Nurse Writing Services

NURS FPX 6111 Assessment 3 Course Evaluation Template

New Samples

Struggling With Your Assessments? Get Help From Our Tutors

    NURS FPX 6111 Assessment 3 Course Evaluation Template

    Student Name

    Capella University

    NURS-FPX 6111 Assessment and Evaluation in Nursing Education

    Prof. Name

    Date

    Part One – Standardized Course Evaluation Template

    In the dynamic realm of education, feedback assumes a crucial role in shaping course content and delivery methodologies. At [University Name], we consider our students essential stakeholders in the teaching-learning process. Your insights aid us in comprehending what is effective and identify areas for improvement. This evaluation form not only signifies our dedication to continuous improvement but also underscores our commitment to fostering a collaborative educational environment. We assure you of the confidentiality of your responses and sincerely appreciate your time and candor.

    Evaluation of the Course “Clinical Healthcare Ethics for Pediatric Nurses”

    Course Objectives – The primary objective of the course is to ensure that you:

    • Strongly Disagree
    • Disagree
    • Neutral
    • Agree
    • Strongly Agree
    • Understand and adeptly apply fundamental ethical principles in pediatric nursing.
    • Exhibit practical skills in navigating and resolving ethical dilemmas.
    • Delve deeply into the emotional and moral undertones of decisions within pediatric nursing.
    • Work synergistically in a team environment, embodying leadership in ethical decision-making.

    Your comments regarding course objectives:

    Learning Outcomes –The course is structured to provide you with skills in the following domains:

    • Strongly Disagree
    • Disagree
    • Neutral
    • Agree
    • Strongly Agree
    • Theoretical understanding and cognitive grasp of pediatric ethical principles.
    • Hands-on application of these principles in practical scenarios.
    • Nurturing emotional intelligence and fostering a profound reflection on ethical decision-making.

    Your comments on learning outcomes:

    Teaching Approaches – Rate the instructor based on the following:

    • Strongly Disagree
    • Disagree
    • Neutral
    • Agree
    • Strongly Agree
    • Their expertise and clarity in presenting ethical principles.
    • Efficient utilization of teaching aids and instructional tools.
    • Frequency and quality of feedback on assignments.
    • Promoting class discussions and active student participation.

    Your comments on teaching approaches:

    Program Outcome – Reflect on the following course components:

    • Strongly Disagree
    • Disagree
    • Neutral
    • Agree
    • Strongly Agree
    • The relevance and comprehensiveness of course literature and supplemental reading materials.
    • The realism and efficacy of class simulations and practical scenarios.
    • The value of peer interactions and structured group activities.

    Your comments on program outcomes:

    Evidence to Support Assessment Strategies

    The development of our template was rooted in multiple evidence-based strategies. Drawing from academic literature, studies have continuously emphasized the necessity of encapsulating all three learning domains—cognitive, psychomotor, and affective—in evaluations, which our template ardently reflects (Agustian, 2022; Lo & Yang, 2022). This theoretical foundation was enriched by the invaluable feedback from educators and students, ensuring the template’s practical relevance. A thorough benchmarking process, where we analyzed templates from esteemed educational institutions, allowed us to recognize and incorporate the most effective assessment strategies. Lastly, our commitment to perfection saw the template being pilot-tested with a select group, ensuring its precision through iterative refinements based on direct feedback.

    Part Two – Executive Summary

    A dependable academic program’s foundation hinges on its evaluative methods’ accuracy. Recognizing this, we have crafted a standardized course evaluation template, which meticulously spans the three integral learning domains: cognitive, psychomotor, and affective. The inclusion of these three domains in our template is not arbitrary. Scholarly evidence suggests that these domains are paramount in grasping the complexity of the educational experience (Smith & Agustian, 2022; Lo & Yang, 2022). For instance, the cognitive domain revolves around the understanding and acquisition of knowledge. The psychomotor domain pertains to the development and execution of skills. Lastly, the affective domain gauges the depth of student engagement, attitudes, and values concerning the course. These domains are a barometer of a student’s holistic educational journey.

