Table 2.

Included Scoping Review Papers | Details of Participants, Data Collection, Aim and Findings

Author (Year)	Participants	Data Collection Method/s	Aim	Results | As related to the student experience of failing professional practice
STUDENT PARTICIPANTS ONLY
Gutman et al., 1998	Student academic records	Review of academic records	To identify the reasons that students failed a fieldwork experience and to evaluate the effectiveness of an intervention program for students identified to be ‘at risk’ for failing their next fieldwork experience.	The reasons for failure were categorised as being communicative or behavioural with eight sub-themes identified. An intervention program was found effective at decreasing future fieldwork failure rates.
Koenig 2003	Student academic records	Quantitative data obtained from existing student records held by the university	To identify any cognitive or non-cognitive factors that may predict fieldwork outcomes.	Students with a lower GPA were statistically significantly more likely to fail fieldwork I. Students with a lower fieldwork I score were more likely to need intervention and support to pass their fieldwork II. Students were more likely to fail fieldwork II if they had either a lower fieldwork I score, a lower GPA or English as a second language. Students with English as second language received the highest rate of intervention and support. Student’s age, gender or ethnicity was not statistically significant for predicting pass/fail or needing placement intervention and support.
McGregor 2007	Student (single case design)	Individual interview Field notes	To understand one student’s experience with failing clinical placement.	The student perceived there was a risk of being “different” and “not fitting in”. The student felt pressured to conform to the teacher’s way and to “keep quiet”. The student’s fear of further errors compromised their ability to perform competently. Student reported their relationship with their clinical educator was disconnected. The student became frustrated and resentful towards their clinical educator, felt powerless and ultimately gave up.
Parker 2010	Students	Individual Interviews	To examine student perspectives of placement breakdown and their experiences of the process.	Students felt the educator and the university have the power. Students felt powerless, lacking control and were fearful of reprisal. Students considered the process was unfair, biased against the student and impenetrable. Students desired to be involved in every step of the placement, to have access to formal and informal supports, and to be able to access impartial representation.
Poletti & Anka 2013	Students	Individual Interviews	To explore the reasons for placement failure from the student’s perspective.	Reasons for placement failure included the high expectations from educators, an unsuitable or unsupportive working environment, lack of support from the educator and/or university, and a lack of clarity regarding the assessment criteria. Students expressed a strong emotional response to failing. Students recommend having clearer assessment criteria, more information relating to what the consequences of failure would be and what supports are available if they were failing.
Johnston et al., 2018	Student academic records	Review of academic records	To identify factors that influence a student’s placement performance.	Students with a pre-entry non-health discipline, a lower GPA or were an international student were more likely to perform below standard on placement.
Roulston et al., 2022	Students	Individual Interviews	To understand the reasons for and the experiences of student’s who failed placement.	Students reported the following factors had a negative impacted on their placement experience: having a poor, strained, or unsupportive relationship with their educator, when the educator used or misused their position of power, and when the assessment and decision-making processes and outcomes were unclear and inconsistent. Students also reported their personal circumstances, health or disability impacted their performance on placement.
STUDENTS PARTICIPANTS AND/OR UNIVERSITY STAFF AND/OR EDUCATORS (Multiple Participant Groups)
Burgess, Campbell, et al., 1998	Students University staff Educators	Individual Interviews	To analyse the perception, the experiences, and the implications of failing placement for students, university staff and educators. To identify the reasons why placements were unsuccessful or uncompleted.	NOTE: This paper reports on initial and interim results only. Full research data is reported in Burgess, Phillips, et al. (1998). The failing experience had an emotional, psychological, and financial impact for the student. Students felt powerless, not listened to, and unable to represent themselves in the decision-making process. Reasons for unsuccessful or incomplete placements included the student’s personal circumstances, a ‘personality clash’ between the student and educator, inadequate learning opportunities or support provided by the placement, the educator’s lack of experience, the student’s academic or writing ability, and the placement location requiring the student to travel a great distance.
