The Competence of Finnish Nurse Educators

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "The Competence of Finnish Nurse Educators"

Corey Wiggins
8 years ago
Views:

1 The Competence of Finnish Nurse Educators Leena Salminen PhD, Senior Lecturer University of Turku Department of Nursing Science FINE conference, , Cardiff

2 Turku TURKU

3 THE AIM was to assess the competence of nurse educators based on their own evaluations as well as those of nursing students, educational administrators, nurse leaders and nurse mentors This study is part of a larger Nurse Educators Competence and its Evaluation research project carried out in cooperation with all the universities of Finland that offer nursing educator education. Salminen et al The competence and the cooperation of nurse educators. Nurse Education Today. In press.

Competence and its Evaluation research project carried out in cooperation with all the universities of Finland that offer

4 Competence of educators is multidimensional Nurse educator roles have been discussed for decades Nurse educator education varies across Europe, no consensus on the minimum qualifications or required experiences Nurse educators need at least to complete a university degree unrealistic to expect teachers can perform the teaching, research, clinical and managerial roles (Salminen et al. 2010)

required experiences Nurse educators need at least to complete a university degree unrealistic to

5 Competence Functional adequacy and the capacity to integrate knowledge, skills, attitudes and values in specific contextual situations of practice. (Meretoja 2003)

6 The competence of nurse educators has been described in different terms academic, research, clinical practice and management (Costa and Barbieri Figuereido, 2008) the roles of nurse educator: teacher, scholar and collaborator (Davis et al. 2005) Competence categories

and Barbieri Figuereido, 2008) the roles of nurse educator:

7 THE COMPETENCE CATEGORIES Nursing competence Personality factors Teaching skills Nurse teacher Relationships with students Evaluation skills (e.g. Mogan and Knox 1987; Nehring 1990; Salminen 2000, 2010; Johnsen et al 2002)

Relationships with students Evaluation skills (e.g.

8 8 METHODS Cross-sectional survey design Structured questionnaire ERNT (a tool for evaluation of requirements of nurse teacher) 20 items /5 categories Data collection via Statistical analysis Participants: Nurse teachers themselves Nursing students Adminstrators of nursing education Clinical supervisors Nursing leaders (leaders at the health care, head nurses, ward nurses)

analysis Participants: Nurse teachers themselves Nursing students Adminstrators of nursing

9 RESULTS

10 PARTICIPANTS BACKGROUND FACTORS (N=689) Participants Mean age Proportion of women Work experience in current job Years SD % n Years SD Nurse educators (n=342) Nursing students (n=202) * Educational administrators (n=17) Nurse leaders (n=64) Nurse mentors (n=64)

7 97 331 14 8.2 Nursing students (n=202) 26 6.3 86 174 * Educational administrators 54 5.

11 The mean values of the sum variables in different groups Group (a) Nurse educators n=342 (b) Nursing students n=202 (c) Educational administrator s n=17 (d) Nurse leaders n=64 (e) Nurse mentors n=64 Cronbach s alpha for the ERNT in sum variable and total levels Pair-wise differences between sum variables Sum variable Mean (SD) Mean (SD) Mean (SD) Mean (SD) Mean (SD) α p Nursing competence Teaching skills Evaluation skills Personality factors 4.51 (0.41) 3.34 (0.67) 4.27 (0.56) 3.26 (0.69) 2.97 (0.63) 0.87 a-b***, a-d***, a-e***, b- c***, b-e**, c-d***, c-e*** 4.37 (0.51) 3.25 (0.79) 4.11 (0.58) 3.67 (0.69) 3.44 (0.62) 0.88 a-b***, a-d***, a-e***, b- c***, b-d**, c-e* 4.42 (0.46) 2.85 (0.77) 3.81 (0.64) 3.31 (0.72) 3.25 (0.68) 0.90 a-b***, a-c*, a-d***, a- e***, b-c***, b-d***, b-e*, c-e* 4.40 (0.47) 2.88 (0.84) 3.66 (0.71) 3.16 (0.77) 2.96 (0.79) 0.91 a-b***, a-c*, a-d***, a- e***, b-c*, c-e* Relationships with students 4.66 (0.41) 3.22 (0.89) 4.02 (0.57) 3.61 (0.66) 3.45 (0.65) 0.92 a-b***, a-c*, a-d***, a- e***, b-c***, b-d*, c-e* Total 4.47 (0.45) 3.11 (0.79) 3.97 (0.61) 3.40 (0.71) 3.21 (0.67) = realize very poorly, 5 = realize very well; the higher the mean, the better the realization. *p = 0.05; **p = 0.001; ***p = <0.001

Teaching skills Evaluation skills Personality factors 4.51 (0.41) 3.34 (0.67) 4.27 (0.56) 3.26 (0.69) 2.97 (0.63) 0.87 a-b***, a-d***, a-e***, b- c***, b-e**, c-d***, c-e*** 4.37 (0.51) 3.25 (0.79) 4.

12 THE HIGHEST AND LOWEST SCORED ITEMS IN DIFFERENT GROUPS Data Highest scored items Mean (SD) Nurse educators take students seriously (RS) Nursing students make active use of the literature and research in the field (NC) Educational administrators Nurse leaders Nurse mentors take responsibility for own actions (NC) make active use of the literature and research in the field (NC) take students seriously (RS) 4.72 (0.51) 3.81 (0.88) 4.41 (0.62) 3.87 (0.77) 3.59 (0.70) Lowest scored items guide students to develop their decision-making skills (TS) prepared to admit own mistakes (PF) prepared to admit own mistakes (PF) Mean (SD) 4.15 (0.69) 2.55 (1.04) 3.38 (1.03) are flexible (PF) 2.87 (1.06) have an overall view of nursing (NC) 2.53 (0.87) NC=nursing competence, TS=teaching skills, ES=evaluation skills, PF=personality factors, RS=relationship with students

students seriously (RS) 4.72 (0.51) 3.81 (0.88) 4.41 (0.62) 3.87 (0.77) 3.59 (0.

13 DISCUSSION - There was a certain amount of variation among groups in terms of the competence areas which were rated highly and poorly - Despite the criticisms, all the groups felt that the nurse educators were quite competent - Nurse educators gave themselves the highest scores comparing to other groups - but the lowest scores for their pedagogical skills

groups felt that the nurse educators were quite competent - Nurse educators gave

14 DISCUSSION - Concerning the evaluation skills: - quite worrying, students gave nurse educators the lowest scores - Based on the results of this study, it is possible to develop the educator training and the further education of nurse educators to better meet the competence demands - set for them by the present work demands and by society itself.

develop the educator training and the further education of nurse educators to better

15 Some limitations - Response rates varied - Data was fairly large - Some groups were quite small - The demographics of the respondents correspond to the population

16 Conclusion In the future it is important to develop evaluation methods to confirm the nurse educators competence level We must discuss, also on a general European level, should we test nurse educators competence via certification program

competence level We must discuss, also on a general

17 THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION

Online EFFECTIVE AS OF JANUARY 2013

Online EFFECTIVE AS OF JANUARY 2013 2013 A and C Session Start Dates (A-B Quarter Sequence*) 2013 B and D Session Start Dates (B-A Quarter Sequence*) Quarter 5 2012 1205A&C Begins November 5, 2012 1205A Ends December 9, 2012 Session Break