Who am I? A linguistic analysis of speech pathology students’ professional identity formation as reflected in their ePortfolios

Who am I? A linguistic analysis of speech pathology students’ professional identity formation as reflected in their ePortfolios | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Research Article Who am I? A linguistic analysis of speech pathology students’ professional identity formation as reflected in their ePortfolios Abigail Lewis, Elizabeth Armstrong This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-8748458/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract Language is a key tool in both shaping and reflecting professional identity, but few studies examine the language of professional identity formation and how this changes across a program. Understanding language differences could inform scaffolding to support deeper reflection on foster professional identity. This study aimed to explore differences between professional identity language in Year 1 (Y1) and Year 4 (Y4) speech pathology students in their portfolios to develop a guide or ‘scaffold’ to support reflection on and ultimately foster professional identity. Written reflective texts were purposively sampled from ten Y1 and ten Y4 students of a four-year undergraduate speech pathology program in Western Australia, matched on demographic characteristics. A systemic functional linguistics framework was used to analyse the language, exploring transitivity (process types), modality and attitude and the overall genre structure of the reflections. Basic descriptive statistics were collated with rich qualitative description to showcase differences. Results showed differences in how Y1 and Y4 students presented themselves and made meaning of their journey to becoming a speech pathologist. Y1 tended to be more self-focused, using more affective words compared to more cognitive processes in Y4. The genre structures indicated the different focus of their reflections. These findings informed the development of a scaffold for professional identity reflections. Analysing the linguistic features of written self-reflections may well assist health professional students to recognise and foster professional identity formation throughout their program. professional identity formation systemic functional linguistics eportfolios career reflections speech pathology students Figures Figure 1 Figure 2 Figure 3 Figure 4 Figure 5 Figure 6 Introduction Professional identity (PI) is the pinnacle of health professional training, with a student ideally completing their program with a sense of belonging to the profession (Cornett et al., 2023 ; Reissner & Armitage-Chan, 2024 ). A strong PI helps students’ self-confidence as professionals, supports resilience, reduces stress and gives protection against burnout (Ashby et al., 2016 ; Fitzgerald, 2020 ). PI contributes to a successful transition to graduate life (Ashby et al., 2016 ), increasing job satisfaction and retention (Fitzgerald, 2020 ). PI also increases students’ motivation to persevere and has benefits for their clients, team and the wider community (Fitzgerald, 2020 ; Wilson et al., 2013 ). Health professions education (HPE), therefore, is not only concerned with the transfer of knowledge and skills as competencies alone are not enough (Jarvis-Selinger et al., 2012 ). Programs need to also consider student ‘being’ (Jarvis-Selinger et al., 2012 ), fostering student ‘becoming’ (Barnett, 2009 ) or professional identity formation (PIF). PI internalises the profession’s knowledge, skills and attributes (such as values and ethics) and gives the sense of belonging to the profession (Cornett et al., 2023 ). Students integrate their personal characteristics, traits and life experiences, and their world view into their PI (Belgraver et al., 2022 ). Students ‘become’ their profession through the actions of aligning, exploring and sometimes struggling with the process (Reissner & Armitage-Chan, 2024 ). Reflection is one strategy to foster PI and is an important skill for health professionals (Lim et al., 2023 ; Mann et al., 2009 ; Wald, 2015 ) as it can foster not only knowledge and clinical skills, but also changes in attitudes, beliefs, biases and values (Fragkos, 2016 ). Reflection is key to the iterative process of PIF (James, 2013 ) as students align their own interests, values and behaviours to the profession’s expectations and explore different aspects of the profession, who they want to be and the career path they wish to take (Reissner & Armitage-Chan, 2024 ). As well as participating in the profession’s public discourses, students also reflect alone in their own thoughts, with peers in discussions, and in written reflections, all contributing to their PIF (Lewis et al., 2023 ; Wald et al., 2015 ; Wilson et al., 2013 ). Written reflections can support PIF (Lim et al., 2023 ), as writing is not only performative but the process of writing can be formational as students use language to position and present themselves, making a claim about their identity (Barnett, 2009 ; James, 2013 ). Writing a reflection about their identity and future career supports students’ narrative of who they are and can support their career success (Gómez, 2014 ). However, reflective practice is a complex skill and requires guidance, with scaffolding or prompts required for deeper levels of reflection (Dunne et al., 2024 ; Harvey et al., 2025 ; Moniz et al., 2024 ; Tight, 2024 ). Analysing written reflections to develop this scaffolding is helpful (e.g., Ryan, 2011 ), however there has been a limited focus on discourse analysis of written texts in HPE (Woodward-Kron, 2020 ). One study by Falgares and colleagues ( 2017 ) examined the differences between texts on ‘becoming a psychologist’ written before and after a group intervention to reflect on PI. Their analysis, using automated software, showed changes in how the students represented their profession, having a more realistic understanding of their role as a psychologist at the end of the intervention. Another study of graduating pharmacy students thematically analysed reflective essays written after a six-week placement and found PI followed a developmental process (Johnson & Chauvin, 2016 ). However, neither of these analyses enabled the development of a guide or scaffold to support deeper reflections on PI, leaving little guidance how to foster and systematically scaffold reflections to specifically enhance PI in heath professional student training even though such scaffolding has been recommended (Ryan, 2011 ). We focus on analysing written reflections in speech pathology (SP) specifically for the purpose of scaffolding PI reflections. Despite increasing research into PIF in medicine, nursing and other allied health professions (Belgraver et al., 2022 ; Reissner & Armitage-Chan, 2024 ), little is known about how PI forms in speech pathology (SP) (Cornett et al., 2023 ; Lewis et al., 2023 ). SP is a profession which focuses on language, yet there has been little reflection on how language shapes and defines the SP profession (Ferguson, 2007 ). Nor on how professional discourses affect the formation of PI in student SPs and the potential for shaping this formation through discourse. As already discussed, PI is shaped by the discourses of the students’ professional community, as well as by the students’ own reflections on their experiences (Mann, 2011 ). As students participate in the discipline’s discourses they learn to talk and learn from talk (Mann, 2011 ). The discipline community discourse includes statements about the profession, considered to be the ‘truth’, that regulate disciplinary practice (Paton et al., 2023 ). This ‘truth’ is passed to students throughout their training both formally and informally, in the curriculum at university and on placements in a variety of other systems (such as healthcare, disability, education). Students are navigating these discourses through their program, and for some PIF may involve struggling, being unable to form their PI and find belonging or cohesion (Reissner & Armitage-Chan, 2024 ). The discourses of SP potentially influence the style of communication and interaction with clients. For example, if SP identifies as a profession that ‘fixes’ communication or swallowing problems then their language and practice will be impairment based. If SP identifies as a profession who ‘advocates’, then some of their time will focus on community and family level advocacy. Theoretical framework In examining potential discourse analyses that may assist in developing a guide or scaffold, a Systemic Functional Linguistic (SFL) framework (Halliday & Matthiessen, 2004 ) provides an opportunity to examine meanings conveyed in student discourses from both content and interpersonal/attitudinal perspectives. SFL is a framework based on a semiotic, meaning-making theoretical perspective, focusing on the linguistic features of discourse, exploring how these might contribute to the construction of certain meanings or reflect attitudes of the writers/speakers. It combines the benefits of a linguistic analysis that focuses on ‘form’ (wording, grammar) and meanings, by focusing on the ‘function’ of the language being used, linking the language closely with the context of the discourse, including its purpose. SFL has been used to analyse oral communication and interactions in healthcare (Schleppegrell & Oteíza, 2023 ), student SPs interacting with supervisors (Ferguson, 2010 ), and pathological discourse patterns in SP clients (Armstrong et al., 2011 ). One SFL study of multiple health disciplines examined on-line reflective journal entries about cross-discipline professional language use and communication skills (Ruitenberg & Towle, 2015 ). Analysis of modality revealed students were more tentative in early journal reflections compared to later, and use of modality of certainty when discussing group agreement indicated a developing interprofessional identity (Ruitenberg & Towle, 2015 ). An analysis of written reflections based on an SFL framework may be well positioned to offer insights into discourse features that reflect PIF and potentially offer a way to ‘develop a shared language to explicitly teach and assess reflective writing’ (Ryan, 2011 , p. 99). SFL has been recommended for use in HPE (James, 2013 ), particularly for reflections, but has not yet been widely used to date for this purpose (Konopasky & Diaz, 2023 ). Aim and research questions Given the current lack of information on PIF in SP and the potential value of an SFL framework in assisting with exploration in this area, this study aimed to investigate how language use differed in PI reflections between Year 1 and Year 4 in a SP program, utilising an SFL framework, in order to better inform the teaching of reflection that specifically supports PIF. The research questions and sub-questions were: 1. What are the language choice and genre structure differences in PI reflections between Y1 and Y4 SP students? Are students’ choices of doing, thinking, feeling verbs or processes different (transitivity)? Is students’ use of probability, obligation, usuality and inclination different (modality)? Is students’ use of affect, judgement and appreciation different (attitude)? Is the genre structure of students’ reflections different? 2. If found, how can the differences inform the teaching of PI reflections to support PIF? Methods Study design and ethics The study used an interpretivist paradigm with a sociocultural theory of learning, particularly useful for understanding PIF because context is so obviously influential (Wilson et al., 2013 ). As noted above, SFL examines language meaning in context so was relevant to explore the phenomena under focus in this study. Our larger study received approval from the human research ethics committees of both the university conducting the research and the university of the participants (approval numbers x). This study followed the Standards for Reporting Qualitative Research (SRQR) guidelines (O’Brien et al., 2014 ). SFL SFL proposes three different components of the semiotic system: field, tenor and mode (Halliday & Matthiessen, 2004 ). The field concerns the nature of the discourse occurring, in this study the written career reflection in an eportfolio used both in the university program and potentially for future employers. The field is ‘realised’ linguistically through choice of vocabulary that conveys the events, actions, people and phenomena involved in the experience(s) the writer is focused on and the semantic roles of the wording e.g. whether a person (realized by a noun) is the actor or the recipient of an action; whether a verb used involves ‘doing’ (material process) or ‘thinking/feeling’ (mental process). Such description is referred to as the transitivity system. The tenor of the discourse relates to the relationship between participants in the discourse, hence is concerned with more interpersonal aspects of the discourse such as levels of formality, persuasiveness, affect etc. The mode is focused on the medium of the text i.e., whether it is written or spoken, face to face vs telephone etc. and the patterns associated with either. As the focus of the current study was on the students’ conveying of attitudes, systems realizing field (transitivity) and tenor (modality, appraisal) were central to the analysis (see further detail below). Genre was also analysed as it gives the holistic meaning of the text and is signalled by a staged or schematic structure (Eggins, 2004 ) as well as being characterised by the combination of field, tenor and mode. Context Xxx is a relatively young university and the student demographic has a high number of students being the first family member to attend university. It also has a high number of mature age students, with two thirds of students studying full time. The Bachelor of Speech Pathology is a four-year undergraduate program enrolling around 35 students each year. Students have placements each semester, building from short early observational and skills-based experiences to practicum units in the final two years. For each placement students collect evidence, write structured reflections and set new goals in their eportfolio, completed in a Workbook template accessed in PebblePad software. Students commence their eportfolio in Y1, completing new pages each subsequent semester. Across Y4 students commence a new Workbook template as a capstone assignment. Students are building their reflective practice, understanding of competencies and ability to set relevant learning goals across the program, supporting their PIF across the program. Recruitment All students enrolled in the program at xxx were given written information about the larger study, an information video, and received email invitations. Presentations and additional invitations were given in the specific units where the eportfolio was embedded in both semesters of 2018. Students were aware that participation was voluntary and would not affect grades or relationships with the researchers. Students could participate by ticking a consent box within the eportfolio, giving permission for the eportfolio to be exported as a PDF document after grading was complete. Participants Overall, 47 eportfolios were submitted to the study in 2018, with participation rates of 84% for Y1 and 89% for Y4, giving an overall participation rate of 85%. We used purposive sampling (Moser & Korstjens, 2018 ) to select 10 eportfolios from Y1 and 10 from Y4 matched as closely as possible on their demographics as shown in Table 1 . The participants were all female, English speaking, domestic students, with none identified as from non-English speaking backgrounds. Table 1 Participant characteristics Variable Y1 (n = 10) Y4 (n = 10) Mean Range Mean Range Age in years 28 19–40 26 21–46 Variable Subgroups frequency % frequency % Disability yes 0 0 1 10 no 6 60 9 90 unknown 4 40 0 0 First in family* yes 6 60 6 60 no 4 40 4 40 Study load full-time 8 80 9 90 part-time 2 20 1 10 SES high 3 30 7 70 medium 7 70 3 30 Regionality urban 10 100 9 90 regional 0 0 1 10 Born overseas # 2 20 2 20 *first in family means first to attend university in the family based on parent qualifications # one born in South Africa, one in Serbia and two in England Insert Table 1 here. Data Students develop a front page called ‘ Who am I?’ to attach to their eportfolio Workbook. This page is an introduction to who they are as a person and their philosophy as a SP student, i.e., a career or PI reflection. Students are encouraged to be creative, by adding photos and other personalisation, and are given questions to guide their reflection: Why are you becoming a SP? What has led you to becoming a SP? Why is becoming a SP important to you? What kind of SP do you want to be and why? This activity commences in a Y1 class in Semester 2, with students choosing from a selection of photographs, symbols and words to start their reflection. Throughout the unit students are given time in small groups to discuss with peers the competencies of SP and reflect on the knowledge and skills they have developed already in their lives that link to the competencies. They are also given time to discuss their two observation day experiences in class. Students also have feedback on an early submission of their ePortfolio, giving guidance about their reflections. These activities shape their ability to reflect before the activity to develop their ‘ Who am I?’ page. The ePortfolio is submitted at the end of semester and the depth of reflection is one of the rubric criteria. The ‘ Who am I?’ page activity is then repeated in Y3 when students are encouraged to redevelop the page. In Y4, students are again given the same instructions and renew their page to attach to their new Workbook (see supplementary file for detailed instructions). This ‘ Who am I? ’ page from Y1 and Y4 students formed the data for this study. After grading at the end of semester 2, the eportfolios with given consent were exported as PDF documents. The text for the ‘ Who am I? ’ page was de-identified and copied into a Word document with each student given a code number to protect their identity. Demographic data had been collected with consent in the larger study and was also given the same code number. Analysis The texts were edited for spelling errors, then each text was added to an Excel workbook page. The text was divided into clauses (as indicated by the presence of a main verb) and each clause (and its associated embedded clause if present) was on a separate line. Clauses were chosen as the unit of analysis in line with SFL’s theory of ‘clause’ as ‘message’ (Halliday & Matthiessen, 2004 ). Columns were added for each analysis type described below. Texts were of a similar length in each cohort (see supplementary file for details). Transitivity Transitivity analysis relates to the field of the text as noted above. It explored the different types of processes depicted by verb usage and the role of participants in clauses. There are five main process types, shown in Table 2 (adapted from Armstrong et al., 2011 ), with mental processes subdivided into processes of sensing, feeling or thinking (Eggins, 2004 ). Different patterns of process usage can reflect the writer’s reality and produce diverse types of genres. For example, the narrative genre typically consists of predominantly material processes reflecting actions and events, with a smaller number of relational processes used to describe participants or circumstances in which these took place. A small number of mental processes reflect either the speaker’s or the narrative participants’ attitudes/feelings towards the events in some way. An expository genre (i.e. explanation, provision of information on a particular topic), on the other hand, would consist predominantly of relational processes, where ‘facts’ are provided from a supposedly more objective stance (Eggins, 2004 ). The main verb was identified in each clause and classified as a particular process type. The total number of different process types were then collated, with the average calculated across all Y1 texts and across Y4 texts. Rich textual description was used to give examples of patterns for each cohort. Table 2 Process types Verb process Definition Discourse function Common examples from texts Material Processes of ‘doing’ Recount actions, events develop, do, give, go, help, make, study, work Relational Processes of ‘having’, ‘being’ Categorizing or evaluating Describing Possessing I am/was… It is… I have/had… Mental Processes of thinking Reporting evaluation or opinion; experiences; or desires I think/know/believe… I learned/realised… I want/hope/need… feeling Reporting Feelings I felt/like/love/enjoyed… sensing Reporting experiences I look/saw/heard… Verbal Processes of speaking Reporting conversation Speak, talk Behavioural Processes of physiology or psychology Reporting physiological or psychological actions Examples would be coughing, dreaming. Insert Table 2 here. Appraisal: Modality The appraisal analysis relates to the tenor of the texts and examined two systems: modality and attitude. Analysis of modality can show the writer’s thoughts and attitudes towards their message. Modality can express the writer’s sense of obligation or inclination towards a task or issue and the probability or usuality of an event or feeling. Modality can be used to hedge, therefore making space for other perspectives (e.g. this might work) or may be definite (e.g. this will work) (Gebhard & Accurso, 2020 ). As explained for transitivity previously, modality (modal verbs, adverbs or nouns) was recorded for each clause in the texts and classified in terms of type (probability, usuality, obligation or inclination) and degree (high, medium, low) (Eggins, 2004 ) as shown in Table 3 . The number of instances of each modality type and degree were then collated across all Y1 texts and compared to the totals from Y4 texts using descriptive statistics with examples and qualitative interpretations also provided. Table 3 Type and degree of modality Type degree Example Probability high (certainty) I know I will do it. Medium (probability) I believe I can do it. Low (possibility) I hope I may do it. Usuality High (always) I always do it. Medium (usually) I usually do it. Low (sometimes) I sometimes do it. inclination High (determined) I need to do it. Medium (keen) I’m keen to do it. Low (willing) I’m willing to do it. obligation High (required) I’m required to do it. Medium (supposed) I’m supposed to do it Low (allowed) I’m allowed to do it. Insert Table 3 here. Appraisal: Attitude Attitude is categorised as ‘affect’ (related to personal feeling about something), ‘appreciation’ (related to more objective evaluations) and ‘judgment’ (related to more objective attitudes regarding ethics). Attitude can be positive or negative, see Table 4 . As described for other analyses, the total number of instances of each type and polarity of attitude was collated, averaged across cohorts and described with examples and qualitative interpretation. Table 4 Type and polarity of attitude Attitude polarity Examples Positive affect I loved it. I’m excited about