Printer Friendly

Evidence-based teaching practice in nursing education: faculty perspectives and practices.

Abstract

PURPOSE This national online study was conducted to describe nursing faculty perspectives and practices about evidence-based teaching practice (EBTP).

BACKGROUND Professional standards for nurse educator practice stress the importance of EBTP; however, the use of evidence by faculty in curriculum design, evaluation and educational measurement, and program development has not been reported.

METHOD Nurse administrators of accredited nursing programs in the United States (N = 1,586) were emailed information about the study, including the research consent form and anonymous survey link, and invited to forward information to nursing faculty.

RESULTS Respondents (551 faculty and nurse administrators) described the importance of EBTP in nursing education, used multiple sources of evidence in their faculty responsibilities, and identified factors that influence their ability to use EBTP.

CONCLUSION EBTP in nursing education requires sustained institutional, administrative, and collegial support to promote faculty effectiveness and student learning.

KEY WORDS

Evidence-Based Education--Evidence-Based Practice--Evidence-Based Teaching--Nursing Education--Nursing Education Research

**********

A 2002 position statement of the National League for Nursing (NLN) states that "the teaching of nursing must be evidence-based, with research informing what is taught, how learning is facilitated and evaluated, and how curricula/programs are designed" (p. 3). However, while professional standards for nurse educator practice stress the importance of using evidence (NLN, 2004, 2005a), the actual use of evidence by faculty to guide curriculum design, evaluation and educational measurement, and program development has not been reported in the literature.

The purpose of this national study was to describe the perspectives and practices of faculty in all degree levels of nursing programs regarding the use of evidence-based teaching practice (EBTP). Consistent with statements published by the NLN (2002, 2004), EBTP was defined for this study as the use of evidence by nursing faculty to inform: a) what to teach, b) how to facilitate and evaluate student learning, and (c) how to design nursing curricula and programs to promote the education of nurses. Evidence was defined as research findings and literature, professional judgment and expertise, and student preferences and values (Oermann, 2015, p. 304). A secondary purpose of the study was to elicit faculty recommendations about EBTP in nursing education.

BACKGROUND

Professional standards and competencies that inform nurse educator practice are replete with the need to use evidence in teaching. For example, four task statements in the NLN'S Core Competencies of Nurse Educators with Task Statements (2005a) focus on using evidence to "ground teaching strategies in educational theory and evidence-based teaching practices," "develop evidence-based assessment and evaluation practices," "implement evidence-based assessment and evaluation strategies that are appropriate to the learner and to learning goals," and "draw on extant literature to design evidence-based teaching and evaluation practices" (pp. 1, 3, 7).

The NLN Hallmarks of Excellence in Nursing Education (2004) defines EBTP as "using systematically-developed and appropriately-integrated research as the foundation for curriculum design, selection of teaching/ learning strategies, selection of evaluation methods, advisement practices, and other elements of the educational enterprise" (Glossary). This NLN document emphasizes EBTP in five areas (Curriculum, Teaching/ Learning/Evaluation Strategies, Resources, Innovation, and Educational Research) and endorses multiple sources of evidence in EBTP, including research, pedagogical reports from nursing and other disciplines, student evaluations of teaching, and peer review findings.

Standards from other professional organizations stress the use of evidence in nursing and health care. These include the American Nurses Association's (2010) Nursing: Scope and Standards of Practice; Quality and Safety Education for Nurses from the QSEN Institute (n.d.); and the Core Competencies for Interprofessional Collaborative Practice (Interprofessional Education Collaborative Expert Panel, 2011).

Several studies relevant to EBTP have investigated how nurse faculty teach about evidence-based practice (EBP). Melnyk, Fineout-Overholt, Feinstein, Sadler, and Green-Hernandez (2008) studied the perceived knowledge, beliefs, and teaching strategies of pediatric nurse practitioner faculty (N = 79) who teach EBP in graduate programs. Melnyk and colleagues reported that 14 percent of respondents identified the need for "the best educational process to teach EBP" (p. 11). Stichler, Fields, Kim, and Brown (2011) reported faculty (N = 40) knowledge, attitudes, and perceived barriers to teaching EBP in nursing programs, concluding that "further research is needed to explore the effectiveness of faculty education on the faculty's integration of the EBP process into course content, assignments, and students' clinical learning experiences as well as into the faculty's professional practice" (p. 99).

