Paper
Tuesday, November 6, 2007

617
This presentation is part of : Strategies for Undergraduate Nursing Students
Formative Evaluation Used to Redesign Simulation in High Acuity Nursing
Jami Michelle Nininger, MS, RN, CCRN1, Victoria Elfrink, PhD, RN2, M. Jodell Lee, BSN, RN3, and Lisa A. Rohring, BSN, RN3. (1) Nursing, The Ohio State University College of Nursing, Columbus, OH, USA, (2) Nursing, The Ohio State University, College of Nursing, Columbus, OH, USA, (3) College of Nursing, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA
Learning Objective #1: describe methods used for formative evaluation.
Learning Objective #2: discuss findings associated with formative evaluation as they relate to the best pedagogical practices for conducting simulation in an undergraduate nursing course

Nurse faculty are responsible for evaluating many components of nursing education including, those involving human patient simulation. Formative evaluation refers to evaluation taking place during a program or learning activity and identifies progress toward purposes, objectives, or outcomes to improve the current teaching strategies.

This presentation discusses the formative evaluation methods and findings to describe the best pedagogical practices for conducting simulation in an undergraduate nursing course.

Faculty members from the Ohio State University College of Nursing facilitated focus groups with 104 senior nursing students in a high acuity nursing course to identify:  a) what simulation strategies worked to facilitate their learning; b) what practices were not helpful to their learning c) what improvements could be made to the simulation experience.

Outcomes from the focus group prompted a discussion among faculty and analysis of our findings with relevant literature, in turn we redesigned our simulations. Specifically, we changed from a strategy where individual students took responsibility for the planning delivering care during the simulation to one in which the students worked collaboratively. This tactic included students using a “group think” plan for care prior to beginning the simulation and calling upon one another during the simulation to consider intervention priorities. Additionally, during debriefing students used the “group think” plan to evaluate their decision-making and to consider alternatives. Students then conducted the simulation a second time using the revised “debriefing group think” plan for care. A second debriefing followed where students were encouraged to analyze their initial care plans and the revised plan to determine the elements that were successful.

Since the implementation of the findings from our formative evaluation, students have provided faculty with v positive feedback. In turn, faculty will continue to use formative evaluation to seek future student opinions regarding their perceptions of best simulation teaching strategies.