A Comparison of Ratings of the Clinical Competency of Recent Graduates of Associate and Baccalaureate Degree Programs in Nursing
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
W&M ScholarWorks Dissertations, Theses, and Masters Projects Theses, Dissertations, & Master Projects 1982 A comparison of ratings of the clinical competency of recent graduates of associate and baccalaureate degree programs in nursing Carol Joan Magby Stanton College of William & Mary - School of Education Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.wm.edu/etd Part of the Nursing Commons Recommended Citation Stanton, Carol Joan Magby, "A comparison of ratings of the clinical competency of recent graduates of associate and baccalaureate degree programs in nursing" (1982). Dissertations, Theses, and Masters Projects. Paper 1539618284. https://dx.doi.org/doi:10.25774/w4-hfd0-ax70 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Theses, Dissertations, & Master Projects at W&M ScholarWorks. It has been accepted for inclusion in Dissertations, Theses, and Masters Projects by an authorized administrator of W&M ScholarWorks. For more information, please contact [email protected]. INFORMATION TO USERS This reproduction was made from a copy of a document sent to us for microfilming. While the most advanced technology has been used to photograph and reproduce this document, the quality of the reproduction is heavily dependent upon the quality of the material submitted. The following explanation of techniques is provided to help clarify markings or notations which may appear on this reproduction. 1.The sign or “target” for pages apparently lacking from the document photographed is “Missing Page(s)”. If it was possible to obtain the missing page(s) or section, they are spliced into the film along with adjacent pages. This may have necessitated cutting through an image and duplicating adjacent pages to assure complete continuity. 2. When an image on the film is obliterated with a round black mark, it is an indication of either blurred copy because of movement during exposure, duplicate copy, or copyrighted materials that should not have been filmed. For blurred pages, a good image of the page can be found in the adjacent frame. If copyrighted materials were deleted, a target note will appear listing the pages in the adjacent frame. 3. When a map, drawing or chart, etc., is part of the material being photographed, a definite method of “sectioning” the material has been followed. It is customary to begin filming at the upper left hand comer of a large sheet and to continue from left to right in equal sections with small overlaps. If necessary, sectioning is continued again—beginning below the first row and continuing on until complete. 4. For illustrations that cannot be satisfactorily reproduced by xerographic means, photographic prints can be purchased at additional cost and inserted into your xerographic copy. These prints are available upon request from the Dissertations Customer Services Department. 5. Some pages in any document may have indistinct print. In all cases the best available copy has been filmed. University Micrcxilms International 300 N. Zeeb Road Ann Arbor, Ml 48106 8303127 Stanton, Carol Joan Magby A COMPARISON OF RATINGS OF THE CLINICAL COMPETENCY OF RECENT GRADUATES OF ASSOCIATE AND BACCALAUREATE DEGREE PROGRAMS IN NURSING The College o f William and Mary in Virginia Ed.D. 1982 University Microfilms International300 N. Zeeb Road, Ann Arbor, MI 48106 Copyright 1983 by Stanton, Carol Joan Magby All Rights Reserved PLEASE NOTE: In all cases this material has been filmed in the best possible way from the available copy. Problems encountered with this document have been identified here with a checkV mark. 1. Glossy photographs or pages______ 2. Colored illustrations, paper or print______ 3. Photographs with dark background______ 4. Illustrations are poor copy______ 5. Pages with black marks, not original copy______ 6. Print shows through as there is text on both sides of______ page 7. Indistinct, broken or small print on several pages 8. Print exceeds margin requirements______ 9. Tightly bound copy with print lost in______ spine 10. Computer printout pages with indistinct______ print 11. Page(s) ____________lacking when material received, and not available from school or author. 12. Page(s) ____________seem to be missing in numbering only as text follows. 13. Two pages numbered___________. Text follows. 