Upton, Scurlock-Evans, Williamson, Rouse, and Upton (2015) used an adapted version of the Evidence-Based Practice Questionnaire (Upton & Upton, 2006) to compare the evidence-based profiles of academic and clinical faculty (N = 81) who teach pre-licensure nursing students in the United States and the United Kingdom. They found that faculty in both countries face similar barriers in teaching about EBP and concluded that there is a need to evaluate the impact of faculty EBP profiles on student learning and the effectiveness of different EBP teaching strategies and curricula.

Research studies about the types of evidence used by faculty for teaching have also been reported in the literature. In a qualitative descriptive study, Patterson (2009) interviewed 14 nurse faculty, with an average 13 years of teaching experience, about the nature of evidence used in their teaching. Faculty preferred a "pluralistic view of evidence" including objective data, professional knowledge and experience, and professional sources (p. 330).

Using the results of the Patterson (2009) study, Patterson and Klein (2012) developed a national online survey to explore the types of evidence used by faculty and triggers, facilitators, and barriers to EBTP. Based on responses from 295 nurse educators representing 89 nursing programs, Patterson and Klein reported that participants identified using diverse sources of evidence in their teaching and "clearly articulated the steps used when considering the use of EBTP" (p. 243). These researchers concluded that the body of science in nursing education needs to be expanded to ensure that nurse educators can engage in EBTP to promote excellence in education.

Other published literature has focused on the need for evidence-based approaches in nursing education. Stevens (1999) defined evidence-based teaching (EBT) as "the conscientious, explicit, and judicious use of current best evidence in making decisions about the education of professional nurses," as well as "the use of knowledge generated through research to guide nursing education practice" (p. 3). According to Stevens, a large body of nursing education research is required for EBT, which includes "the arenas of teaching, learning, curriculum development, and education administration" (p. 3).

Ferguson and Day (2005) defined the concept of evidence-based nursing education as "the use of best evidence to justify particular teaching or curricular interventions, considering the needs of individual learners, the professional judgment of nurse educators, and the resource costs of the interventions" (p. 110), and called for research-generated evidence and developing the science of nursing education. McCartney and Morin (2005) described strategies nurse educators can use to develop an evidence-based approach to teaching, and recommended literature resources in nursing and education, bibliographic database search techniques, guides for appraisal of quantitative and qualitative research, and an evidence hierarchy to evaluate the quality of evidence in nursing (p. 406). Oermann (2007) proposed three phases for developing an evidence-based approach to teaching in nursing: asking questions about educational practices; searching for, critically appraising, and synthesizing available evidence; and evaluating the quality and relevance of evidence for individual teaching, learners, and settings (p. 255).

Yonge et al. (2005) compiled an inventory of 1,286 nursing education research articles published between 1991 and 2000 (including 22 literature reviews and meta-analyses), and evaluated the quality, content areas investigated, geographic locations where the research was conducted, research designs, sample size, instruments used for data collection, and funding resources. They concluded that a national research agenda for nursing education, including funding sources, needs to be developed to promote EBT.

Emerson and Records (2008) conducted a literature review of evidence-based education in nursing that focused on scholarship and education, and catalysts to the valuing of evidence-based teaching practices in nursing education. These authors recommended that the scholarship of nursing education practice continue to be explored through the design, testing, and refinement of education strategies from nursing and other disciplines (p; 359).

Gresley (2009) made a compelling case for teacher-scholars in nursing education who are actively engaged in the scholarship of teaching to build a science of nursing education that synthesizes "relevant research findings about teaching and learning" (p. 3). Consistent with the NLN Research Priorities in Nursing Education (2012a), Gresley asserted the need for pedagogical research to identify the most effective approaches for teaching students how to provide quality patient care. According to Gresley, the teaching and learning of evidence-based clinical practice must be evidence-based; that is, faculty must use teaching and evaluation strategies that are evidence-based and facilitate student achievement of desired learning outcomes (p. 8).

Boswell and Cannon (2012) proposed a working definition for EBT as "a dynamic, holistic system using educational principles validated by evidence to support, maintain, and promote a new level of knowledge for a learner in a variety of settings" (pp. 8-9). These authors systematically compared the steps and definitions of EBP with the steps and definitions of EBT and identified multiple components in the teaching-learning environment that impact the learner and the educational process. Boswell and Cannon also developed a schematic that depicts the sequence of activities for identifying EBT strategies and evaluating the EBT process.

