Speech and language therapy students: how do those with ‘non traditional’ university entry qualifications perform?

Abstract

These results suggest that some types of assessment may be more effective at tapping the skills of students from non-traditional academic backgrounds, and that more tailored support could be provided for this group of students in tackling university written examinations throughout all years of the programme. Despite limited preparation for university-level study and mixed performance on assessment, students from non-traditional academic backgrounds can do well at university and successfully gain employment as SLTs.

A scoping review of predictors of speech-language pathology student success

“…Of these, 11 were published in 2012 or later (see Figure 2). Only four were from outside the USA, with two from Australia Lee & Schmaman, 1987), and one each from Canada (Hagler, 1981), and the UK (Smith, Mahon, & Newton, 2013). Most studies investigated a range of variables fitting to the admission criteria of the program/s, however, one investigated the present model for admission and suggested improvements (Troche & Towson, 2018).…”

“…Little is known about the predictors of Australian SLP students' performance, with only two studies being from Australia Lee & Schmaman, 1987). Additionally, only four studies investigated predictors in undergraduate prequalification degrees Hagler, 1981;Lee & Schmaman, 1987;Smith et al, 2013). Further research investigating predictors of undergraduate pre-qualification SLP student performance in these contexts is warranted.…”

“…The first outcome measure was 'success' in the program, including professional entry through either performance on the USA national SLP certification exam (PRAXIS) (Anderson, Hayes, Massey, & Brownell, 2017;Armstead, 1981;Baggs, Barnett, & McCullough, 2015;Boles, 2018;Forrest & Naremore, 1998;Garrity, Clark, & Brooks, 2008;Kjelgaard & Guarino, 2012a, 2012b; Moore, 2013;Reed, 2007;Roitsch, 2018;Ryan, Morgan, & Wacker-Mundy, 1998), or clinical competence , and employment destination, where one study found that students entering SLP programs via non-traditional pathways were more likely than their peers to be working as SLP 6 months post-graduation (Smith et al, 2013). The second outcome measure was final GPA in the program (Anderson et al, 2017;Forrest & Naremore, 1998;Garrity et al, 2008;Hagler, 1981;Halberstam & Redstone, 2005;Kjelgaard & Guarino, 2012a, 2012bMoore, 2013;Roitsch, 2018;Ryan et al, 1998;Smith et al, 2013;Troche & Towson, 2018). The third outcome measure was clinical performance during the program Crane & Cooper, 1983;Hagler, 1981;Halberstam & Redstone, 2005;Kjelgaard & Guarino, 2012a, 2012bLee & Schmaman, 1987;Reed, 2007;Richardson, Roberts, & Victor, 2020;Troche & Towson, 2018).…”

“…The academic skills clearly associated with the outcomes in SLP students were: high school results, which were associated with academic but not clinic performance (Hagler, 1981); non-traditional entry, which negatively impacted professional entry (Smith et al, 2013); undergraduate grade point average (UGPA) in SLP prerequisite subjects (Baggs et al, 2015;Boles, 2018;Halberstam & Redstone, 2005;Ryan et al, 1998); and UGPA in the last 60 semester hours (Troche & Towson, 2018). UGPA was inconsistently associated with success: six studies found associations (Baggs et al, 2015;Forrest & Naremore, 1998;Halberstam & Redstone, 2005;Kjelgaard & Guarino, 2012a, 2012bMoore, 2013) and four found none (Anderson et al, 2017;Garrity et al, 2008;Reed, 2007;Ryan et al, 1998).…”

Vocational and Mature Student Success in Higher Education Foundation Programmes

“…Similar to other studies (C. H. Smith, Mahon, & Newton, 2013), this research aims to look at the academic performance of a single year cohort of students, by comparing their entry qualifications and tariff points with their overall level average on this Foundation Year programme.…”