By: Ruth Crutchfield, SLPD, CCC-SLP, University Issues Committee Chair, and Marva Mount, MA, CCC-SLP, FNAP, Vice President for Professional Services

Supervising graduate students in speech-language pathology and audiology has always required a careful balance of teaching, coaching, and mentoring (American Speech-Language-Hearing Association [ASHA], 2008; 2026). But as more Gen Z students enter clinical training, many supervisors are realizing that some of their traditional approaches need a bit of adjustment—not because expectations have changed but because how students learn and engage has evolved (Chardonnens, 2025; Seemiller & Grace, 2016).

Clarity and Structure in Clinical Decision-Making
Gen Z students bring a lot of strengths into the clinical setting. Research consistently characterizes them as digitally fluent, socially aware, and motivated by meaningful work, with strong values related to diversity, equity, and inclusion (Seemiller & Clayton, 2019; Smith & Cawthon, 2017). They are typically comfortable with technology, open to diversity, and genuinely motivated to do meaningful work. At the same time, they often benefit from clear expectations, frequent feedback, and relational engagement, which align with broader findings that Gen Z learners prefer personalized, learner-centered environments with rapid feedback loops (Nature Index, 2025). When supervisors understand these tendencies, supervision can become more effective and often more rewarding.

Frequent Formative Feedback
One of the biggest shifts supervisors notice is how much Gen Z students value clarity. Many of these students have grown up in highly structured academic environments where expectations are clearly outlined. Research indicates that Gen Z learners thrive when educators provide clear performance expectations and defined criteria for success, particularly in applied learning environments (Shirazian et al., 2025). In clinical training, where there are often gray areas and nuanced decision-making, that lack of structure can feel overwhelming at first. Supervisors who take time to clearly explain expectations—what a strong therapy session looks like, how documentation should be completed, and how clinical reasoning is demonstrated—tend to see students gain confidence more quickly. It is not about over-directing; it’s about creating a foundation that allows students to take informed risks. Providing clear descriptions of therapy expectations, documentation standards, and clinical reasoning processes builds the scaffolding necessary for independent decision-making. Another noticeable difference is how Gen Z students engage with feedback. They don’t necessarily want less feedback; they tend to want more. Waiting until a midterm evaluation to discuss performance can feel too late for them. Instead, they respond well to brief, consistent check-ins. A quick conversation after a session—what went well and what could shift next time—can go a long way. Many supervisors find that this kind of “in-the-moment” coaching helps prevent small issues from becoming bigger ones later. At the same time, feedback needs to feel balanced. Research shows that Gen Z learners benefit from formative assessment and real-time feedback, which enhances engagement, self-regulation, and learning outcomes (Chardonnens, 2025). Gen Z students are often highly self-aware, sometimes to a fault, and benefit from hearing what they’re doing effectively just as much as what needs improvement. This aligns with clinical supervision models, which emphasize a combination of proactive instruction and ongoing formative feedback as essential to skill acquisition (Sterling-Orth et al., 2022)

An additional lens for understanding Gen Z learners in clinical education is self-regulated learning (SRL). SRL refers to a learner’s ability to set goals, monitor performance, and adjust strategies in response to feedback. In clinical training environments—where learning is dynamic, unpredictable, and highly contextual—SRL is essential for developing independent clinicians. Research suggests that SRL is not developed in isolation but is shaped through structured feedback, mentoring, and guided reflection. In many ways, the supervisory strategies that support Gen Z learners—clear expectations, ongoing feedback, and coaching-based questioning—are the very mechanisms that promote the development of self-regulated learning (Sahar, et al. 2026).

Technology Integration in Clinical Training
Technology also plays an important role. Most Gen Z students are very comfortable using digital tools, and they often expect those tools to be part of their learning. This doesn’t mean supervision has to become overly technical, but it can be helpful to incorporate simple approaches like shared documents for feedback, video review of sessions, or digital planning tools. Gen Z students—having grown up in digitally immersive environments—expect technology to support learning and communication (Alruthaya et al., 2021). These strategies can make supervision feel more collaborative and transparent. For students who are used to accessing information quickly, it also supports their ability to reflect and adjust in real time (O’Brien & Forde, 2023)

Developing Clinical Reasoning
At the same time, one area where supervisors can really make an impact is in helping students develop deeper clinical reasoning. Gen Z learners are often used to finding quick answers, but clinical work requires slowing down and thinking critically. A critical tension identified in the literature is that while Gen Z learners are adept at rapid information access, they may require structured support in developing deep, analytic clinical reasoning (Chardonnens, 2025). This is where supervision becomes less about telling and more about guiding. Instead of immediately offering solutions, asking questions like, “What do you think the client needed in that moment?” or “Why did you choose that strategy?” encourages students to build the kind of thinking they’ll need as independent clinicians. Over time, this helps them move beyond following steps and into truly understanding their decisions.