Research studies and published literature in higher education in general echo the call for faculty to adopt teaching methods that are based on evidence and consistent with the most effective teaching methods available. Ambrose and colleagues (2010), as cited in Groccia and Buskist (2011, p. 8), identified seven evidence-based principles that influence student learning and "form the building blocks in the construction of integrated, holistic systems of teaching." Buskist and Groccia (2011) summarized different systems of EBT and aligned these evidence-based approaches with Chickering and Gamson's seven principles for good educational practices (Chickering & Gamson, 1987). In an anthology of EBTP in higher education, Schwartz and Gurung (2012) presented exemplars of innovative and technologically enhanced teaching practices used in the social sciences, many of which are applicable to nursing education. The literature clearly supports the timeliness of this study.

METHOD

Three questions were addressed in this descriptive study:

1. What are faculty perspectives about EBTP in nursing education?

2. How do faculty use evidence to inform their teaching and faculty responsibilities?

3. What factors influence the ability of faculty to engage in EBTP?

The study was approved as exempt by the institutional review board (IRB) at the academic institution where the principal investigator teaches.

Instrument Development

A researcher-designed survey was developed because an appropriate instrument was not identified to investigate the study questions. A pool of 60 possible survey items was generated using items adapted from existing instruments about EBP and items derived from literature about EBTP, including professional, academic, and accreditation standards used in nurse educator practice. Items were organized into three sections for each study question. Two independent, doctorally prepared experts in scale development recommended the number of response options for survey items.

An external review panel of 12 faculty experts in EBTP used an online validation tool to evaluate the pool of 60 possible survey items. Panel members were recommended by nursing deans and colleagues and included nine doctorally prepared and three master's-prepared nurse faculty who teach in associate, baccalaureate, master's, and/or doctoral programs located in three academic settings. The panel was sent a link to the online validation tool with a description of the study purpose, research questions, and intended study participants. The panel evaluated each item for relevance, clarity, and overall recommendation with an open-ended entry for comments and recommendations. Panel responses were anonymous.

A summary of the panel's individual ratings and recommendations was compiled, and copies were provided to the research team (study authors) for analysis. Substantial agreement existed among the reviewers regarding the relevance of the proposed items. The content validity index at the item level (I-CVI) for relevance was 0.81 or higher for 83/100 items; the interrater reliability for items evaluated by reviewers as highly relevant or quite relevant was .861 (Polit & Beck, 2012). The clarity of items elicited a wider range of responses, with 28 items rated as "not clear" by at least two reviewers.

Comments about why a particular item was not relevant and/or not clear were used by the research team to modify 6 items and remove 15 items from the revised survey. Additional items about databases used in EBTP and standards used to teach EBP were removed based on reviewer recommendations to shorten the survey. In addition, the lists of factors that facilitate or interfere with EBTP were combined as "influencing factors" to eliminate redundancy. Finally, reviewer recommendations were incorporated to include the study definition of EBTP in every section of the survey and to revise demographic items.

Based on the research team's analysis of ratings and recommendations from the external review panel, the 33-item survey was finalized and organized into three sections: a) faculty perspectives about EBTP; b) how faculty use evidence in teaching, including sources of evidence; and c) factors that influence the ability of faculty to use EBTP. Ten Likert-scale items were included in each section, and three open-ended items were added to elicit responses about other sources of evidence used in EBTP, additional factors that influence the ability of faculty to use EBTP, and comments and recommendations about EBTP. Demographic information about academic setting, role responsibilities, years in academic teaching, highest academic degree, and experience learning about EBTP were included at the end of the survey. The revised survey was reviewed and completed by three of the external reviewers, an assessment consultant with expertise in online survey development, and two graduate nurse educator students.

Subjects and Setting

An invitation to participate in the study was emailed to nurse administrators in accredited nursing programs in the United States using contact information available on accrediting agency websites (N = 1,586). This message included a brief description of the study, the information and consent form with documentation of IRB approval, and an anonymous link to the online survey. Nurse administrators were invited to forward the message to nursing program faculty. A follow-up message was sent to the nurse administrators 10 days later.

A total of 653 surveys were examined. Survey data were transferred to a Statistical Package for the Social Sciences 22.0 file. All identifying information was deleted (e.g., IP addresses), and surveys were screened for completeness. Surveys with fewer than 10 completed items or less (n = 102, 16.6 percent) were not included in the analysis, yielding a total of 551 surveys used for data analysis (84.4 percent). An expert in measurement assisted with statistical analysis and interpretation of data.

RESULTS

Participants

Nearly all respondents (n = 503, 91 percent) were women, with the largest percentage (n = 225, 41 percent) 51 to 60 years old. Demographic data provided by respondents reflect the diversity and complexity of faculty roles and responsibilities in nursing education (Table 1).

