Background: Many professional educations have element of practice in their educations. Any assessment scheme involves large uncertainties, and this will in particular be applicable in practice assessment. Studies show that students who do not meet the goals of a practice period pass anyway. Purpose: The purpose of the literature study is to describe what may lie at the core of those supervisors who allow underperforming students to pass in practice. Method: A systematic literature search was carried out in March 2013 in the CHINAL, OVID Nursing database, OVID Medline, OVID PsycInfo, ProQuest, Science Direct, Eric, Norart and SweMedþ. Results: Nine articles and a monograph were included in the study. The reasons for not failing an incompetent student stems from lack of knowledge and confidence, challenges related to documentation, personal attitudes and beliefs, lack of support, the scarcity of time and the fear that the decision would be overturned by the university and the appeal. Conclusion: The study shows that the supervisors have lack of competence in the role of their supervisor, both on the knowledge, skills and personal competence. To ensure that underperforming students fail, the need for training and support to the supervisors is essential. InnledningSykepleie-og medisinutdanningen har varierende omfang av praksis i sin utdanning. Å vurdere studenter i praksis er en kompleks prosess. Enhver vurderingsordning innebaerer store usikkerhetsmomenter, og vurdering i et praksisfellesskap er langt mer avhengig av relasjoner og kontekst enn vurdering av skriftlige teoretiske prøver. 1 Vurderingen i praksis er basert pa˚direkte observasjoner og vil derfor involvere bedømmelse basert pa˚subjektive verdier og kan variere fra person til person. 2 Avgjørelsen om ikke besta˚tt praksis for en student vil medføre store personlige og ressursmessige utfordringer, noe som kan føre til at studenten besta˚r under tvil selv om det motsatte er mer forsvarlig. 1 Det er derfor viktig at veileder fa˚r støtte na˚r de sta˚r overfor en situasjon hvor avgjørelsen om ikkebesta˚tt er aktuell. [3][4][5][6][7][8] Studier viser at studenter som ikke innfrir ma˚lene i en praksisperiode i noen tilfeller allikevel fa˚r besta˚tt. Veilederne føler seg trygge til a˚stryke en student først na˚r han hadde satt pasientens liv i fare. 9 En studie viser at 46% (N ¼ 272) av veilederne var enige i at studenter noen ganger fa˚r passere til tross for at kompetansen ikke var tilfredsstillende. 11% av veilederne hadde strøket minst 1 student, og alle disse beklaget at de ma˚tte ta denne avgjørelsen. 10 Norge har ingen nasjonal statistikk som kan gi opplysninger om hvor mange studenter som pr a˚r fa˚r underkjent en eller flere praksisperioder. En slik nasjonal oversikt finnes heller ikke i England, og en studie ble her gjennomført hvor de sammenlignet vurderingene i teori og i praksis ved alle sykepleieutdanningene. 11 Funnene indikerte at svaert fa˚studenter strøk i praksis. Forholdet mellom stryk i teori og praksis var ved førstegangs eksamen 4:1. Det va...

Background: Clinical training in health and social care educations are important in the development of professional competence. Evidence indicates that there are major quality differences in clinical practice in health- and social studies.Purpose: To examine what key players related to clinical practice in nursing and social education believes provides quality.Method: Focus Group Interview where students, supervisor and teachers participated in all groups.Results: Students learning in practice presupposes a knowledge base of the student, a learning environment with adapted responsibilities and coping capabilities, and a relationship with the supervisor who promotes both recognition and needed correction. The supervisor's role can be strengthened through individual competence, clearer support from boss and co-workers, and more emphasis on triangular cooperation with the college.Conclusion: There is a large overlap in the understanding of what in practice is all about quality. The perspectives of the three actors appear primarily as mutually complementary.

No abstract

Aim The aim was to explore the psychometric properties with respect to the internal consistency reliability of the subject‐specific questionnaire “Failing to Fail.” Design Cross‐sectional study. Methods Exploratory factor analysis with varimax rotation. A confirmatory factor analysis was used to examine the factor structure of the “Failing to Fail” scale. The sample included 336 Norwegian nurse mentors. Results The confirmatory factor analysis confirmed a five‐factor structure of the “Failing to Fail” scale with adequate model fit. The factors were named as: (a) Insufficient mentoring competence; (b) Insufficient support in the working environment; (c) Emotional process dominates the assessment; (d) Insufficient support from the university; and (e) Decision‐making detached from learning outcomes. The scale proved to be feasible to test whether mentors are Failing to Fail nursing students. The confirmatory factor analysis model supported the predictive validity of the “Failing to Fail” scale.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

Distribution électronique Cairn.info pour Éditions GREUPP. © Éditions GREUPP. Tous droits réservés pour tous pays.La reproduction ou représentation de cet article, notamment par photocopie, n'est autorisée que dans les limites des conditions générales d'utilisation du site ou, le cas échéant, des conditions générales de la licence souscrite par votre établissement. Toute autre reproduction ou représentation, en tout ou partie, sous quelque forme et de quelque manière que ce soit, est interdite sauf accord préalable et écrit de l'éditeur, en dehors des cas prévus par la législation en vigueur en France. Il est précisé que son stockage dans une base de données est également interdit.