Clinical Teaching in Rehabilitation Sciences: Clinical Educators’ Perceptions of its Effectiveness and Pedagogical Competencies
Abstract
Introduction: Clinical teaching and its effectiveness are essential components in the training of rehabilitation professionals, as they integrate practice in real contexts with the development of professional and pedagogical competencies. Therefore, the effectiveness and teaching competencies of clinical educators are crucial to consider for the student’s comprehensive development. Objective: To analyze the effectiveness of clinical teaching based on the reported teaching skills and competencies considered relevant by clinical educators in rehabilitation sciences programs. Methods: A mixed-methods study with an explanatory sequential design was conducted. In the first phase, 45 professionals in physiotherapy, occupational therapy, and speech therapy completed the adapted Clinical Teaching Effectiveness Questionnaire. In the second phase, a subgroup was selected for semi-structured interviews in focus group format. Results: Clinical educators reported high levels of effectiveness in planning learning experiences (93.3 %), adapting to different learning styles (86.7 %), and providing constructive feedback (100 %). Weaknesses were identified in student participation in planning (42.2 % agreed with not expecting their involvement), in addressing high-performing students, and in the rigidity of institutional evaluation instruments. Qualitative findings emphasized the importance of pedagogical adaptability, emotional intelligence, and assertive communication. Conclusion: Clinical teaching is perceived as effective in its formative dimension, although strengthening the pedagogical preparation of clinical educators and granting greater autonomy in assessment processes remain necessary.
Downloads
Metrics
-
Abstract81
-
pdf (Español (España))56
-
pdf56
References
Nolla Domenjó M. Aprendizaje y prácticas clínicas. Educación Médica. 2019, 20(2), 100–4. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edumed.2018.12.019
Rojas MR, Navarro DR. Percepción de tutores clínicos pertenecientes a centros de salud familiar en Chile sobre las barreras para la docencia clínica en atención primaria. Revista Española de Educación Médica. 2025, 6(2). https://doi.org/10.6018/edumed.645591
Negesso A, Rikitu G, Sime G, Gebregzabher E, Tekele S, Misganaw A. Preceptors training need assessment for medical laboratory professional clinical education programs in Ethiopia. PLoS One. 2022, 17(10), e0275533. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0275533
Srinivasan M, Li S, Meyers F, Pratt D, Collins J, Braddock C. “Teaching as a Competency”: Competencies for Medical Educators. Academic Medicine. 2011, 86(10), 1211–20. https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0b013e31822c5b9a
Phillips H, Jator E, Latchem S, Catalano T. Clinical Educators’ Teaching Approaches and Attributes in Laboratory Medicine. Lab Med. 2023, 54(5), e134–40. https://doi.org/10.1093/labmed/lmad001
Manthey M. Foundations of Interprofessional Communication and Collaboration. Creat Nurs. 2012, 18(2), 64–7. https://doi.org/10.1891/1078-4535.18.2.64
Rogers J, Lautar C, Dunn L. Allied Health Students’ Perceptions of Effective Clinical Instruction. Health Care Manag (Frederick). 2010, 29(1), 63–7. https://doi.org/10.1097/HCM.0b013e3181cca311
Zhang H, Yoong S, Dong Y, Goh S, Lim S, Chan Y. Using a 3-Phase Peer Feedback to Enhance Nursing Students’ Reflective Abilities, Clinical Competencies, Feedback Practices, and Sense of Empowerment. Nurse Educ. 2023, 48(1), E11–6. https://doi.org/10.1097/NNE.0000000000001294
Cauraugh J, Martin M, Komer M. Modeling surgical expertise for motor skill acquisition. The American Journal of Surgery. 1999, 177(4), 331–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0002-9610(99)00057-4
Nordquist J, Chan M, Maniate J, Cook D, Kelly C, McDougall A. Examining the clinical learning environment through the architectural avenue. Med Teach. 2019, 41(4), 403–7. https://doi.org/10.1080/0142159X.2019.1566603
Tang Z, Shikama Y, Otani K. Comparison of student self-assessment and teacher assessment of medical interview performance during bedside learning. Fukushima J Med Sci. 2023, 69(1). https://doi.org/10.5387/fms.2023-03
Stalmeijer R, Dolmans D, Wolfhagen I, Peters W, Van Coppenolle L, Scherpbier A. Combined student ratings and self-assessment provide useful feedback for clinical teachers. Advances in Health Sciences Education. 2010, 15(3), 315–28. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10459-009-9199-6
Hernández M, Albarrán-Pérez D. Docencia clínica en APS: una vocación que exige más que buena voluntad. Revista Española de Educación Médica. 2025, 6(2). https://doi.org/10.6018/edumed.656871
Ingwersen K, Lyons N, Hitch D. Perceptions of fieldwork in occupational therapy. Clin Teach. 2017, 14(1), 55–9. https://doi.org/10.1111/tct.12518
Reilly B. Inconvenient truths about effective clinical teaching. The Lancet. 2007, 370(9588), 705–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(07)61347-6
Gibson S, Palermo C. Optimizing the Role of Clinical Educators in Health Professional Education. In: Clinical Education for the Health Professions. Springer Nature Singapore; 2023, 985–98. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-3344-0_125
Creswell J, Creswell D. Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches. 5th ed. Vol. 1. SAGE Publications; 2018.
