JCPSLP Vol 17 No 1 2015_lores

Table 5. Group A participants’ perceptions of satisfaction of clients/families, private practitioners and students involved in student placements in private practice

Category

Subcategory

Exemplar comments

“Some clients loved it for the change of environment” “I’ve never had any parents or clients complain” “One client with autism didn’t cope with the change” “We’ve had reports back that it’s the best placement they’ve ever had in their course” “I had feedback that it was a really positive first off-campus experience”

Client satisfaction

Most clients enjoyed change from clinician to student Most clients happy to have student again in the future Clients appreciative of the effort put in by students

Student satisfaction Students enjoyed: • the caseload

• being part of the team • access to resources • access to other clinicians • the self-directedness of the placement

“It exceeded my expectations” “We are obviously satisfied with the experience. We would not have done it for 15 years otherwise” “I’m obviously happy as already have my next placement planned”

Clinician satisfaction 5 of 6 clinicians plan to continue to have students 1 of 6 still undecided after having students for the first time

and “I don’t know how to do it; it’s just in the ‘too hard basket’” (Participant 10). We will work with willing private practitioners to explore a range of strategies to make it possible to take students on placements in private practice. Acknowledgements The authors thank the speech pathologists in private practice who participated in this study for their generosity of time and ideas. References Armstrong, A., Fordham, L., & Ireland, S. (2004). Clinical education in private practice settings: An impossible dream or a new marriage? Paper presented at the International Association of Logopedics and Phoniatrics Congress, Brisbane, Australia. DiCicco-Bloom, B., & Crabtree, B. F. (2006). The qualitative research interview. Medical Education , 40 (4), 314–321. Doubt, L., Paterson, M., & O’Riordan, A. (2004). Clinical education in private practice: An interdisciplinary project. Journal of Allied Health , 33 (1), 47–50. Green, R. G., Baskind, F. R., Mustian, B. E., Reed, L. N., & Taylor, H. R. (2007). Professional education and private practice: Is there a disconnect? Social Work , 52 (2), 151–159. Health Workforce Australia. (2013). Strategic plan 2013–2016 . Canberra, ACT: Australian Government. Health Workforce Australia. (2014). Australia’s health workforce series – Speech pathologists in focus . Canberra, ACT: Australian Government. Health Workforce Australia. (n.d.). Integrated Regional Clinical Training Networks. Retrieved 2 Oct. 2014 from https://www.hwa.gov.au/our-work/build-capacity/ integrated-regional-clinical-training-networks Hsieh, H. F., & Shannon, S. E. (2005). Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qualitative Health Research , 15 (9), 1277–1288. Lambier, J. (2002). Membership survey . Melbourne: Speech Pathology Australia. MacPhail, A., Alappat, T., Mullen, B., & Napoli, L. (2011). Policies, barriers and incentives impacting student clinical

Participant 11: “we have a lot to offer!” There were many common challenges and barriers across both groups, including lack of clarity around reimbursement and how to manage time and space issues. Private practitioners who had supervised students identified some different barriers to those who had not, including clarity of expectations from the university and managing weak students. Workload, income maintenance, and client selection, which were perceived barriers for private practitioners who had not supervised students, were not a concern for those who had; they had found ways to manage these challenges. Both groups could see benefits in having students on placement including benefits for individual clients. Importantly, those who had taken students reported benefits of increased productivity and diversity of services able to be offered to clients, and enjoyment and reward in supervising students. The results of this preliminary study need to be considered with caution given the sample size was small and the participants’ perceptions may not reflect those of other members of the profession. In addition, the interviews were not recorded and transcribed verbatim, thus limiting the authors’ capacity to complete member checks with participants on accuracy of the data. However, it is noted that the study did include all private practitioners who are currently taking students at the authors’ university, thus reducing the risk of bias within the targeted population. Furthermore, the issues the participants raised were largely consistent with those raised in similar studies examining the perceptions of physiotherapists and occupational therapists. There are some clear implications from our findings. Participants want clarity around reimbursement and professional indemnity issues when students are involved in service delivery, and also clear information about expectations from universities who send students on placements. Participants want advice on how to make student placements work effectively for them. Therefore, in the next phase of this project we will attempt to respond to comments such as “we’re going to have to take a role eventually. It’s got to be something we have to resolve but I’m just confused as to the hows” (Participant 7)

43

JCPSLP Volume 17, Number 1 2015

www.speechpathologyaustralia.org.au