Burgess, Phillips, et al., 1998	Students University staff Educators	Individual Interviews	To analyse the perception, the experiences, and the implications of failing placement for students, university staff and educators. To identify the reasons why placements were unsuccessful or uncompleted.	Students describe feeling powerless, excluded, misunderstood, not listened to, and were unaware of the formal processes and options available to them. Reasons for unsuccessful or incomplete placements included the student’s personal circumstances, a poor student-educator relationship, unsuitable placement allocation, and inadequate learning opportunities or support provided by the placement.
Dove & Skinner 2010	Student academic records University staff	Review of records from practice assessment panel Individual interviews (with university staff)	To identify the reasons for placement failure.	Reasons for failure were due to a complex mix of interrelated factors, including the student’s health and personal circumstances, the student’s immaturity or lack of professionalism, a lack of availability and support from the educator, and a poor student-supervisor relationship.
Higgins 2017	Students University staff Educators	Individual interviews Focus Groups	To determine if students are failing placement due to the expectations of stakeholders of students on placement.	Organisational and professional expectations of each participant group can be contradictory and inconsistent which impacted the student’s ability to meet expectations for placement.
McGovern 2021	Student academic records	Review of placement documentation and evaluations	To investigate the role, actions, and experiences of key stakeholders when a student fails placement.	Failing can be a traumatic and emotional experience for everyone involved - the student, the educator, and the university staff. Findings revealed that the student’s health and disability can impact performance, any performance concerns need to be explored and addressed in a timely manner and feedback needs to be clear and consistent. Found that university staff should provide mentorship and support for students and that students can pass subsequent placements.
UNIVERSITY STAFF AND/OR EDUCATOR PARTICIPANTS – EXCLUDING STUDENTS
Brandon & Davies 1979	University staff	Individual Interviews Review of reports and attendance at examination board	To explore the experiences of educators and university staff when determining pass/fail for students who are at risk of failing.	Eight unique categories were identified as to why students failed representing communication, professionalism, knowledge, and interactions with clients and colleagues. The assessment was considered complex due to the student’s resources, skills and circumstances that may impact the student’s performance. They recommend clearer assessment processes and performance expectations.
Drake & Irurita 1997	Educators	Individual Interviews	To explore the educator’s experience of working with problem students.	According to educators, problem students were often characterized by those who demonstrated poor communication skills, unprofessional behaviours, unsafe practices, had difficulties with integrating knowledge and problem-solving, lacked motivation or engagement, or denied there were any performance problems, or had personal circumstanced impacting their ability to perform on placement. Educators acknowledged the supervisory relationship is intense and time limited. The educators expressed uncertainty or lack of clarity regarding their supervisory role and the process of working with problem students. Educators are challenged by wanting to be aware of a student’s past performance issues whilst trying to avoid any potential bias or breach of confidentiality.
James & Musselman 2006	Educators	Questionnaire Individual interviews	To identify commonalities in failing placement relating to student characteristics, the supervisory structure, and how it was addressed.	Some common student characteristics reported in relation to failing placement include inadequate academic preparation, poor clinical skills, safety concerns, judgement errors, poor clinical reasoning, difficulty responding to feedback, difficulty grasping the big picture, and poor organizational skills. Supervisors provided both written and verbal feedback, were present to provide guidance and assistance and most commonly the student had more than one supervisor involved in their placement and evaluation. Students were informed first of their performance issues, with the university program typically being informed the following week. Most times the university became involved with the student and educator but not always.
Attrill et al., 2012	University staff	Survey	To identify the performance levels and perceptions of placement performance for international Speech and Language Pathology students.	Domestic students experienced statistically significant lower rates of placement failure than international students. Undergraduate domestic students were significantly less likely to require additional placement support. Undergraduate domestic students required significantly fewer supplementary (extended or repeated) placements. Students from a non-English speaking background or non-western cultural background may experience greater difficulties on placement. International students were more likely to be rated as having difficulties in communication, as well as in the professional, group, and community education competencies on the COMPASS student evaluation tool.
