2013 – 2014 Assessment Plan Report
Date Submitted: December 31, 2014
School: Engelstad School of Health Sciences
Program: AAS Nursing
Person(s) responsible for the design and implementation of assessment plan and writing the report:
Pat Riede, MSN/MBA, RN, CNE- Program Director; Gail Lupica, PhD, RN, CNE
1.
Program Overview and Assessment Goals
The following annual assessment report evaluates achievement of the ADN Program learning
outcomes through the December 2013 and the May 2014 graduating students. It focuses on the
following courses: NURS 247, NURS 248, NURS 208, NURS 211, and NURS 296. The learning
outcomes are listed below. Following, is the explanation of the assessment methods that were used
and the results that were obtained. Lastly, opportunities for improvement are identified with the
related recommendations for change.
A. List the program Learning Outcome(s) that the plan is assessing.
Outcome 1: Incorporate physiological, psychological, socio-cultural and spiritual concepts
into providing safe and competent nursing care for patients at various stages in their life
span.
Outcome 2: Combine the nursing process with clinical reasoning to assist patients with
adaptive behaviors that enhance, maintain, and promote optimal health, quality of life,
and/or death with dignity.
Outcome 3: Demonstrate caring behaviors with patients to attain optimal health, quality
of life, or death with dignity.
Outcome 4: Apply principles of verbal and written communication with professionals and
patients.
Outcome 5: Employ the QSEN initiatives while incorporating standards of professional
practice and working within nursing’s legal, ethical, and regulatory framework when
providing care to patients.
Outcome 6: Integrate teaching/learning principles to promote healthy behavior for
patients.
Outcome 7: Optimize collaboration with interdisciplinary teams and community resources
when managing nursing care of patients.
Provide a brief description of the plan and the assessment question(s) being addressed.
The question being explored is: Does the class demonstrate achievement of each of the
seven learning outcomes?
B.
If this report does not correspond to the most recent program assessment plan sent to
the school assessment coordinator please submit a copy of the revised plan along with
this report.
This report does correspond to the most recent program assessment.
1
C.
2.
Indicate when the outcome(s) were assessed and what conclusions were reached from
the previous assessment, and what “closing the loop” changes, if any, were made
based on those conclusions. Also indicate whether the assessment method used
previously is the same as the one described in this report. If not, what is changed?
Assessment Design and Coherence
A. Identify the student product(s) used for direct assessment of the Learning Outcome(s)
that you listed in 1.A. Explain the context for this product [course name(s) and
number(s), place in curriculum, instructor(s), and so forth). NOTE: If your project
depends on anonymity, report only contextual information that doesn’t need to be
anonymous. If the project focused on a single or common assignment, please attach
the assignment handout or explanation in the syllabus as an appendix.
B.
C.
Explain how the student product was scored and by whom [for example, objective scoring
by machine; course instructor using a rubric; judging panel using a rubric] If the project
used a rubric, please explain who created the rubric and attach it as an appendix.
Explain the “fit” or “match” between the program Learning Outcome(s) being assessed
and the student product used as a direct measure. In other words, how fully does the
quality of the product reveal achievement of the learning objective? [Sometimes there
may be a one-to-one correspondence between the learning objective and the product.
At other times, only some features of the product are relevant to the learning
objective. In such cases, the learning objective might be assessed only by one or two
rows of a rubric or by a few selected questions on an exam.]
D. Explain how program faculty defined achievement terms (example: minimally
competent, proficient, aspiring, satisfactory etc.) for the learning objective and how
they distinguished between the levels of achievement (criteria). If the project used a
rubric, does the rubric clearly indicate these categories and specify the corresponding
criteria? If not, explain how rubric scores correspond to these categories. If program
faculty haven’t yet defined terms and criteria for achievement of the learning
objective(s), how and when do you plan to do so?
E.
3.
If your project used a rubric, did program faculty try to establish inter-rater reliability in
the use of the rubric? If so, explain how. If not, explain why.
Assessment Methods: Narrate how the project was conducted. Who did what when?
The achievement of the seven learning outcomes was evaluated using three measures. The first
measure is of the students’ successful completion of Nursing 296: Nursing Management &
Preceptorship, according to the course’s Clinical Evaluation tool. The second measure is students’
scores on the Assessment Technology Incorporated (ATI) Comprehensive Predictor. The third
measure is students’ scores on the ATI Content Mastery series (tests) for Maternal-Child Nursing,
Pediatric Nursing, Medical-Surgical Nursing, and Nursing Leadership.
