In a complex healthcare environment, educating nursing students to safely care for clients is a challenging endeavor. As the use of high fidelity simulations increases, the ability to evaluate students is essential. A review of the literature identified a lack of tested simulation evaluation instruments to accurately measure student performance. A simulation evaluation tool was developed and tested with senior nursing students. Content validity was established from the literature and from the review of the tool by an expert panel. Reliability was established using sixteen simulation sessions, with two trained evaluators at each session. Percent agreement by evaluators ranged from 84.4% to 89.1%. Additional research needs to verify these results with different evaluators, varying levels of students, and additional scenarios. A valid, reliable tool to evaluate simulation experiences improves student assessment skills and ultimately clinical performance.

The concept of feeling disrespected was explored using the Parse research method. Ten women living with embodied largeness were asked, "What is the experience of feeling disrespected?" The structure of the living experience was feeling disrespected is mortifying disheartenment arising with disquieting irreverence, as distancing affiliations surface while enduring hardship. The findings provided new knowledge of living quality, advanced nursing practice, and presented future direction for research.

Simulation is an excellent venue for students to learn experientially and provides opportunities for students to practice problem solving and psychomotor skills in a safe, controlled environment. Through the use of a specifically designed format, faculty at Creighton University School of Nursing have developed a unique method of implementing high-fidelity simulation that allows a more comprehensive learning experience. This innovative teaching strategy incorporates not just skill acquisition, but also care management concepts into the scenario, while requiring only one faculty member. Students simultaneously take one of two paths through the components of this method to achieve the same learning outcomes.

Healthcare institutions, accreditation agencies for higher learning, and organizations such as the National Academy of Medicine in the United States, support interprofessional education (IPE) opportunities. However, incorporating IPE opportunities into academic settings remains difficult. One challenge is assessing IPE learning and practice outcomes, especially at the level of student performance to ensure graduates are "collaboration-ready". The Creighton-Interprofessional Collaborative Evaluation (C-ICE) instrument was developed to address the need for a measurement tool for interprofessional student team performance. Four interprofessional competency domains provide the framework for the C-ICE instrument. Twenty-six items were identified as essential to include in the C-ICE instrument. This instrument was found to be both a reliable and a valid instrument to measure interprofessional interactions of student teams. Inter-rater reliability as measured by Krippendorff's nominal alpha (nKALPHA) ranged from .558 to .887; with four of the five independent assessments achieving nKALPHA greater than or equal to 0.796. The findings indicated that the instrument is understandable (Gwet's alpha coefficient (gAC) 0.63), comprehensive (gAC = 0.62), useful and applicable (gAC = 0.54) in a variety of educational settings. The C-ICE instrument provides educators a comprehensive evaluation tool for assessing student team behaviors, skills, and performance.

Students expressed satisfaction and increased awareness of the importance of collaboration to ensure patient safety. Increasing interprofessional education experiences prior to clinical rotations should be considered. [J Nurs Educ. 2018;57(7):426-429.].