Authors
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Clinical evaluation is very important in the educational system of nursing. One
of the most common methods of clinical evaluation is evaluation by the teacher, but the challenges
that students would face in this evaluation method, have not been mentioned. Thus, this study aimed
to explore the experiences and views of nursing students about the challenges of teacher‑based
clinical evaluation.
METHODS: This study was a descriptive qualitative study with a qualitative content analysis approach.
Data were gathered through semi‑structured focused group sessions with undergraduate nursing
students who were passing their 8th semester at Rafsanjan University of Medical Sciences. Date
were analyzed using Graneheim and Lundman’s proposed method. Data collection and analysis
were concurrent.
RESULTS: According to the findings, “factitious evaluation” was the main theme of study that
consisted of three categories: “Personal preferences,” “unfairness” and “shirking responsibility.”
These categories are explained using quotes derived from the data.
CONCLUSION: According to the results of this study, teacher‑based clinical evaluation would lead
to factitious evaluation. Thus, changing this approach of evaluation toward modern methods of
evaluation is suggested. The finding can help nursing instructors to get a better understanding of
the nursing students’ point of view toward this evaluation approach and as a result could be planning
for changing of this approach.
Keywords
and midwifery students’ perspective. Iran J Nurs 2012;25:71‑7.
2. Biria M, Dadkhah B, Kamran A, Malekpour A, Sharghi A. Status
and strategies for improving nursing education in view of nursing
students in Ardebil University of Medical Sciences. Iran J Nurs
Res 2012;7:25‑31.
3. McCarthy B, Murphy S. Assessing undergraduate nursing
students in clinical practice: Do preceptors use assessment
strategies? Nurse Educ Today 2008;28:301‑13.
4. Ebadi A, Habibi H, Mahmoodi H, Seyedmazhari M,
KhaghanizadeM. Comparison of the effects of modern assessment
methods (DOPS and Mini‑CEX) with traditional method on
nursing students’ clinical skills: A randomized trial print. Iran J
Med Educ 2013;13:364‑72.
5. Smith‑Strøm H, Nortvedt MW. Evaluation of evidence‑based
methods used to teach nursing students to critically appraise
evidence. J Nurs Educ 2008;47:372‑5.
6. Hessler K, Humphreys J. Student evaluations: Advice for novice
faculty. J Nurs Educ 2008;47:187‑9.
7. Imanipour M, Jalili M. Nursing students’ clinical evaluation in
students and teachers views. Nurs Res 2012;7:17‑26.
8. Elcigil A, Yildirim Sari H. Determining problems experienced by
student nurses in their work with clinical educators in Turkey.
Nurse Educ Today 2007;27:491‑8.
9. Peyman H, Darash M, Sadeghifar J, Yaghoubi M, Yamani N,
Alizadeh M. Evaluating the viewpoints of nursing and midwifery
students about their clinical educational status. Iran J Med Educ
2011;10:1121‑30.
10. Mardani Hamule M, Heidari H, Changiz T. Evaluation of clinical
education status from the viewpoints of nursing students. Iran J
Med Educ 2011;10:500‑11.
11. Alavi M, Abedi HA. Nursing students’ experiences and
perceptions of effective instructor in clinical education. Iran J
Med Educ 2008;7:325‑34.
12. Pazargadi M, Ashktorab T, Khosravi S. Nursing students`
experiences and perspectives on the clinical characteristics of
instructors` in clinical evaluation. J Nurs Educ 2012;1:1‑13.
13. Khosravi SH, Pazargadi M, Ashktorab T. Nursing students`
viewpoints on challenges of student assessment in clinical
settings: A qualitative study. Iran J Med Educ 2012;11:735‑47.
14. Vaismoradi M, Parsa‑Yekta Z. Iranian nursing students`
comprehension and experiences regarding evaluation process:
A thematic analysis study. Scand J Caring Sci 2011;25:151‑9.
15. Sabzevari S, Abbaszadeh A, Borhani F. Perception of nursing
faculties from clinical assessment challenges in students:
A qualitative study. Strides in development of medical
education. J Med Educ Dev Cent Kerman Univ Med Sci
2013;10:267‑79.
16. Streubert HJ, Carpenter DR. Qualitative Research in Nursing:
Advancing the Humanistic Imperative. Philadelphia, PA:
Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2010.
17. Hsieh HF, Shannon SE. Three approaches to qualitative content
analysis. Qual Health Res 2005;15:1277‑88.
18. Krippendorff K. Content Analysis: An Introductory to Its
Methodology. California: Sage Publication Inc.; 2004.
19. Graneheim UH, Lundman B. Qualitative content analysis in
nursing research: Concepts, procedures and measures to achieve
trustworthiness. Nurse Educ Today 2004;24:105‑12.
20. Hadizadeh F, Firoozi M, Shamaeyan Razavi N. Nursing and
midwifery students’ perspective on clinical education in
Gonabad University of Medical Sciences. Iran J Med Educ
2005;5:70‑8.
21. Narenji F, Roozbahani N, Amiri L. The effective education and
assessment program on clinical learning of nursing and midwifery
instructors and students opinion in Arak University. Arak Med
Univ J 2010;12:103‑10.
22. Calman L, Watson R, Norman I, Redfern S, Murrells T. Assessing
practice of student nurses: Methods, preparation of assessors and
student views. J Adv Nurs 2002;38:516‑23.
23. Chapman H. Some important limitations of competency‑based
education with respect to nurse education: An Australian
perspective. Nurse Educ Today 1999;19:129‑35.
)