Kim Mi Ja, Park Chang Gi, McKenna Hugh, Ketefian Shake, Park So Hyun, Klopper Hester, Lee Hyeonkyeong, Kunaviktikul Wipada, Gregg Misuzu F, Daly John, Coetzee Siedine, Juntasopeepun Phanida, Murashima Sachiyo, Keeney Sinead, Khan Shaheen
College of Nursing, University of Illinois at Chicago, Illinois, USA.
J Adv Nurs. 2015 May;71(5):1098-109. doi: 10.1111/jan.12606. Epub 2015 Jan 28.
This study aimed to compare the findings of the quality of nursing doctoral education survey across seven countries and discuss the strategic directions for improving quality.
No comparative evaluation of global quality of nursing doctoral education has been reported to date despite the rapid increase in the number of nursing doctoral programmes.
A descriptive, cross-country, comparative design was employed.
Data were collected from 2007-2010 from nursing schools in seven countries: Australia, Japan, Korea, South Africa, Thailand, UK and USA. An online questionnaire was used to evaluate quality of nursing doctoral education except for Japan, where a paper version was used. Korea and South Africa used e-mails quality of nursing doctoral education was evaluated using four domains: Programme, Faculty (referring to academic staff), Resource and Evaluation. Descriptive statistics, correlational and ordinal logistic regression were employed.
A total of 105 deans/schools, 414 faculty and 1149 students/graduates participated. The perceptions of faculty and students/graduates about the quality of nursing doctoral education across the seven countries were mostly favourable on all four domains. The faculty domain score had the largest estimated coefficient for relative importance. As the overall quality level of doctoral education rose from fair to good, the resource domain showed an increased effect.
Both faculty and students/graduates groups rated the overall quality of nursing doctoral education favourably. The faculty domain had the greatest importance for quality, followed by the programme domain. However, the importance of the resource domain gained significance as the overall quality of nursing doctoral education increased, indicating the needs for more attention to resources if the quality of nursing doctoral education is to improve.
本研究旨在比较七个国家护理博士教育质量调查的结果,并探讨提高质量的战略方向。
尽管护理博士项目数量迅速增加,但迄今为止尚未有关于全球护理博士教育质量的比较评估报告。
采用描述性、跨国、比较性设计。
2007年至2010年从澳大利亚、日本、韩国、南非、泰国、英国和美国这七个国家的护理学院收集数据。除日本使用纸质问卷外,其他国家均使用在线问卷来评估护理博士教育质量。韩国和南非通过电子邮件收集数据。护理博士教育质量通过四个领域进行评估:项目、教师(指学术人员)、资源和评估。采用描述性统计、相关性分析和有序逻辑回归分析。
共有105位院长/学校、414名教师和1149名学生/毕业生参与。七个国家的教师和学生/毕业生对护理博士教育质量在所有四个领域的看法大多是积极的。教师领域得分在相对重要性方面的估计系数最大。随着博士教育的整体质量水平从一般提高到良好,资源领域的影响有所增加。
教师和学生/毕业生群体对护理博士教育的整体质量评价良好。教师领域对质量的重要性最大,其次是项目领域。然而,随着护理博士教育整体质量的提高,资源领域的重要性日益凸显,这表明如果要提高护理博士教育质量,需要更多地关注资源。