it. Affect Negative I hated it. I’m sad about it. Appreciation positive I’m grateful for it. It is fascinating . Appreciation Negative It is difficult . I won’t miss it. Judgement positive I’m competent . They were great supervisors. Judgement Negative I have so much to learn . They were unhelpful . Insert Table 4 here. Genre A genre occurs in a particular context, has stages or a schematic structure indicated by patterns in the text (Eggins, 2004 ). Reflection is a type of ‘social genre’ with a social purpose, and has elements of different ‘cognitive’ genres that have a relatively fixed purpose: recount, description, explanation, and discussion (Ryan, 2011 ). In order to explore the genre of the texts and place the student’s reflection within context, the procedure outlined by Woodward-Kron ( 2020 ), based on Eggins ( 2004 ) was used. The procedure involved: describing the overall purpose of the genre; identifying the main stages in the text based on topic and linguistic features; providing a rationale for these stages; identifying the order of the stages and whether stages are obligatory, optional or recursive; providing labels for the stages; and providing a description of the associated linguistic patterns (i.e., any relevant field, tenor and mode variables) for each stage (adapted from Woodward-Kron, 2020 , p. 67). Each text was analysed separately, with results for each cohort collated for comparison. Researcher characteristics The first author was known to the participants as the long-term clinical coordinator for the program. She prepared students for placements, taught clinical skills, lectured in different units and was responsible for the eportfolio. She has experience in qualitative research and this study was part of her doctoral study. The second author was also part of the SP academic team as a researcher, only having brief contact with students during the program. She has extensive research experience including as part of large multi-disciplinary teams. Rigour To enhance rigour and ensure trustworthiness, dependability, reliability and credibility (McAllister & Lyons, 2022 ) several processes were engaged. The first author kept a journal throughout the analysis process for ongoing reflexivity and to ensure a transparent audit trail across the research process. All decisions were discussed between authors to ensure trustworthiness and as part of the ongoing reflexivity process, to reduce the influence of biases on the analyses. Reliability checks were carried out for coding. The first author coded all texts for transitivity, modality and attitude, and the second author coded 20%. As the genre analysis involved extensive working back and forth across a number of texts to identify patterns and stages, the first author completed the analysis, and the second author checked the analysis and any differences were discussed. Finally, many student examples are given to support analyses and additional data can be found in the supplementary file. Results Transitivity Generally, the type of processes between cohorts were similar. The majority were material processes, while relational and mental processes were about equal (see Table 5 ). This reflects the relatively factual nature of the students’ statements, often relating to their journeys towards their choice of profession (Y1) or along their program (Y4). Table 5 Processes in texts Processes Y1 frequency ( n = 10) % of all processes Y4 frequency ( n = 10) % of all processes Material 247 39 261 43 Relational 194 30 166 27 Mental 184 29 159 26 Verbal 15 2 25 4 Behavioural 0 0 0 0 Total 640 100 611 100 Insert Table 5 here. Material processes The most common material verbs used by both cohorts were: do , help, take , and work , reflecting relatively concrete actions reported in their portfolio as they both commenced and completed their program of study. Most students in both cohorts used help frequently, as expected for a helping profession (in 80% of Y1 texts and 70% of Y4 texts). Y1 students were general in denoting recipients of this ‘helping’, whereas Y4 students elaborated more on the recipients and the gains clients could achieve through the help, showing their increasing focus on outcomes of intervention by SP. Eighty percent of both Y1 and Y4 texts contained work , however Y1 students predominantly focused on their previous or current work outside of SP as well as their aspirations for SP work, whereas Y4 focused on their clinical placements, future job aspirations and about the work of an SP. Y4 reflected a broader perspective of the profession and the future. The verbs continue , develop and improve were used more frequently by Y4 students (29 instances compared to 7 in Y1). Both cohorts wrote about wanting to improve or develop patients’ quality of life , however, only Y4 (#6, #8, #99, #105, #108, #110, #111) reflected on how their own competencies and attributes developed through the program and will continue to develop in the workplace. This indicated their understanding of the importance of their own ongoing learning and development to then effectively assist others. Y4 students also used a greater variety of material processes related to doing things with clients or patients potentially demonstrating the wider range of activities they have undertaken with clients. Mental processes Although both cohorts used a similar number of mental processes, Y4 students used a higher percentage of thinking processes and Y1 more feeling and sensing processes (see Table 6 , examples in Fig. 1 ). Y4 may have associated being ‘professional’ with having less emotional content in their reflections. Y1 used feeling words to indicate their enthusiasm for the program and that they were a positive fit for SP, but reflected less explicitly on their beliefs, attitudes and learnings. Table 6 Types of mental processes Type of mental process Y1 frequency Y1% of all mental processes Y4 frequency Y4% of all mental processes thinking 111 60 118 74 feeling 54 30 36 23 sensing 19 10 5 3 Total 184 100 159 100 Insert Table 6 and Fig. 1 here. The most common lexical items for thinking mental processes, were learn, decide, realise, understand and consider. Y1 students presented the decisions that led to this career and a prospective view of learning goals whereas Y4 students reported retrospectively on their learning journey and saw learning as a lifelong activity. Y4 realised the full scope and role of an SP and saw the importance of understanding and considering all aspects of clients. Y1 were sensing the different careers available to them, including SP, as well as their future and Y4 students sensed the role of the SP, the importance of communication and what a difference SP makes. Y4 were less self-focused. Verbal processes While verbal processes were relatively rare across texts, there were some qualitative differences. Both cohorts used communicate, say, speak and talk but Y4 used a wider range of more specific communication vocabulary, for example advocate, express , and pronounce indicating a slightly more sophisticated understanding of SP practice (see supplementary file). Appraisal: modality While the number of occurrences of modality markers for obligation or inclination towards something and the probability or usuality of something was small for some categories, both cohorts used a range of modal words with similar overall frequency (20% of clauses in Y1; 24% in Y4, see supplementary file). However, as shown in Table 7 , Y1 used slightly less probability and obligation, and more usuality than Y4; with inclination similar in both (see Fig. 2 for examples). In terms of degree (i.e. intensity of high, medium or low), Y1 used more high degree modality than Y4 (see Fig. 3 ). Both cohorts were positively definite about their career choice and the profession with Y4 being more moderated in their expression (i.e., medium degree) and more aware of their future obligations. Table 7 Types of modality Type of modality Y1 frequency Y1% of all modality Y4 frequency Y4% of all modality Probability (certainty of doing something) 97 70 113 76 Inclination (desire to do something) 20 15 19 13 Usuality (the frequency of doing something) 18 13 9 5 Obligation (to do something) 3 2 7 6 Total 138 100 148 100 Insert Table 7 , Figs. 2 & 3 here. There was a similar spread of degree of probability across cohorts, with high probability most frequent, followed by medium then low. However, the cohorts were more/less certain about different things. Y1 were certain about their choice of SP as a career and of helping people; less certain they had the skills and attributes for SP; and least certain in future career goals they hope to achieve. Y4 expressed certainty about client-related facts or circumstances (e.g., impact of communication difficulties) and were much more emphatic about how much they had learnt, been challenged, and developed through the program. Y4 had less certainty they were ready and had the knowledge, competencies, and skills to be a SP and least certainty in their future, but hopeful of being the best SP and ready for anything that comes. Inclination was similar but Y1 used only high degree. Y1 needed to become a SP, needed certain attributes to become one, and always wanted to help people and make a difference. Y4 used low as well as high obligation, they wanted to advocate and enable clients who wanted to have improved lives and endeavoured to continue learning. Overall Y1 used slightly more usuality modals i.e. they were always interested in helping others, in communication and in SP as a career. Y4 also were also always interested in SP, will always remember to apply the skills they have learnt so they always focusing on clients’ needs. Finally, use of obligation was minimal and Y1 only used high levels, e.g., experiences made them realise their purpose in life. Y4 used high and low obligation, they had to do this job, realise the importance of communication, how essential functional communication approaches are and will be allowed to improve client lives. Appraisal: attitude Y1 used slightly less appraisal, in 33% of clauses, compared to 40% in Y4 (see supplementary file). Table 8 shows the different types. Y1 used more affect (emotions) and less judgement than Y4. Appreciation usage was similar. In terms of positive/negative valence, Y1 texts were slightly more positive (90%) than Y4 (84%) and this was for both affect and appreciation; judgement was about the same (see Fig. 4 and supplementary file for text examples). Table 8 Attitude expressed in Y1 and Y4 texts Attitude type Y1 ( n = 10) % Y4 ( n = 10) % Affect 98 47 74 30 Appreciation 29 14 37 15 Judgement 80 39 137 55 Total 207 100 248 100 Insert Table 8 and Fig. 4 here. Both Y1 and Y4 showed enthusiasm and anticipation for SP (see Fig. 5 ), while Y4 had more comments about specific supervisors, practicum experiences. Y1 had negative affect about past careers, justifying or attempting to validate their feelings for either choosing SP or changing careers. Y4 were more focused on the future with positive affect towards SP. Y4 were also focused on the benefits they had gained from the program personally and expressed gratitude for this. They were often surprised by the journey through the program, with both negative and positive affect towards the challenges they faced as well as the challenges clients face. Insert Fig. 5 here. Y1 had appreciation for their own opportunities and for SP with negative appreciation towards their other potential careers/programs. Y4 had both positive and negative appreciation of the program, it being more than they expected but also challenging. They appreciated the importance of communication , helping clients improve their quality of life and the SP career. Y1 judged themselves as a good fit for SP, having the traits , interests and skills required. They also judged their previous experiences, the skills of communication and the special person that has the skills and traits required to make a difference for clients, improving their quality of life and that SP would give them purpose and meaning . Y1 used negative judgement towards clients and other careers. Over half of the attitude type for Y4 was judgment, directed at supervisors, the impact of SP on clients, and the skills, knowledge and attributes the profession shares. They judged their own growth through the program, with improved knowledge, competencies and attributes, while still having more to learn. Like affect and appreciation, Y4 had mixed judgement about the challenge of the program, difficult but worth it , and for clients, the impact of communication difficulties is negative, but SP can make a positive difference. Finally, Y4 used judgement to say how little is known about the importance of communication, the right to communicate, the value of SP, which led to a strong commitment to advocating for clients and the profession in the future. This shows Y4 not only noticing issues but taking up the responsibility of their profession to make changes. Genre Across the texts nine stages were identified but not used by both cohorts as shown in Table 9 (full analysis in supplementary file). Y1 had a higher number and higher average of stages and more recursion perhaps indicating being unsure about what to write. Two stages were unique to Y1 (Other careers, SP is my purpose) and three unique to Y4 (My SP journey, Advocacy for SP, The future of SP), indicating a different reflection focus (examples in Fig. 6 ). Table 9 Stages in texts Stage Total stages used (%) stage order (optional) Recursive Y1 ( n = 10) Y4 ( n = 10) Y1 Y4 Y1 Y4 My identity 8 (80) 4 (40) (i) (i) No No Other careers 7 (70) 0 (0) (ii) - Yes No Finding SP 7 (70) 2 (20) (iii)+ (ii) Yes No SP is my purpose 5 (50) 0 (0) (iv)+ - No - I fit SP 10 (100) 3 (30) any (iii) Yes No My SP future 10 (100) 10 (100) ii+ ii+ Yes Yes My SP journey 0 (0) 10 (100) - (any) - Yes Advocacy for SP 0 (0) 8 (80) - (any) - Yes The future of SP 0 (0) 1 (10) - (iv) - No Total stages (mean, range) 47 (4.7, 2–6) 38 (3.8, 3–5) 6 7 4 3 Total stages with recursive stages included (mean, range) 62 (6.2, 2–10) 46 (4.6, 3–7) - - - - Insert Table 9 and Fig. 6 here. My identity was used as the first stage by both groups, but more frequently by Y1. Younger Y1 students tended to list their name, age, previous school; mature Y1 students discussed other life roles. Y4 only gave their name, year and current placement, with few referring to personal details or circumstances, showing their understanding of a professional presentation and their focus on their SP identity. The four stages of Other Careers, Finding SP, SP is my purpose , and I fit SP were only/mostly used by Y1. Mature Y1 students presented previous careers/roles and younger students discussed previous studies. Y1 described experiences/research leading to SP, were definite SP was for them, giving them meaning or purpose; and gave multiple reasons why they fit SP. This shows Y1 focused on justifying their choice of SP and how they were suited for this profession which was less important for Y4. My SP future was included by all students. Y1 presented how they saw themselves in the future, working with children or across the lifespan with some listing specific areas that interested them (e.g., disability). Y4 students were less specific about who they wanted to work with, being more open now they had experienced different placements. Y4 were excited and confident about entering their profession, knowing this was what they wanted to do, seeing how they would improve clients’ lives, advocate, enable and provide the best care. Y4 were more specific about what they would do for clients, rather than the clients they would work with . This indicates their focus was not on themselves and how they fit SP but on the outcomes they will be achieving for clients. The final three stages were only used by Y4, again indicating the shift of focus to their clients and their clients’ needs. In My SP journey Y4 discussed all they had learnt and experienced and how they had been challenged and changed by the process. Some expressed appreciation for staff and supervisors who had shaped them and acknowledged the learning journey was just beginning. Advocacy for SP covered Y4 students’ belief in the fundamental right of communication, the importance SP and of advocating for communication, their clients and their profession. Finally, only one Y4 discussed used new developments that will change SP in The future of SP . Reliability Inter-coder agreement was 81% for processes, 72% for modality and 83% for appraisal. Discussion As one of the few studies to examine PIF from a linguistic perspective, and the first to explore PIF in speech pathology students, this study found differences in the language of written reflective statements of Y1 and Y4 SP students that can inform improved teaching of reflection that specifically supports PIF. We will discuss the results in relation to each of the research questions. What are the language choice and genre structure differences in PI reflections between Y1 and Y4 SP students? Differences found in students’ language choices and genre structure indicated that Y1 tended to be more focused on themselves, with a personal and enthusiastic reflection on their journey to SP, justifying their choice of SP rather than another career. They strongly presented themselves as fitting SP and saw themselves working with specific client groups yet may not have had a strong self-awareness reflected in their frequent use of emotive/affective language rather than thinking language (differences in transitivity, attitude and genre). Y4 were more moderate and objective in their reflection, more focused on their journey through the program and their activities with their clients. They appreciated experiences that had developed their competencies and attributes, the difficult journey had been worth it to enter the career they now perceived to have a positive impact on clients (differences in attitude). They were committed to ongoing learning and to advocate for SP and their clients. They were excited to enter the profession and open to different career paths in SP, showing a broader understanding and deeper commitment to SP (differences in attitude and genre). Are students’ choices of doing, thinking, feeling verbs or processes different (transitivity)? Reflection is the basis for PIF (Wald et al., 2015 ) and reflection involves thinking and questioning (using mental processes) along with self and contextual awareness, resulting in learning and improvement (Tovey & Skolits, 2022 ). Increasing self-awareness, therefore, is an important aspect of PIF (Belgraver et al., 2022 ; Gómez, 2014 ). The self is central to the construction of knowledge (Johnson & Chauvin, 2016 ) and also to delivering relationship-centred care (Shapovalova et al., 2020 ). Our worldview is formed from our core beliefs and values, shaped by personal norms, upbringing and sociocultural background, often informing the choice to become a health professional (Belgraver et al., 2022 ). The fact that Y1 used less ‘thinking’ and more ‘feeling’ mental processes in their portfolio texts could indicate a focus on their own instinctive feelings of ‘liking, loving’ something rather than more reflective-related processes of, for example, ‘deciding, believing’, with limited self-reflection or even awareness of the significance of their instinctive feelings at this stage in their professional formation journey. Is students’ use of probability, obligation, usuality and inclination different (modality)? High degree modality was more frequent in Y1 and the types of modality differed. Y1 included more usuality, Y4 slightly more probability and obligation. For later students, prompts for students to consider their obligations to their clients and profession (obligation) and to see themselves more clearly in their future career (probability) would be useful (see supplementary file). Is students’ use of affect, judgement and appreciation different (attitude)? Bearing in mind the previous discussion of reflection, it should also be noted that self-awareness does not only have cognitive components, but also emotional and behavioural components (Shapovalova et al., 2020 ). Emotions have an important role in the reflective process (Gómez, 2014 ), and are closely linked to self-regulated learning (Pekrun et al., 2002 ). Emotions are key to how we perceive and remember things, negative emotions can impact decision making, and unprocessed emotions can impact mental health (Lönn et al., 2023 ). Emotional intelligence is ‘the competence to identify, express, understand and regulate emotions in the self and in others’ (Shi & Du, 2020 , p. 2). Reflective writing can foster emotional awareness and enable the processing of emotions, protecting against stress and burnout (Wald et al., 2015 ). The fact that Y4 used less feeling mental processes and affect (attitude) than Y1 could be seen either negatively or positively. From the negative perspective, perhaps the ‘professionalisation journey’ may distance some students/clinicians from their emotions and may ultimately detract from the building of strong relationships required to engender trust. Seeing ‘stoicism’ as an aspect of being a health professional is harmful, contributing to burnout (Wu, 2025 ). On the other hand, students may have developed a degree of emotional regulation through the program. Students are often encouraged to distance themselves somewhat from their emotions as a) a self-protective measure in terms of emotional vulnerability, and b) a client-protective measure as the client should not necessarily be impacted by the clinician’s emotional responses. Is the genre structure of students’ reflections different? The cohorts were given four identical questions to support their reflections yet Y1 used different stages from Y4. Some stages were common to both cohorts, some unique to each cohort with some differences found in the reflections of mature-age students. Y1 focused on why they chose SP and how they were suited to the profession, being more self-focused and did not discuss their progress through the program. Y4 focused more on their profession and clients than Y1, showing a move from self to other awareness, including a commitment to advocacy. Y4 also reflected on their journey through the program, noting what they had learned and challenges they had overcome. Y4’s possible emotional self-regulation, described previously, fosters resilience and is linked to wellbeing (Field, 2019 ), as is gratitude, (also expressed by Y4). In addition, Y4 reflected on the overcoming of challenges, another indicator of their resilience and confidence (Zegwaard & Adams-Hutcheson, 2025 ). How can the differences inform the teaching of PI reflections to support PIF? The SFL categories of wording used provided clear links to PI patterns and how PI was conveyed in Y1 and Y4. The analyses reflected insights into specific wording patterns related to self-awareness and emotions in particular, as well as differences in stages in the genre structure. These differences may assist in the development of a learning guide or scaffold for a PI reflection. An example of a PI reflection