The majority of respondents (n = 281, 51 percent) administer and/or teach in more than one degree level program. Respondents identified multiple role responsibilities, with the vast majority engaged in classroom (83 percent) and clinical (65 percent) teaching and nearly half with administrative responsibilities (41 percent). The highest academic degree reported by respondents was almost evenly divided between master's (n = 284, 52 percent) and doctoral degrees (n = 216, 41 percent). Over half of the respondents (n = 303, 55 percent) hold certifications in nursing, including 110 certified nurse educators (20 percent). Respondents identified ways they have learned about EBTP, most frequently identifying professional journals (n = 404, 73 percent), continuing education programs (n = 360, 65 percent), and faculty development programs (n = 314, 57 percent).

Findings

Faculty perspectives about EBTP were unanimously positive (Table 2). The vast majority of respondents strongly agreed that it is important for faculty to use EBTP in nursing education (M = 3.82). Respondents also strongly agreed that EBTP contributes to advancing the science (M = 3.68) and improves the quality of nursing education (M = 3.64). Each of these perspectives has been emphasized in the literature.

The availability of sufficient evidence to make changes in nursing education was rated the lowest by respondents (M = 3.05). It was not possible to clarify why this statement was rated lower, but multiple respondents commented about the lack of quality evidence needed to identify and enact changes in nursing education.

Respondents reported using diverse sources of evidence in EBTP. More than 80 percent of respondents reported using academic (n = 514, 93 percent), accreditation (n = 466, 84 percent), and professional (n = 449, 81 percent) standards; clinical expertise (n = 459, 83 percent); and student course evaluations (n = 455, 82 percent). Other frequently reported sources of evidence were research findings from quantitative (n = 419, 76 percent) and qualitative (n = 402, 73 percent) studies, teaching expertise (n = 397, 72 percent), and student evaluations of faculty (n = 394, 71 percent).

Respondents "usually" or "always" use evidence to revise courses (M = 3.49), design curriculum (M = 3.46), develop course content (M = 3.42), and guide teaching (M = 3.34). Although respondents are less likely to use evidence to select evaluation methods (M = 3.17), 83 percent use evidence-based evaluation methods "usually" or "always" (Table 3). No significant differences for faculty practices were identified among respondents who teach in different degree levels or specific types of academic settings, or among respondents who hold different academic degrees or professional certifications.

Respondents were asked to describe how factors in their academic environment influence their ability to engage in EBTP. These factors addressed the availability of mentors and colleagues who use EBTP, a supportive nurse administrator, librarians and resources that support EBTP, time for EBTP, faculty development about EBTP, and recognition of EBTP efforts in promotion and tenure decisions. Respondents were nearly unanimous in rating these factors as "important" or "very important" (M = 3.42 to 3.65). A supportive nurse administrator (M = 3.65), availability of resources (M = 3.65), faculty development opportunities (AI = 3.62), and an academic setting that recognizes EBTP for promotion and tenure (M = 3.62) and supports the use of EBTP in nursing education (M = 3.61) were rated most highly. However, the rating scale did not allow respondents to indicate whether these factors were available to them.

Other influencing factors (identified by 147 of 551 total respondents, 27 percent) emphasized the need for time to engage in EBTP, the importance of a supportive nurse administrator and colleagues, access to mentors, and availability of resources. These findings are consistent with the barriers and facilitators identified by faculty as described in the literature (Patterson, 2009; Patterson & Klein, 2012; Stichler et al., 2011). Additional findings describing the influencing factors identified by these 147 respondents will be discussed in a future article.

The final open-ended item invited respondents to provide recommendations or comments about EBTP. A content analysis of 164 of 551 (30 percent) responses to this item yielded categories and themes related to access and quality of evidence, clarity of terms, faculty accountability, faculty development, institutional support, and integrating EBTP in nursing programs. Additional findings describing the recommendations and comments provided by these 164 respondents will also be addressed in a future article.

DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING EDUCATION

Overall, the 551 respondents who completed this survey were in agreement that EBTP is essential in nursing education. The majority of respondents report using EBTP consistently in their role responsibilities and use multiple sources of evidence, most frequently citing academic, professional, and accreditation standards. Respondents were also in agreement about the importance of factors that influence their ability to engage in EBTP.

In addition to providing data about perspectives, practices, and influencing factors of EBTP, 235 respondents (43 percent) provided rich and substantial responses to open-ended survey items, which focused on sources of evidence, influencing factors, and other comments and recommendations about EBTP. Some respondents indicated they were familiar with EBP but were not aware of EBTP or the need to use evidence in their teaching and faculty responsibilities. This lack of awareness has significant implications for the preparation of new nurse faculty and the professional development of current faculty.

