This paper reports on findings and issues arising from a study designed to promote mental health service users' involvement in a preregistration nursing curriculum. Users' views about the knowledge, skills and attributes required by mental health nurses were explored to inform the curriculum design. Strategies that would facilitate long term, active user involvement in the design and delivery of the curriculum were also explored. Findings are presented with concurrent discussion of issues arising from the research process in relation to user involvement in education. The issue of 'conflict' explores findings relating to users' views of a 'good' mental health nurse and inherent conflicts between user and professional views are highlighted. The representativeness of the research participants is explored and debated in relation to service user involvement in nurse education. Finally, the concepts of 'involvement' and 'tokenism' are discussed and recommendations made about how active user involvement in nurse education can be achieved.

Recent policy statements that address the future priorities for nurse education have emphasized that service users and carers should be actively engaged in partnerships with education professionals in all aspects of the curriculum. The development of this agenda is well advanced; however, examples of 'how to do it' are sparse. The development of a strategy to involve users and carers in the design and delivery of the Diploma of Higher Education in Nursing at Napier University provided an opportunity to evaluate the process of developing partnerships in this area of nurse education. This paper presents the findings from a process evaluation from the various standpoints of the key interest groups. The overall project and evaluation is outlined, along with methodological and practical issues surrounding this type of 'collaborative' evaluation. The importance and satisfaction of practical aspects of the project are examined. The issues of representativeness, expertise in 'involvement' and the importance of the 'process' of involvement are explored. Finally, the challenges to developing 'meaningful involvement' that goes beyond 'classroom involvement' in nurse education are identified and discussed.

This paper describes a study which aimed to explore the present and ideal role of the nurse teacher in the clinical area from the perspective of: nurse teachers; ward sisters/charge nurses; staff nurses and students nurses undertaking the 'traditional' and Project 2000 programmes of training. The study adopted a qualitative design. Findings from this study demonstrate that the clinical role of the nurse teacher lacks clarity, however, clear criteria emerged as to how trained nurses and student nurses perceived the ideal role. Nurse teachers' role in assuring the quality of the clinical learning environment emerged as a major area of criticism. It was suggested that, if nurse teachers adopted a clinical role that was primarily concerned with supporting clinically based nurses in their teaching role, this served to assure the quality of students' clinical learning experience. In conclusion, it is suggested that for nurse teachers to meet the needs of trained nurses and student nurses in the clinical area, the role must be diverse and flexible. Attempts to prescribe a unimodel approach to deliver the service should be avoided. Rather, the role must be negotiated between teachers, clinical nurses and students, and constructed in a way that best meets the needs of all parties concerned.

Part I of this article presented an examination of the methodology used in previous psychosocial interventions (PSI) research and the rationale for the collaborative, qualitative design used in this study. In this second article the findings from an evaluation of five short PSI training courses are presented. Findings demonstrated that while the training was positively evaluated by participants and seen to be relevant to practice, the actual dissemination of PSI training into practice was a complex and context dependent process. There was difficulty for course participants in using PSI in practice as discrete, formal interventions. Rather the predominant way participants used PSI in practice was via a process of modifying PSI. The course philosophy, content and mode of delivery impacted on how the respondents constructed PSI as an overall approach to care and working relationships. Participants reported other 'hidden' benefits of training, such as reaffirming practice, increasing confidence and perhaps most powerfully, a change in attitude linked to the importance and impact attached to the service user and carer involvement in delivering the courses. Discussion locates the findings within the findings from previous PSI training evaluations and recommendations are made for a reappraisal of approaches to PSI training and research.