scaffold with prompts to facilitate a deeper PI reflection based on the analyses of language choices and genre structure can be found in the supplementary file, with a different scaffold for Y1 and Y2 than for Y3 and Y4. Increasing self-awareness Students and professionals are often not aware of their own worldview and yet this level of self-awareness is important for culturally safe practice in a cross-cultural context (Belgraver et al., 2022 ). Reflections are an ideal tool for developing self-awareness: …students need to get insight in their beliefs, values and norms, identity and personality, and attach meaning to his/her experiences within those values: why do I do what I do? what are my motives? Who am I? what is my passion? What do I want to achieve in my life? (Gómez, 2014 , p. 81 − 2) Therefore, including prompts in the scaffold to trigger thinking processes could support Y1 students to become more self-aware (see supplementary file). Fostering insight into emotions The role of emotions and their regulation in PI could be discussed with students as part of their reflections, using the wording categories as described in the analysis to facilitate further reflection, including prompts to focus on emotions in the scaffolding. This could support students to consider the implications of their emotions and ensure they are developing emotional regulation, rather than ‘stoicism’ (see supplementary file). Genre structure as a scaffold The genre analysis demonstrated differences in genre structure, indicating the usefulness of the SFL analysis to potentially inform a PI reflection scaffold to facilitate students’ learning. While a greater number of students would need to be sampled to establish an ultimate generic structure for such reflection, results suggest elements students may be encouraged to consider as they progress through their program. Having an explicit structure may well support more detailed and focused reflections (Gómez, 2014 ). The language choices and genre stages indicated differences in self-awareness, thinking and feeling language, and a different understanding of their role as a SP and these differences were used to identify prompts to add to the scaffold. Strengths and limitations This study was based in one university in an undergraduate program in Australia, examining texts of twenty students, which may impact the representativeness of the students, and the results may not be applicable to other health profession programs. Larger numbers of texts would enhance the generalisability of the results as would following students longitudinally. In written texts students can project an identity that they think is required for the assignment rather than being in line with their own identity (O'Donnell, 2014 ) so this may also impact findings. The original texts contained multi-modal features, such as page banners, headings and photos, which were not examined in this analysis. Recommendations Embedding career reflections (e.g., in an eportfolio) across a program may both facilitate and capture differences in PIF. As noted above regarding genre structure, annotated career reflections, highlighting stages and examples of linguistic features associated with each (e.g., modality, process type) could be developed (Ryan, 2011 ), tailored to the cohort with prompt questions for each stage (see example in supplementary file). These analyses could also be useful for reflections in other disciplines. In examining the language used to express the students’ journeys, particularly investigating the explicit conveying of attitudes and the generic structuring of the written reflections, insights into student perceptions of their own status at their journey stage can be directly gained. Using the career reflections of final year students and gathering career reflections from early and experienced working SPs would provide strong exemplars to extend the thinking of all SP students. Including prompts that encourage reflection on beliefs, values and identity to support increased self-awareness, as well as helping students see meaning in the full range of their experiences (Gómez, 2014 ) would be especially helpful for early in the program. In addition, students could be encouraged to reflect on those who have helped them on their journey so far along with the challenges they have faced and how they have overcome them to build their resilience and confidence before they face the increased pressure of full clinical placements. Future research into the role of emotions in PIF could yield greater insights into how to scaffold the use of emotive language in PI reflections. Another aspect of transitivity analysis which was beyond the scope of this study, but may prove useful in future studies is agency, the participant roles within a clause. Agency could potentially reflect students’ levels of perceived independence, autonomy or self-confidence and may also show differences in students’ understanding of client agency. Conclusion An SFL analysis of PI reflections indicated differences between Y1 and Y4 students’ language choices and genre structure that could be used to develop scaffolding to enhance PI reflections in the future. Using a specific scaffold to foster a PI reflection may not only support students’ reflection but in addition may also foster PIF. Declarations The authors report that there are no competing interests to declare. The authors would like to acknowledge the contribution of an Australian Government Research Training Program Scholarship in supporting this research. References Armstrong, E., Ciccone, N., Godecke, E., & Kok, B. (2011). Monologues and dialogues in aphasia: Some initial comparisons. Aphasiology , 25 (11), 1347–1371. https://doi.org/10.1080/02687038.2011.577204 Ashby, S. E., Adler, J., & Herbert, L. (2016). An exploratory international study into occupational therapy students' perceptions of professional identity. Australian Occupational Therapy Journal , 63 (4), 233–243. https://doi.org/10.1111/1440-1630.12271 Barnett, R. (2009). Knowing and becoming in the higher education curriculum. Studies in Higher Education , 34 (4), 429–440. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075070902771978 Belgraver, E. E., Coppoolse, R., van Doorn, L., & Bakker, C. (2022). The personal dimension of allied health professional identity: A scoping review in health sciences literature. International Journal of Health Professions , 9 (1), 39–58. https://doi.org/10.2478/ijhp-2022-0004 Cornett, M., Palermo, C., & Ash, S. (2023). Professional identity research in the health professions—a scoping review. Advances in Health Sciences Education , 28 (2), 589–642. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10459-022-10171-1 Dunne, M., Penman, M., & Nisbet, G. (2024). Exploring the outcomes of a reflective teaching strategy with students: A feasibility study. International Journal of Speech-Language Pathology , 26 (4), 532–543. https://doi.org/10.1080/17549507.2023.2223373 Eggins, S. (2004). Introduction to systemic functional linguistics (2nd ed.). Continuum International Publishing Group. Falgares, G., Venza, G., & Guarnaccia, C. (2017). Learning psychology and becoming psychologists: Developing professional identity through group experiential learning. Psychology Learning and Teaching , 16 (2), 232–247. https://doi.org/10.1177/1475725717695148 Ferguson, A. (2007). Expert practice: A critical discourse . Plural Publishing. Ferguson, A. (2010). Appraisal in student–supervisor conferencing: A linguistic analysis. International Journal of Language and Communication Disorders , 45 (2), 215–229. https://doi.org/10.3109/13682820902929099 Field, R. (2019). Teaching resilience and self-management skills: Fostering student psychological wellbeing for future employability. In J. Higgs, W. Letts, & G. Crisp (Eds.), Education for Employability (Vol. 2, pp. 237–246). Brill. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004418707_020 Fitzgerald, A. (2020). Professional identity: A concept analysis. Nursing Forum , 55 (3), 447–472. https://doi.org/10.1111/nuf.12450 Fragkos, K. C. (2016). Reflective practice in healthcare education: an umbrella review. Education Sciences , 6 (3), 27. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci6030027 Gebhard, M., & Accurso, K. (2020). Systemic functional linguistics. In C. A. Chapelle (Ed.), The concise encyclopedia of applied linguistics (pp. 1029–1103). Wiley. Gómez, A. G. (2014). Professional identity: a story about successes, failures & the power of words. In F. Meijers, M. Kuijpers, R. Lengelle, M. Post, A. G. Gómez, M. Harlaar-Oostveen, W. v. d. Westen, D. Vijsbroek, R. Hensel, T. Korver, E. Sjoer, M. Aangenendt, M. Kuijpers, K. Sanders, & H. Kopnina (Eds.), Dynamic Dialogue Dynamiek in dialoog (pp. 73–104). De Haagse Hogeschool. Halliday, M. A. K., & Matthiessen, C. (2004). An Introduction to Functional Grammar (3rd ed.). Hodder Arnold. Harvey, M., Walkerden, G., Semple, A., McLachlan, K., Lloyd, K., & Bosanquet, A. (2025). Reflecting on reflective practice: issues, possibilities and guidance principles. Higher Education Research & Development , 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2025.2463517 James, B. (2013). Researching student becoming in higher education. Higher Education Research & Development , 32 (1), 109–121. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2012.751089 Jarvis-Selinger, S., Pratt, D. D., & Regehr, G. (2012). Competency is not enough: integrating identity formation into the medical education discourse. Academic Medicine , 87 (9), 1185–1190. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1097/acm.0b013e3182604968 Johnson, J. L., & Chauvin, S. (2016). Professional identity formation in an advanced pharmacy practice experience emphasizing self-authorship. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education , 80 (10), 172. https://doi.org/10.5688/ajpe8010172 Konopasky, A., & Diaz, B. A. (2023). Functional and corpus linguistics in health professions education research: the study of language in use. In J. Cleland, & S. J. Durning (Eds.), Researching medical education (2nd ed., pp. 163–174). Wiley. Lewis, A., Jamieson, J., & Smith, C. A. (2023). Professional identity formation in allied health: A systematic review with narrative synthesis. Teaching and Learning in Medicine , 37 (1), 24–40. https://doi.org/10.1080/10401334.2023.2290608 Lim, J. Y., Ong, S. Y. K., Ng, C. Y. H., Chan, K. L. E., Wu, S. Y. E. A., So, W. Z., Tey, G. J. C., Lam, Y. X., Gao, N. L. X., Lim, Y. X., Tay, R. Y. K., Leong, I. T. Y., Rahman, N. D. A., Chiam, M., Lim, C., Phua, G. L. G., Murugam, V., Ong, E. K., & Krishna, L. K. R. (2023). A systematic scoping review of reflective writing in medical education. BMC Medical Education , 23 (1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-022-03924-4 Lönn, A., Weurlander, M., Seeberger, A., Hult, H., Thornberg, R., & Wernerson, A. (2023). The impact of emotionally challenging situations on medical students’ professional identity formation. Advances in Health Sciences Education , 28 (5), 1557–1578. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10459-023-10229-8 Mann, K. (2011). Theoretical perspectives in medical education: past experience and future possibilities. Medical Education , 45 (1), 60–68. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2923.2010.03757.x Mann, K., Gordon, J., & MacLeod, A. (2009). Reflection and reflective practice in health professions education: a systematic review. Advances in Health Sciences Education , 14 (4), 595–621. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10459-007-9090-2 McAllister, L., & Lyons, R. (2022). Evidence matters: strategies for ensuring rigour in designing, doing, and publishing qualitative research. Journal of Clinical Practice in Speech-Language Pathology , 24 (3), 149–153. https://doi.org/10.1080/22087168.2022.12370377 Moniz, T., Melro, C. M., Warren, A., & Watling, C. (2024). Twelve tips for maximizing the potential of reflective writing in medical education. Medical Teacher , 46 (11), 1410–1415. https://doi.org/10.1080/0142159X.2024.2326093 Moser, A., & Korstjens, I. (2018). Series: Practical guidance to qualitative research. Part 3: Sampling, data collection and analysis. European Journal of General Practice , 24 (1), 9–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/13814788.2017.1375091 O'Donnell, M. (2014). Exploring identity through appraisal analysis: A corpus annotation methodology. Linguistics & the Human Sciences , 9 (1). https://doi.org/10.1558/lhs.v9i1.95 O’Brien, B. C., Harris, I. B., Beckman, T. J., Reed, D. A., & Cook, D. A. (2014). Standards for reporting qualitative research. Academic Medicine , 89 (9), 1245–1251. https://doi.org/10.1097/acm.0000000000000388 Paton, M., Naidu, T., Wong, R., Whitehead, C., & Kuper, A. (2023). Critical discourse analysis: questioning what we believe to be ‘true’. In J. Cleland, & S. J. Durning (Eds.), Researching medical education (2nd ed., pp. 153–162). Wiley. Pekrun, R., Goetz, T., Titz, W., & Perry, R. P. (2002). Academic emotions in students' self-regulated learning and achievement: A program of qualitative and quantitative research. Educational Psychologist , 37 (2), 91–105. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15326985EP3702_4 Reissner, S., & Armitage-Chan, E. (2024). Manifestations of professional identity work: an integrative review of research in professional identity formation. Studies in Higher Education , 49 (12), 2707–2722. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2024.2322093 Ruitenberg, C. W., & Towle, A. (2015). How to do things with words in health professions education. Advances in Health Sciences Education , 20 , 857–872. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10459-014-9568-7 Ryan, M. (2011). Improving reflective writing in higher education: A social semiotic perspective. Teaching in Higher Education , 16 (1), 99–111. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2010.507311 Schleppegrell, M. J., & Oteíza, T. (2023). Systemic functional linguistics: Exploring meaning in language. In M. Handford, & J. P. Gee (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of discourse analysis (pp. 156–169). Routledge. Shapovalova, M. L., Enns, E. A., Serdyukova, E. F., & Zvereva, R. G. (2020). Professional self-consciousness as factor of professional formation and self-development of personality. European Proceedings of Social and Behavioural Sciences , 306–314. https://doi.org/10.15405/epsbs.2020.10.05.41 Shi, M., & Du, T. (2020). Associations of emotional intelligence and gratitude with empathy in medical students. BMC Medical Education , 20 , 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-020-02041-4 Tight, M. (2024). Reflection: an assessment and critique of a pervasive trend in higher education. European Journal of Higher Education , 14 (2), 324–342. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/21568235.2023.2193345 Tovey, T. L. S., & Skolits, G. J. (2022). Conceptualizing and engaging in reflective practice: experienced evaluators’ perspectives. American Journal of Evaluation , 43 (1), 5–25. https://doi.org/10.1177/1098214020983926 Wald, H. S. (2015). Professional identity (trans) formation in medical education: reflection, relationship, resilience. Academic Medicine , 90 (6), 701–706. https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0000000000000731 Wald, H. S., Anthony, D., Hutchinson, T. A., Liben, S., Smilovitch, M., & Donato, A. A. (2015). Professional identity formation in medical education for humanistic, resilient physicians: pedagogic strategies for bridging theory to practice. Academic Medicine , 90 (6), 753–760. Wilson, I., Cowin, L. S., Johnson, M., & Young, H. (2013). Professional identity in medical students: pedagogical challenges to medical education. Teaching and Learning in Medicine , 25 (4), 369–373. https://doi.org/10.1080/10401334.2013.827968 Woodward-Kron, R. (2020). Let's talk about discourse analysis for health professional education: what, why and how. Focus on Health Professional Education: A Multi-Professional Journal , 21 (2), 63–74. https://doi.org/10.11157/fohpe.v21i2.470 Wu, Y. (2025). Reclaiming health professional identity when enforced stocisim harms. Advances in Health Sciences Education . https://doi.org/10.1007/s10459-025-10479-8 Zegwaard, K., & Adams-Hutcheson, G. (2025). Sources of stress and students’ perceptions of their wellbeing during work placement. International Journal of Work-Integrated Learning , 26 (1), 25–41. Additional Declarations No competing interests reported. Supplementary Files SupplementaryfileLinguisticanalysisofSPPIformation.docx Cite Share Download PDF Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-8748458","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Research Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":594511703,"identity":"c5ae28e1-220c-4564-a1a7-a6f997c5c688","order_by":0,"name":"Abigail Lewis","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"University Department of Rural Health South West, Edith Cowan University","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"Abigail","middleName":"","lastName":"Lewis","suffix":""},{"id":594511704,"identity":"9a9af72a-ae4e-4bac-8e32-6b78fc673951","order_by":1,"name":"Elizabeth Armstrong","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"University Department of Rural Health South West, Edith Cowan University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Elizabeth","middleName":"","lastName":"Armstrong","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2026-01-31 09:26:12","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":"","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-8748458/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-8748458/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":103338014,"identity":"750d4043-b1c7-4d23-9879-7c9a4bae3765","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-02-24 14:56:19","extension":"png","order_by":1,"title":"Figure 1","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":40609,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eMental processes examples\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage1.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8748458/v1/0bbd3d684d3e37f750cfe733.png"},{"id":103338011,"identity":"7bc5769f-568a-4f8b-8e3c-d69f656bafcf","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-02-24 14:56:18","extension":"png","order_by":2,"title":"Figure 2","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":37187,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eDegree of modality\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"2.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8748458/v1/eeab4f87069c469caf40439c.png"},{"id":103338021,"identity":"c51e72e4-9c8f-45ac-b4ab-aa2faf2cafb8","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-02-24 14:56:20","extension":"png","order_by":3,"title":"Figure 3","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":59275,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eModality examples\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage2.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8748458/v1/cab27c99442db9b2062d3e29.png"},{"id":103338018,"identity":"09dd338e-508c-49b7-97e3-29fedcb07870","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-02-24 14:56:19","extension":"png","order_by":4,"title":"Figure 4","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":37276,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003ePercentage positive attitude for each type\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"4.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8748458/v1/8a1848482deccff2a249ceb2.png"},{"id":103338019,"identity":"43bb71cb-0c6f-45dc-9d00-dbaf6b899c58","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-02-24 14:56:19","extension":"png","order_by":5,"title":"Figure 5","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":85522,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eAppraisal examples\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage3.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8748458/v1/670b576ee250c31a01d0456c.png"},{"id":103338022,"identity":"13ae5aa0-ce52-4f1f-9b52-77013272f685","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-02-24 14:56:20","extension":"png","order_by":6,"title":"Figure 6","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":134722,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eExamples of genre\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage4.