A National Survey of Nursing Faculty Resilience, Moral Courage, and Purpose
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: High rates of nursing faculty burnout and moral distress fuel faculty attrition, which directly affects our ability to educate new nurses. This study investigated the relationships among resilience, moral courage, and purpose to inform strategies to promote well-being in nursing faculty. Method: A descriptive, correlational study was conducted using a convenience sample of nursing faculty in the United States and Canada ( n = 690). Participants completed three surveys: the Connor Davidson Resilience Scale (CD-RISC), the Moral Courage Scale for Nursing Faculty (MCNF), and the Meaning of Life Questionnaire (MSQ), as well as a single open-ended question. Results: Moral courage was moderately correlated to resilience, and the Meaning of Life Presence subscale was moderately correlated to resilience. Meaning of life presence and meaning of life search were moderately negatively correlated. Conclusion: Resilience, moral courage, and purpose are essential in promoting professional fulfillment and personal well-being in nursing faculty. [ J Nurs Educ . 2023;62(7):381–386.]
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".