George W Wolford, S. Brannick, S. Strother, Laura L. Wolford
{"title":"Clinical Education Outcomes and Research Directions in Speech-Language Pathology: A Scoping Review","authors":"George W Wolford, S. Brannick, S. Strother, Laura L. Wolford","doi":"10.30707/tlcsd5.2.1624983591.656565","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose: To describe what researchers are investigating and how they are measuring the constructs of their investigations within the speech-language pathology (SLP) clinical education literature. Method: A scoping review methodology (Arksey & O’Malley, 2005) was employed to develop a picture of clinical education articles which reported a measured outcome. Articles that met criteria were categorized by the purpose of the investigation and the outcome measures reported. Result: 124 articles met inclusion criteria. Analysis of study purposes revealed a wide breadth of foci that were grouped into four broad clusters: Outcome Measures, Student Perspectives, Educational Contexts, and Teaching Methods. Most of the studies in the corpus relied only on student self-report measures. In addition, any specific outcome measure was typically used only once and not found in subsequent studies. Trends indicate a variety of constructs are being studied at an exploratory level with limited in-depth investigation. Conclusion: Given the inconsistency of outcome measures and reliance on self-report measures, more research is needed to validate recommendations of best practices in clinical education. Areas of need include developing and implementing validated outcomes, more frequent investigation of clinical education using measures other than student self-reports, and testing theories found in other fields.","PeriodicalId":202254,"journal":{"name":"Teaching and Learning in Communication Sciences and Disorders","volume":"20 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Teaching and Learning in Communication Sciences and Disorders","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.30707/tlcsd5.2.1624983591.656565","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3
Abstract
Purpose: To describe what researchers are investigating and how they are measuring the constructs of their investigations within the speech-language pathology (SLP) clinical education literature. Method: A scoping review methodology (Arksey & O’Malley, 2005) was employed to develop a picture of clinical education articles which reported a measured outcome. Articles that met criteria were categorized by the purpose of the investigation and the outcome measures reported. Result: 124 articles met inclusion criteria. Analysis of study purposes revealed a wide breadth of foci that were grouped into four broad clusters: Outcome Measures, Student Perspectives, Educational Contexts, and Teaching Methods. Most of the studies in the corpus relied only on student self-report measures. In addition, any specific outcome measure was typically used only once and not found in subsequent studies. Trends indicate a variety of constructs are being studied at an exploratory level with limited in-depth investigation. Conclusion: Given the inconsistency of outcome measures and reliance on self-report measures, more research is needed to validate recommendations of best practices in clinical education. Areas of need include developing and implementing validated outcomes, more frequent investigation of clinical education using measures other than student self-reports, and testing theories found in other fields.
目的:描述研究人员在言语语言病理学(SLP)临床教育文献中正在调查的内容以及他们如何测量他们调查的结构。方法:采用范围审查方法(Arksey & O 'Malley, 2005)对报告测量结果的临床教育文章进行分析。符合标准的文章按调查目的和报告的结果措施进行分类。结果:124篇文章符合纳入标准。研究目的分析揭示了广泛的焦点,分为四大类:结果测量、学生观点、教育背景和教学方法。语料库中的大多数研究仅依赖于学生的自我报告测量。此外,任何特定的结果测量通常只使用一次,在随后的研究中没有发现。趋势表明,在有限的深入调查下,各种结构正在探索性水平上进行研究。结论:考虑到结果测量的不一致性和对自我报告测量的依赖,需要更多的研究来验证临床教育中最佳实践的建议。需要的领域包括开发和实施有效的结果,使用学生自我报告以外的方法更频繁地调查临床教育,以及测试在其他领域发现的理论。