Content area
Aim
To evaluate the early impact of the Centre.
Background
The educational quality of nursing and midwifery student clinical placement learning varies. The National Placement Evaluation Centre has a pivotal role in quality improvement by systematically collecting student and supervisor feedback on placement experiences.
Design
Multimodal impact evaluation.
Methods
Data were collected from website analytics and a survey shared via stakeholder registration emails and social media. The Impact Management Planning and Evaluation Ladder model was used to understand impact. Data were analysed using a sequential, hybrid inductive/deductive approach. Descriptive statistics summarised participant characteristics and qualitative data were themed.
Results
Website analytics revealed Centre visitors were from 92 countries, with most reviewing placement evaluation tools. Registered NPEC members represented 37 Australian education and 590 placement providers and together they accessed their data 6213 times. There was n = 107 survey responses. Thematic analysis revealed four themes describing user experiences, enhancements to placements and recommendations for system improvements: 1) A valued system, 2) Barriers to engagement, 3) Resulting changes and 4) It’s early days! The deductive analysis revealed far reaching national impact.
Conclusions
The Australian National Placement Evaluation Centre impact is amplified by its nationally consistent reach. Data collection via validated placement evaluation tools and streamlined data reporting informs improvements to the quality of nursing and midwifery clinical placements. Increased promotion of the NPEC to students is needed. The Centre has the potential to enhance clinical placement quality across national and international healthcare professions. Promotion to students is necessary. Future directions are reported.
Details
Validity;
Stakeholders;
Participant Characteristics;
Authors;
Supervisory Methods;
Evidence Based Practice;
Comparative Education;
Comparative Analysis;
Obstetrics;
Educational Environment;
Individual Characteristics;
Educational Quality;
Sequential Approach;
Learning Experience;
Mail Surveys;
Ethics;
Feedback (Response);
Student Surveys;
Data Analysis;
Nursing;
Information Sources;
Recruitment;
Educational Facilities Improvement
Students;
Websites;
Midwifery;
Midwifery education;
Conferences;
Validity;
Midwives;
Quality improvement;
Clinical placements;
Polls & surveys;
Stakeholders;
Nursing;
Learning;
School environment;
Supervisors;
Feedback;
Multimodality;
Health care;
Social media;
Visitors;
Clinical nursing;
Email;
Responses;
Professions;
Mass media effects;
Data quality;
Registration;
Nurses;
Evaluation;
Data collection;
Health services;
Education;
Learning outcomes;
Statistics
1 School of Nursing Midwifery and Social Sciences, Central Queensland University, 160 Ann St, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
2 Health Innovation and Transformation Centre, Federation University, Berwick, 100 Clyde Rd, VIC 3806, Australia
3 School of Nursing and Midwifery, National Placement Evaluation Centre, Griffith University, 170 Kessels Rd Nathan, 4111, Australia
4 Faculty of Health and Human Science, Southern Cross University, Northern Rivers, Gold Coast, Coffs Harbour, Australia
5 School of Nursing & Midwifery, Faculty of Health, Deakin University, 221 Burwood Hwy, Burwood, VIC 3125, Australia
6 School of Nursing and Midwifery, Edith Cowan University, 270 Joondalup Drive, Joondalup, WA 6027, Australia
7 School of Nursing and Midwifery, Griffith University, 170 Kessels Rd Nathan, 4111, Australia
8 School of Health, University of the Sunshine Coast, 1 Moreton Pde, Petrie, 4502, Australia