary study indicated that the SQF model did not influence the overall outcomes on the selected critical thinking measures. Student preference for the SQF model may support existing evidence that learning clinicians want to be actively engaged in the supervisory process. There were several limitations to this study including the small sample size, variability in the implementation of the SQF model across supervisors, sensitivity of the selected critical thinking measures, and timing of post-intervention procedures. Further investigation of the effects of SQF on students’ critical thinking is warranted.
Highlights
Discussions surrounding the significance of supervisory methodologies in speech-language pathology and audiology have dated as far back as the 1950s (Anderson, 1988; Cogan, 1972; Dudding et al, 2017; Goldhammer et al, 1980)
The growing recognition of the complexities surrounding efficacious supervisory practices has prompted formalized training requirements for speech-language pathologists and audiologists who engage in clinical teaching (ASHA, 2016; Council for Clinical Certification in Audiology and Speech-Language Pathology of the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association [CFCC], 2018; Procaccini, et al, 2017)
Many different models of clinical teaching have been presented within the literature in disciplines outside of speech-language pathology and audiology, few have been systematically investigated within the clinical teaching-learning environment of speech-language pathology
Summary
Discussions surrounding the significance of supervisory methodologies in speech-language pathology and audiology have dated as far back as the 1950s (Anderson, 1988; Cogan, 1972; Dudding et al, 2017; Goldhammer et al, 1980). Preliminary discussions regarding supervisory methodologies have evolved into formalized position statements (American Speech-Language-Hearing Association [ASHA], 1985; ASHA, 2008a), national committees (ASHA, 2013; ASHA, 2016), and acceptance that clinical supervision is a professional specialty that requires its own representative knowledge and skill set (ASHA, 2008c; ASHA, 2013; Council of Academic Programs in Communication Sciences and Disorders [CAPCSD], 2013; Dudding et al, 2017). Most supervisory approaches implemented within the clinical teaching-learning context of speech-language pathology and audiology have been influenced primarily by one supervisory approach, Anderson’s continuum model (Anderson, 1988; ASHA, 2008b; Dudding et al, 2017). Anderson’s continuum model has been widely favored because its theoretical underpinnings strongly emphasize the importance of modifying the supervisor's style in response to the needs, knowledge, and skills of the supervisee at each stage of clinical development (ASHA, n.d.; Anderson, 1988)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: Teaching and Learning in Communication Sciences and Disorders
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
