Why shouldn’t we do that on placement if we’re doing it in the real world? Differences between undergraduate and graduate identities in speech and language therapy

Healthcare graduates are often characterised as ill-prepared for workplace entry. Historically, research on health professional’s work preparedness has focused on the quality of graduates’ clinical knowledge, skills and problem-solving. This ignores the role of professional identity formation in determining readiness for clinical practice. Yet, professional identity defines graduate self-perception, how others perceive them and informs clinical behaviour. The scholarship of identity formation at the transition from undergraduate to graduate is characterised by individual (cognitive) rather than relational (sociocultural) perspectives. Yet there is growing recognition that identity formation is not just individually mediated, but is also constructed between individuals and social context. The aim of this study was to explore professional identity formation among undergraduates and graduates from one healthcare profession (speech and language therapy-SLT) using a sociocultural theoretical standpoint. A qualitative descriptive methodology was used. Final (4th) year SLT undergraduate students and graduate SLTs with less than 2 years’ clinical experience participated in individual semi-structured interviews. Thematic analysis was used to describe patterns in the data, which were subsequently subjected to interpretation informed by the constructs of Figured Worlds. Data analysis revealed that undergraduate professional identity was characterised by dependency, self-centredness (as opposed to patient-centredness), and a naïve role concept. Graduate identity on the other hand included expectations of self-sufficiency, patient-centredness and a more nuanced perception of the professional role. Undergraduates have naïve, prototypical understandings of what it is to be a graduate practitioner. The nature of undergraduate clinical placement hinders meaningful identity development. This suggests that curriculums should facilitate undergraduates to act with meaningful autonomy and to be positioned in more patient-centred roles, e.g. involvement in the decision-making process for patients. Graduates may then feel more authentic as autonomous professionals in their early graduate posts. This leads to better graduate, patient and service outcomes.