Position statements, research priorities, and other excellence initiatives launched by the NLN (Felver et al., 2010; NLN, 2002, 2004, 2005a, 2005b, 2010, 2012a, 2012b) consistently call for developing the science of nursing education and preparing faculty who use research and evidence in their faculty responsibilities. Some respondents were not aware of these initiatives, which may be a function of lack of time and inconsistent institutional support. Other respondents were committed to using quality evidence that facilitates teaching effectiveness and promotes student learning and achievement of program outcomes.

Overall, respondents stressed the importance of creating a culture that ensures quality evidence is accessible and used effectively by faculty. Respondents recognized the need to educate nurses who are prepared to engage in interprofessional, evidence-based clinical practice that ultimately improves patient outcomes and promotes the quality of health care.

Limitations

Study limitations included the use of a researcher-developed survey and the inability to clarify responses for open-ended survey items secondary to using an anonymous, online survey for data collection. Conceptual confusion between EBP and EBTP may have influenced some survey respondents. The inclusive sampling plan, which relied on nurse administrators of accredited nursing programs to forward study information to program faculty, did not allow for determining how many faculty were invited to participate. Using contact information on accreditation websites for nurse administrators was an inefficient and unreliable method for distributing information about the study to nursing faculty. More than 15 nurse administrators emailed the principal investigator about the need for approval of the study by their IRB before information about the study could be forwarded to faculty, which was not possible given the timeframe for data collection. Finally, survey respondents were self-selected and are not necessarily representative of nursing faculty and nurse administrators in accredited nursing programs in the United States.

CONCLUSION

Learning more about nursing faculty perspectives and practices in EBTP is particularly timely with the call to transform nursing education described in recent publications (Benner, Sutphen, Leonard, & Day, 2010; Institute of Medicine [IOM], 2011; NLN, 2005b). To enact the recommendations described in these publications, all nurse faculty are challenged to use evidence that informs not only what they teach, but how they teach. With the IOM's 2020 goal that 90 percent of clinical decisions be evidence-based, there is a concomitant need to build faculty capacity to use EBTP and prepare graduates at all degree levels to use EBP effectively in clinical practice. As Boswell and Cannon (2012) assert, "Our battle cry must be 'Effective Teaching results in Successful Learning.' The nursing education community must ensure that the strategies and practices incorporated into the classroom and the learning environment are firmly founded on the best evidence as to what improves the acquisition of knowledge" (p. 2).

The sustained efforts of faculty, nurse administrators, academic institutions, and national nursing organizations are critical to ensuring faculty are prepared to use EBTP and have access to the resources needed for EBTP. More specifically, robust initiatives are needed to: a) explore strategies that promote faculty use of EBTP in their role responsibilities; b) conduct qualitative studies to clarify recommendations and comments about EBTP provided by survey respondents; c) complete concept analyses to define EBTP and what constitutes evidence in nursing education to eliminate conceptual confusion with EBP; d) develop, test, and evaluate EBTP models in nursing education; e) design measures to evaluate if and how faculty are using EBTP; f) conduct multicenter studies to evaluate if and how EBTP enhances teaching effectiveness, enriches student learning, contributes to achievement of program outcomes, impacts patient outcomes, and promotes the quality of health care; and g) disseminate information about EBTP to ensure faculty are informed about and have access to resources and initiatives that promote EBTP in nursing education.

According to the NLN (2010), excellence in nursing education requires faculty who "continually seek creative, bold, and original ways to do things better" by "creating and implementing transformative strategies with daring ingenuity" (p. 2). Transformative strategies that will advance EBTP and the science of nursing education require "the efforts of faculty, educational administrators, students, graduate students in teacher preparation programs, clinical partners, and colleagues in other disciplines" (Valiga, 2009, p. 302). Examples of these strategies include infusing EBTP in nurse educator preparation programs; pro viding ongoing faculty development opportunities; ensuring access to expert mentors; generating and disseminating quality evidence accessible in databases; and integrating best practices from nursing, education, and other disciplines.

Creating a culture that uses evidence to inform clinical practice begins with faculty who know how to use evidence in their academic practice and model this evidence-based approach in their teaching. This evidence-based teaching "is predicated on the continued generation of evidence (research) and dissemination of that evidence (publication)" to transform nursing education (NLN, 2015, p. 1). The individual and collective voice of these survey respondents was consistent and clear: The time for evidence-based teaching practice in nursing education is now.

doi:10.5480/14-1472

REFERENCES

American Nurses Association. (2010). Nursing: Scope and standards of practice (2nd ed.). Silver Spring, MD: Nursesbooks.org.