Psychological Safety and Supervisory Relationships
The supervisory relationship itself also matters quite a bit. Gen Z students tend to value authenticity and approachability in their supervisors. They want to feel comfortable asking questions and acknowledging when they’re unsure. Creating that kind of environment doesn’t mean lowering expectations—it means making it clear that growth is expected and that mistakes are part of the process (Edmondson, 1999; Dong et al., 2025). When students feel psychologically safe, they’re more willing to try new strategies, reflect honestly, and ultimately improve.

Equity, Inclusion, and Cultural Responsiveness
Another layer that often comes up with this generation is their strong awareness of cultural and social factors. Many Gen Z students are highly attuned to issues of equity and inclusion and want to make sure their clinical work reflects that (Seemiller & Grace, 2016; Weber & Keim, 2021) Supervisors can support this by creating space for conversations about cultural responsiveness, biases in assessment, and individualized care (Dong et al., 2025). These discussions not only align with best practices in the fields but also resonate with students’ values and strengthen their engagement.

Professional Expectations and Cognitive Load
That said, it is still important to be very clear about professional expectations. Gen Z students may be used to flexibility in some areas of their lives, but clinical settings require consistency, accountability, and adherence to ethical standards. Supervisors should be explicit about things like timeliness, documentation responsibilities, and professional communication—and, just as importantly, explain why those expectations matter. When students understand the impact on clients, teams, and compliance, they’re more likely to take ownership.

Something supervisors are increasingly noticing is that even very capable students can struggle with managing the many demands of clinical training. Between therapy sessions, documentation, coursework, and evaluations, the cognitive load is high. Additionally, research on graduate training highlights the high cognitive and emotional demands placed on students, particularly in clinically intensive professions. These demands contribute to stress, anxiety, and difficulty with workload management among graduate learners (Wang & Li, 2023). Offering support with organization—whether that’s helping them prioritize tasks, break down larger responsibilities, or use planning systems—can make a significant difference. This kind of support isn’t about doing the work for them; it’s about giving them the tools to manage it effectively.

Supporting Gen Z Students Experiencing Imposter Syndrome
One area that comes up frequently with graduate students—especially high-achieving Gen Z learners—is imposter syndrome. Many students enter clinical placements academically strong but quietly questioning whether they truly belong or are “good enough” to be in the room. In speech-language pathology and audiology, where students are expected to apply knowledge in real time with clients, that self-doubt can surface quickly (Yang et al., 2024).

Supervisors often see this show up in subtle ways. A student may over-prepare but still hesitate to make decisions during a session. They might seek constant reassurance, apologize frequently, or downplay their successes. In some cases, they may become overly focused on avoiding mistakes rather than engaging fully in the clinical process. Graduate students, particularly in rigorous programs, experience elevated rates of anxiety and stress, which can intensify feelings of inadequacy (Wang & Li, 2023).

Encouraging a growth mindset is also critical in addressing imposter syndrome. A growth mindset frames ability as something that develops over time, rather than something fixed. In health professions education, learners with a growth mindset are more likely to engage with feedback, persist through challenges, and view mistakes as part of the learning process (William & Lewis, 2021).

Supporting students through this doesn’t require lowering expectations; it requires being intentional about how we frame growth. One of the most helpful things supervisors can do is normalize the learning curve. Clinical work is complex, and even experienced clinicians continue to refine their skills. When supervisors openly acknowledge that uncertainty is part of becoming a competent clinician, it helps reduce the pressure students feel to “have it all figured out.” Simple statements like, “This is exactly the stage where you’re supposed to be figuring this out,” can be powerful.

It also helps to be specific when recognizing student strengths. General praise like “good job” often isn’t enough to counteract self-doubt. Instead, pointing out exactly what the student did well—and why it mattered—helps them start to internalize their competence. Highlighting how their cueing supported a client’s success or how their rapport improved engagement makes their growth more concrete and believable.

At the same time, supervisors can gently redirect perfectionistic thinking. Many students with imposter syndrome hold themselves to unrealistically high standards, interpreting any misstep as failure. Reframing mistakes as data—not deficiencies—can shift this mindset. A discussion might sound like, “That didn’t go the way you planned—what did we learn from that, and how might we adjust next time?” This keeps the focus on problem-solving rather than self-judgment.

Encouraging reflection also plays an important role, but it often needs to be guided. Students experiencing imposter syndrome tend to fixate on what went wrong, overlooking what went well. Supervisors can help balance this by intentionally prompting both: What worked? What will you carry forward? What will you adjust? Over time, this builds a more accurate and balanced sense of self as a clinician.

Finally, relationship matters. Students are more likely to push through self-doubt when they feel supported and seen by their supervisor. Taking time to check in, acknowledging effort, and reinforcing that growth—not perfection—is the expectation can create the kind of environment where students feel safe to try, adjust, and improve.

