Purpose, Setting, Validity and Reliability of Technique Used for Evaluation In Nursing Education

Evaluation In Nursing Education and Purpose, Setting, Validity & Reliability of Technique Being Used

Purpose of Evaluation In Nursing Education, Setting or Environment for Evolution In Nursing Education, Choice of Strategy In Nursing Education for Evaluation, Procedures for Evaluation In Nursing Education, Validity and Reliability of Technique Used for Evaluation In Nursing Education.

Purpose of Evaluation In Nursing Education

    The purpose of evaluation is to ascertain that students have achieved their potential and have acquired the knowledge, skills, and abilities set forth in courses and curricula. The instructional goals and course outcomes and objectives indicate the type of behavior (cognitive, affective, or psychomotor) to be assessed or evaluated. 

    The learning experiences should be designed to have relevance to the students and the evaluation should carry value in the grading system. Finally, the grading criteria should be shared with the students before evaluation occurs.

Setting or Environment for Evolution In Nursing Education 

    Another critical factor to consider is the setting in which the instruction and evaluation will occur. Most faculty are comfortable with evaluation in traditional classroom settings, but a majority of nursing schools are now using some form of computer based learning support for either completely online instruction or hybrid (blended) instruction. 

    For example, a threaded discussion can be used for critiquing or even as a forum for verbal questioning. Concept maps can be developed in an electronic format. Students or faculty may maintain an electronic portfolio representative of student work throughout the course or program. 

    When considering assessment or evaluation strategies in an online environment, the faculty needs to be sure the technology is relevant for the assessment purpose and build in learning time for both students and faculty to become proficient in the use of the technology (Mok, 2012). 

    The expansion of interprofessional education creates new opportunities to collaborate with educators from other professions. Clearly identified shared competencies (Interprofessional Education Collaborative Expert Panel, 2011) are essential to this process. As with any team teaching effort, consistent application of criteria is essential. 

Choice of Strategy In Nursing Education for Evaluation

    When choosing the best strategy for the purpose, faculty must weigh the advantages and disadvantages of each strategy. Faculty should also consider time for preparation, implementation, and grading. Other issues, such as cost, may also be determining factors. 

    Faculty must decide how often to evaluate, who will evaluate, and how the students will be prepared for the evaluation. When selecting an evaluation strategy, it is imperative that students have ample opportunity to practice in the way in which they will be tested.

Procedures for Evaluation In Nursing Education

    Although for using evaluation strategies to vary, any procedure selected must be well planned. The strategy should be pilot tested before it is fully implemented. This process will help prevent unexpected difficulties and allows for refinement and quality improvements prior to full-scale implementation. 

    It is also important to delineate the responsibilities associated with the methods used. For example, in the case of portfolio evaluation, a decision must be made about whether students or faculty will collect and keep the work. Another area of concern is the environment in which the evaluation will take place. 

    Because of the anxiety and stress associated with the process of being evaluated, faculty must attempt to provide an atmosphere conducive to the process. Appropriately used humor can help place students at ease.

Validity and Reliability of Technique Used for Evaluation In Nursing Education

    In determining validity, faculty must ask whether the technique is appropriate to the purpose and whether it provides useful and meaningful data (Miller, Linn, & Gronlund, 2012). Faculty must consider the fit of the strategy with the identified objectives. In other words, does the strategy measure what it is supposed to measure? 

    For instance, if the objective for an assignment is for the student to demonstrate skill in written communication, evaluating student performance through oral questioning will not provide valid data. Similarly, at the nursing department level, faculty should coordinate strategies with nursing program outcomes such as critical thinking, clinical reasoning, and communication. 

    It is a challenge to develop sound criteria for evaluation that accurately reflect the specified outcomes, objectives, and content. To establish face validity, faculty must seek input from colleagues by asking questions such as, “Do these criteria appear to measure the specified objectives?” 

    In addition, obtaining the opinion of other content experts can assist in determining whether there is adequate sampling of the content (content validity). These traditional approaches to establishing validity are being replaced by a unitary concept, based on several different categories of evidence (e.g., face-related evidence, content-related evidence). 

    The evidence available to establish validity determines whether validity is considered low, medium, or high ( Gikandi et al., 2011; Miller et al., 2012). Once evaluation criteria are developed, it is essential to establish their reliability or the ability to be dependable in measuring the desired learning outcome ( Gikandi et al., 2011). 

    In completing their systematic review of online formative evaluation these authors determined that a reliable evaluation would document and monitor evidence of learning, and incorporate multiple sources of evidence and “explicit clarity of learning goals and shared meaning of rubrics” (p. 2339). 

    A commonly used method for establishing reliability of an evaluation rubric is to have two or more instructors independently rate student performance using the agreed on criteria for sample work. Ratings are correlated to establish interrater reliability, which is expressed as a percentage of agreement between scores. 

    When agreement is less than 70%, faculty should continue to refine the specificity and clarity of each criterion to come to a stronger agreement. It is especially important to establish interrater reliability when multiple faculties are grading the same assignment. Frequently evaluation criteria are placed in rubrics as a way of articulating the grading scale for assessment criteria. 

    A multiplicity of evaluation strategies can provide a more complete picture of the student's abilities and therefore contribute to the trustworthiness of the process. It is a serious limitation to rely on a single strategy. Each strategy has limitations and issues that can influence the reliability, validity, and appropriateness of the strategy for given student populations. Using multiple strategies provides a more robust and accurate framework for making decisions.