Benner, R, Sutphen, M., Leonard, V., & Day, L. (2010). Educating nurses: A call for radical transformation. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Boswell, C., & Cannon, S. (2012). Overview of evidence-based practice. In S. Cannon & C. Boswell (Eds.), Evidence-based teaching in nursing: A foundation for educators (pp. 1-28). Sudbury, MA: Jones & Bartlett Learning.

Ambrose, S. A., Bridges, M. W., DiPietro, M. Lovett, M. C., & Norman, M. K. (2010). How learning works: Seven research-based principles for smart teaching. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Buskist, W., & Groccia, J. E. (2011). Evidence-based teaching: Now and in the future. New Directions for Teaching & Learning, 2011(128), 105-111. doi:10.1002.tl,473

Chickering, A. W., & Gamson, Z. F. (1987). Seven principles for good practice in undergraduate education. AAHE Bulletin, 39, 3-7. (ERIC No. ED282491)

Emerson, R. J., & Records, K. (2008). Today's challenge, tomorrow's excellence: The practice of evidence-based education. Journal of Nursing Education, 47(8), 359-370.

Felver, L., Gaines, B., Heims, M., Lasater, K., Laustsen, G., Lynch, M.,... Tanner, C. (2010). Best practices in teaching and learning in nursing education. New York, NY: National League for Nursing.

Ferguson, L., & Day, R. A. (2005). Evidence-based nursing education: Myth or reality? Journal of Nursing Education, 44(3), 107-115.

Gresley, R. S. (2009). Building a science of nursing education. In C. M. Shultz (Ed.), Building a science of nursing education: Foundation for evidence-based teaching-learning (pp. 1-13). New York, NY: National League for Nursing.

Groccia, J. E., & Buskist, W. (2011). Need for evidence-based teaching. New Directions for Teaching & Learning, 2011(128), 5-11. doi:10.1002.tl.463

Institute of Medicine. (2011). The future of nursing: Leading change, advancing health. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.

Interprofessional Education Collaborative Expert Panel. (2011). Core competencies for interprofessional collaborative practice: Report of an expert panel. Retrieved from http://www.aacn.nche.edu/Education/ PDF/IPECReport.pdf

McCartney, P. R., & Morin. K. H. (2005). Where is the evidence for teaching methods used in nursing education? MCN: The American Journal of Maternal/Child Nursing, 30(6), 406-412.

Melnyk, B. M., Fineout-Overholt, E., Feinstein, N. F., Sadler, L. S., & Green-Hernandez, C. (2008). Nurse practitioner educators' perceived knowledge, beliefs, and teaching strategies regarding evidence-based practice: Implications for accelerating the integration of evidence-based practice into graduate programs. Journal of Professional Nursing, 24(1), 7-13. doi:10.1016/j.profnurs.2007.06.023

National League for Nursing. (2002). The preparation of nurse educators [Position Statement], Retrieved from www.nln.org/docs/default-source/about/archived-position-statements/ the-preparation-of-nurse-educators-pdf.pdf?sfvrsn=6

National League for Nursing. (2004). Hallmarks of excellence: Hallmarks, indicators, glossary & references. Retrieved from www.nln.org/ professional-development-programs/teaching-resources/hallmarks-ofexcellence

National League for Nursing. (2005a). Core competencies of nurse educators with task statements. Retrieved from www.nln.org/docs/default-source/ default-document-library/core-competencies-of-nurse-educators-with task-statements.pdf?sfvrsn=0

National League for Nursing. (2005b). Transforming nursing education [Position Statement]. Retrieved from www.nln.org/docs/default-source/ about/archived-position-statements/transforming052005.pdf?sfvrsn=6

National League for Nursing. (2010). Outcomes and competencies for graduates of practical/vocational, associate, baccalaureate, master's, practice doctorate, and research doctorate programs in nursing. New York, NY: Author.

National League for Nursing. (2012a). NLN research priorities in nursing education 2012-2015. Retrieved from www.nln.org/docs/default-source/ default-document-library/researchpriorities.pdf?sfvrsn=2

National League for Nursing. (2012b). NLN Vision: Transforming research in nursing education [NLN Vision Series]. Retrieved from www.nln.org/ docs/default-source/about/nln-vision-seroes-(position-statements)/ nlnvision_5.pdf?sfvrsn=4

National League for Nursing. (2015, March 19). Spotlight: Nursing Education Perspectives Journal [Faculty Development Bulletin], Retrieved from http://nln.org/docs/default-source/newsroom/bulletin_03-2015. pdf?sfvrsn=0

Oermann, M. H. (2007). Approaches to gathering evidence for educational practices in nursing. Journal of Continuing Education in Nursing, 38(6), 250-255.