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8748458/v1/ae472caf822a2d9dc60a41a1.png"},{"id":108821474,"identity":"35427b2b-03fb-4f55-95c0-6e639836a99e","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-05-08 16:45:54","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":924915,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8748458/v1/e12ed042-f3d7-444c-9f07-8b850fec0d3a.pdf"},{"id":103338012,"identity":"b9ba8ca8-1e08-4d88-a8c4-dd442316cbf3","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-02-24 14:56:18","extension":"docx","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"supplement","size":96512,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"SupplementaryfileLinguisticanalysisofSPPIformation.docx","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8748458/v1/8e608e897c1966cb97015021.docx"}],"financialInterests":"No competing interests reported.","formattedTitle":"Who am I? A linguistic analysis of speech pathology students’ professional identity formation as reflected in their ePortfolios","fulltext":[{"header":"Introduction","content":"\u003cp\u003eProfessional identity (PI) is the pinnacle of health professional training, with a student ideally completing their program with a sense of belonging to the profession (Cornett et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e; Reissner \u0026amp; Armitage-Chan, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR34\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). A strong PI helps students\u0026rsquo; self-confidence as professionals, supports resilience, reduces stress and gives protection against burnout (Ashby et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e; Fitzgerald, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e). PI contributes to a successful transition to graduate life (Ashby et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e), increasing job satisfaction and retention (Fitzgerald, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e). PI also increases students\u0026rsquo; motivation to persevere and has benefits for their clients, team and the wider community (Fitzgerald, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e; Wilson et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR44\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eHealth professions education (HPE), therefore, is not only concerned with the transfer of knowledge and skills as competencies alone are not enough (Jarvis-Selinger et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e). Programs need to also consider student \u0026lsquo;being\u0026rsquo; (Jarvis-Selinger et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e), fostering student \u0026lsquo;becoming\u0026rsquo; (Barnett, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2009\u003c/span\u003e) or professional identity formation (PIF). PI internalises the profession\u0026rsquo;s knowledge, skills and attributes (such as values and ethics) and gives the sense of belonging to the profession (Cornett et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e). Students integrate their personal characteristics, traits and life experiences, and their world view into their PI (Belgraver et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). Students \u0026lsquo;become\u0026rsquo; their profession through the actions of aligning, exploring and sometimes struggling with the process (Reissner \u0026amp; Armitage-Chan, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR34\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). Reflection is one strategy to foster PI and is an important skill for health professionals (Lim et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e; Mann et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR26\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2009\u003c/span\u003e; Wald, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR42\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e) as it can foster not only knowledge and clinical skills, but also changes in attitudes, beliefs, biases and values (Fragkos, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eReflection is key to the iterative process of PIF (James, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR18\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e) as students align their own interests, values and behaviours to the profession\u0026rsquo;s expectations and explore different aspects of the profession, who they want to be and the career path they wish to take (Reissner \u0026amp; Armitage-Chan, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR34\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). As well as participating in the profession\u0026rsquo;s public discourses, students also reflect alone in their own thoughts, with peers in discussions, and in written reflections, all contributing to their PIF (Lewis et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e; Wald et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR43\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e; Wilson et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR44\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e). Written reflections can support PIF (Lim et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e), as writing is not only performative but the process of writing can be formational as students use language to position and present themselves, making a claim about their identity (Barnett, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2009\u003c/span\u003e; James, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR18\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e). Writing a reflection about their identity and future career supports students\u0026rsquo; narrative of who they are and can support their career success (G\u0026oacute;mez, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e). However, reflective practice is a complex skill and requires guidance, with scaffolding or prompts required for deeper levels of reflection (Dunne et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e; Harvey et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e; Moniz et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR28\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e; Tight, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR40\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). Analysing written reflections to develop this scaffolding is helpful (e.g., Ryan, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR36\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2011\u003c/span\u003e), however there has been a limited focus on discourse analysis of written texts in HPE (Woodward-Kron, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR45\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e). One study by Falgares and colleagues (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR8\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e) examined the differences between texts on \u0026lsquo;becoming a psychologist\u0026rsquo; written before and after a group intervention to reflect on PI. Their analysis, using automated software, showed changes in how the students represented their profession, having a more realistic understanding of their role as a psychologist at the end of the intervention. Another study of graduating pharmacy students thematically analysed reflective essays written after a six-week placement and found PI followed a developmental process (Johnson \u0026amp; Chauvin, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e). However, neither of these analyses enabled the development of a guide or scaffold to support deeper reflections on PI, leaving little guidance how to foster and systematically scaffold reflections to specifically enhance PI in heath professional student training even though such scaffolding has been recommended (Ryan, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR36\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2011\u003c/span\u003e). We focus on analysing written reflections in speech pathology (SP) specifically for the purpose of scaffolding PI reflections.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eDespite increasing research into PIF in medicine, nursing and other allied health professions (Belgraver et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e; Reissner \u0026amp; Armitage-Chan, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR34\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e), little is known about how PI forms in speech pathology (SP) (Cornett et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e; Lewis et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e). SP is a profession which focuses on language, yet there has been little reflection on how language shapes and defines the SP profession (Ferguson, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2007\u003c/span\u003e). Nor on how professional discourses affect the formation of PI in student SPs and the potential for shaping this formation through discourse. As already discussed, PI is shaped by the discourses of the students\u0026rsquo; professional community, as well as by the students\u0026rsquo; own reflections on their experiences (Mann, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR25\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2011\u003c/span\u003e). As students participate in the discipline\u0026rsquo;s discourses they learn to talk and learn from talk (Mann, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR25\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2011\u003c/span\u003e). The discipline community discourse includes statements about the profession, considered to be the \u0026lsquo;truth\u0026rsquo;, that regulate disciplinary practice (Paton et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR32\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e). This \u0026lsquo;truth\u0026rsquo; is passed to students throughout their training both formally and informally, in the curriculum at university and on placements in a variety of other systems (such as healthcare, disability, education). Students are navigating these discourses through their program, and for some PIF may involve struggling, being unable to form their PI and find belonging or cohesion (Reissner \u0026amp; Armitage-Chan, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR34\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). The discourses of SP potentially influence the style of communication and interaction with clients. For example, if SP identifies as a profession that \u0026lsquo;fixes\u0026rsquo; communication or swallowing problems then their language and practice will be impairment based. If SP identifies as a profession who \u0026lsquo;advocates\u0026rsquo;, then some of their time will focus on community and family level advocacy.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eTheoretical framework\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn examining potential discourse analyses that may assist in developing a guide or scaffold, a Systemic Functional Linguistic (SFL) framework (Halliday \u0026amp; Matthiessen, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2004\u003c/span\u003e) provides an opportunity to examine meanings conveyed in student discourses from both content and interpersonal/attitudinal perspectives. SFL is a framework based on a semiotic, meaning-making theoretical perspective, focusing on the linguistic features of discourse, exploring how these might contribute to the construction of certain meanings or reflect attitudes of the writers/speakers. It combines the benefits of a linguistic analysis that focuses on \u0026lsquo;form\u0026rsquo; (wording, grammar) \u003cem\u003eand\u003c/em\u003e meanings, by focusing on the \u0026lsquo;function\u0026rsquo; of the language being used, linking the language closely with the context of the discourse, including its purpose. SFL has been used to analyse oral communication and interactions in healthcare (Schleppegrell \u0026amp; Ote\u0026iacute;za, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR37\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e), student SPs interacting with supervisors (Ferguson, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2010\u003c/span\u003e), and pathological discourse patterns in SP clients (Armstrong et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2011\u003c/span\u003e). One SFL study of multiple health disciplines examined on-line reflective journal entries about cross-discipline professional language use and communication skills (Ruitenberg \u0026amp; Towle, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR35\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e). Analysis of modality revealed students were more tentative in early journal reflections compared to later, and use of modality of certainty when discussing group agreement indicated a developing interprofessional identity (Ruitenberg \u0026amp; Towle, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR35\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e). An analysis of written reflections based on an SFL framework may be well positioned to offer insights into discourse features that reflect PIF and potentially offer a way to \u0026lsquo;develop a shared language to explicitly teach and assess reflective writing\u0026rsquo; (Ryan, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR36\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2011\u003c/span\u003e, p. 99). SFL has been recommended for use in HPE (James, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR18\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e), particularly for reflections, but has not yet been widely used to date for this purpose (Konopasky \u0026amp; Diaz, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR21\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec3\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eAim and research questions\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eGiven the current lack of information on PIF in SP and the potential value of an SFL framework in assisting with exploration in this area, this study aimed to investigate how language use differed in PI reflections between Year 1 and Year 4 in a SP program, utilising an SFL framework, in order to better inform the teaching of reflection that specifically supports PIF. The research questions and sub-questions were:\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e1. What are the language choice and genre structure differences in PI reflections between Y1 and Y4 SP students?\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cul\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003eAre students\u0026rsquo; choices of doing, thinking, feeling verbs or processes different (transitivity)?\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003eIs students\u0026rsquo; use of probability, obligation, usuality and inclination different (modality)?\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003eIs students\u0026rsquo; use of affect, judgement and appreciation different (attitude)?\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003eIs the genre structure of students\u0026rsquo; reflections different?\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003c/ul\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e2. If found, how can the differences inform the teaching of PI reflections to support PIF?\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"Methods","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec5\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eStudy design and ethics\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe study used an interpretivist paradigm with a sociocultural theory of learning, particularly useful for understanding PIF because context is so obviously influential (Wilson et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR44\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e). As noted above, SFL examines language meaning in context so was relevant to explore the phenomena under focus in this study. Our larger study received approval from the human research ethics committees of both the university conducting the research and the university of the participants (approval numbers x). This study followed the Standards for Reporting Qualitative Research (SRQR) guidelines (O\u0026rsquo;Brien et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR31\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eSFL\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSFL proposes three different components of the semiotic system: field, tenor and mode (Halliday \u0026amp; Matthiessen, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2004\u003c/span\u003e). The field concerns the nature of the discourse occurring, in this study the written career reflection in an eportfolio used both in the university program and potentially for future employers. The field is \u0026lsquo;realised\u0026rsquo; linguistically through choice of vocabulary that conveys the events, actions, people and phenomena involved in the experience(s) the writer is focused on and the semantic roles of the wording e.g. whether a person (realized by a noun) is the actor or the recipient of an action; whether a verb used involves \u0026lsquo;doing\u0026rsquo; (material process) or \u0026lsquo;thinking/feeling\u0026rsquo; (mental process). Such description is referred to as the transitivity system. The tenor of the discourse relates to the relationship between participants in the discourse, hence is concerned with more interpersonal aspects of the discourse such as levels of formality, persuasiveness, affect etc. The mode is focused on the medium of the text i.e., whether it is written or spoken, face to face vs telephone etc. and the patterns associated with either. As the focus of the current study was on the students\u0026rsquo; conveying of attitudes, systems realizing field (transitivity) and tenor (modality, appraisal) were central to the analysis (see further detail below). Genre was also analysed as it gives the holistic meaning of the text and is signalled by a staged or schematic structure (Eggins, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2004\u003c/span\u003e) as well as being characterised by the combination of field, tenor and mode.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eContext\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eXxx is a relatively young university and the student demographic has a high number of students being the first family member to attend university. It also has a high number of mature age students, with two thirds of students studying full time. The Bachelor of Speech Pathology is a four-year undergraduate program enrolling around 35 students each year. Students have placements each semester, building from short early observational and skills-based experiences to practicum units in the final two years. For each placement students collect evidence, write structured reflections and set new goals in their eportfolio, completed in a Workbook template accessed in PebblePad software. Students commence their eportfolio in Y1, completing new pages each subsequent semester. Across Y4 students commence a new Workbook template as a capstone assignment. Students are building their reflective practice, understanding of competencies and ability to set relevant learning goals across the program, supporting their PIF across the program.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec8\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eRecruitment\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eAll students enrolled in the program at xxx were given written information about the larger study, an information video, and received email invitations. Presentations and additional invitations were given in the specific units where the eportfolio was embedded in both semesters of 2018. Students were aware that participation was voluntary and would not affect grades or relationships with the researchers. Students could participate by ticking a consent box within the eportfolio, giving permission for the eportfolio to be exported as a PDF document after grading was complete.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eParticipants\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eOverall, 47 eportfolios were submitted to the study in 2018, with participation rates of 84% for Y1 and 89% for Y4, giving an overall participation rate of 85%. We used purposive sampling (Moser \u0026amp; Korstjens, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR29\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e) to select 10 eportfolios from Y1 and 10 from Y4 matched as closely as possible on their demographics as shown in Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e. The participants were all female, English speaking, domestic students, with none identified as from non-English speaking backgrounds.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab1\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 1\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eParticipant characteristics\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"6\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c6\" colnum=\"6\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c2\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eVariable\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eY1 \u003cem\u003e(n\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;10)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c6\" namest=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eY4 \u003cem\u003e(n\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;10)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c2\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMean\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eRange\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMean\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eRange\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c2\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAge in years\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e28\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e19\u0026ndash;40\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e26\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e21\u0026ndash;46\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eVariable\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eSubgroups\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003efrequency\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003efrequency\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDisability\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eyes\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e10\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eno\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e6\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e60\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e9\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e90\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eunknown\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e40\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFirst in family*\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eyes\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e6\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e60\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e6\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e60\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eno\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e40\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e40\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eStudy load\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003efull-time\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e8\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e80\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e9\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e90\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003epart-time\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e20\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e10\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSES\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ehigh\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e30\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e7\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e70\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003emedium\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e7\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e70\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e30\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eRegionality\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eurban\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e10\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e100\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e9\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e90\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eregional\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e10\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c2\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eBorn overseas\u003csup\u003e#\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e20\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e20\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003ctfoot\u003e \u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"6\"\u003e*first in family means first to attend university in the family based on parent qualifications\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"6\"\u003e# one born in South Africa, one in Serbia and two in England\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tfoot\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cem\u003eInsert\u003c/em\u003e Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e \u003cem\u003ehere.