Wormley M, Romney W, Greer A. Development of the Clinical Teaching Effectiveness Questionnaire in the United States. J Educ Eval Health Prof. 2017, 14(14). https://doi.org/10.3352/jeehp.2017.14.14
Moustakas CE. Phenomenological research methods. Phenomenological research methods. Thousand Oaks, CA, US: Sage Publications, Inc; 1994. 192, xiv, 192–xiv p.
Murphy S. Remember how it feels to be a student? Clin Teach. 2014, 11(5), 336–9. https://doi.org/10.1111/tct.12163
Costello M, Cantillon P, Geoghegan R, Byrne D, Lowery A, Walsh S. Experience‐based learning: how a crisis solution informed fundamental change in a clinical education curriculum. Clin Teach. 2022, 19(1), 42–7. https://doi.org/10.1111/tct.13441
Stupans I, Owen S. Clinical Educators in the Learning and Teaching Space—a model for their Work Based Learning. Int J Health Promot Educ. 2010, 48(1), 28–32. https://doi.org/10.1080/14635240.2010.10708177
Sanders R, Thorne J. A day in the life of a maternity unit: immersive simulation for final year midwifery students. Br J Midwifery. 2024, 32(10), 570–3. https://doi.org/10.12968/bjom.2024.0067
Anderson M, Campbell SH, Nye C, Diaz D, Boyd T. Simulation in Advanced Practice Education: Let’s Dialogue!!. Clin Simul Nurs. 2019, 26, 81–5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecns.2018.10.011
Talwalkar JS, Cyrus KD, Fortin AH. Twelve tips for running an effective session with standardized patients. Med Teach. 2020, 42(6), 622–7. https://doi.org/10.1080/0142159X.2019.1607969
Polyzois I, McLouglin J, Kelly A, Claffey N. Clinical teaching in restorative dentistry and the variation between students’ and supervisors’ perceptions of its effectiveness. European Journal of Dental Education. 2010, 14(2), 92–8. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0579.2009.00597.x
Murphy M, Seneviratne R, Mcaleer S, Remers O, Davis M. Student selected components: do students learn what teachers think they teach?. Med Teach. 2008, 3(10), 175–9. https://doi.org/10.1080/01421590802337138
Sellberg M, Halvarsson A, Nygren-Bonnier M, Palmgren PJ, Möller R. Relationships matter: a qualitative study of physiotherapy students’ experiences of their first clinical placement. Physical Therapy Reviews. 2022, 27(6), 477–85. https://doi.org/10.1080/10833196.2022.2106671
Bernal J, Cresalia N, Fuller J, Gin B, Laves E, Lupton K, et al. Comprehensive Assessment of Clinical Learning Environments to Drive Improvement: Lessons Learned from a Pilot Program. Teach Learn Med. 2023, 35(5), 565–76. https://doi.org/10.1080/10401334.2022.2110497
Edwards E, Phillips A, McEvoy M, Johnston K. Characteristics and outcomes of communities of practice in allied health educators: rapid review. J Interprof Care. 2025, 39(3), 510–8. https://doi.org/10.1080/13561820.2025.2452957
Lekalakala-Mokgele E, Caka E. Facilitative and obstructive factors in the clinical learning environment: Experiences of pupil enrolled nurses. Curationis. 2015, 38(1). https://doi.org/10.4102/curationis.v38i1.1263
Gupta PB, McRae AE, Franke JL, Saba JA, Soroosh GP, Solomon BS, et al. The Distinguished Teaching Society at the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine: A Student-Led Initiative to Recognize Clinical Educators. Academic Medicine. 2021, 96(8), 1160–3. https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0000000000003873
Smith J, Lane I. Making the most of five minutes: The clinical teaching moment. J Vet Med Educ. 2015, 42(3), 271-80. https://doi.org/10.3138/jvme.0115-004R
Myers K, Bilyeu C, Covington K, Sharp A. Clinical Teaching Competencies in Physical Therapist Education: A Modified Delphi Study. Phys Ther. 2022, 102(7). https://doi.org/10.1093/ptj/pzac063
