Veilederes beveggrunner for å unnlate å gi ikke-bestått i praksisstudier til tross for at læringsutbyttene ikke er nådd

Abstract

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...

Failing to Fail nursing students among mentors: A confirmatory factor analysis of the Failing to Fail scale

“…We proposed a model using exploratory factor analysis (EFA) to support dimensionality and interpretation of the factors. Then, we tested a four-factor model, based on the reviews of previous studies (Hauge, 2015;, in a confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) framework. The Stata software, version 15, was used to analyse the data.…”

“…Both Hauge (2015) and Hughes et al (2016) conducted a literature review to investigate the phenomenon Failing to Fail. Hughes et al (2016) suggested that failure to fail is an issue with complex facets and identified five factors related to the failure to fail: the difficulty of failing a student, the emotional process for nurse mentors, the need for confidence, unsafe student characteristics and the importance of university support.…”

“…Hughes et al (2016) suggested that failure to fail is an issue with complex facets and identified five factors related to the failure to fail: the difficulty of failing a student, the emotional process for nurse mentors, the need for confidence, unsafe student characteristics and the importance of university support. Hauge (2015), in turn, identified six factors: a lack of knowledge and confidence, challenges related to documentation, personal attitudes and beliefs, lack of support, the scarcity of time and fear of losing face. When we see what is laid in the two authors' different factors, a four-factor model illuminates mentors' reasons for Failing to Fail: lack of competence, lack of support, emotional consequences for nurse mentors and personal attitudes and beliefs.…”

“…When we see what is laid in the two authors' different factors, a four-factor model illuminates mentors' reasons for Failing to Fail: lack of competence, lack of support, emotional consequences for nurse mentors and personal attitudes and beliefs. Hauge (2015) identified no studies from Scandinavia when investigating whether nursing students pass their clinical studies without achieving the learning outcomes. Hughes et al (2016) recommended further research to identify whether "failure to fail" is a universal problem in undergraduate nursing programmes.…”

“…We retained some of the items from Brown et al (2012). In addition, construction of the questionnaire was based on a theory-based methodology (Araï & Martinussen, 2010;Haraldsen, 1999) and qualitative studies (Duffy, 2003;Hauge, 2015;Rutkowski, 2007). The aim of the item construction was to ensure that the items covered different reasons for Failing to Fail.…”