\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eData\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eStudents develop a front page called \u0026lsquo;\u003cem\u003eWho am I?\u0026rsquo;\u003c/em\u003e to attach to their eportfolio Workbook. This page is an introduction to who they are as a person and their philosophy as a SP student, i.e., a career or PI reflection. Students are encouraged to be creative, by adding photos and other personalisation, and are given questions to guide their reflection:\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cul\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003eWhy are you becoming a SP?\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003eWhat has led you to becoming a SP?\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003eWhy is becoming a SP important to you?\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003eWhat kind of SP do you want to be and why?\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003c/ul\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis activity commences in a Y1 class in Semester 2, with students choosing from a selection of photographs, symbols and words to start their reflection. Throughout the unit students are given time in small groups to discuss with peers the competencies of SP and reflect on the knowledge and skills they have developed already in their lives that link to the competencies. They are also given time to discuss their two observation day experiences in class. Students also have feedback on an early submission of their ePortfolio, giving guidance about their reflections. These activities shape their ability to reflect before the activity to develop their \u0026lsquo;\u003cem\u003eWho am I?\u0026rsquo;\u003c/em\u003e page. The ePortfolio is submitted at the end of semester and the depth of reflection is one of the rubric criteria. The \u0026lsquo;\u003cem\u003eWho am I?\u0026rsquo;\u003c/em\u003e page activity is then repeated in Y3 when students are encouraged to redevelop the page. In Y4, students are again given the same instructions and renew their page to attach to their new Workbook (see supplementary file for detailed instructions).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis \u0026lsquo;\u003cem\u003eWho am I?\u003c/em\u003e\u0026rsquo; page from Y1 and Y4 students formed the data for this study. After grading at the end of semester 2, the eportfolios with given consent were exported as PDF documents. The text for the \u0026lsquo;\u003cem\u003eWho am I?\u003c/em\u003e\u0026rsquo; page was de-identified and copied into a Word document with each student given a code number to protect their identity. Demographic data had been collected with consent in the larger study and was also given the same code number.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec11\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eAnalysis\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe texts were edited for spelling errors, then each text was added to an Excel workbook page. The text was divided into clauses (as indicated by the presence of a main verb) and each clause (and its associated embedded clause if present) was on a separate line. Clauses were chosen as the unit of analysis in line with SFL\u0026rsquo;s theory of \u0026lsquo;clause\u0026rsquo; as \u0026lsquo;message\u0026rsquo; (Halliday \u0026amp; Matthiessen, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2004\u003c/span\u003e). Columns were added for each analysis type described below. Texts were of a similar length in each cohort (see supplementary file for details).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eTransitivity\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eTransitivity analysis relates to the field of the text as noted above. It explored the different types of processes depicted by verb usage and the role of participants in clauses. There are five main process types, shown in Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e (adapted from Armstrong et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2011\u003c/span\u003e), with mental processes subdivided into processes of sensing, feeling or thinking (Eggins, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2004\u003c/span\u003e). Different patterns of process usage can reflect the writer\u0026rsquo;s reality and produce diverse types of genres. For example, the narrative genre typically consists of predominantly material processes reflecting actions and events, with a smaller number of relational processes used to describe participants or circumstances in which these took place. A small number of mental processes reflect either the speaker\u0026rsquo;s or the narrative participants\u0026rsquo; attitudes/feelings towards the events in some way. An expository genre (i.e. explanation, provision of information on a particular topic), on the other hand, would consist predominantly of relational processes, where \u0026lsquo;facts\u0026rsquo; are provided from a supposedly more objective stance (Eggins, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2004\u003c/span\u003e). The main verb was identified in each clause and classified as a particular process type. The total number of different process types were then collated, with the average calculated across all Y1 texts and across Y4 texts. Rich textual description was used to give examples of patterns for each cohort.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab2\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 2\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eProcess types\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"4\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eVerb process\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDefinition\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDiscourse function\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCommon examples from texts\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMaterial\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eProcesses of \u0026lsquo;doing\u0026rsquo;\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eRecount actions, events\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003edevelop, do, give, go, help, make, study, work\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eRelational\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eProcesses of \u0026lsquo;having\u0026rsquo;, \u0026lsquo;being\u0026rsquo;\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCategorizing or evaluating\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eDescribing\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003ePossessing\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eI am/was\u0026hellip;\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIt is\u0026hellip;\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eI have/had\u0026hellip;\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"2\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMental\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eProcesses of thinking\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eReporting evaluation or opinion; experiences; or desires\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eI think/know/believe\u0026hellip;\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eI learned/realised\u0026hellip;\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eI want/hope/need\u0026hellip;\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003efeeling\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eReporting Feelings\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eI felt/like/love/enjoyed\u0026hellip;\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003esensing\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eReporting experiences\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eI look/saw/heard\u0026hellip;\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eVerbal\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eProcesses of speaking\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eReporting conversation\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSpeak, talk\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eBehavioural\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eProcesses of physiology or psychology\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eReporting physiological or psychological actions\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eExamples would be coughing, dreaming.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cem\u003eInsert\u003c/em\u003e Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e \u003cem\u003ehere.\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAppraisal: Modality\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe appraisal analysis relates to the tenor of the texts and examined two systems: modality and attitude. Analysis of modality can show the writer\u0026rsquo;s thoughts and attitudes towards their message. Modality can express the writer\u0026rsquo;s sense of obligation or inclination towards a task or issue and the probability or usuality of an event or feeling. Modality can be used to hedge, therefore making space for other perspectives (e.g. this \u003cem\u003emight\u003c/em\u003e work) or may be definite (e.g. this \u003cem\u003ewill\u003c/em\u003e work) (Gebhard \u0026amp; Accurso, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e). As explained for transitivity previously, modality (modal verbs, adverbs or nouns) was recorded for each clause in the texts and classified in terms of type (probability, usuality, obligation or inclination) and degree (high, medium, low) (Eggins, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2004\u003c/span\u003e) as shown in Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e. The number of instances of each modality type and degree were then collated across all Y1 texts and compared to the totals from Y4 texts using descriptive statistics with examples and qualitative interpretations also provided.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab3\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 3\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eType and degree of modality\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"3\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eType\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003edegree\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eExample\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"2\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eProbability\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ehigh (certainty)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eI \u003cb\u003eknow\u003c/b\u003e I \u003cb\u003ewill\u003c/b\u003e do it.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMedium (probability)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eI \u003cb\u003ebelieve\u003c/b\u003e I \u003cb\u003ecan\u003c/b\u003e do it.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLow (possibility)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eI \u003cb\u003ehope\u003c/b\u003e I \u003cb\u003emay\u003c/b\u003e do it.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"2\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eUsuality\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eHigh (always)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eI \u003cb\u003ealways\u003c/b\u003e do it.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMedium (usually)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eI \u003cb\u003eusually\u003c/b\u003e do it.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLow (sometimes)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eI \u003cb\u003esometimes\u003c/b\u003e do it.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"2\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003einclination\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eHigh (determined)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eI \u003cb\u003eneed\u003c/b\u003e to do it.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMedium (keen)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eI\u0026rsquo;m \u003cb\u003ekeen\u003c/b\u003e to do it.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLow (willing)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eI\u0026rsquo;m \u003cb\u003ewilling\u003c/b\u003e to do it.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"2\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eobligation\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eHigh (required)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eI\u0026rsquo;m \u003cb\u003erequired\u003c/b\u003e to do it.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMedium (supposed)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eI\u0026rsquo;m \u003cb\u003esupposed\u003c/b\u003e to do it\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLow (allowed)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eI\u0026rsquo;m \u003cb\u003eallowed\u003c/b\u003e to do it.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cem\u003eInsert\u003c/em\u003e Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e \u003cem\u003ehere.\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAppraisal: Attitude\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAttitude is categorised as \u0026lsquo;affect\u0026rsquo; (related to personal feeling about something), \u0026lsquo;appreciation\u0026rsquo; (related to more objective evaluations) and \u0026lsquo;judgment\u0026rsquo; (related to more objective attitudes regarding ethics). Attitude can be positive or negative, see Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e. As described for other analyses, the total number of instances of each type and polarity of attitude was collated, averaged across cohorts and described with examples and qualitative interpretation.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab4\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 4\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eType and polarity of attitude\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"2\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAttitude polarity\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eExamples\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePositive affect\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eI \u003cb\u003eloved\u003c/b\u003e it.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eI\u0026rsquo;m \u003cb\u003eexcited\u003c/b\u003e about it.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAffect Negative\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eI \u003cb\u003ehated\u003c/b\u003e it.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eI\u0026rsquo;m \u003cb\u003esad\u003c/b\u003e about it.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAppreciation positive\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eI\u0026rsquo;m \u003cb\u003egrateful\u003c/b\u003e for it.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIt is \u003cb\u003efascinating\u003c/b\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAppreciation Negative\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIt is \u003cb\u003edifficult\u003c/b\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eI \u003cb\u003ewon\u0026rsquo;t miss\u003c/b\u003e it.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eJudgement positive\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eI\u0026rsquo;m \u003cb\u003ecompetent\u003c/b\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThey were \u003cb\u003egreat\u003c/b\u003e supervisors.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eJudgement Negative\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eI have \u003cb\u003eso much to learn\u003c/b\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThey were \u003cb\u003eunhelpful\u003c/b\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cem\u003eInsert\u003c/em\u003e Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e \u003cem\u003ehere.\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eGenre\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eA genre occurs in a particular context, has stages or a schematic structure indicated by patterns in the text (Eggins, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2004\u003c/span\u003e). Reflection is a type of \u0026lsquo;social genre\u0026rsquo; with a social purpose, and has elements of different \u0026lsquo;cognitive\u0026rsquo; genres that have a relatively fixed purpose: recount, description, explanation, and discussion (Ryan, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR36\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2011\u003c/span\u003e). In order to explore the genre of the texts and place the student\u0026rsquo;s reflection within context, the procedure outlined by Woodward-Kron (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR45\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e), based on Eggins (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2004\u003c/span\u003e) was used. The procedure involved:\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cul\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003edescribing the overall purpose of the genre;\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003eidentifying the main stages in the text based on topic and linguistic features;\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003eproviding a rationale for these stages;\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003eidentifying the order of the stages and whether stages are obligatory, optional or recursive;\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003eproviding labels for the stages; and\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003eproviding a description of the associated linguistic patterns (i.e., any relevant field, tenor and mode variables) for each stage (adapted from Woodward-Kron, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR45\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e, p. 67).\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003c/ul\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eEach text was analysed separately, with results for each cohort collated for comparison.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec12\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eResearcher characteristics\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe first author was known to the participants as the long-term clinical coordinator for the program. She prepared students for placements, taught clinical skills, lectured in different units and was responsible for the eportfolio. She has experience in qualitative research and this study was part of her doctoral study. The second author was also part of the SP academic team as a researcher, only having brief contact with students during the program. She has extensive research experience including as part of large multi-disciplinary teams.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec13\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eRigour\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eTo enhance rigour and ensure trustworthiness, dependability, reliability and credibility (McAllister \u0026amp; Lyons, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR27\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e) several processes were engaged. The first author kept a journal throughout the analysis process for ongoing reflexivity and to ensure a transparent audit trail across the research process. All decisions were discussed between authors to ensure trustworthiness and as part of the ongoing reflexivity process, to reduce the influence of biases on the analyses. Reliability checks were carried out for coding. The first author coded all texts for transitivity, modality and attitude, and the second author coded 20%. As the genre analysis involved extensive working back and forth across a number of texts to identify patterns and stages, the first author completed the analysis, and the second author checked the analysis and any differences were discussed. Finally, many student examples are given to support analyses and additional data can be found in the supplementary file.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"Results","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec15\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eTransitivity\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eGenerally, the type of processes between cohorts were similar. The majority were material processes, while relational and mental processes were about equal (see Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab5\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e). This reflects the relatively factual nature of the students\u0026rsquo; statements, often relating to their journeys towards their choice of profession (Y1) or along their program (Y4).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab5\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 5\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eProcesses in texts\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"5\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eProcesses\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eY1 frequency\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e(\u003cem\u003en\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;10)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e% of all processes\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eY4 frequency (\u003cem\u003en\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;10)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e% of all processes\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMaterial\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e247\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e39\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e261\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e43\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eRelational\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e194\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e30\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e166\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e27\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMental\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e184\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e29\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e159\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e26\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eVerbal\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e15\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e25\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eBehavioural\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTotal\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e640\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e100\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e611\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e100\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cem\u003eInsert\u003c/em\u003e Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab5\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e \u003cem\u003ehere.