Development of an Assessment Tool for Clinical Skills in Speech-Language Pathology Students
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.61989/qk9m4j97Keywords:
clinical education, static criterion-referenced assessment, skills-based approach, Speech and Language Pathology/Therapy, learning tool, teachingAbstract
Context. In France, the Certificat de Compétences Cliniques (Clinical Competency Certificate) marks the completion of speech and language therapy training. To obtain this certificate, students must demonstrate the acquisition of knowledge, skills, and professional attitudes consistent with the level of autonomy required for clinical practice. However, assessment procedures vary considerably across university training centers. Current practices often lack explicit criteria, temporal indicators, and structured feedback mechanisms to support clinical reasoning and learner autonomy. Criterion-referenced formative assessment, grounded in authentic learning situations, provides a coherent framework to clarify expectations, monitor progress, and guide pedagogical adjustments.
Objective. To design a criterion-referenced, longitudinal, and equitable assessment tool to monitor the development of clinical competencies during the second cycle of speech and language therapy education, and to support the attainment of the Clinical Competency Certificate.
Method. The DÉveloppement CLInique Certificatif (DÉCLIC) tool was developed following the principles of criterion-referenced assessment and existing educational frameworks, aligned with the national competency reference framework. The development process comprised three stages: (1) the selection and hierarchical organization of core clinical competencies and their sub-competencies; (2) the design of a longitudinal grid (from semester 7 to semester 10) specifying expected levels of autonomy for each competency, with a visual cue system to identify students requiring additional support; and (3) the integration of this grid into a structured continuous assessment process organized around six evaluation points and five formative learning activities.
Results. Eight core clinical competencies from the national framework were selected, and 24 sub-competencies were operationalized into measurable acquisition criteria with defined developmental trajectories. The hetero-assessment grid enables the documentation, at each of the six evaluation points of the level achieved for each sub-competency and the identification of gaps relative to expectations. The self-assessment grid, entitled J’ME DÉCLIC, reformulates items in the first person and provides structured guidance for self-evaluation and pedagogical adjustment.
Conclusion. The DÉCLIC tool makes learning acquisition benchmarks explicit, supports targeted feedback, and enhances students’ reflexivity. It also facilitates the early identification of students who are struggling or who demonstrate high potential, thereby informing realistic pedagogical interventions.
References
Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives. In P. W. Airasian, K. A. Cruikshank, R. E. Mayer, P. R. Pintrich, J. Raths, & M. C. Wittrock (dir.), A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives. Longman.
Andreassen, P., & Malling, B. (2019). How are formative assessment methods used in the clinical setting? A qualitative study. International Journal of Medical Education, 10, 208–215. https://doi.org/10.5116/ijme.5db3.62e3
Ariza, M., Lajzerowicz, C., Onaisi, R., Hofferer, A., Macabrey, J., & Rabiaza, A. (2022). Élaboration d’un outil d’évaluation des compétences en fin de troisième cycle de médecine générale. Exercer, 33(185), 327-331. https://doi.org/10.56746/exercer.2022.185.327
Bates, R. (2004). A critical analysis of evaluation practice: the Kirkpatrick model and the principle of beneficence. Evaluation and Program Planning, 27(3), 341–347. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2004.04.011
Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 5(1), 7–74. https://doi.org/10.1080/0969595980050102
Bloom, B. S., Engelhart, M. D., Furst, E. J. Hill, W. H., & Krathwohl, D. R. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: the classification of educational goals. Handbook I: Cognitive domain. David McKay. Bloom et al -Taxonomy of Educational Objectives.pdf
Brookhart, S. M. (2017). How to give effective feedback to your students (2de éd.). ASCD.
