Fieldwork Performance Evaluation Scores- Determining Competency as a Generalist Upon GraduationJohanna Bardo, OTS, Tamara Brown, OTS, Christina Khal, OTS, Amy Roder, OTS

Mary Barnes, OTR/L & Michael Roberts, MS, OTR/LTufts University – Boston School of Occupational Therapy

Fieldwork Performance Evaluation Scores- Determining Competency as a Generalist Upon GraduationJohanna Bardo, OTS, Tamara Brown, OTS, Christina Khal, OTS, Amy Roder, OTS

Mary Barnes, OTR/L & Michael Roberts, MS, OTR/LTufts University – Boston School of Occupational Therapy

Statistical analysis of variance (ANOVA) of the mean scores of each FWPE sub-category in relation to category, setting, and population of fieldwork placement •4 (setting) x 7 (subscale) ANOVA, not significant for first or scond placement, p> .05•6 (category) x 7 (subscale) ANOVA, not significant for first or second placement, p> .05•2 (population) x 7 (subscale) ANOVA, not significant for first placement, p> .05•2 (population) X 7(subscale) ANOVA, significant for second placement, F(1, 95)=4.27, p=.04

\•First fieldwork placement data: 81 adult sites and only 16 pediatric sites•Second fieldwork placement data: 49 adult sites and 48 pediatric sites•Greater number of adult sites in first placement may explain why students scored significantly higher in adult sites in second placement (more experience)

•Based on similarity of FWPE scores across settings, categories, and populations, Tufts’ curriculum appears to be graduating generalist OTs upon completion of the entry-level Master’s program

•FWPE could be used at other universities to inform curriculum by assessing potential areas of weakness in Level II fieldwork scores.

•Sample size drawn only from Tufts students

•Analysis focused on seven subscales rather than looking at each of the 42 questions of the FWPE

•Unequal sample sizes across the different settings, populations, and categories (i.e only one score across all data set for Research)

•Explore whether these results hold true across a variety of entry-level Master’s programs

•Consider differences in student and supervisor background (i.e. experience, age, etc.) and the potential implications on FWPE scores

•Explore the validity of the FWPE in evaluating student level II fieldwork performance

Atler, K. (2003). The complete guide : Using the fieldworkperformance  evaluation  forms. State College,PA:AOTAPress.

American Occupational Therapy Association. (1998). Standardsof practice for occupational therapy. American Journal of

Occupational Therapy, 52, 866-896.American Occupational Therapy Association. (2002).

Occupational therapy practice framework: domain andprocess. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 56,606-639.

Dillion, M.B., Dillion, T.H., King, R.M, Chamberlin, J.L. (2007).Interfacing with community mental health services:opportunities for occupational therapy and level IIfieldwork education. Occupational Therapy in HealthCare, 21, 91-104.

Kirchner, G. L., Stone, R. G., & Holm, M. B. (2002). Validation ofthe fieldwork evaluation for the occupational therapist.

Occupational Therapy in Health Care, 14(1), 39-46.Sooy Griswold, L., Seybold Strassler, B. (1995). Fieldwork in

schools: A model for alternative settings. AmericanJournal of Occupational Therapy, 49, 127-132.

 

•FWPE developed in accordance with Occupational Therapy Practice Framework: Domain and Process (AOTA, 2002) with focus on: evaluation, intervention plan, and targeting outcomes•FWPE based on AOTA’s 8 standards of practice•Because there is limited research specifically on the FWPE, its reliability and validity are considered when attempting accurate measures of student competency in all settings

•Understand how to use the FWPE to inform curriculum review for an entry-level master’s program.•Understand how to utilize FWPE scores to verify that an entry-level masters program is graduating generalists. •Understand trends in student performance on Level II fieldwork placements across setting, population, and category.

Using the Fieldwork Performance Evaluation form (FWPE), we will be able to determine entry-level proficiency upon completion of Level II fieldwork placements independent of setting, population, or category of the given fieldwork placement.

•97 de-identified Tufts graduate students from Fall of 2008 to Summer of 2011 who completed their required entry-level Master’s coursework •Scores for each FWPE sub-section were reported by supervisors at the mid-term and final of each Level II placement

Introduction

Methods

Limitations

Future Research

References

Purpose

Results ConclusionHypothesis