\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eMaterial processes\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe most common material verbs used by both cohorts were: \u003cem\u003edo\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003ehelp, take\u003c/em\u003e, and \u003cem\u003ework\u003c/em\u003e, reflecting relatively concrete actions reported in their portfolio as they both commenced and completed their program of study. Most students in both cohorts used \u003cem\u003ehelp\u003c/em\u003e frequently, as expected for a helping profession (in 80% of Y1 texts and 70% of Y4 texts). Y1 students were general in denoting recipients of this \u0026lsquo;helping\u0026rsquo;, whereas Y4 students elaborated more on the recipients and the gains clients could achieve through the help, showing their increasing focus on outcomes of intervention by SP. Eighty percent of both Y1 and Y4 texts contained \u003cem\u003ework\u003c/em\u003e, however Y1 students predominantly focused on their previous or current work outside of SP as well as their aspirations for SP work, whereas Y4 focused on their clinical placements, future job aspirations and about the work of an SP. Y4 reflected a broader perspective of the profession and the future.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe verbs \u003cem\u003econtinue\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003edevelop\u003c/em\u003e and \u003cem\u003eimprove\u003c/em\u003e were used more frequently by Y4 students (29 instances compared to 7 in Y1). Both cohorts wrote about wanting to improve or develop patients\u0026rsquo; \u003cem\u003equality of life\u003c/em\u003e, however, only Y4 (#6, #8, #99, #105, #108, #110, #111) reflected on how their own competencies and attributes developed through the program and will continue to develop in the workplace. This indicated their understanding of the importance of their own ongoing learning and development to then effectively assist others. Y4 students also used a greater variety of material processes related to doing things with clients or patients potentially demonstrating the wider range of activities they have undertaken with clients.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eMental processes\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAlthough both cohorts used a similar number of mental processes, Y4 students used a higher percentage of thinking processes and Y1 more feeling and sensing processes (see Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab6\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003e, examples in Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e). Y4 may have associated being \u0026lsquo;professional\u0026rsquo; with having less emotional content in their reflections. Y1 used feeling words to indicate their enthusiasm for the program and that they were a positive fit for SP, but reflected less explicitly on their beliefs, attitudes and learnings.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab6\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 6\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTypes of mental processes\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"5\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eType of mental process\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eY1 frequency\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eY1% of all mental processes\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eY4 frequency\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eY4% of all mental processes\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ethinking\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e111\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e60\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e118\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e74\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003efeeling\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e54\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e30\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e36\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e23\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003esensing\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e19\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e10\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTotal\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e184\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e100\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e159\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e100\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cem\u003eInsert\u003c/em\u003e Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab6\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003e \u003cem\u003eand\u003c/em\u003e Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e \u003cem\u003ehere.\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe most common lexical items for thinking mental processes, were \u003cem\u003elearn, decide, realise, understand\u003c/em\u003e and \u003cem\u003econsider.\u003c/em\u003e Y1 students presented the decisions that led to this career and a prospective view of learning goals whereas Y4 students reported retrospectively on their learning journey and saw learning as a lifelong activity. Y4 realised the full scope and role of an SP and saw the importance of understanding and considering all aspects of clients. Y1 were sensing the different careers available to them, including SP, as well as their future and Y4 students sensed the role of the SP, the importance of communication and what a difference SP makes. Y4 were less self-focused.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e Verbal processes\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e While verbal processes were relatively rare across texts, there were some qualitative differences. Both cohorts used \u003cem\u003ecommunicate, say, speak\u003c/em\u003e and \u003cem\u003etalk\u003c/em\u003e but Y4 used a wider range of more specific communication vocabulary, for example \u003cem\u003eadvocate, express\u003c/em\u003e, and \u003cem\u003epronounce\u003c/em\u003e indicating a slightly more sophisticated understanding of SP practice (see supplementary file).\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec16\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eAppraisal: modality\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eWhile the number of occurrences of modality markers for obligation or inclination towards something and the probability or usuality of something was small for some categories, both cohorts used a range of modal words with similar overall frequency (20% of clauses in Y1; 24% in Y4, see supplementary file). However, as shown in Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab7\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e7\u003c/span\u003e, Y1 used slightly less probability and obligation, and more usuality than Y4; with inclination similar in both (see Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e for examples). In terms of degree (i.e. intensity of high, medium or low), Y1 used more high degree modality than Y4 (see Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e). Both cohorts were positively definite about their career choice and the profession with Y4 being more moderated in their expression (i.e., medium degree) and more aware of their future obligations.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab7\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 7\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTypes of modality\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"5\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eType of modality\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eY1 frequency\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eY1% of all modality\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eY4 frequency\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eY4% of all modality\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eProbability (certainty of doing something)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e97\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e70\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e113\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e76\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eInclination (desire to do something)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e20\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e15\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e19\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e13\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eUsuality (the frequency of doing something)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e18\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e13\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e9\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eObligation (to do something)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e7\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e6\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTotal\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e138\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e100\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e148\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e100\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cem\u003eInsert\u003c/em\u003e Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab7\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e7\u003c/span\u003e, Figs.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e \u0026amp; \u003cspan refid=\"Fig3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e \u003cem\u003ehere.\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThere was a similar spread of degree of probability across cohorts, with high probability most frequent, followed by medium then low. However, the cohorts were more/less certain about different things. Y1 were \u003cem\u003ecertain\u003c/em\u003e about their choice of SP as a career and of helping people; less certain they had the skills and attributes for SP; and least certain in future career goals they \u003cem\u003ehope\u003c/em\u003e to achieve. Y4 expressed \u003cem\u003ecertainty\u003c/em\u003e about client-related facts or circumstances (e.g., impact of communication difficulties) and were much more emphatic about how much they had learnt, been challenged, and developed through the program. Y4 had less certainty they were ready and had the knowledge, competencies, and skills to be a SP and least certainty in their future, but hopeful of being the best SP and ready for anything that comes.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eInclination was similar but Y1 used only high degree. Y1 \u003cem\u003eneeded\u003c/em\u003e to become a SP, \u003cem\u003eneeded\u003c/em\u003e certain attributes to become one, and always \u003cem\u003ewanted\u003c/em\u003e to help people and make a difference. Y4 used low as well as high obligation, they \u003cem\u003ewanted\u003c/em\u003e to advocate and enable clients who \u003cem\u003ewanted\u003c/em\u003e to have improved lives and \u003cem\u003eendeavoured\u003c/em\u003e to continue learning.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eOverall Y1 used slightly more usuality modals i.e. they were \u003cem\u003ealways\u003c/em\u003e interested in helping others, in communication and in SP as a career. Y4 also were also \u003cem\u003ealways\u003c/em\u003e interested in SP, will \u003cem\u003ealways\u003c/em\u003e remember to apply the skills they have learnt so they \u003cem\u003ealways\u003c/em\u003e focusing on clients\u0026rsquo; needs.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFinally, use of obligation was minimal and Y1 only used high levels, e.g., experiences \u003cem\u003emade\u003c/em\u003e them realise their purpose in life. Y4 used high and low obligation, they \u003cem\u003ehad\u003c/em\u003e to do this job, \u003cem\u003erealise\u003c/em\u003e the importance of communication, how \u003cem\u003eessential\u003c/em\u003e functional communication approaches are and will be \u003cem\u003eallowed\u003c/em\u003e to improve client lives.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec17\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eAppraisal: attitude\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eY1 used slightly less appraisal, in 33% of clauses, compared to 40% in Y4 (see supplementary file). Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab8\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e8\u003c/span\u003e shows the different types. Y1 used more affect (emotions) and less judgement than Y4. Appreciation usage was similar. In terms of positive/negative valence, Y1 texts were slightly more positive (90%) than Y4 (84%) and this was for both affect and appreciation; judgement was about the same (see Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e and supplementary file for text examples).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab8\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 8\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAttitude expressed in Y1 and Y4 texts\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"5\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAttitude type\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eY1 (\u003cem\u003en\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;10)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eY4 (\u003cem\u003en\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;10)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAffect\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e98\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e47\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e74\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e30\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAppreciation\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e29\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e14\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e37\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e15\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eJudgement\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e80\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e39\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e137\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e55\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTotal\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e207\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e100\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e248\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e100\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cem\u003eInsert\u003c/em\u003e Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab8\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e8\u003c/span\u003e \u003cem\u003eand\u003c/em\u003e Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e \u003cem\u003ehere.\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eBoth Y1 and Y4 showed enthusiasm and anticipation for SP (see Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig5\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e), while Y4 had more comments about specific supervisors, practicum experiences. Y1 had negative affect about past careers, justifying or attempting to validate their feelings for either choosing SP or changing careers. Y4 were more focused on the future with positive affect towards SP. Y4 were also focused on the benefits they had gained from the program personally and expressed gratitude for this. They were often surprised by the journey through the program, with both negative and positive affect towards the challenges they faced as well as the challenges clients face.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cem\u003eInsert\u003c/em\u003e Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig5\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e \u003cem\u003ehere.\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eY1 had appreciation for their own opportunities and for SP with negative appreciation towards their other potential careers/programs. Y4 had both positive and negative appreciation of the program, it being more than they expected but also challenging. They appreciated the \u003cem\u003eimportance of communication\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003ehelping clients\u003c/em\u003e improve their \u003cem\u003equality of life\u003c/em\u003e and the SP career.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eY1 judged themselves as a good fit for SP, having the \u003cem\u003etraits\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003einterests\u003c/em\u003e and \u003cem\u003eskills\u003c/em\u003e required. They also judged their previous experiences, the skills of communication and the \u003cem\u003especial person\u003c/em\u003e that has the \u003cem\u003eskills\u003c/em\u003e and \u003cem\u003etraits\u003c/em\u003e required to \u003cem\u003emake a difference\u003c/em\u003e for clients, improving their \u003cem\u003equality of life\u003c/em\u003e and that SP would give them \u003cem\u003epurpose\u003c/em\u003e and \u003cem\u003emeaning\u003c/em\u003e. Y1 used negative judgement towards clients and other careers.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eOver half of the attitude type for Y4 was judgment, directed at supervisors, the impact of SP on clients, and the skills, knowledge and attributes the profession shares. They judged their own growth through the program, with improved knowledge, competencies and attributes, while still having more to learn. Like affect and appreciation, Y4 had mixed judgement about the challenge of the program, \u003cem\u003edifficult\u003c/em\u003e but \u003cem\u003eworth it\u003c/em\u003e, and for clients, the impact of communication difficulties is negative, but SP can make a positive difference. Finally, Y4 used judgement to say how little is known about the importance of communication, the right to communicate, the value of SP, which led to a strong commitment to advocating for clients and the profession in the future. This shows Y4 not only noticing issues but taking up the responsibility of their profession to make changes.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec18\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eGenre\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eAcross the texts nine stages were identified but not used by both cohorts as shown in Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab9\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e9\u003c/span\u003e (full analysis in supplementary file). Y1 had a higher number and higher average of stages and more recursion perhaps indicating being unsure about what to write. Two stages were unique to Y1 (Other careers, SP is my purpose) and three unique to Y4 (My SP journey, Advocacy for SP, The future of SP), indicating a different reflection focus (examples in Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig6\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab9\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 9\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eStages in texts\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"7\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c6\" colnum=\"6\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c7\" colnum=\"7\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eStage\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c3\" namest=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTotal stages used (%)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c5\" namest=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003estage order\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e(optional)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c7\" namest=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eRecursive\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eY1\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e(\u003cem\u003en\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;10)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eY4\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e(\u003cem\u003en\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;10)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eY1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eY4\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eY1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eY4\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMy identity\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e8 (80)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4 (40)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e(i)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e(i)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNo\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNo\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOther careers\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e7 (70)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0 (0)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e(ii)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eYes\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNo\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFinding SP\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e7 (70)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2 (20)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e(iii)+\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e(ii)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eYes\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNo\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSP is my purpose\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5 (50)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0 (0)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e(iv)+\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNo\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eI fit SP\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e10 (100)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3 (30)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eany\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e(iii)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eYes\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNo\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMy SP future\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e10 (100)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e10 (100)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eii+\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eii+\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eYes\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eYes\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMy SP journey\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0 (0)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e10 (100)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e(any)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eYes\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAdvocacy for SP\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0 (0)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e8 (80)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e(any)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eYes\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe future of SP\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0 (0)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1 (10)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e(iv)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNo\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTotal stages\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e(mean, range)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e47\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e(4.7, 2\u0026ndash;6)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e38\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e(3.8, 3\u0026ndash;5)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e6\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e7\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTotal stages with recursive stages included\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e(mean, range)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e62\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e(6.2, 2\u0026ndash;10)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e46\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e(4.6, 3\u0026ndash;7)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cem\u003eInsert\u003c/em\u003e Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab9\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e9\u003c/span\u003e \u003cem\u003eand\u003c/em\u003e Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig6\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003e \u003cem\u003ehere.