MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2400569314 · doi:10.5430/jnep.v6n10p43

Reflective writing: Factors that influence the successful transition of nursing students entering into their second semester of a RN-ABSN program

2016· article· en· W2400569314 sur OpenAlexvenueno aff
Debra R. Wallace

Notice bibliographique

RevueJournal of Nursing Education and Practice · 2016
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineSocial Sciences
ThématiqueReflective Practices in Education
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésJournaling file systemRubricReflective writingGraduation (instrument)BachelorPsychologyMedical educationNurse educationReflective practiceNursingPedagogyTransition (genetics)NarrativeMedicineComputer scienceEngineeringChemistry

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Objective: Identify factors influencing the successful transition of nursing students entering into their second semester of a RN-ABSN program. Background: Newly graduate registered nurses (RNs) are able to enter practice within weeks of graduation as fully licensed RNs. An inadvertent effect of this transition is placing new graduates into an environment that demands safe, effective and quality care. Identifying factors that influence the successful transition of nursing students entering into the second semester of an ABSN (Accelerated Bachelor of Science Nursing) program sets off ones actions, increases awareness and understanding, and promotes the development of personal experiences by means of reflective journaling. Reflective journal rubrics (personal narrative of storytelling) help to fortify the successful transformation to practice by allowing self-reflection and encourage the reconceptualization of the problem situations. Reflective journals illuminate performance expectancies and can diminish misperceptions around role. The reflective journal rubric for assessing RN performance, focused on reflective writing. The tool was developed using the modified version of written exercises by Freshwater, Taylor and Sherwood for active learning concepts used in the classroom. Reflective journaling incorporates the application of concepts and leads to increase mastery and retention of content. Additionally, it identifies important themes and offers opportunities for students to discuss essential topics for a smooth transition into their first and second semester. Methodology: A group of seventeen ABSN students in the second semester medical surgical clinical were required to participate in the reflective journaling at the beginning and end of their experiences in training as a part of their preparation for a clinical rotation. Nurse educators, read the reflective journals to gain insight into the participants’ experience and then coded to highlighted themes. The journals were evaluated with the reflective practices of Freshwater, Taylor and Sherwood who have proposed the use of the term “art” pertinent in the context of reflective journaling in nursing. Qualitative content analysis was deemed complete when agreement was reached regarding major themes. Dependability was achieved by the researchers using the participants’ own words to support the themes and conclusions. Data Collection: IRB approval was obtained. 17 students participated in the study and identifying themes from approximately 17 students over the past 2 years. The self-reflection rubric contained open-ended, short write-in items. Responses were anonymous. No names, email addresses, nor computer IP addresses were collected. Results: Seventeen journals were analyzed. Students are using critical reflection to improve practice, especially with respect to Freshwaters statement ‘thinking about thinking’. The key outcomes indicated that reflective journals assist students to focus on their clinical learning during the coaching point. These following themes emerged: my preceptor was knowledgeable about nursing practice, therapeutic touch, confidence level, prioritization of patient care, caring, communication, six rights of medication administration, holistic approach and skills. Conclusions: This study heightens most discussions on the use of reflective journals validating previous information defined in the literature with the advantages of utilizing journals in terms of fostering and stimulating reflection type to enhance first-hand learning in the nursing student’s clinical practice.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,002
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Qualitatif · Signal consensuel: Qualitatif
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,383
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,340

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0020,002
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,003
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,080
Tête enseignante GPT0,507
Écart entre enseignants0,426 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeQualitatif
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations2
Publié2016
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueJournal of Nursing Education and PracticeMême sujetReflective Practices in EducationTravaux en français237 207