Carraccio, C., Wolfsthal, S. D., Englander, R., Ferentz, K., & Martin, C. (2002). Shifting paradigms: From Flexner to competencies. Academic Medicine, 77(5), 361–367. https://doi.org/10.1097/00001888-200205000-00003
Catteau, O., Beyne Rauzy, O., Mayère, A., & Savy, N. (2019). Dispositif d’évaluation pour un certificat d’aptitudes cliniques : quelles mesures pour quelles compétences ? 9e conférence Environnements Informatiques pour l’Apprentissage Humain (EIAH 2019), 157–168. https://hal.science/hal-02435357v1
Cohen, J. (1960). A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 20(1), 37–46. https://doi.org/10.1177/001316446002000104
Curran, G. M., Bauer, M., Mittman, B., Pyne, J. M., & Stetler, C. (2012). Effectiveness-implementation hybrid designs: combining elements of clinical effectiveness and implementation research to enhance public health impact. Medical Care, 50(3), 217–226. https://doi.org/10.1097/MLR.0b013e3182408812
Décret n° 2013-798 du 30 août 2013 relatif au régime des études en vue du certificat de capacité d'orthophoniste. NOR : ESRS1317552D. JORF n°0203 du 1 septembre 2013.https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/loda/id/JORFTEXT000027915618
Décret n° 2020-579 du 14 mai 2020 modifiant la section 1 du chapitre VI, du titre III du livre VI du code de l'éducation relative aux études d'audioprothèse et la section 2 du chapitre VI, du titre III du livre VI du code de l'éducation relative aux études d'orthophonie. NOR : ESRS2001475D. JORF n°0121 du 17 mai 2020. https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/loda/id/JORFTEXT000041885587
Durieux, N., Pasleau, F., Piazza, A., Donneau, A.-F., Vandenput, S., & Maillart, C. (2016). Information behaviour of French-speaking speech-language therapists in Belgium: Results of a questionnaire survey. Health Information & Libraries Journal, 33(1), 61–76. https://doi.org/10.1111/hir.12118
European Speech and Language therapy (ESLA, 2023). Speech and language therapists' roles in critical care and emercency medicine [webinaire]. European speech-language therapy day. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XcXVL6fazw4
Elwood, J. (2006). Formative assessment: Possibilities, boundaries and limitations. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 13(2), 215–232. https://doi.org/10.1080/09695940600708653
Gulikers, J. T. M., Bastiaens, T. J., & Kirschner, P. A. (2004). A five-dimensional framework for authentic assessment. Educational Technology Research and Development, 52(3), 67-86. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02504676
Hattie, J. A. C., & Donoghue, G. M. (2016). Learning strategies: A synthesis and conceptual model. npj Science of Learning, 1, 16013. https://doi.org/10.1038/npjscilearn.2016.13
Hesketh, E. A., Bagnall, G., Buckley, E. G., Friedman, M., Goodall, E., Harden, R. M., Laidlaw, J. M., Leighton-Beck, L., McKinlay, P., Newton, R., & Oughton, R. (2001). A framework for developing excellence as a clinical educator. Medical Education, 35(6), 555–564. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2923.2001.00920.x
Hsu, C. & Sandford, B. A., (2007) The Delphi technique: Making sense of consensus. Practical Assessment, Research, and Evaluation, 12(1), 10. https://doi.org/10.7275/pdz9-th90
Jug, R., Jiang, X. S., & Bean, S. M. (2019). Giving and receiving effective feedback: A review article and how-to guide. Archives of Pathology & Laboratory Medicine, 143(2), 244–250. https://doi.org/10.5858/arpa.2018-0058-RA
Kassam, A., de Vries, I., Zabar, S., Durning, S. J., Holmboe, E., Hodges, B., Boscardin, C., & Kalet, A. (2024). The next era of assessment within medical education: Exploring intersections of context and implementation. Perspectives on Medical Education, 13(1), 496-506. https://doi.org/10.5334/pme.1128
Kendall, M. G. (1938). A new measure of rank correlation. Biometrika, 30(1–2), 81–93. https://doi.org/10.1093/biomet/30.1-2.81