    Integral to our template’s foundation is the underlying assumption that holistic student experiences can be quantified and that a mixed-method approach captures a fuller, more comprehensive view of learning outcomes. Our template’s format, used to assess learning and program outcomes, is a mixed-method strategy, revolving around research, quantitative, and qualitative assessment. Grounded in research, such a strategy ensures both breadth and depth in feedback collection. Quantitative metrics, in the form of Likert scales, offer standardized, measurable insights into student perceptions (Kondakci et al., 2022). On the other hand, qualitative inquiries, achieved through open-ended questions, unearth detailed narratives of student experiences (Wilson et al., 2023). This blend ensures that while we get a pulse on general sentiments, we are also attuned to the nuances that might not be captured through structured questions alone.

    NURS FPX 6111 Assessment 3 Course Evaluation Template

    Criteria for evaluating this strategy include its capacity for comprehensive feedback, alignment with learning outcomes, and adaptability to diverse educational settings. Reliability and validity form the pillars of any evaluation mechanism. Our template shines in this regard. We have undertaken rigorous steps to ensure that our questions maintain a high standard of content validity, aligning closely with course objectives. We underscore the criterion validity by mapping our feedback mechanism to specific learning outcomes. Furthermore, our methods provide a predictive lens, giving educators foresight into potential academic outcomes based on received feedback. This reliability stems from the template’s standardization, assuring consistent feedback regardless of when or by whom the evaluation is conducted (Varghese & Timmons, 2022).

    Despite its strengths, our evaluation methodology recognizes its imperfections. The nature of open-ended responses means personal sentiments can sometimes sway them. Moreover, our wide-ranging questions, aiming to capture the more extensive educational experience, might occasionally miss the nuances of specific course modules, as highlighted by Mello (2022). However, here is the silver lining: recognizing these shortcomings is our first step toward excellence. By acknowledging these gaps, we are being transparent and sending a clear message of our unwavering dedication to improvement.

    Embracing these challenges inspires us to work even harder, ensuring our evaluation tool is continually refined, becoming more accurate and valuable with each iteration. In conclusion, our evaluation template is not a static entity but a dynamic tool. It is deeply rooted in academic research, pedagogical best practices, and the pragmatic needs of educators and learners. Its design promotes actionable insights, yet its utility is contingent on continuous updates and alignments, ensuring it remains a gold standard in course evaluations.

    References

    Agustian, H. Y. (2022). Considering the hexad of learning domains in the laboratory to address the overlooked aspects of chemistry education and fragmentary approach to the assessment of student learning. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 23(3), 518–530. https://doi.org/10.1039/D1RP00271F

    Kondakci, Y., Zayim Kurtay, M., Kaya Kasikci, S., & Önen, Ö. (2022). Graduate student perceptions of preparedness for responsible conduct of research: A mixed methods study. Ethics & Behavior, 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508422.2022.2149524

    Lo, K.-W., & Yang, B.-H. (2022). Development and learning efficacy of a simulation rubric in childhood pneumonia for nursing students: A mixed methods study. Nurse Education Today, 119, 105544. https://doi

    .org/10.1016/j.nedt.2022.105544

    NURS FPX 6111 Assessment 3 Course Evaluation Template

    Mello, R. F., Neto, R., Fiorentino, G., Alves, G., Verenna Arêdes, Galdino, V., Taciana Pontual Falcão, & Dragan Gašević. (2022). Enhancing instructors’ capability to assess open-response using natural language processing and learning analytics. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 102–115. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-16290-9_8

    Varghese, D., & Timmons, D. (2022). Establishing and reporting content validity evidence of periodic, objective treatment review and nursing evaluation. Nursing Communications, 6(0), e2022022. https://doi.org/10.53388/in2022022

    Wilson, S. T., Urban, R. W., & Smith, J. G. (2023). Online prelicensure nursing students’ experiences of academic incivility during COVID ‐19: A qualitative inquiry. Journal of Advanced Nursing. https://doi.org/10.1111/jan.15656