2.50
Hdl Handle:
http://hdl.handle.net/10755/157577
Type:
Presentation
Title:
Measuring Pre-Nurse and Senior Students' Thinking
Abstract:
Measuring Pre-Nurse and Senior Students' Thinking
Conference Sponsor:Western Institute of Nursing
Conference Year:2009
Author:Olsen, Kathleen A., PhD, RN
P.I. Institution Name:Idaho State University, School of Nursing
Title:Clinical Assistant Professor
Contact Address:921 South 8th Ave, Stop 8101, Pocatello, ID, 83209, USA
Contact Telephone:208-282-5180
Co-Authors:Deana Molinari, PhD, RN, CNE, Associate Professor
Purpose: A study to examine thinking acts in pre-nursing students and senior nursing students. Rationale: The baccalaureate generalist is prepared to use clinical/critical reasoning to address simple to complex situations (AACN, 2008). Nursing schools must look at the development of thinking processes as nursing students progress across the curriculum. Therefore, this comparison study, utilizing two studies, synthesized two research questions: Study 1: Can a short thinking process instruction make a difference in the number of thinking acts in pre-nursing students? Study 2: How do senior nursing students think who have not been taught a specific thinking process? Comparison Study: How do thinking acts in pre-nurse students differ from senior nursing students "thinking acts." Methods: Pre and Post instruction surveys were used. Students answered two essay questions about what information they would need to solve a health care case scenario. Pre-nurses were provided one hour of instruction about critical thinking processes in six 10 minutes blocks. They then received the post survey. The senior nursing students did not receive instruction so they completed one survey. Student responses where analyzed using qualitative descriptive methods in the framework of The Perceptive, Affective, Cognitive (PAC) Critical Thinking Process Model. Institutional Review of Human Rights approved all studies. Results: Ninety-three responses from a convenience sample of 104 pre-nursing students were analyzed. The most common type of information gathered was facts about the patient. The second most common type was perceptions of pain and its acuity. Reflections about the meaning of the data were made but students did not analyze the quantity and quality of the information. Pre-nurses failed to weigh the risks of alternative decisions, prioritize alternatives, or conduct cost/benefit analyses. Pre-nurses increased the frequency of thinking acts; such as, cognitive, external, reflection, commitment and actions after intervention. Pre-nurses rarely considered the context of the case study scenario. Fifty senior students' responses reflected more on clinical data. Seniors did not analyze the quantity or quality of the information they gathered before making decisions. Seniors asked more patient questions requiring cognitive responses than affective and perceptive information. Even though the case study contained ethical issues, no students gathered information about personal perceptions, emotional responses, their skill level, or knowledge limitations. Intra group and intergroup comparisons support: Seniors demonstrated more cognitive questioning (p=<.00) and more reflection (p=.017) than pre-nurses while the pre-nurse class asked more perceptive questions (p=.001). There was no significant change in internal evaluation of facts, perceptions, or emotions following the critical thinking process intervention. Conclusions: Pre-nursing students appeared to be aware of the basics of pain assessment but did not justify their plans and decisions. Seniors seemed to skip basic principles of information gathering regarding pain assessment while demonstrating knowledge of more complex treatment protocols. Pre-nurses relied upon the opinions of authority figures rather than reflecting on information gathered. Seniors applied diagnosing and treatment protocols while pre-nurses applied assessment procedures. Both groups applied protocols rather than use an information gathering and processing thinking model. Seniors propensity for applying care protocols rather than analyzing information hampered their ability to justify decisions.