\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cem\u003eMy identity\u003c/em\u003e was used as the first stage by both groups, but more frequently by Y1. Younger Y1 students tended to list their name, age, previous school; mature Y1 students discussed other life roles. Y4 only gave their name, year and current placement, with few referring to personal details or circumstances, showing their understanding of a professional presentation and their focus on their SP identity.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe four stages of \u003cem\u003eOther Careers, Finding SP, SP is my purpose\u003c/em\u003e, and \u003cem\u003eI fit SP\u003c/em\u003e were only/mostly used by Y1. Mature Y1 students presented previous careers/roles and younger students discussed previous studies. Y1 described experiences/research leading to SP, were definite SP was for them, giving them meaning or purpose; and gave multiple reasons why they fit SP. This shows Y1 focused on justifying their choice of SP and how they were suited for this profession which was less important for Y4.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cem\u003eMy SP future\u003c/em\u003e was included by all students. Y1 presented how they saw themselves in the future, working with children or across the lifespan with some listing specific areas that interested them (e.g., disability). Y4 students were less specific about who they wanted to work with, being more open now they had experienced different placements. Y4 were excited and confident about entering their profession, knowing this was what they wanted to do, seeing how they would improve clients\u0026rsquo; lives, advocate, enable and provide the best care. Y4 were more specific about what they would do \u003cem\u003efor\u003c/em\u003e clients, rather than the clients they would work \u003cem\u003ewith\u003c/em\u003e. This indicates their focus was not on themselves and how they fit SP but on the outcomes they will be achieving for clients.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe final three stages were only used by Y4, again indicating the shift of focus to their clients and their clients\u0026rsquo; needs. In \u003cem\u003eMy SP journey\u003c/em\u003e Y4 discussed all they had learnt and experienced and how they had been challenged and changed by the process. Some expressed appreciation for staff and supervisors who had shaped them and acknowledged the learning journey was just beginning. \u003cem\u003eAdvocacy for SP\u003c/em\u003e covered Y4 students\u0026rsquo; belief in the fundamental right of communication, the importance SP and of advocating for communication, their clients and their profession. Finally, only one Y4 discussed used new developments that will change SP in \u003cem\u003eThe future of SP\u003c/em\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec19\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eReliability\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eInter-coder agreement was 81% for processes, 72% for modality and 83% for appraisal.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"Discussion","content":"\u003cp\u003e As one of the few studies to examine PIF from a linguistic perspective, and the first to explore PIF in speech pathology students, this study found differences in the language of written reflective statements of Y1 and Y4 SP students that can inform improved teaching of reflection that specifically supports PIF. We will discuss the results in relation to each of the research questions.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003eWhat are the language choice and genre structure differences in PI reflections between Y1 and Y4 SP students?\u003c/b\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eDifferences found in students\u0026rsquo; language choices and genre structure indicated that Y1 tended to be more focused on themselves, with a personal and enthusiastic reflection on their journey to SP, justifying their choice of SP rather than another career. They strongly presented themselves as fitting SP and saw themselves working with specific client groups yet may not have had a strong self-awareness reflected in their frequent use of emotive/affective language rather than thinking language (differences in transitivity, attitude and genre). Y4 were more moderate and objective in their reflection, more focused on their journey through the program and their activities with their clients. They appreciated experiences that had developed their competencies and attributes, the difficult journey had been worth it to enter the career they now perceived to have a positive impact on clients (differences in attitude). They were committed to ongoing learning and to advocate for SP and their clients. They were excited to enter the profession and open to different career paths in SP, showing a broader understanding and deeper commitment to SP (differences in attitude and genre).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAre students\u0026rsquo; choices of doing, thinking, feeling verbs or processes different (transitivity)?\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eReflection is the basis for PIF (Wald et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR43\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e) and reflection involves thinking and questioning (using mental processes) along with self and contextual awareness, resulting in learning and improvement (Tovey \u0026amp; Skolits, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR41\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). Increasing self-awareness, therefore, is an important aspect of PIF (Belgraver et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e; G\u0026oacute;mez, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e). The self is central to the construction of knowledge (Johnson \u0026amp; Chauvin, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e) and also to delivering relationship-centred care (Shapovalova et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR38\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e). Our worldview is formed from our core beliefs and values, shaped by personal norms, upbringing and sociocultural background, often informing the choice to become a health professional (Belgraver et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). The fact that Y1 used less \u0026lsquo;thinking\u0026rsquo; and more \u0026lsquo;feeling\u0026rsquo; mental processes in their portfolio texts could indicate a focus on their own instinctive feelings of \u0026lsquo;liking, loving\u0026rsquo; something rather than more reflective-related processes of, for example, \u0026lsquo;deciding, believing\u0026rsquo;, with limited self-reflection or even awareness of the significance of their instinctive feelings at this stage in their professional formation journey.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIs students\u0026rsquo; use of probability, obligation, usuality and inclination different (modality)?\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eHigh degree modality was more frequent in Y1 and the types of modality differed. Y1 included more usuality, Y4 slightly more probability and obligation. For later students, prompts for students to consider their obligations to their clients and profession (obligation) and to see themselves more clearly in their future career (probability) would be useful (see supplementary file).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIs students\u0026rsquo; use of affect, judgement and appreciation different (attitude)?\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eBearing in mind the previous discussion of reflection, it should also be noted that self-awareness does not only have cognitive components, but also emotional and behavioural components (Shapovalova et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR38\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e). Emotions have an important role in the reflective process (G\u0026oacute;mez, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e), and are closely linked to self-regulated learning (Pekrun et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR33\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2002\u003c/span\u003e). Emotions are key to how we perceive and remember things, negative emotions can impact decision making, and unprocessed emotions can impact mental health (L\u0026ouml;nn et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR24\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e). Emotional intelligence is \u0026lsquo;the competence to identify, express, understand and regulate emotions in the self and in others\u0026rsquo; (Shi \u0026amp; Du, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR39\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e, p. 2). Reflective writing can foster emotional awareness and enable the processing of emotions, protecting against stress and burnout (Wald et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR43\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e). The fact that Y4 used less feeling mental processes and affect (attitude) than Y1 could be seen either negatively or positively. From the negative perspective, perhaps the \u0026lsquo;professionalisation journey\u0026rsquo; may distance some students/clinicians from their emotions and may ultimately detract from the building of strong relationships required to engender trust. Seeing \u0026lsquo;stoicism\u0026rsquo; as an aspect of being a health professional is harmful, contributing to burnout (Wu, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR46\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e). On the other hand, students may have developed a degree of emotional regulation through the program. Students are often encouraged to distance themselves somewhat from their emotions as a) a self-protective measure in terms of emotional vulnerability, and b) a client-protective measure as the client should not necessarily be impacted by the clinician\u0026rsquo;s emotional responses.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIs the genre structure of students\u0026rsquo; reflections different?\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe cohorts were given four identical questions to support their reflections yet Y1 used different stages from Y4. Some stages were common to both cohorts, some unique to each cohort with some differences found in the reflections of mature-age students. Y1 focused on why they chose SP and how they were suited to the profession, being more self-focused and did not discuss their progress through the program. Y4 focused more on their profession and clients than Y1, showing a move from self to other awareness, including a commitment to advocacy. Y4 also reflected on their journey through the program, noting what they had learned and challenges they had overcome. Y4\u0026rsquo;s possible emotional self-regulation, described previously, fosters resilience and is linked to wellbeing (Field, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e), as is gratitude, (also expressed by Y4). In addition, Y4 reflected on the overcoming of challenges, another indicator of their resilience and confidence (Zegwaard \u0026amp; Adams-Hutcheson, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR47\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec21\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eHow can the differences inform the teaching of PI reflections to support PIF?\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe SFL categories of wording used provided clear links to PI patterns and how PI was conveyed in Y1 and Y4. The analyses reflected insights into specific wording patterns related to self-awareness and emotions in particular, as well as differences in stages in the genre structure. These differences may assist in the development of a learning guide or scaffold for a PI reflection. An example of a PI reflection scaffold with prompts to facilitate a deeper PI reflection based on the analyses of language choices and genre structure can be found in the supplementary file, with a different scaffold for Y1 and Y2 than for Y3 and Y4.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIncreasing self-awareness\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eStudents and professionals are often not aware of their own worldview and yet this level of self-awareness is important for culturally safe practice in a cross-cultural context (Belgraver et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). Reflections are an ideal tool for developing self-awareness:\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026hellip;students need to get insight in their beliefs, values and norms, identity and personality, and attach meaning to his/her experiences within those values: why do I do what I do? what are my motives? Who am I? what is my passion? What do I want to achieve in my life? (G\u0026oacute;mez, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e, p. 81\u0026thinsp;\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;2)\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eTherefore, including prompts in the scaffold to trigger thinking processes could support Y1 students to become more self-aware (see supplementary file).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFostering insight into emotions\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe role of emotions and their regulation in PI could be discussed with students as part of their reflections, using the wording categories as described in the analysis to facilitate further reflection, including prompts to focus on emotions in the scaffolding. This could support students to consider the implications of their emotions and ensure they are developing emotional regulation, rather than \u0026lsquo;stoicism\u0026rsquo; (see supplementary file).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eGenre structure as a scaffold\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe genre analysis demonstrated differences in genre structure, indicating the usefulness of the SFL analysis to potentially inform a PI reflection scaffold to facilitate students\u0026rsquo; learning. While a greater number of students would need to be sampled to establish an ultimate generic structure for such reflection, results suggest elements students may be encouraged to consider as they progress through their program. Having an explicit structure may well support more detailed and focused reflections (G\u0026oacute;mez, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e). The language choices and genre stages indicated differences in self-awareness, thinking and feeling language, and a different understanding of their role as a SP and these differences were used to identify prompts to add to the scaffold.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec22\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eStrengths and limitations\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis study was based in one university in an undergraduate program in Australia, examining texts of twenty students, which may impact the representativeness of the students, and the results may not be applicable to other health profession programs. Larger numbers of texts would enhance the generalisability of the results as would following students longitudinally. In written texts students can project an identity that they think is required for the assignment rather than being in line with their own identity (O'Donnell, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR30\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e) so this may also impact findings. The original texts contained multi-modal features, such as page banners, headings and photos, which were not examined in this analysis.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec23\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eRecommendations\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eEmbedding career reflections (e.g., in an eportfolio) across a program may both facilitate and capture differences in PIF. As noted above regarding genre structure, annotated career reflections, highlighting stages and examples of linguistic features associated with each (e.g., modality, process type) could be developed (Ryan, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR36\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2011\u003c/span\u003e), tailored to the cohort with prompt questions for each stage (see example in supplementary file). These analyses could also be useful for reflections in other disciplines. In examining the language used to express the students\u0026rsquo; journeys, particularly investigating the explicit conveying of attitudes and the generic structuring of the written reflections, insights into student perceptions of their own status at their journey stage can be directly gained. Using the career reflections of final year students and gathering career reflections from early and experienced working SPs would provide strong exemplars to extend the thinking of all SP students. Including prompts that encourage reflection on beliefs, values and identity to support increased self-awareness, as well as helping students see meaning in the full range of their experiences (G\u0026oacute;mez, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e) would be especially helpful for early in the program. In addition, students could be encouraged to reflect on those who have helped them on their journey so far along with the challenges they have faced and how they have overcome them to build their resilience and confidence before they face the increased pressure of full clinical placements.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFuture research into the role of emotions in PIF could yield greater insights into how to scaffold the use of emotive language in PI reflections. Another aspect of transitivity analysis which was beyond the scope of this study, but may prove useful in future studies is agency, the participant roles within a clause. Agency could potentially reflect students\u0026rsquo; levels of perceived independence, autonomy or self-confidence and may also show differences in students\u0026rsquo; understanding of client agency.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"Conclusion","content":"\u003cp\u003eAn SFL analysis of PI reflections indicated differences between Y1 and Y4 students\u0026rsquo; language choices and genre structure that could be used to develop scaffolding to enhance PI reflections in the future. Using a specific scaffold to foster a PI reflection may not only support students\u0026rsquo; reflection but in addition may also foster PIF.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Declarations","content":"\u003cp\u003eThe authors report that there are no competing interests to declare.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe authors would like to acknowledge the contribution of an Australian Government Research Training Program Scholarship in supporting this research.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eArmstrong, E., Ciccone, N., Godecke, E., \u0026amp; Kok, B. (2011). Monologues and dialogues in aphasia: Some initial comparisons. \u003cem\u003eAphasiology\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e25\u003c/em\u003e(11), 1347\u0026ndash;1371. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/02687038.2011.577204\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/02687038.2011.577204\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAshby, S. E., Adler, J., \u0026amp; Herbert, L. (2016). An exploratory international study into occupational therapy students' perceptions of professional identity. \u003cem\u003eAustralian Occupational Therapy Journal\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e63\u003c/em\u003e(4), 233\u0026ndash;243. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1111/1440-1630.12271\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1111/1440-1630.12271\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBarnett, R. (2009). Knowing and becoming in the higher education curriculum. \u003cem\u003eStudies in Higher Education\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e34\u003c/em\u003e(4), 429\u0026ndash;440. