Comparison of Nurse Mentor and Instructor

1
Comparison of Nurse Mentor and Instructor
Evaluation of Clinical Performance
Kathleen M. Seurynck, DNP, RN Carrie L.
Abele, Ph.D., RN Marisa A. Ferrari, DNP, RN
Susan L. Murphy, ScD, OTR University of Michigan
School of Nursing, Oakland University,
University of Michigan Department of PMR
BACKGROUND SIGNIFICANCE
DATA ANALYSES
Evaluating a student in the clinical setting has
been difficult in nursing schools. The
ever-changing environment, instructor
subjectivity, and lack of training in evaluation
techniques are all challenges of clinical
evaluation. Partnerships in hospitals and
schools of nursing have been on the rise and many
schools are having bedside nurse mentors take a
greater role in educating and evaluating students.
RESULTS

• PASW software was used for the analysis.
• To assess the level of agreement between the
  groups a general kappa statistic was used which
  allowed the comparison of independent groups
  rather than simply a pair of raters.
• To further understand how nurse educators and
  mentors are rating students, an independent
  sample t test was performed to compare means on
  each question of the survey.

.
Table 1 Level of Agreement between Educators and
Mentors in Evaluation of Nursing Students
Table 2 Means and Standard Deviations of
Evaluation Questions
Questions from Evaluation Mentor Scores Mean (SD) Educator Scores Mean (SD) t value P value
Professionalism Shared Accountability 3.8 (0.4) 3.5 (0.6) 3.72 0.00
Professionalism Evaluates Performance 3.8 (0.4) 3.3 (0.6) 6.24 0
Communication Written Documentation 3.6 (0.6) 3.3 (0.6) 3.52 0.44
Nursing Process Assessment 3.6 (0.5) 3.4 (0.6) 2.04 0.04
Nursing Process Diagnosis 3.3 (0.5) 3.2 (0.5) 1.25 0.36
Nursing Process Planning 3.4 (0.5) 3.1 (0.5) 2.66 0.02
Nursing Process Implementation 3.4 (0.6) 3.1 (0.6) 3.45 0.02
Patient Education Evaluates Effectiveness of Education 3.5 (0.6) 2.9 (0.6) 5.58 0.01
Evidence Based Practice Appraises Quality Evidence 3.6 (0.5) 2.9 (0.8) 4.93 0.06
Evidence Based Practice Applies Best Evidence 3.5 (0.5) 3.0 (0.7) 4.51 0.84
Question on Evaluation Kappa Number of participants with completed data
Professionalism Shared Accountability .089 71
Professionalism Evaluates Performance .064 57
Nursing Process Assessment .099 72
Nursing Process Diagnosis -.064 66
Nursing Process Planning -.061 71
Nursing Process Implementation .072 70
Patient Education Evaluates Effectiveness of Education .134 43
To compare the level of agreement between
nursing instructors and mentors in the evaluation
of student clinical performance in a new model of
clinical education at the University of Michigan
Health System (UMHS).
PURPOSE
CONCLUSIONS

• Results showed there was poor to slight agreement
  on all measures.
• Group means were calculated on all ten questions
  to further understand the low level of agreement
  between mentors and instructors.
• It was found that nurse mentors rated student
  nurses higher than nurse instructors on all
  questions from the evaluation tool.

METHODS

• The sample included staff nurse mentors (N 81)
  and nursing instructors (N 20) at UMHS hospital
  involved in the Initiative for Excellence in
  Clinical Education, Practice, and Scholarship
• All undergraduate nursing students for winter
  semester being evaluated by both a nurse mentor
  and nursing instructor in Week 8 of the term were
  included in the study (N 81).

As institutions rely more on mentor evaluation of
students, research need to be done to find out
why the instructors and mentors are not in better
agreement in evaluating the students and the
reasons mentors are rating higher than
instructors.