Larocque & Luhanga 2013	University staff Educators	Individual Interviews Focus group	To explore the issue of ‘failure to fail’ in a nursing program.	Failing has consequences for all stakeholders i.e. the student, the agency and the university. Failing a student is a difficult process and students and educators require academic and emotional supports.
Schaub & Dalrymple 2013	Educators	Individual Interviews	To research educator’s experiences and views of students who are challenging or failing on placement.	Students demonstrated several challenges, such as poor communication skills, inadequate engagement with the team and service users, limited insight, and insufficient capacity for reflection. Additionally, they were unable to demonstrate their professional identity and values, specific to the discipline.
Foote 2015	University staff Educators	Focus groups	To identify common learning issues experienced by students who are having difficulties on placement.	Difficulties during placement arose due to various reasons, such as the student’s health or disability, inability to transition into a professional role, and an ineffective use of supervision. Suggested strategies to address these issues included improving the student-placement match, increasing disclosure of factors relating to a student’s health and well-being and improving student preparations for entering a professional context for placement.
Nicola-Richmond et al., 2017	University staff Educators	Individual Interviews Survey	To explore participant’s perspectives of the contributing factors for students failing placement.	Failing a student is a difficult and time-consuming experience for the educator. Reasons for students failing placement included poor communication and reflection skills, nondisclosure of health issues and an inability to accept feedback. Findings highlighted the importance of having a strong student-educator relationship with clear and regular communication, supervision, and feedback. Recommend that issues should be identified and addressed as early as possible, that disclosure of considerations relating to the student’s health and well-being is desirable and additional support is needed for students with English as their second language.
Davenport et al., 2018	n/a	Critical narrative review	To review the research regarding failing and struggling health professional students undertaking clinical placements with a focus on Speech and Language Pathology students.	Most research found in this review represented medicine and nursing with only a few publications representing allied health. The voice of the struggling student was largely absent in the literature. Research in this area focused on aspects such as the identification of at-risk students, support and remediation strategies, the humanistic nature of learning, the concept of failure to fail or the impact of policy and processes. Further research is needed that combine both the predictive or risk factors along with remediation strategies and not just exploring these factors independently.
So et al., 2019	Educators	Individual Interviews	To explore the experiences of educator’s and their decision-making process relating to supervising students who are performing below expectations on placement.	The educator would appreciate disclosure about a student’s performance or other learning considerations before the placement commenced. Early and honest communication about performance concerns is of value. A student would fail if there were repeated incidents, not due to a single incident or event. The student’s ability to respond to and implement feedback had the greatest impact on the educator’s assessment and recommendations. Educators wished university had followed up and advised them of the assessment outcome / final decision.
Hughes et al., 2021	University staff Educators	Individual Interviews Survey	To explore and further understand the enablers and barriers for educators when determining a pass or fail outcome for students on placement.	Enablers for educators to fail a student include having access to their own (educator) supports, being in an organisation that supports failing a student and the program is flexible and able to provide the student with alternative or additional learning opportunities. Educators are less likely to fail a student if the educator tends to rate a student’s performance higher than is deserved or they may give the student the benefit of the doubt. Other barriers to failing a student include if the educator is concerned about or have had experienced negative or inappropriate student responses, if the organisational process for failing a student is considered cumbersome and burdensome and if the workload and time associated with failing a student is too high and is difficult to manage for the educator.
Roulston et al., 2021	Student academic records Educators	Review of placement documents and practice assessment panels	To identify the incidence of, and the reasons why students fail professional practice (as reported by educators).	The fail rate for social work students in Ireland was 3%. Four categories for failure were identified including the student’s skills, knowledge, their values or personal factors. The four highest specific reasons that were identified was that the student demonstrated either a lack of understanding of their professional role, had poor time management or poor writing skills or being unable to follow guidance.