Caring Futures Institute, College of Nursing and Health Sciences, Flinders University, Sturt Road, Bedford Park, 5042, GPO Box 2100, Adelaide, SA 5100, Australia.
Caring Futures Institute, College of Nursing and Health Sciences, Flinders University, Sturt Road, Bedford Park, 5042, GPO Box 2100, Adelaide, SA 5100, Australia.
Nurse Educ Pract. 2023 Nov;73:103818. doi: 10.1016/j.nepr.2023.103818. Epub 2023 Oct 31.
This review aimed to systematically scope undergraduate or postgraduate tertiary higher education nursing students' clinical practice teaching and assessment methods to identify features that align with promoting students' evaluative judgement.
Evaluative judgement is a new concept to nursing tertiary education. Currently, there are no published reviews of evaluative judgement in nursing clinical practice education. This review aims to assist nursing educators to operationalise the concept of evaluative judgement in clinical practice education. As such the starting point was to determine features of evaluative judgement in current clinical teaching and assessment designs.
Peer reviewed qualitative or quantitative studies that have evaluated teaching and/or assessment of tertiary (university/higher education) pre-registration (undergraduate) or post-registration (postgraduate) nursing students' clinical practice.
The systematic scoping review was prospectively registered systematic review (OSF DOI 10.17605/OSF.IO/PYWZ6) reported using PRISMA guidelines. A systematic search of five databases (Medline, Scopus, Web of Science, ProQuest, CINAHL) was conducted, limited from 1989 onwards and in English. Two reviewers independently screened titles and abstracts, then full text, with disagreements resolved with a third independent author. Data were extracted, including the frequency and methods of developing students' evaluative judgement across the categories of discerning quality, judgement process, calibration and feedback. A narrative synthesis was performed.
Seventy-one studies were included (n=53 teaching, n=18 assessment). Most of the included studies, included some, but not all, of the features to develop nursing students' evaluative judgment. For teaching methods, the most identified evaluative judgement features in the included studies were discerning quality (n=47), feedback (n=41) and judgement process (n=21). Only three studies included a method of calibration. For the assessment methods, feedback (n=16), discerning quality (n=15), judgement process (n=9) and calibration (n=4) were included. Many clinical practice teaching and assessment methods in nursing included features that develop students' evaluative judgement, with methods relating to discerning quality and feedback well embedded. Further adjustments are required to include methods to assist students to judge and calibrate their own performance.
This systematic scoping review identified that evaluative judgement in current nursing clinical teaching and assessment is not an overt aim. With minor adjustment to teaching and assessment design, nursing students could be better supported to develop their ability to judge the value of their own work.
本综述旨在系统地考察本科或研究生高等教育护理学生的临床实践教学和评估方法，以确定与促进学生评价判断能力相一致的特征。
评价判断是护理高等教育的一个新概念。目前，尚无关于护理临床实践教育中评价判断的发表评论。本综述旨在帮助护理教育者在临床实践教育中实施评价判断的概念。因此，出发点是确定当前临床教学和评估设计中评价判断的特征。
评价教学和/或评估本科（大学/高等教育）预注册（本科）或研究生（研究生）护理学生临床实践的同行评审定性或定量研究。
系统范围综述是前瞻性注册系统评价（OSF DOI 10.17605/OSF.IO/PYWZ6），并按照 PRISMA 指南进行报告。对五个数据库（Medline、Scopus、Web of Science、ProQuest、CINAHL）进行了系统搜索，限制在 1989 年以后，语言为英语。两名审查员独立筛选标题和摘要，然后筛选全文，有分歧的由第三名独立作者解决。提取数据，包括在辨别质量、判断过程、校准和反馈等类别中培养学生评价判断能力的频率和方法。进行了叙述性综合。
共纳入 71 项研究（教学 53 项，评估 18 项）。大多数纳入的研究包括但不限于培养护理学生评价判断能力的所有特征。在教学方法方面，纳入研究中最能识别评价判断特征的是辨别质量（n=47）、反馈（n=41）和判断过程（n=21）。只有三项研究包括校准方法。在评估方法方面，包括反馈（n=16）、辨别质量（n=15）、判断过程（n=9）和校准（n=4）。护理临床实践教学和评估的许多方法都包含了培养学生评价判断能力的特征，与辨别质量和反馈相关的方法已经很好地嵌入其中。需要进一步调整教学和评估设计，以更好地支持护理学生发展自己判断和校准自己表现的能力。
本系统范围综述确定，当前护理临床教学和评估中评价判断不是一个明确的目标。通过对教学和评估设计进行微小调整，可以更好地支持护理学生提高评价自己工作价值的能力。
