Reliability and Validity of the Willingness to Adopt Inclusive Teaching Strategies in Nursing Education Instrument

Purpose and Background/Significance: The purpose of this study is to: (1) examine the psychometric properties of the Willingness to Adopt Inclusive Teaching Strategies (ITSinNE) instrument and (2) measure factors influencing nurse educators’ willingness to adopt inclusive teaching strategies based in universal design for instruction (UDI).  National nursing organizations are calling for innovative and inclusive science of nursing education demonstrated by the use of teaching strategies that are accessible, responsive and meaningful to diverse student populations, with and without disabilities.  Universal design for instruction (UDI) is one approach to facilitate multiple ways of learning and evaluation in various learning environments for all learners; however, it is not well known or researched in nursing education.

Theoretical Framework: Diffusion of innovation theory (Rogers, 2003) and universal design for instruction (McGuire & Scott, 2006) provide the theoretical framework for the study. Inclusive teaching strategies are defined as teaching pedagogies based in UDI that enable all students to access and engage in learning throughout the nursing curriculum and environments.  Nursing education occurs in multiple environments including the classroom, clinical, online, simulation and skills lab settings.

Sample/Setting: A cross-sectional design was used to measure educators’ willingness to adopt inclusive teaching strategies in nursing educational settings. 

Method: SurveyMonkey collected data on the newly developed ITSinNE (55-item) instrument consisting of the following domains: Previous Teaching Strategies, Knowledge of Inclusive Teaching Strategies, Social System Support for Inclusive Teaching Strategies, and Willingness to Adopt Inclusive Teaching Strategies in Nursing Educational Environments.  In the preliminary study, face and content validity were examined by national content experts and resulted in a CVI ranging from .84 to .97.  The initial internal consistency on the subscales ranged from .51 to .98.  For this study, data analysis consisted of descriptive statistics, Cronbach’s alpha, correlation, hierarchical multiple regression, and confirmatory factor analysis.

 

Results: A total of 401 nurse educators participated in the study.  The sample revealed 311 educators taught in pre-licensure or Baccalaureate programs and the analysis targeted this population.  The Cronbach’s alphas for almost all of the ITSinNE domain subscales were .7 or greater.  The confirmatory factor analysis demonstrated adequate model fit on most indices (exogenous model: c² = 0.00; RMSEA = .08; GFI = .96; TLI = .95; WRWR = 1.64; endogenous model: c² = 0.00; RMSEA = .18; GFI = .89; TLI = .87; WRWR = 2.64).  When the endogenous model domains were all freestanding, model fit indexes improved (c² = 0.00; RMSEA = .098; GFI = .97; TLI = .96; WRWR = 1.24).  The model as a whole explained 44.8% (R² = .448) of the variance in WillAdITS.  None of the characteristics of a nurse educator contributed to the model, except for years of teaching (B =.-.008, p < .001)

Conclusions: Reliability and validity estimates support the continued development of an instrument to examine nurse educator’s knowledge, support, and willingness to adopt inclusive teaching strategies.  The results will enable intervention research to enhance professional development fostering access to content and environments for all learners.