Content area
Full Text
ABSTRACT
An integrated curriculum was implemented in an upper division baccalaureate nursing program which required letter grades for clinical courses. The second semester clinical course involved student evaluation in four different settings. The original evaluation tool lacked both the discrimination needed for letter grades and the competencies common to all the settings. A computerized evaluation tool was developed to identify behaviors which could be evaluated and assigned a letter grade in all four clinical settings, and to provide formative and summative evaluation of performance for students throughout the semester. The tool focuses on the four areas of the nursing process, each of which is weighted according to the conceptual framework of the curriculum and the ability of a student at this level. In each of these four areas, entry level behaviors were identified and then built upon by progression from fundamental skills to more complex and independent behaviors. Students are rated on a criterion-referenced rating scale. A statistician verified that the tool was mathematically sound. Once developed, the tool was placed on computer where both students and faculty evaluate student clinical performance every two to four weeks. Because the tool was placed on computer, students receive immediate feedback, which facilitates formative evaluations. Trends in student performance can be identified easily, and faculty paperwork is decreased. The tool also promotes objectivity in evaluation and student awareness of expected behaviors. Finally, faculty and students have become more familiar and more comfortable with computers.
The implementation of a new curriculum in an upper division baccalaureate nursing program created a problem in clinical evaluation of student performance. The new second semester clinical course required assignment of an end-of-course letter grade reflecting performance in four different clinical settings: medical-surgical, community health, maternity, and pediatric nursing. The paper-andpencil evaluation tool used in the old curriculum lacked both the discrimination needed for letter grades and the identification of competencies common to all the clinical settings. In addition, students had difficulty determining their level of performance during the semester.
Over the next few months, the six faculty members teaching the course met to resolve...