Repository Posting Date:
26-Oct-2011
Date of Publication:
17-Oct-2011
Sponsors:
Western Institute of Nursing

Full metadata record

DC FieldValue Language
dc.typePresentationen_GB
dc.titleMeasuring Pre-Nurse and Senior Students' Thinkingen_GB
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10755/157577-
dc.description.abstract<table><tr><td colspan="2" class="item-title">Measuring Pre-Nurse and Senior Students' Thinking</td></tr><tr class="item-sponsor"><td class="label">Conference Sponsor:</td><td class="value">Western Institute of Nursing</td></tr><tr class="item-year"><td class="label">Conference Year:</td><td class="value">2009</td></tr><tr class="item-author"><td class="label">Author:</td><td class="value">Olsen, Kathleen A., PhD, RN</td></tr><tr class="item-institute"><td class="label">P.I. Institution Name:</td><td class="value">Idaho State University, School of Nursing</td></tr><tr class="item-author-title"><td class="label">Title:</td><td class="value">Clinical Assistant Professor</td></tr><tr class="item-address"><td class="label">Contact Address:</td><td class="value">921 South 8th Ave, Stop 8101, Pocatello, ID, 83209, USA</td></tr><tr class="item-phone"><td class="label">Contact Telephone:</td><td class="value">208-282-5180</td></tr><tr class="item-email"><td class="label">Email:</td><td class="value">olsekath@isu.edu</td></tr><tr class="item-co-authors"><td class="label">Co-Authors:</td><td class="value">Deana Molinari, PhD, RN, CNE, Associate Professor</td></tr><tr><td colspan="2" class="item-abstract">Purpose: A study to examine thinking acts in pre-nursing students and senior nursing students. Rationale: The baccalaureate generalist is prepared to use clinical/critical reasoning to address simple to complex situations (AACN, 2008). Nursing schools must look at the development of thinking processes as nursing students progress across the curriculum. Therefore, this comparison study, utilizing two studies, synthesized two research questions: Study 1: Can a short thinking process instruction make a difference in the number of thinking acts in pre-nursing students? Study 2: How do senior nursing students think who have not been taught a specific thinking process? Comparison Study: How do thinking acts in pre-nurse students differ from senior nursing students &quot;thinking acts.&quot; Methods: Pre and Post instruction surveys were used. Students answered two essay questions about what information they would need to solve a health care case scenario. Pre-nurses were provided one hour of instruction about critical thinking processes in six 10 minutes blocks. They then received the post survey. The senior nursing students did not receive instruction so they completed one survey. Student responses where analyzed using qualitative descriptive methods in the framework of The Perceptive, Affective, Cognitive (PAC) Critical Thinking Process Model. Institutional Review of Human Rights approved all studies. Results: Ninety-three responses from a convenience sample of 104 pre-nursing students were analyzed. The most common type of information gathered was facts about the patient. The second most common type was perceptions of pain and its acuity. Reflections about the meaning of the data were made but students did not analyze the quantity and quality of the information. Pre-nurses failed to weigh the risks of alternative decisions, prioritize alternatives, or conduct cost/benefit analyses. Pre-nurses increased the frequency of thinking acts; such as, cognitive, external, reflection, commitment and actions after intervention. Pre-nurses rarely considered the context of the case study scenario. Fifty senior students' responses reflected more on clinical data. Seniors did not analyze the quantity or quality of the information they gathered before making decisions. Seniors asked more patient questions requiring cognitive responses than affective and perceptive information. Even though the case study contained ethical issues, no students gathered information about personal perceptions, emotional responses, their skill level, or knowledge limitations. Intra group and intergroup comparisons support: Seniors demonstrated more cognitive questioning (p=&lt;.00) and more reflection (p=.017) than pre-nurses while the pre-nurse class asked more perceptive questions (p=.001). There was no significant change in internal evaluation of facts, perceptions, or emotions following the critical thinking process intervention. Conclusions: Pre-nursing students appeared to be aware of the basics of pain assessment but did not justify their plans and decisions. Seniors seemed to skip basic principles of information gathering regarding pain assessment while demonstrating knowledge of more complex treatment protocols. Pre-nurses relied upon the opinions of authority figures rather than reflecting on information gathered. Seniors applied diagnosing and treatment protocols while pre-nurses applied assessment procedures. Both groups applied protocols rather than use an information gathering and processing thinking model. Seniors propensity for applying care protocols rather than analyzing information hampered their ability to justify decisions.</td></tr></table>en_GB
dc.date.available2011-10-26T20:00:04Z-
dc.date.issued2011-10-17en_GB
dc.date.accessioned2011-10-26T20:00:04Z-
dc.description.sponsorshipWestern Institute of Nursingen_GB
All Items in this repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.