The Nursing 296: Nursing Management & Preceptorship Clinical Evaluation tool is the
instrument used in the final nursing course, NURS 296. It is a direct measure of the ADN
program learning outcomes, as students’ performance is evaluated in the clinical setting. A
student works with a consistent nurse preceptor for 120 hours overseen by a faculty liaison. The
nurse preceptor and the faculty liaison evaluates the student according to the Nursing 296
clinical evaluation tool on their successful achievement of the learning objectives that support
each learning outcome. There is a learning objective rubric that is used to assure inter-rater
reliability and each evaluator is oriented to use of the rubric. A score of 3 indicates that the
student demonstrated achievement of the identified learning outcome with minimal cues and is
defined as satisfactory and passing. This instrument was designed by the nursing faculty as a
direct clinical measurement of the program learning outcomes and as such, completely reveals
student achievement of each outcome.
2
ATI provides nationally benchmarked, psychometrically reliable and valid exams to assess
students’ overall content mastery and content mastery of the nursing specialty content areas. A
nursing specialty content mastery test is administered at the end of each nursing course to
assess student learning outcomes of that course. The Comprehensive Predictor exam is
administered at the end of the ADN program to assess student readiness for their licensure exam
and achievement of program learning outcomes. ATI test questions are written by leading
nursing educators to reflect the latest standards and technology in the field of nursing. The test
questions and answers with rationales are held to the highest standards and are continuously
evolving in order to maintain and improve nursing’s standards of education and evaluation. ATI
test questions are created to ensure that students are prepared their future career. The ADN
program learning outcomes and the ATI exams are aligned to prepare students to demonstrate
minimal competency required to practice nursing. Therefore, the student achievement on the
ATI exams reflects the students’ mastery of the program learning outcomes. The ATI exams are a
good fit for assessment of learning outcomes by assessing clinical nursing knowledge and
reasoning.
ATI reports student scores as levels of proficiency and as percent correct. Levels of proficiency
reported are Level 3, level 2, level 1 and below level 1. The faculty sets Level 1 as demonstrating
adequate achievement. The percentage correct scores are also very useful because ATI reports
the average percent correct for various categories of content. This provides faculty with data
about the areas in which the students are weaker.
4.
Project Results: Report your results as a table or chart showing the number of student products
evaluated and the distribution of performances across the quality categories shown in your rubric
or across the continuum of objective scores. Particularly highlight the percentage of performances
meeting your program’s aspirational goals and the percentage failing to meet minimal standards.
NURS 296 Clinical Evaluation
The Nursing 296: Nursing Management & Preceptorship Clinical Evaluation instrument (Appendix A)
results show that every individual student was scored at least a 3 for each learning outcome. This
data indicates that the December 13 and May 14 classes adequately demonstrated achievement of
every program learning outcome in a clinical setting. The nursing curriculum adequately prepared
students.
ATI Content Mastery
NURS 247: Maternal-Newborn Nursing (Appendices B and C).More than 99% of students achieved a
satisfactory proficiency level, while less than 1% of students achieved below level one proficiency
level. Overall results indicate that the students are performing well in all areas.
NURS 248: Pediatric Nursing (Appendices D and E). 94% of students achieved a satisfactory
proficiency level, while 6% of students achieved below level one proficiency level. Overall results
indicate that the students are weaker in safety and infection control.
NURS 208: Nursing Leadership (Appendix F). 95% of students achieved a satisfactory proficiency
level, while 5% of students achieved below level one proficiency level. Overall results indicate that
the students are performing well in all areas.
NURS 211: Medical-Surgical Nursing (Appendices G and H). 94% of students achieved a satisfactory
proficiency level, while 6% of students achieved below level one proficiency level. Overall results
indicate that the students are performing well in all areas.
ATI Comprehensive Predictor (Appendices I and J)
72% of students achieved a satisfactory proficiency level (73% probability of passing the licensure
exam), while 28% of students achieved below satisfactory probability of passing the licensure exam.
Overall results indicate that the students are performing well in all areas. Overall results indicate
that pharmacology is the lowest clinical area.
3
5.
Discussion of Results:
Overall results indicate that the students demonstrate achievement of each of the seven learning
outcomes. However, there does seem to be opportunity to improve instruction in the areas of
pharmacology and safety and infection control.
6.
“Closing the loop” actions: What follow-up actions do program faculty plan to take next as a result
of this project?
The recommendation is that faculty place greater emphasis on pharmacology instruction and
testing. Furthermore, the faculty course coordinators can form an ad hoc committee to coordinate
the instruction and/or reinforcement of drug classifications and prototype medications. Another
recommendation is for the NURS 248 faculty to reinforce the content area of safety and infection
control.
7.
Assessment ownership: To what extent were all program faculty involved in this project’s
discussion and analysis? When, how, and by whom were assessment findings discussed and
decisions made about appropriate actions to take in relation to these findings?
4