The description of levels in nursing degrees: an illustration and analysis of the variations

139

The Delphi method is used to investigate consensus amongst a panel of experts using repeated rounds of a questionnaire, often in healthcare settings. However, many Delphi studies do not report any investigation into what happens to the stability of consensus or the convergence of agreement between the rounds in the study, which may be of importance. In this paper an accessible analytical approach is outlined using graphical presentations of means and standard deviations to identify what happens between rounds. For Delphi studies where the scale upon which experts are expressing their opinions can be considered to be interval, the mean will represent the group opinion whilst the standard deviation will represent the level of agreement. An example Delphi study from a healthcare setting is used to illustrate the methodology.

Section: The Exemplar Delphi Studymentioning

confidence: 99%

An accessible analytical approach for investigating what happens between the rounds of a Delphi study

Greatorex

Dexter

2000

139

“…These developments have raised questions for nurse educators concerning how the academic nature of a particular award can be met while retaining the centrality of the professional concern about the nurse’s competence to practice. In particular, there has been considerable debate as to what constitutes ‘diploma level’ and, importantly, its distinctiveness from ‘degree level’ (see for example, Davis & Burnard 1992, Jinks 1994, James & Redfern 1995, Gerrish et al. 1997 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…There is substantial research evidence which indicates the need for greater clarity concerning diploma level theory and practice ( Elkan & Robinson 1995) and calls for a shared understanding of what constitutes diploma, degree and master’s level ( Davis & Burnard 1992, Jinks 1994, James & Redfern 1995). Previous research ( Gerrish et al.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

‘Levels’ of attainment in nursing practice: reality or illusion?

Ashworth

Gerrish²,

Hargreaves³

et al. 1999

In earlier research based on an analysis of course documentation, it had been found that there was little consensus among nurse educators concerning the parameters which distinguish levels of practice skills, particularly those which differentiate diploma and degree qualifications in the United Kingdom. This result was confirmed and strengthened in the current study. Lecturers in nursing, when presented with a sorting task using 40 statements derived from course documentation selected from the earlier study, were unable to distinguish statements describing diploma level from those describing degree level practice. Possible reasons for the difficulty are discussed. It is concluded that the attempt to represent practice skill in a hierarchy of assessment for degree or diploma qualifications is premature since the parameters of practice remain unreliably specified.

“…The growth in academic provision for nurses has been accompanied by uncertainty as to the parameters that differentiate diploma, degree and master's level, especially in respect of professional practice (Elkan & Robinson 1993, White et al 1993, Jowett et al 1994, James & Redfern 1995, Wilson Barnett et al 1995. Research (Gerrish et al 1997) has highlighted the dif®culties nurse educators experienced in differentiating between academic levels and a lack of shared understanding regarding performance in practice at diploma, degree and master's level.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Some dilemmas of master's level nurse education

Gerrish

Ashworth

McManus

2000

Despite an increase in the growth of master's level provision for qualified nurses in the United Kingdom uncertainty exists regarding the characteristics of master's level performance in respect of professional practice. This paper presents selected findings from a multidisciplinary study that sought to examine the characteristics of master's level performance in health professional courses that had an expressed practice orientation. It focuses specifically on dilemmas nurse educators encountered in relation to British master's level nurse education. Following an initial pilot stage involving focus group interviews with separate groups of nurses, occupational therapists and physiotherapists, an interview agenda was developed to explore participants' perspectives of the characteristics of master's level performance. Individual in-depth interviews were undertaken with a purposive sample of 18 nurse educators drawn from eight universities in England. Interview transcripts were coded and thematically analysed. Six kinds of dilemma emerged from the interviews. These were breadth vs. depth in the conceptualization of master's level for nursing, relevance to practice vs. academic detachment, facilitating creative thinking vs. reinforcing rigidity, encouraging or suppressing different modes of critical thinking, postgraduate nurses as loyal change agents vs. the problem of well-qualified mavericks, and professional experience as facilitating or hindering master's level performance. These dilemmas raise important questions about course design and the role of stakeholders in determining curriculum content. Moreover, a pervasive tension between a utilitarian emphasis on the application and utility of knowledge on one hand, and aspirations to promote creativity and critical thinking which look to alternative possibilities on the other hand, suggests that nurse educators exercise a degree of conservatism in relation to master's level. It is concluded that this apparent quest to maintain a safe variant of the status quo as the best way of promoting the wellbeing of patients should be subject to profound questioning.