Chu G, Pitt V, Cant R, Johnson A, Inder K. Students' evaluation of professional experience placement quality in a pre-registration nursing programme: A cross-sectional survey.
Nurse Educ Pract 2024;
75:103877. [PMID:
38232675 DOI:
10.1016/j.nepr.2024.103877]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/01/2023] [Revised: 12/29/2023] [Accepted: 01/01/2024] [Indexed: 01/19/2024]
Abstract
AIM
To evaluate the quality of student nurses' experiences and overall satisfaction with professional experience placements at a regional Australian University.
BACKGROUND
Professional experience placements are a crucial component of pre-registration nursing programs. However, the absence of standardised approaches to assess placement quality has created uncertainty on what constitutes a high-quality placement from a student's perspective.
DESIGN
Cross-sectional survey.
METHODS
A descriptive cross-sectional survey was administered online to 800 second and third year undergraduate nursing students at an Australian university. The survey contains demographic questions (e.g., year of study, placement specialty, duration, setting and geographic location), a validated Placement Evaluation Tool and free-text comments. The Placement Evaluation Tool is a 20-item questionnaire that measures two key factors: clinical environment (factor 1), learning support (factor 2) and overall satisfaction of students' learning experiences during a professional experience placement. A descriptive analysis was conducted to evaluate the student's overall experience and satisfaction. Multivariate linear regression was used to assess the relationship between the quality of the student experience and demographics and presented as beta coefficient (β) and confidence interval (CI). Free-text comments were thematically analysed.
RESULTS
A total of 1104 survey responses were received (as students may rate more than one placement), with an estimated 71% response rate. Most responses (60.3%) were third-year students. Most students experienced high-quality placements, reflected in the overall positive placement experience (PET item 1-19 score: mean 85.9 out of 95) and high student satisfaction (PET item 20: mean 8.53 out of 10). Multiple linear regression analyses revealed that the third year of study and public facilities were independent predictors of positive student experiences (β: 2.61, 95% CI: 0.75, 4.47 and β: 3.72, CI: 0.90, 6.55, respectively). Further analysis of PET items related to factor 1 and factor 2 revealed that high positive experiences in public facilities may be due to the higher learning support (β: 2.54, CI: 0.80, 4.27). Three main themes were perceived to be important to students' professional experience: (i) staff and facilitator attitudes, (ii) learning opportunities and (iii) a team-based learning environment.
CONCLUSIONS
Most students reported high-quality placement experience and high satisfaction; however, a lack of learning support may contribute to less positive student experiences. This finding emphasises the importance of collaboration between clinical facilities and educational institutions to enhance the student's placement experience.
Collapse