Imposter syndrome doesn’t disappear overnight, but with consistent support, students begin to replace self-doubt with clinical confidence. And often, those who start out questioning themselves the most become some of the most thoughtful, reflective, and effective clinicians.

Closing Thoughts
Ultimately, working with Gen Z graduate students is less about changing standards and more about evolving how supervision is delivered. These students are thoughtful, capable, and eager to learn, but they tend to thrive in environments where expectations are clear, feedback is ongoing, and relationships feel supportive.

When supervisors lean into a more collaborative, coaching-oriented approach, they often find that students not only meet expectations but exceed them. In many ways, Gen Z is reshaping the field toward stronger mentorship, clearer communication, and more intentional teaching. This is done through the implementation of learner-centered approaches, frequent formative feedback, relational supervision, integration of digital tools, and intentional support for well-being and identify development (Chardonnens, 2025; Dong et al., 2025; ASHA 2008). And in speech-language pathology and audiology—where clinical skill, human connection, and adaptability are essential—that shift is a meaningful and positive one for both clinicians and the clients they serve.

References

American Speech-Language-Hearing Association. (2008). Clinical supervision in speech-language pathology (Technical report). https://www.asha.org/policy/TR2008-00296/

American Speech-Language-Hearing Association. (n.d.). Clinical education and supervision. https://www.asha.org/Practice-Portal/Professional-Issues/Clinical-Education-and-Supervision/

Alruthaya, A., Nguyen, T.-T., & Lokuge, S. (2021). The application of digital technology and the learning characteristics of Generation Z in higher education. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2111.05991

Chardonnens, S. (2025). Adapting educational practices for Generation Z: Integrating metacognitive strategies and artificial intelligence. Frontiers in Education, 10. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2025.1504726

Dong, C., Altshuler, L. L., Ban, N., Wong, L. Y. L., Mohammed, F. E. A., Tang, C. T., & Kachur, E. (2025). Psychological safety in health professions education: Insights and strategies from a global community of practice. Frontiers in Medicine, 11. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmed.2024.1508992

Edmondson, A. (1999). Psychological safety and learning behavior in work teams. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(2), 350–383. doi.org

Nature Index. (2025). Generation Z characteristics in educational practices. Nature Portfolio.

O’Brien, A., & Forde, C. (2023). Health science staff and student experiences of teaching and assessing clinical skills using digital tools: A qualitative study. Annals of Medicine, 55(2), Article 2256656. https://doi.org/10.1080/07853890.2023.2256656

Sahar, F, Wei-Han, H., Mohamad Nabil, M.D., Chan, C.F. & Vinod, P. (2026) Evaluating the Instructional Strategies Influencing Self-Regulated Learning in Clinical Clerkship Years: A Mixed Studies Review. Teaching and Learning in Medicine, 38:1, 47-65, DOI: 10.1080/10401334.2025.2468953

Seemiller, C., & Grace, M. (2016). Generation Z goes to college. Jossey-Bass.

Seemiller, C., Grace, M., Campagnolo, P. D. B., Alves, I. M. R., & De Borba, G. S. (2019). How Generation Z college students prefer to learn: A comparison of U.S. and Brazil students. Journal of Educational Research and Practice, 9(1), 349–368. https://doi.org/10.5590/JERAP.2019.09.1.25

Shirazian, S., Vatanpour, M., & Guity, P. (2025). Generation Z: Learners’ profiles and teaching challenges. Frontiers in Dentistry, 22, 40. https://doi.org/10.18502/fid.v22i40.19906

Smith, T., & Cawthon, T. W. (2017). Generation Z Goes to College [Review of the book Generation Z Goes to College, by C. Seemiller & M. Grace]. College Student Affairs Journal, 35(1), 101-102

Sterling-Orth, A., Schraeder, P., & Courtade, G. (2022). Guide to clinical supervision. SpeechPathology.com. https://www.speechpathology.com/articles/guide-to-clinical-supervision-20509

Yang, X., Yeo, K. J., Lee, S.-H., & Handayani, L. (2024). A systematic review of impostor syndrome in higher education. International Journal of Evaluation and Research in Education, 13(6), 3884–3892. https://doi.org/10.11591/ijere.v13i6.30726

Wang Y and Li W (2023) The impostor phenomenon among doctoral students: a scoping review. Front. Psychol. 14:1233434. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1233434

Weber, K. M., & Keim, H. (2021). Meeting the needs of Generation Z college students through out-of-class interactions. About Campus, 26(2), 10–16. DOI:10.1177/1086482220971272

Williams, C. A., & Lewis, L. (2021). Mindsets in health professions education: A scoping review. Nurse Education Today, 100, Article 104863.