Structured debriefing and reflective thinking in speech-language pathology education: A proof-of-concept study.

Abstract

Purpose: This proof-of-concept study explored the influence of structured debriefing on reflective thinking in graduate speech-language pathology students during an Objective Structured Clinical Examination.

Method: Using a qualitative descriptive design informed by experiential learning theory, students' written reflections, pre- and post-debriefing were analysed. The Debriefing with Good Judgement model, led by a trained facilitator, used advocacy-inquiry to uncover learners' assumptions and reasoning, fostering deeper reflection and insights. Eight first-year graduate students submitted written reflections pre- and post-debriefing. The Reflection Evaluation for Learners' Enhanced Competencies Tool and thematic analysis examined changes in reflection depth and content.

Result: Structured debriefing enhanced reflective depth across multiple Reflection Evaluation for Learners' Enhanced Competencies Tool dimensions, including attending to emotions, conflict analysis, and meaning making. Thematic analysis revealed key shifts such as reframing emotions, broadening clinical perspectives, and strengthening professional identity.

Conclusion: Findings suggest structured debriefing can facilitate deeper thinking by guiding students to critically examine actions, assumptions, and emotions. Result also support the feasibility of applying the Reflection Evaluation for Learners' Enhanced Competencies Tool rubric alongside thematic analysis to evaluate reflective capacity in speech-language pathology education. This study provides preliminary evidence for structured debriefing as a pedagogical tool to enhance reflection and promote workplace readiness.