Friday, 20 April 2018
Concept-based curricula are being implemented in nursing education as a means to shift the emphasis from content to an emphasis on concepts and conceptual learning (Giddens & Brady, 2007). This paradigm shift requires concomitant changes in how faculty teaches and how students learn. In concept-based curricula, teachers use student-centered learning activities, such as cases, questions, or problems to engage students in active learning (Giddens, Caputi, & Rodgers, 2015). In the summer of 2016, a College of Nursing in an academic health science institution in the northeast region of the United States began the implementation of an undergraduate concept-based curriculum. A workgroup was formed and charged by the faculty at large with developing and executing an evaluation plan of the concept-based curriculum. The purpose of this poster is to describe the development of a concept-based curriculum evaluation plan and the results of preliminary data from the evaluation. The National League for Nursing’s (2016) Hallmarks of Excellence served as guiding principles and existing literature regarding curriculum evaluation served as a framework to approach this work (Giddens & Morton, 2010; Oermann, 2017). The workgroup specified a threefold purpose: identify gaps in content, identify and reduce redundancies in concepts, and ensure that concepts and exemplars are arranged from simple to complex. Next, each member of the workgroup was tasked with submission of summative and formative assessment questions. The mutually agreed upon questions that guided this inquiry were (a) do faculty and students systematically evaluate the impact of innovative teaching and curriculum approaches on student learning, student satisfaction, and other student-centered outcomes (summative and formative); (b) to what extent does each clinical experience help students develop their ability to provide evidence-based care to patients, families, and communities experiencing a wide range of health problems (summative and formative); (c) are teacher-made tests aligned with the NCLEX-RN blueprint (formative); (d) are curricular concepts and exemplars following the principle of simple to complex (formative); (e) do correlations between numeric course grades and nationally-recognized standardized assessment raw scores support that such assessments are placed appropriately throughout plan of study (formative); (f) how are students adapting to, within one course, different faculty, different learning strategies, and different class preparation (summative and formative); (g) how is faculty integrating active learning strategies utilized across the curriculum (summative and formative); and (h) is there any change in traditional program indicators of success when comparing the concept-based curriculum in terms of graduation rate, NCLEX-RN performance, and employer satisfaction (summative). For each question, specific outcome metrics were identified, time frames for assessment were established, and workgroup champions were identified. Data collection methods included (a) student course evaluations, (b) faculty summative evaluation, (c) stakeholder surveys, (d) concept assessment, (e) student and faculty focus groups, (f) standardized test scores, (g) graduation rate, and (h) NCLEX-RN pass rate. The concept-based curriculum was implemented in the prelicensure program that includes a traditional, upper division track and an accelerated, second-degree track. Each track admits students once a year, with the accelerated track starting in May and the traditional track starting in August. The accelerated students complete four quarters of nursing course work over a 12 month period; whereas, the traditional students complete four semesters of course work over a two year period. The data collection included all four quarters of nursing coursework for the accelerated students and the first two semesters of the traditional students. A variety of methods, such as descriptive statistics, correlational analysis, and qualitative content analysis, were used. At the end of one academic year, the workgroup has generated several deliverables, thus far, including (a) a curriculum assessment and evaluation plan for three years, (b) a revised concept/exemplar map, (c) an initial analysis of standardized test scores as compared with final numeric course grades earned by students, (d) a revision of pharmacology course content, (e) clinical and didactic scheduling recommendations, and (f) faculty feedback regarding active learning strategies and textbook resources. Next steps for ongoing evaluation include collection of data regarding student satisfaction with concept-based learning, active learning strategies, and varying faculty approaches to teaching. Additionally, clinical preparation for employment should be evaluated, including graduate and employer feedback. Finally, ongoing evaluation of questions that have already been addressed is important given that the traditional students have not yet completed a full-cycle of the concept-based curriculum. The development of this concept-based curriculum evaluation plan and its preliminary results are significant to this College of Nursing, as well as other nurse educators. In addition to developing a three-year curriculum assessment and evaluation plan, this work provided data that contributed to evidence-based revisions of this curriculum. This curriculum evaluation plan will be a useful guide to nurse educators who are implementing concept-based curricula and beginning the process of curriculum evaluation.