14. Curling and wrinkled p______ ag es 15. Other_______________________________________________________________________ University Microfilms International A COMPARISON OF RATINGS OF THE CLINICAL COMPETENCY OF RECENT GRADUATES OF ASSOCIATE AND BACCALAUREATE DEGREE PROGRAMS IN NURSING A dissertation Presented to The Faculty of the School of Education The College of William and Mary in Virginia In Partial Fulfillment Of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Education by Carol Joan Magby Stanton A COMPARISON OF RATINGS OF THE CLINICAL COMPETENCY OF RECENT GRADUATES OF ASSOCIATE AND BACCALAUREATE DEGREE PROGRAMS IN NURSING by Carol Joan Magby Stanton Approved July 23, 1982 ^ria, Ed .Dy (A'nrf 'Danowitz ^ria, Ed.Dy Paul Unger, Ph.D. ___ Donald J. Herrmann, Ph.D. Chairman of Doctoral Committee Dedication This report is dedicated to my husband, Kevin, and to my children, Karen, Curt, and Kathleen, who made personal and financial sacrifices that I might pursue my educational endeavors. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS It is with appreciation and pleasure that the writer wishes to acknowledge and express thanks to the many individuals who have contributed to this study. Completion would not have been possible without the contributions and assistance of the following people: Dr. Donald Herrmann, Chairman of my doctoral committee, for his sense of humor, patience and continuous encouragement. Dr. Mary Ann Sagaria and Dr. Paul Unger for their critique and services as conscientious committee members. Dr. Carole Mutzebaugh for accepting the job of reader and for her constructive criticism. Dr. and Mrs. John Selby who donated many hours to editing this paper. Dr. Kevin Stanton, my husband, for his optimism, endurance and faithful assistance in teaching me how to use the word processer and home computer. Also, again, to my husband, Kevin, and to our children, Karen, Curt, and Kathleen, my deepest appreciation for the many sacrifices and continued affection and inspiration. TABLE OF CONTENTS Page DEDICATION.............................................. 3 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS........................................ 4 LIST OF TABLES.......................................... 9 Chapter 1. INTRODUCTION.................................... 11 The Need for the Study......................... 14 General Area of Inquiry........................ 14 Purpose of the Study........................... 15 Statement of the Problem....................... 16 Definition of Terms............................ 17 Limitations of the Study....................... 19 Overview........................................ 20 2. RELATED LITERATURE.............................. 23 Description of AD Nursing Education........... 23 Description of BS Nursing Education........... 26 Perceived Expectations of Practicing ADN Graduates.................................... 29 Perceived Expectations of Practicing BSN Graduates.................................... 40 Perceived Differences and Similarities of ADN and BSN Graduates.................... 52 Summarization of Related Literature........... 57 Rating Patterns of Clinical Competence........ 62 Use of Head Nurse Evaluators................... 63 Slater Nursing Competencies Rating Scale..... 65 5 6 Reliability............ 68 Inter-Rater Reliability........................ 68 Internal Consistency........................... 69 Stability....................................... 69 Validity........................................ 70 Construct Validity............................. 70 Content Validity................................ 70 Predictive Validity............................ 71 Discrimination.......... 72 3. RESEARCH DESIGN................................. 74 Use of Head Nurse Evaluators................... 75 Instrumentation................................. 76 Reliability and Validity....................... 77 Population...................................... 80 Data Collection................................. 84 Hypotheses...................................... 89 Statistical Analysis........................... 89 4. PRESENTATION OF DATA........................... 91 Demographic Data - Evaluators................ 91 Demographic Data - Evaluatees................. 96 Comparison of Graduates on Six Subsections of the Slater................................... 106 5. ANALYSIS OF FINDINGS, DISCUSSION CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS............ 123 Analysis of Findings........................... 124 Psychosocial: Individual Subsection.......... 125 Psychosocial: Group Subsection............... 126 Physical Subsection............................ 128 7 General Subsection............................. 131 Communication Subsection....................... 134 Professional Implications Subsection......... 136 Analysis of Demographic Information........... 139 Summary of Findings............................ 146 Limitations of the Study....................... 148 Recommendations and Suggestions for Future Research..................................... 149 APPENDICES.............................................. 152 Appendix A. Slater Nursing Competencies Rating Scale.............................. 152 Appendix B. Cue Sheet........................... 159 Appendix C. Instructions for Use............... 187 Appendix D. Request for Participation,