Krumm, A. E., Lai, H., Marcotte, K., Ark, T. K., Yaneva, V., Chahine, S. (2024). Proximity to practice: The role of technology in the next era of assessment. Perspectives on Medical Education, 13(1), 646-653. https://doi.org/10.5334/pme.1272
Lacasse, M., Audétat, M.-C., Boileau, É., Caire Fon, N., Dufour, M.-H., Laferrière, M.-C., Lafleur, A., La Rue, È., Lee, S., Nendaz, M., Paquette Raynard, E., Simard, C., Steinert, Y., & Théorêt, J. (2019). Interventions for undergraduate and postgraduate medical learners with academic difficulties: A BEME systematic review: BEME Guide No. 56. Medical Teacher, 41(9), 981–1001. https://doi.org/10.1080/0142159X.2019.1596239
Lacasse, M., Rheault, C., Tremblay, I., Renaud, J.-S., Coché, F., St-Pierre, A., Théorêt, J., Tessier, S., Arsenault, L., Simard, M.-L., Simard, C., Savard, I., Castel, J., & Côté, L. (2017). Développement, validation et implantation d’un outil novateur critérié d’évaluation de la progression des compétences des résidents en médecine familiale. Pédagogie Médicale, 18(2), 83–100. https://doi.org/10.1051/pmed/2018007
Lacasse, M., Théorêt, J., Tessier, S., & Arsenault, L. (2014). Expectations of clinical teachers and faculty regarding development of the CanMEDS-family medicine competencies: Laval developmental benchmarks scale for family medicine residency training. Teaching and Learning in Medicine, 26(3), 244–251. https://doi.org/10.1080/10401334.2014.914943
Laveault, D., & Grégoire, J. (2023). Introduction aux théories des tests en psychologie et en sciences de l’éducation (4e éd.). De Boeck Supérieur.
Nagai, N., Birch, G. C., Bower, J. V., & Schmidt, M. G. (2020). CEFR-informed learning, teaching and assessment: A practical guide. Springer Nature Singapore.
Nicol, D. J., & Macfarlane-Dick, D. (2006). Formative assessment and self-regulated learning: A model and seven principles of good feedback practice. Studies in Higher Education, 31(2), 199–218. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075070600572090
Ramani, S., & Leinster, S. (2008). AMEE Guide no. 34: Teaching in the clinical environment. Medical Teacher, 30(4), 347–364. https://doi.org/10.1080/01421590802061613
Ripp, J. A., Privitera, M. R., West, C. P., Leiter, R., Logio, L., Shapiro, J., & Bazari, H. (2017). Well-being in graduate medical education: A call for action. Academic Medicine, 92(7), 914–917. https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0000000000001735
Roegiers, X. (2019). Le recours aux compétences dans le Supérieur : mettre l’efficacité au service du sens. Revista Iberoamericana de Evaluación Educativa, 12(2), 11-28. https://doi.org/10.15366/riee2019.12.2.001
Sadler, D. R. (2005). Interpretations of criteria-based assessment and grading in higher education. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 30(2), 175–194. https://doi.org/10.1080/0260293042000264262
Scallon, G. (2004). L’évaluation des apprentissages dans une approche par compétences. De Boeck.
Tardif, J. (2006). L’évaluation des compétences : documenter le développement du savoir-agir professionnel. Chenelière Éducation.
Van Someren, M., Barnard, Y., & Sandberg, J. (1994). The Think Aloud method - A practical guide to modelling cognitive processes. Academic Press.
Williams, A. (2024). Delivering effective student feedback in higher education: An evaluation of the challenges and best practice. International Journal of Research in Education and Science, 10(2), 473-501. https://doi.org/10.46328/ijres.3404
Yepes-Rios, M., Dudek, N., Duboyce, R., Curtis, J., Allard, R. J., & Varpio, L. (2016). The failure to fail underperforming trainees in health professions education: A BEME systematic review: BEME Guide No. 42. Medical Teacher, 38(11), 1092–1099. https://doi.org/10.1080/0142159X.2016.1215414
Downloads
Additional Files
Published
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Guillaume Duboisdindien, Muriel Bot-Morvan

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

