Psychometric properties of the clinical learning environment, Supervision and Nurse Teacher scale (CLES+T) for undergraduate nursing students in Hong Kong

Perception of Nursing Students About Effective Clinical Teaching Environments: A Multi-Country Study

Background

The transition of nursing education from traditional methods to more advanced approaches is crucial for adequately preparing students to deliver competent care in tertiary care centers. Moreover, clinical faculty in nursing plays a key role in guiding nursing students through their clinical training in various healthcare settings.

Purpose

This study aims to describe the perceptions of undergraduate nursing students regarding the effectiveness of the learning environment and clinical teaching in clinical areas across various countries.

Methods

The study, conducted using a descriptive, cross-sectional research design, gathered data from 215 nursing students using the Clinical Learning Environment Inventory and Clinical Teaching Effectiveness Instrument. Data analysis included frequencies, percentages, mean, standard deviation, t-tests, analysis of variance, and correlation assessments to comprehend the impact of clinical teaching and learning environments.

Results

Nursing students' perceptions of the clinical learning environment produced mean scores between 2.03 and 3.38 on a scale from 1 to 4, resulting in an overall mean score of 2.72 across 42 items. This indicates a general satisfaction with their clinical learning experiences. Regarding effective clinical teaching, the mean student responses varied from 3.02 to 3.40 out of a possible 5 points, with a total mean of 3.22. The study revealed notable correlations in the context of effective clinical teaching, particularly with demographic variables and the clinical learning environment. Specifically, a significant correlation with age (r = .177, p = .009) and the clinical learning environment (r = .572, p < .001) was identified.

Conclusion

The study concludes that students expressed overall satisfaction with their clinical learning experiences. They recognized the importance of participating in clinical training, fulfilling clinical responsibilities for assigned patients, exerting extra effort for learning, receiving support from preceptors in clinical settings, and being attentive to communications from staff. The collaboration between clinical preceptors and academic nursing lecturers is crucial in providing a positive learning environment for students to complete clinical tasks effectively.

Appraisal and Evaluation of the Learning Environment Instruments of the Student Nurse: A Systematic Review Using COSMIN Methodology

BACKGROUND

Nursing education consists of theory and practice, and student nurses' perception of the learning environment, both educational and clinical, is one of the elements that determines the success or failure of their university study path. This study aimed to identify the currently available tools for measuring the clinical and educational learning environments of student nurses and to evaluate their measurement properties in order to provide solid evidence for researchers, educators, and clinical tutors to use in the selection of tools.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review to evaluate the psychometric properties of self-reported learning environment tools in accordance with the Consensus-based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) Guidelines of 2018. The research was conducted on the following databases: PubMed, CINAHL, APA PsycInfo, and ERIC.

RESULTS

In the literature, 14 instruments were found that evaluate both the traditional and simulated clinical learning environments and the educational learning environments of student nurses. These tools can be ideally divided into first-generation tools developed from different learning theories and second-generation tools developed by mixing, reviewing, and integrating different already-validated tools.

CONCLUSION

Not all the relevant psychometric properties of the instruments were evaluated, and the methodological approaches used were often doubtful or inadequate, thus threatening the instruments' external validity. Further research is needed to complete the validation processes undertaken for both new and already developed instruments, using higher-quality methods and evaluating all psychometric properties.