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/03075070902771978\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/03075070902771978\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBelgraver, E. E., Coppoolse, R., van Doorn, L., \u0026amp; Bakker, C. (2022). The personal dimension of allied health professional identity: A scoping review in health sciences literature. \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Health Professions\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e9\u003c/em\u003e(1), 39\u0026ndash;58. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.2478/ijhp-2022-0004\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.2478/ijhp-2022-0004\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCornett, M., Palermo, C., \u0026amp; Ash, S. (2023). Professional identity research in the health professions\u0026mdash;a scoping review. \u003cem\u003eAdvances in Health Sciences Education\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e28\u003c/em\u003e(2), 589\u0026ndash;642. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/s10459-022-10171-1\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/s10459-022-10171-1\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDunne, M., Penman, M., \u0026amp; Nisbet, G. (2024). Exploring the outcomes of a reflective teaching strategy with students: A feasibility study. \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Speech-Language Pathology\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e26\u003c/em\u003e(4), 532\u0026ndash;543. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/17549507.2023.2223373\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/17549507.2023.2223373\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eEggins, S. (2004). \u003cem\u003eIntroduction to systemic functional linguistics\u003c/em\u003e (2nd ed.). Continuum International Publishing Group.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eFalgares, G., Venza, G., \u0026amp; Guarnaccia, C. (2017). Learning psychology and becoming psychologists: Developing professional identity through group experiential learning. \u003cem\u003ePsychology Learning and Teaching\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e16\u003c/em\u003e(2), 232\u0026ndash;247. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1177/1475725717695148\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1177/1475725717695148\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eFerguson, A. (2007). \u003cem\u003eExpert practice: A critical discourse\u003c/em\u003e. Plural Publishing.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eFerguson, A. (2010). Appraisal in student\u0026ndash;supervisor conferencing: A linguistic analysis. \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Language and Communication Disorders\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e45\u003c/em\u003e(2), 215\u0026ndash;229. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.3109/13682820902929099\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.3109/13682820902929099\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eField, R. (2019). Teaching resilience and self-management skills: Fostering student psychological wellbeing for future employability. In J. Higgs, W. Letts, \u0026amp; G. Crisp (Eds.), \u003cem\u003eEducation for Employability\u003c/em\u003e (Vol. 2, pp. 237\u0026ndash;246). Brill. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1163/9789004418707_020\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1163/9789004418707_020\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eFitzgerald, A. (2020). Professional identity: A concept analysis. \u003cem\u003eNursing Forum\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e55\u003c/em\u003e(3), 447\u0026ndash;472. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1111/nuf.12450\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1111/nuf.12450\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eFragkos, K. C. (2016). Reflective practice in healthcare education: an umbrella review. \u003cem\u003eEducation Sciences\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e6\u003c/em\u003e(3), 27. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.3390/educsci6030027\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.3390/educsci6030027\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGebhard, M., \u0026amp; Accurso, K. (2020). Systemic functional linguistics. In C. A. Chapelle (Ed.), \u003cem\u003eThe concise encyclopedia of applied linguistics\u003c/em\u003e (pp. 1029\u0026ndash;1103). Wiley.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eG\u0026oacute;mez, A. G. (2014). Professional identity: a story about successes, failures \u0026amp; the power of words. In F. Meijers, M. Kuijpers, R. Lengelle, M. Post, A. G. G\u0026oacute;mez, M. Harlaar-Oostveen, W. v. d. Westen, D. Vijsbroek, R. Hensel, T. Korver, E. Sjoer, M. Aangenendt, M. Kuijpers, K. Sanders, \u0026amp; H. Kopnina (Eds.), \u003cem\u003eDynamic Dialogue Dynamiek in dialoog\u003c/em\u003e (pp. 73\u0026ndash;104). De Haagse Hogeschool.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHalliday, M. A. K., \u0026amp; Matthiessen, C. (2004). \u003cem\u003eAn Introduction to Functional Grammar\u003c/em\u003e (3rd ed.). Hodder Arnold.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHarvey, M., Walkerden, G., Semple, A., McLachlan, K., Lloyd, K., \u0026amp; Bosanquet, A. (2025). Reflecting on reflective practice: issues, possibilities and guidance principles. \u003cem\u003eHigher Education Research \u0026amp; Development\u003c/em\u003e, 1\u0026ndash;9. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2025.2463517\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/07294360.2025.2463517\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eJames, B. (2013). Researching student becoming in higher education. \u003cem\u003eHigher Education Research \u0026amp; Development\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e32\u003c/em\u003e(1), 109\u0026ndash;121. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2012.751089\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/07294360.2012.751089\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eJarvis-Selinger, S., Pratt, D. D., \u0026amp; Regehr, G. (2012). Competency is not enough: integrating identity formation into the medical education discourse. \u003cem\u003eAcademic Medicine\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e87\u003c/em\u003e(9), 1185\u0026ndash;1190. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1097/acm.0b013e3182604968\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1097/acm.0b013e3182604968\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eJohnson, J. L., \u0026amp; Chauvin, S. (2016). Professional identity formation in an advanced pharmacy practice experience emphasizing self-authorship. \u003cem\u003eAmerican Journal of Pharmaceutical Education\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e80\u003c/em\u003e(10), 172. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.5688/ajpe8010172\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.5688/ajpe8010172\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKonopasky, A., \u0026amp; Diaz, B. A. (2023). Functional and corpus linguistics in health professions education research: the study of language in use. In J. Cleland, \u0026amp; S. J. Durning (Eds.), \u003cem\u003eResearching medical education\u003c/em\u003e (2nd ed., pp. 163\u0026ndash;174). Wiley.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLewis, A., Jamieson, J., \u0026amp; Smith, C. A. (2023). Professional identity formation in allied health: A systematic review with narrative synthesis. \u003cem\u003eTeaching and Learning in Medicine\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e37\u003c/em\u003e(1), 24\u0026ndash;40. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/10401334.2023.2290608\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/10401334.2023.2290608\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLim, J. Y., Ong, S. Y. K., Ng, C. Y. H., Chan, K. L. E., Wu, S. Y. E. A., So, W. Z., Tey, G. J. C., Lam, Y. X., Gao, N. L. X., Lim, Y. X., Tay, R. Y. K., Leong, I. T. Y., Rahman, N. D. A., Chiam, M., Lim, C., Phua, G. L. G., Murugam, V., Ong, E. K., \u0026amp; Krishna, L. K. R. (2023). A systematic scoping review of reflective writing in medical education. \u003cem\u003eBMC Medical Education\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e23\u003c/em\u003e(1). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-022-03924-4\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1186/s12909-022-03924-4\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eL\u0026ouml;nn, A., Weurlander, M., Seeberger, A., Hult, H., Thornberg, R., \u0026amp; Wernerson, A. (2023). The impact of emotionally challenging situations on medical students\u0026rsquo; professional identity formation. \u003cem\u003eAdvances in Health Sciences Education\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e28\u003c/em\u003e(5), 1557\u0026ndash;1578. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/s10459-023-10229-8\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/s10459-023-10229-8\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMann, K. (2011). Theoretical perspectives in medical education: past experience and future possibilities. \u003cem\u003eMedical Education\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e45\u003c/em\u003e(1), 60\u0026ndash;68. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2923.2010.03757.x\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1111/j.1365-2923.2010.03757.x\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMann, K., Gordon, J., \u0026amp; MacLeod, A. (2009). Reflection and reflective practice in health professions education: a systematic review. \u003cem\u003eAdvances in Health Sciences Education\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e14\u003c/em\u003e(4), 595\u0026ndash;621. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/s10459-007-9090-2\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/s10459-007-9090-2\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMcAllister, L., \u0026amp; Lyons, R. (2022). Evidence matters: strategies for ensuring rigour in designing, doing, and publishing qualitative research. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Clinical Practice in Speech-Language Pathology\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e24\u003c/em\u003e(3), 149\u0026ndash;153. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/22087168.2022.12370377\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/22087168.2022.12370377\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMoniz, T., Melro, C. M., Warren, A., \u0026amp; Watling, C. (2024). Twelve tips for maximizing the potential of reflective writing in medical education. \u003cem\u003eMedical Teacher\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e46\u003c/em\u003e(11), 1410\u0026ndash;1415. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/0142159X.2024.2326093\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/0142159X.2024.2326093\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMoser, A., \u0026amp; Korstjens, I. (2018). Series: Practical guidance to qualitative research. Part 3: Sampling, data collection and analysis. \u003cem\u003eEuropean Journal of General Practice\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e24\u003c/em\u003e(1), 9\u0026ndash;18. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/13814788.2017.1375091\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/13814788.2017.1375091\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eO'Donnell, M. (2014). Exploring identity through appraisal analysis: A corpus annotation methodology. \u003cem\u003eLinguistics \u0026amp; the Human Sciences\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e9\u003c/em\u003e(1). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1558/lhs.v9i1.95\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1558/lhs.v9i1.95\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eO\u0026rsquo;Brien, B. C., Harris, I. B., Beckman, T. J., Reed, D. A., \u0026amp; Cook, D. A. (2014). Standards for reporting qualitative research. \u003cem\u003eAcademic Medicine\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e89\u003c/em\u003e(9), 1245\u0026ndash;1251. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1097/acm.0000000000000388\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1097/acm.0000000000000388\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePaton, M., Naidu, T., Wong, R., Whitehead, C., \u0026amp; Kuper, A. (2023). Critical discourse analysis: questioning what we believe to be \u0026lsquo;true\u0026rsquo;. In J. Cleland, \u0026amp; S. J. Durning (Eds.), \u003cem\u003eResearching medical education\u003c/em\u003e (2nd ed., pp. 153\u0026ndash;162). Wiley.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePekrun, R., Goetz, T., Titz, W., \u0026amp; Perry, R. P. (2002). Academic emotions in students' self-regulated learning and achievement: A program of qualitative and quantitative research. \u003cem\u003eEducational Psychologist\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e37\u003c/em\u003e(2), 91\u0026ndash;105. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1207/S15326985EP3702_4\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1207/S15326985EP3702_4\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eReissner, S., \u0026amp; Armitage-Chan, E. (2024). Manifestations of professional identity work: an integrative review of research in professional identity formation. \u003cem\u003eStudies in Higher Education\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e49\u003c/em\u003e(12), 2707\u0026ndash;2722. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2024.2322093\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/03075079.2024.2322093\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRuitenberg, C. W., \u0026amp; Towle, A. (2015). How to do things with words in health professions education. \u003cem\u003eAdvances in Health Sciences Education\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e20\u003c/em\u003e, 857\u0026ndash;872. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/s10459-014-9568-7\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/s10459-014-9568-7\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRyan, M. (2011). Improving reflective writing in higher education: A social semiotic perspective. \u003cem\u003eTeaching in Higher Education\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e16\u003c/em\u003e(1), 99\u0026ndash;111. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2010.507311\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/13562517.2010.507311\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSchleppegrell, M. J., \u0026amp; Ote\u0026iacute;za, T. (2023). Systemic functional linguistics: Exploring meaning in language. In M. Handford, \u0026amp; J. P. Gee (Eds.), \u003cem\u003eThe Routledge handbook of discourse analysis\u003c/em\u003e (pp. 156\u0026ndash;169). Routledge.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eShapovalova, M. L., Enns, E. A., Serdyukova, E. F., \u0026amp; Zvereva, R. G. (2020). Professional self-consciousness as factor of professional formation and self-development of personality. \u003cem\u003eEuropean Proceedings of Social and Behavioural Sciences\u003c/em\u003e, 306\u0026ndash;314. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.15405/epsbs.2020.10.05.41\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.15405/epsbs.2020.10.05.41\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eShi, M., \u0026amp; Du, T. (2020). Associations of emotional intelligence and gratitude with empathy in medical students. \u003cem\u003eBMC Medical Education\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e20\u003c/em\u003e, 1\u0026ndash;8. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-020-02041-4\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1186/s12909-020-02041-4\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eTight, M. (2024). Reflection: an assessment and critique of a pervasive trend in higher education. \u003cem\u003eEuropean Journal of Higher Education\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e14\u003c/em\u003e(2), 324\u0026ndash;342. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/21568235.2023.2193345\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/21568235.2023.2193345\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eTovey, T. L. S., \u0026amp; Skolits, G. J. (2022). Conceptualizing and engaging in reflective practice: experienced evaluators\u0026rsquo; perspectives. \u003cem\u003eAmerican Journal of Evaluation\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e43\u003c/em\u003e(1), 5\u0026ndash;25. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1177/1098214020983926\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1177/1098214020983926\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eWald, H. S. (2015). Professional identity (trans) formation in medical education: reflection, relationship, resilience. \u003cem\u003eAcademic Medicine\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e90\u003c/em\u003e(6), 701\u0026ndash;706. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0000000000000731\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1097/ACM.0000000000000731\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eWald, H. S., Anthony, D., Hutchinson, T. A., Liben, S., Smilovitch, M., \u0026amp; Donato, A. A. (2015). Professional identity formation in medical education for humanistic, resilient physicians: pedagogic strategies for bridging theory to practice. \u003cem\u003eAcademic Medicine\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e90\u003c/em\u003e(6), 753\u0026ndash;760.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eWilson, I., Cowin, L. S., Johnson, M., \u0026amp; Young, H. (2013). Professional identity in medical students: pedagogical challenges to medical education. \u003cem\u003eTeaching and Learning in Medicine\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e25\u003c/em\u003e(4), 369\u0026ndash;373. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/10401334.2013.827968\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/10401334.2013.827968\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eWoodward-Kron, R. (2020). Let's talk about discourse analysis for health professional education: what, why and how. \u003cem\u003eFocus on Health Professional Education: A Multi-Professional Journal\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e21\u003c/em\u003e(2), 63\u0026ndash;74. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.11157/fohpe.v21i2.470\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.11157/fohpe.v21i2.470\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eWu, Y. (2025). Reclaiming health professional identity when enforced stocisim harms. \u003cem\u003eAdvances in Health Sciences Education\u003c/em\u003e. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/s10459-025-10479-8\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/s10459-025-10479-8\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eZegwaard, K., \u0026amp; Adams-Hutcheson, G. (2025). Sources of stress and students\u0026rsquo; perceptions of their wellbeing during work placement. \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Work-Integrated Learning\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e26\u003c/em\u003e(1), 25\u0026ndash;41. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"http://www.ijwil.org/files/IJWIL_26_1_25_41.pdf\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/ol\u003e"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":false,"hideJournal":true,"highlight":"","institution":"","isAcceptedByJournal":false,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true},"keywords":"professional identity formation, systemic functional linguistics, eportfolios, career reflections, speech pathology students","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-8748458/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-8748458/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003cp\u003eLanguage is a key tool in both shaping and reflecting professional identity, but few studies examine the language of professional identity formation and how this changes across a program. Understanding language differences could inform scaffolding to support deeper reflection on foster professional identity. This study aimed to explore differences between professional identity language in Year 1 (Y1) and Year 4 (Y4) speech pathology students in their portfolios to develop a guide or \u0026lsquo;scaffold\u0026rsquo; to support reflection on and ultimately foster professional identity. Written reflective texts were purposively sampled from ten Y1 and ten Y4 students of a four-year undergraduate speech pathology program in Western Australia, matched on demographic characteristics. A systemic functional linguistics framework was used to analyse the language, exploring transitivity (process types), modality and attitude and the overall genre structure of the reflections. Basic descriptive statistics were collated with rich qualitative description to showcase differences. Results showed differences in how Y1 and Y4 students presented themselves and made meaning of their journey to becoming a speech pathologist. Y1 tended to be more self-focused, using more affective words compared to more cognitive processes in Y4. The genre structures indicated the different focus of their reflections. These findings informed the development of a scaffold for professional identity reflections. Analysing the linguistic features of written self-reflections may well assist health professional students to recognise and foster professional identity formation throughout their program.\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"Who am I? A linguistic analysis of speech pathology students’ professional identity formation as reflected in their ePortfolios","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2026-02-24 14:56:12","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-8748458/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"3cad5b4d-587e-4cb2-bf59-4b949f40fec0","owner":[],"postedDate":"February 24th, 2026","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[{"type":"decision","content":"Rejected","date":"2026-05-08T14:31:03+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""}],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"posted","subjectAreas":[],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2026-05-08T16:22:11+00:00","versionOfRecord":[],"versionCreatedAt":"2026-02-24 14:56:12","video":"","vorDoi":"","vorDoiUrl":"","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-8748458","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-8748458","identity":"rs-8748458","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"XKTyCvWXoU3ODBz1xrDgd","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}