Oermann, M. H. (2015). Evidence-based teaching in nursing. In M. H. Oermann (Ed.), Teaching in nursing and role of the educator: The complete guide to best practice in teaching, evaluation and curriculum development (pp. 303-316). New York, NY: Springer.

Patterson, B. J. (2009). The nature of evidence in teaching practice. Journal of Nursing Education, 48(6), 327-333. doi.T0.9999/01484834-20090515-05

Patterson, B. J., & Klein, J. M. (2012). Evidence for teaching: What are faculty using? Nursing Education Perspectives, 33(4), 240-245. doi:10.5480/15365026-33.4.240

Polit, D. F., & Beck, C. T. (2012). Nursing research: Generating and assessing evidence for nursing practice (12th ed.). Philadelphia, PA: Wolters Kluwer Health | Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.

QSEN Institute, (n.d.). QSEN Institute: Competencies. Retrieved from http:// qsen.org/competencies/

Schwartz, B. M., & Gurung, R. A. R. (2012). Evidence-based teaching for higher education. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

Stevens, K. R. (1999). Advancing evidence-based teaching. In K. R. Stevens & V. R. Cassidy (Eds.), Evidence-based teaching: Current research in nursing education (pp. 3-22). Sudbury, MA: Jones and Bartlett.

Stichler, J. F., Fields, W., Kim, S. C., & Brown, C. E. (2011). Faculty knowledge, attitudes, and perceived barriers to teaching evidence-based nursing. Journal of Professional Nursing, 27(2), 92-100. doi:10.1016/j.profnurs.2010.09.012

Upton, D., & Upton, P. (2006). Development of an evidence-based practice questionnaire for nurses. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 54(4), 454-458. doi:10.1111/j, 1365-2648.2006.03739.x

Upton, P, Scurlock-Evans, L., Williamson, K., Rouse, J., & Upton, D. (2015). The evidence-based practice profiles of academic and clinical staff involved in pre-registration nursing students' education: A cross sectional survey of US and UK staff. Nurse Education Today, 35(1), 80-85. doi:10.1016/j.nedt.2014.06.006

Valiga, T. M. (2009). Ongoing development of the science of nursing education. In C. M. Shultz (Ed.), Building a science of nursing education: Foundation for evidence-based teaching-learning (pp. 301-308). New York, NY: National League for Nursing.

Yonge, O. J., Anderson, M., Profetto-McGrath, J., Olson, J. K., Skillen, D. L., Boman, J., ... Day, R. (2005). An inventory of nursing education research. International Journal of Nursing Education Scholarship, 2(1), Article 11. Retrieved from http://www.bepress.com/ijnes

Kathleen A. Kalb, PhD, RN, CNE, is an associate professor, St. Catherine University Department of Nursing, St. Paul, Minnesota. Susan K. O'Conner-Von, PhD, RN, C, is an associate professor, University of Minnesota School of Nursing, Minneapolis. Christine Brockway, MSN, RN, CCRN, CSC, is an assistant professor, St. Catherine University Department of Nursing. Cindy L. Rierson, MSN, RN, is an adjunct faculty, St. Catherine University Department of Nursing. Sue Sendelbach, PhD, RN, CCNS, FAAN, FAHA, is director of nursing research and clinical nurse specialist, Abbott Northwestern Hospital, Minneapolis. This research study was funded by a Research and Scholarly Activities grant awarded by the Academic Professional Development Committee at St. Catherine University in St. Paul, Minnesota. The authors gratefully acknowledge the nurse administrators and faculty who completed the survey and the faculty who served as expert reviewers of the researcher-developed survey. They also thank Dr. Carol Skay for sharing her expertise and wisdom in assisting with data analysis and interpretation of findings. For more information, contact Dr. Kalb at kakalb@stkate.edu.
Table 1: Summary of Demographic Information Provided by
Respondents (N = 551)

