Development of the Clinical Learning Environment Comparison Survey

Leighton, Kim

doi:10.1016/j.ecns.2014.11.002

Cited by 32 publications

(60 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Only consenting students' survey results were used. After students finished both the leadership simulation and traditional clinical experiences, students completed the Leighton CLECS (L-CLECS; Leighton, 2015) prior to beginning their preceptorship/internship.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The scale has been validated with good face and construct validity, and good reliability (Cronbach's alpha for each subscale ranged from 0.73 to 0.97; Leighton, 2007Leighton, , 2015. Leighton (2015) provided definitions of these subscales: Self-efficacy is the perceived capability to perform a behavior (Kear, 2000). Teaching-learning dyad is the interactive, collaborative relationship between teacher and student in which both have shared responsibility for the learning that occurs.…”

Section: Instrumentmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The CLECS is a 29-item self-report survey based on pertinent topics from a literature review, and designed to compare how well undergraduate students perceived their learning needs were met in the simulated clinical environment and in the traditional clinical environment. Participants respond to each item using a Likert scale of 1-4, and a not applicable choice (0 ¼ not applicable; 1 ¼ not met; 2 ¼ partially met; 3 ¼ met, and 4 ¼ well met) with total possible scores from 0 to 116 (Leighton, 2015). The scale has been validated with good face and construct validity, and good reliability (Cronbach's alpha for each subscale ranged from 0.73 to 0.97; Leighton, 2007Leighton, , 2015.…”

Section: Instrumentmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Participants respond to each item using a Likert scale of 1-4, and a not applicable choice (0 ¼ not applicable; 1 ¼ not met; 2 ¼ partially met; 3 ¼ met, and 4 ¼ well met) with total possible scores from 0 to 116 (Leighton, 2015). The scale has been validated with good face and construct validity, and good reliability (Cronbach's alpha for each subscale ranged from 0.73 to 0.97; Leighton, 2007Leighton, , 2015. Leighton (2015) provided definitions of these subscales: Self-efficacy is the perceived capability to perform a behavior (Kear, 2000).…”

Section: Instrumentmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Hayden and colleagues (2014) used several tools for evaluation of the longitudinal, randomized, controlled study for replacing clinical hours with simulation in pre-licensure nursing education. One of the tools used was the Clinical Learning Environments Comparison Survey (CLECS; Leighton, 2015) for student perceived learning effectiveness at the end of each clinical course and the completion of curriculum for each group for simulation as clinical time: the control group used 10% simulation (n ¼ 197 traditional; n ¼ 174 simulation), 25% simulation (n ¼ 202) and 50% simulation (n ¼ 187). Hayden and colleagues found that students in the control group (10% simulation) preferred traditional clinical experiences and the 50% simulation group preferred the simulated clinical experiences.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Teaching Nursing Leadership: Comparison of Simulation versus Traditional Inpatient Clinical

Gore

Johnson

Wang

2015

International Journal of Nursing Education Scholarship

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Nurse educators claim accountability to ensure their students are prepared to assume leadership responsibilities upon graduation. Although front-line nurse leaders and nurse executives feel new graduates are not adequately prepared to take on basic leadership roles, professional nursing organizations such as the American Nurses Association (ANA) and the Association of Colleges of Nursing (AACN) deem leadership skills are core competencies of new graduate nurses. This study includes comparison of a leadership-focused multi-patient simulation and the traditional leadership clinical experiences in a baccalaureate nursing leadership course. The results of this research show both environments contribute to student learning. There was no statistical difference in the overall score. Students perceived a statistically significant difference in communication with patients in the traditional inpatient environment. However, the students perceived a statistical significant difference in teaching-learning dyad toward simulation.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Instrumentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Instrumentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Instrumentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Teaching Nursing Leadership: Comparison of Simulation versus Traditional Inpatient Clinical

Gore

Johnson

Wang

2015

International Journal of Nursing Education Scholarship

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Evaluation of students' perceived clinical competence and learning needs following an online virtual simulation education programme with debriefing during the COVID‐19 pandemic

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aims and objectives This study aimed to evaluate the effect of a virtual simulation education programme with debriefing in undergraduate nursing students. Perceived clinical competence and learning needs of students in a simulation environment were also measured. Background Evidence showed virtual simulation education programmes provided better knowledge acquisition. However, these studies to date did not incorporate virtual simulation in the combination of a debriefing model in nursing students. Design A one‐group pre‐test and post‐test design. Methods 188 final year undergraduate nursing students participated in the study. Linear mixed model analysis was conducted to evaluate the effect of the programme. Results Students have perceived a significant improvement in clinical competence and nursing process. Self‐efficacy has also boosted. Communication and critical thinking were applied better in the traditional clinical environment. Conclusion Perceived clinical competence of Chinese nursing students has significant improvements by using virtual simulation combining a debriefing model during the COVID‐19 period. Virtual simulation met students' learning needs. Future studies should include a control group for comparison and long‐term measurement. Relevance to clinical practice The study provided an innovative clinical learning pedagogy to serve as a potential alternative with traditional clinical practicum during the COVID‐19 period as this is substantially limited.

show abstract

Psychometric properties of the Norwegian version of the clinical learning environment comparison survey

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim To translate The Clinical Learning Environment Comparison Survey (CLECS) into Norwegian and to evaluate the psychometric properties of the Norwegian version. Design A cross‐sectional survey including a longitudinal component. Methods The CLECS was translated into Norwegian following the World Health Organization guidelines, including forward translation, expert panel, back‐translation, pre‐testing and cognitive interviewing. Nursing students at a Norwegian university college were invited to participate in the study (psychometrical testing) based on informed consent. Reliability and validity of the translated version of CLECS were investigated using a confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), Cronbach's alpha and test–retest analysis. Results A total of 122 nursing students completed the questionnaire and Cronbach alphas for the CLECS subscales ranged from 0.69 to 0.89. CFA goodness‐of‐fit indices (χ2/df = 1.409, CFI = 0.915, RMSEA = 0.058) showed acceptable model fit. Test–retest ICC ranged from 0.55 to 0.75, except for two subscales with values below 0.5

show abstract

Development of the Clinical Learning Environment Comparison Survey

Cited by 32 publications

References 11 publications

Teaching Nursing Leadership: Comparison of Simulation versus Traditional Inpatient Clinical

Teaching Nursing Leadership: Comparison of Simulation versus Traditional Inpatient Clinical

Evaluation of students' perceived clinical competence and learning needs following an online virtual simulation education programme with debriefing during the COVID‐19 pandemic

Psychometric properties of the Norwegian version of the clinical learning environment comparison survey

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About