Nursing Faculty's Needs of Knowledge, Beliefs, and Readiness to Implement Interprofessional Education in their Teaching: An Exploratory Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The drive towards interprofessional health education in nursing cannot be isolated from political and financial factors that affect Western countries and the demands for knowledge and skills required to face the health challenges of the 21st century. Complex social determinants of health relating to demographic aging, health inequities, higher prevalence of non-communicable illnesses, and the rise of health care costs constitute the forces that push for the delivery of interprofessional health education. Despite the growing literature on interprofessional education in nursing and health sciences, less attention has been devoted to studying the needs of faculty development needs of nurse educators. This study addresses this gap in knowledge regarding nursing faculty development perspective. The objectives of the study were to explore and understand nursing faculty members’ perceptions of knowledge, beliefs, barriers and needs related to interprofessional education. A descriptive exploratory quantitative design was used to study a sample of 53 faculty members at a Canadian institution of higher nursing education. With ethics approval, an online survey was administered to a sample of convenience across five geographical sites. The survey was conducted from August to September 2013 with a recall two weeks after sending the online invitation. Issues of anonymity and confidentiality were addressed. Twenty faculty members out of 53 participated in the survey for a response rate of 35%. The survey was composed of 68 items derived from validated and reliable instruments such as the National Competency Framework and the Interdisciplinary Education Perception Scale (IEPS). Descriptive and non-parametric statistical analyses were used to explore correlations between age, years of practice, the level of education, years of teaching, and knowledge and readiness for interprofessional health education. Results indicate participants’ willingness of implement interprofessional education within teaching activities, yet issues like time constraints, workload, lack of time, lack of knowledge and skills, and low self- esteem and confidence influence nurse educators’ readiness. Also, institutional support is the main factor to support the application of interprofessional health education activities. Despite the limitations related to the sample size, findings show that addressing faculty`s lack of knowledge and skills represent the steps to implement interprofessional education in higher education and health professionals programs. A successful and sustainable implementation of interprofessional education requires nurse administrators and educators to address the lack of knowledge and skills and support faculty members through evidence-based faculty development programs.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".