Variable                                                      n      %

Academic setting *
  University (research intensive)                             99    18
  University or college (non-research-intensive)             209    38
  Community college                                          134    24
  Technical college                                           18     3
  Not specified or multiple                                   91    17
Degree level of program where you teach *
  Practical Nursing                                           44     8
  Diploma                                                     19     3
  Associate                                                  184    33
  Baccalaureate                                              237    43
  RN-BSN                                                     119    22
  Master's                                                   143    26
  Clinical Doctorate (DNP)                                    66    12
  PhD                                                         23     4
  Not specified                                               15     3
  More than one degree level                                 281    51
Faculty responsibilities *
  Classroom teaching                                         455    83
  Clinical/practice teaching                                 359    65
  Lab/simulation teaching                                    276    50
  Online teaching                                            235    43
  Administrative                                             226    41
  Other (e.g., advising, committee work)                      86    16
Number of years in faculty role
  0-2 years                                                   67    12
  3-5 years                                                   71    13
  6-10 years                                                 121    22
  11 -20 years                                               146    27
  > 20 years                                                 130    24
Highest academic degree
  Baccalaureate                                                5     1
  Master's                                                   284    52
  PhD in Nursing                                              91    17
  PhD in other discipline                                     80    15
  DNP                                                         45     8
Certification(s) *
  Yes                                                        303    55
    Certified nurse educator                                 110    20
    Certified nurse practitioner                              83    15
    Certified clinical nurse specialist                       34     6
    Certified nurse midwife                                   11     2
    Certified registered nurse anesthetist                     1     0
    Other nursing certification                               84    15
  No                                                         228    41
Clinical practice
  Part of faculty responsibilities                           162    29
  In addition to faculty responsibilities                    175    32
How you learned about evidence-based teaching practice *
  Professional journals                                      404    73
  Continuing education programs                              360    65
  Faculty development programs                               314    57
  Colleagues                                                 289    53
  Professional competencies                                  286    52
  Formal academic coursework                                 250    45
  Self-taught                                                239    43
  Clinical practice opportunities                            233    43
  Mentors                                                    171    31
  Other (e.g., texts, conferences, Internet resources,        30     5
    librarians)
Faculty rank
  Not ranked                                                  35     6
  Instructor                                                 108    20
  Adjunct faculty                                             31     6
  Assistant professor                                        134    24
  Associate professor                                        111    20
  Professor                                                   88    16
  Other (e.g., dean, program director, teaching professor)    25     5

* More than one response allowed.

Table 2: Perspectives About Evidence-Based
Teaching Practice (EBTP) Reported by Respondents

Statement                                               n     M

It is important for faculty to use EBTP in nursing     550   3.82
  education.
EBTP contributes to advancing the science of nursing   543   3.68
  education.
EBTP improves the quality of nursing education.        545   3.64
EBTP enables faculty to advocate for needed changes    540   3.64
  in nursing education.
EBTP enables faculty to implement best practices in    548   3.63
  nursing education.
EBTP contributes to student achievement of learning    533   3.47
  outcomes.
EBTP improves faculty performance.                     523   3.42
EBTP enables faculty to address student learning       535   3.40
  needs more effectively.
EBTP is necessary for faculty to fulfill their         541   3.36
  teaching responsibilities.
Sufficient evidence is available to make changes       533   3.05
  in nursing education.

Note. Likert scale used: 1 = Strongly Disagree, 4 = Strongly Agree.

Table 3: Use of Evidence in Evidence-Based
Teaching Practice (EBTP) Reported by Respondents

Statement                                       n     M

I use evidence to revise courses.              532   3.49
I use evidence to design curriculum.           506   3.46
I use evidence to develop course content.      535   3.42
I use evidence to guide my teaching.           550   3.34
I use evidence to answer questions about       548   3.30
  educational practices.
I use evidence to evaluate the effectiveness   545   3.30
  of my teaching.
I use evidence to select teaching methods.     549   3.26
I use evidence to evaluate the quality of      546   3.25
  student learning.
I critique evidence to inform my teaching.     544   3.20
I use evidence to select evaluation methods.   544   3.17

Note. Likert scale used: 1 = Never, 4 = Always.
COPYRIGHT 2015 National League for Nursing, Inc.
No portion of this article can be reproduced without the express written permission from the copyright holder.
Copyright 2015 Gale, Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.

Article Details
Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback
Author:Kalb, Kathleen A.; O'Conner-Von, Susan K.; Brockway, Christine; Rierson, Cindy L.; Sendelbach, Sue
Publication:Nursing Education Perspectives
Date:Jul 1, 2015
Words:5903
Previous Article:Testing: how should the evidence be used?
Next Article:What goes into a decision? How nursing faculty decide which best practices to use for classroom testing.
Topics:

Terms of use | Privacy policy | Copyright © 2020 Farlex, Inc. | Feedback | For webmasters