The Acquisition of Static and Dynamic Intervention Skills by Graduate Speech-Language Pathology Students.

PURPOSE: Speech-language pathology programs use simulated learning experiences (SLEs) to teach graduate student clinicians about fidelity to therapeutic interventions, including static skills (clinical actions that are delivered in a prespecified way regardless of the client's behavior) and dynamic skills (contingent responses formulated in response to a client's behavior). The purpose of this study was to explore student learning of static and dynamic skills throughout SLEs and live clinical practice. METHOD: Thirty-three speech-language pathology graduate students participated in this study. Students were first trained to deliver an intervention before having their treatment fidelity measured at three time points: an initial SLE, actual clinical practice, and a final SLE. Treatment fidelity was first summarized using an overall accuracy score and then separated by static and dynamic skills. We hypothesized that (a) overall accuracy would increase from the initial simulation to treatment but remain steady from treatment to the final simulation and that (b) students would acquire dynamic skills more slowly than static skills. RESULTS: In line with our hypotheses, students' overall accuracy improved over time. Although accuracy for static skills was mostly established after the first simulation, dynamic skills remained less accurate, with a slower acquisition timeline. CONCLUSIONS: These results demonstrate that SLEs are efficacious in teaching students the clinical skills needed for actual clinical practice. Furthermore, we show that dynamic skills are more difficult for students to learn and implement than static skills, which suggests the need for greater attention to dynamic skill acquisition during clinical education.

How does training format and clinical education model impact fidelity and confidence in a speech-language pathology rotation?

Clinical education rotations typically involve an initial training phase followed by supervised clinical practice. However, little research has explored the separate contributions of each component to the development of student confidence and treatment fidelity. The dual purpose of this study was to compare the impact of clinical training format (synchronous vs. asynchronous) and education model (traditional vs. collaborative) on student confidence and treatment fidelity. Thirty-six speech-language pathology graduate students completed this two-phase study during a one-term clinical rotation. Phase 1 investigated the impact of training condition (synchronous, asynchronous guided, asynchronous unguided) on student confidence and treatment fidelity. Phase 2 explored the impact of education model (traditional vs. collaborative) on student confidence and treatment fidelity. Treatment fidelity was measured at the conclusion of Phases 1 and 2. Students rated their confidence at six-time points throughout the study. Our results indicate that training condition did not differentially impact student confidence or treatment fidelity; however, education model did: students in the collaborative education model reported increased confidence compared to students in the traditional education model. Students in the collaborative education model also trended towards having higher treatment fidelity than students in the traditional education model. These results demonstrate that pre-clinical trainings can be effective in several different formats provided they cover the discrete skills needed for the clinical rotation. While preliminary, our results further suggest that students may benefit from working with peers during their clinical rotations.