Tavares W, Eppich W, Cheng A, Miller S, Teunissen PW, Watling CJ, et al. Learning Conversations: An Analysis of the Theoretical Roots and Their Manifestations of Feedback and Debriefing in Medical Education. Academic Medicine. 2020, 95(7), 1020–5. https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0000000000002932
Epstein RM. How Students Learn From Community-Based Preceptors. Arch Fam Med. 1998, 7(2), 149–54. https://doi.org/10.1001/archfami.7.2.149
Jenq CC, Ou LS, Tseng HM, Chao YP, Lin JR, Monrouxe L V. Evaluating Clinical Educators’ Competence in an East Asian Context: Who Values What?. Front Med (Lausanne). 2022, 9. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmed.2022.896822
Becker M, Shields RK, Sass KJ. Psychometric Analysis of an Integrated Clinical Education Tool for Physical Therapists. Journal of Physical Therapy Education. 2024, 38(4), 277–84. https://doi.org/10.1097/JTE.0000000000000341
Atrash H, Katz-Leurer M, Shahar G. The effect of self-assessment on student competence in physiotherapy clinical training: a randomized controlled trial. BMC Med Educ. 2023, 23(1), 780. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-023-04737-9
Yoho R, Vardaxis V, Millonig K. Relationship Between Academic Performance and Student Self-Assessment of Clinical Performance in the College of Podiatric Medicine and Surgery. J Am Podiatr Med Assoc. 2016, 106(3),214–7. https://doi.org/10.7547/14-166
Bockrath R, Rodriguez G, O’Brien CL, Dolan BM. Students as Teachers: Development and Implementation of a Workplace-Based Assessment. Med Sci Educ. 2024, 34(3), 537–41. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40670-024-02022-y
Casa-Levine C, Nappo-Dattoma L. Effects of Self-Assessment on Clinical Competence in Dental Hygiene Education. J Dent Hyg. 2022, 96(2), 43–9. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-025-07453-8
Chimea T La, Kanji Z, Schmitz S. Assessment of clinical competence in competency-based education. Can J Dent Hyg. 2020, 54(2), 83–91. Aviable: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7668267/
Armson H, Perrier L, Roder S, Shommu N, Wakefield J, Shaw E. Assessing Unperceived Learning Needs in Continuing Medical Education for Primary Care Physicians: A Scoping Review. Journal of Continuing Education in the Health Professions. 2020, 40(4), 257–67. https://doi.org/10.1097/CEH.0000000000000300
Galport N, Azzam T. Evaluator Training Needs and Competencies. American Journal of Evaluation. 2017, 38(1),80–100. https://doi.org/10.1177/1098214016643183
Boerboom TBB, Jaarsma D, Dolmans DHJM, Scherpbier AJJA, Mastenbroek NJJM, Van Beukelen P. Peer group reflection helps clinical teachers to critically reflect on their teaching. Med Teach. 2011, 33(11), e615–23. https://doi.org/10.3109/0142159X.2011.610840
Joyce J, Cantillon P, Geoghegan R. Peer feedback in graduate training: A phenomenological investigation of possibilities. Med Teach. 2022, 44(12), 1362–7. https://doi.org/10.1080/0142159X.2022.2094229
Copyright (c) 2025 Servicio de Publicaciones de la Universidad de Murcia

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
The works published in this magazine are subject to the following terms:
1. The Publications Service of the University of Murcia (the publisher) preserves the economic rights (copyright) of the published works and favors and allows them to be reused under the use license indicated in point 2.
2. The works are published under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivative 4.0 license.
3. Self-archiving conditions. Authors are allowed and encouraged to disseminate electronically the pre-print versions (version before being evaluated and sent to the journal) and / or post-print (version evaluated and accepted for publication) of their works before publication , since it favors its circulation and earlier diffusion and with it a possible increase in its citation and reach among the academic community.












