September 2012, Jane Lister Reis, Evaluator

NEEDL LPN TO RN PROGRAM EVALUATION

SECTION 1: STUDENTSAND SURVEY INFORMATION

1. NEEDL Student Demographics (24 students)

a. Gender
7 Men (30%)
17 Women (70%)

b. Race/Ethnicity
14 Caucasian (58%)
10Students of Color (42%)

Last Name / First Name / Gender / Ethnicity
Anamelechi* / Tochukwu / M / African immigrant (coded as African American)
Asfha* / Selamawit / F / African immigrant – (coded as “other race”)
Baharudin* / Roziawati / F / Asian
Butts / Desiree / F / Caucasian
Curtis* / Lori - Ann / F / Caucasian
Furlong / Elizabeth / F / Caucasian
Gibbs / Mark / M / Caucasian
McGuire / Travis / M / Caucasian
Olivares / Annelaraine / F / Asian
Omotuyole* / Benson / M / African immigrant(coded as African American)
Oung / Joanne / F / Asian
Pac / Denise / F / Caucasian
Peltzer / Christine / F / Caucasian
Riewe* / Thidarat / F / Asian
Robinson* / Brian / M / Caucasian
Severide / Shane / M / Caucasian
Ta-Asan / Kathryna Marie / F / Asian
Torres / Stefan / M / Hispanic
Tufui / Litia / F / Hispanic (coded as Asian)
Wachtler / Tami / F / Caucasian
Walker / Tammy / F / Caucasian
(not coded)
Williamson / Breanne / F / Caucasian
Willis / Kristen / F / Caucasian
Wilson / Megan / F / Caucasian

c. Students who didn’t graduate and/or complete the LPN to RN NEEDL program
*7 students (29%) did not complete the program.
Five (5) of these 7 students were students of color (71%).

2. Evaluation Methodology

Twenty-four (24) students were emailed asking them to participate in an evaluation of the NEEDL program. Students were given three choices on how they could participate:

a. online survey (using Survey Monkey) with three questions

b. on-site focus group

c. face to face personal interview

Thirty-six (36) NEEDL nursing faculty were also sent an email asking them to respond to the same three questions with one additional question added by the dean (see question #4, page 6).

3. Number of Respondents

a. Nine students (38%) responded to the online survey.

b. Three students (12.5%) asked for a personal interview.

c. Eight faculty (22%) responded to the online survey.

SECTION 2: ONLINE SURVEY - THEME ANALYSIS (STUDENTS AND FACULTY)

QUESTION 1: WHAT WORKED WELL? (FULL RESPONSES ON PAGES 6-7)
THEMES / NUMBER OF STUDENT RESPONSES / NUMBER OF FACULTY RESPONSES
Flexibility (online format) / 5 (56%) / 2 (25%)
Helpful/Knowledgeable Instructors / 3 (33%) / 1
Extra time in clinicals / 2(25%)
Tegrity / 2 (22%) / 1
Communication / 1 / 4 (50%)
Provision of Course Materials / 1 / 0
Course Organization / 1 / 0
Having previous instructor talk about students; care plan; math assessment / 1
Support of Program Manager / 1 / 0
Materials related to exams / 1 / 0
Clinical Sites / 1 / 1
Tutoring Help / 1
On-Campus Lectures & Labs / 1
QUESTION 2: WHAT DIDN’T WORK WELL? (FULL RESPONSES ON PAGES 8-9)
THEMES / STUDENT RESPONSES / FACULTY RESPONSES
Too many books (reading amount too high) / 2(22%) / 2(25%)
Clinical Labs: more time, long hours, too rushed, better arranged for more hands-on learning and practical demonstrations; skill check list provided earlier to faculty / 3(33%) / 2(25%)
Not having face to face 1:1 with instructor / 3(33%) / 2(25%)
Some instructors / 2(22%)
Fully online format (includes email) / 1 / 2(25%)
ANGEL (down time) / 1
Lack of lectures / 1
Quality of lecture notes / 1
Case Studies – not relevant / 1
PowerPoint – lacking content / 1
Too much homework and tests in too short of period of time / 1
Tests not related to reading / 1
Faculty teamwork and guidance to support students / 1
Course Design / 1
Instructions for students and timely feedback / 1
Lack of certain clinical sites / 1
QUESTION #3: WHAT CHANGES DO YOU SUGGEST? (FULL RESPONSES ON PAGES 10—13)
THEMES / STUDENT RESPONSES / FACULTY RESPONSES
More online video lectures (with lecture notes) / 5 (55%)
Instructors – Quality & Consistency; Teachers as Trainers / 3 (33%)
More class time on campus. Less online – suggest hybrid. More days, but short for lab. / 2 (22%)
LPN program face to face; RN program online or hybrid / 2 (25%)
Prepare students for what is expected of them at clinical sites (what is failure) / 1
Better prepare students for the challenge / 1
Redesign clinicals for more training and skill development / 1
Plan to support students’ learning (don’t let them drop out) – extra training and assessment / 1
Create shadow program at students’ work site to assist clinical skill development (preceptor) / 1
Fund tutors for students taking tough classes / 1
Stay in touch with students; visit clinical sites / 1
Reduce work hours to 0.4 FTE / 1
Better funding / 1
Consistent online audio/video lectures / 1
Union involvement needs to improve / 1
Connect PPT to tests / 1
More class time / 1
Structure courses more closely to the on campus program, including lab and clinical / 1
Skill testing in lab sessions similar on campus cohort / 1
Improved communication, both between instructors teaching in the same quarter (so the student work load is more evenly distributed) and between clinical and theory instructors. / 1
Improved communication between on-line theory instructors and students. / 1
Learn better communication via email (netiquette) / 1
Consider more face-to face time in lab. / 1
Students needed more time in the clinical settings:
1) Create less on-line educational material for them and balance it with some in class lectures.
2) Create several lab sessions for them so they can practice the skills.
3) Have the same faculty that teaches the classdo the lab sessions with the students.
4) Allow more clinical days for the students.
5) Allow more social networking for the students so they can support each other in order to make it through. On-line social networking is very crucial for these students.
6) Provide more faculty support in the clinical setting and on-line setting. / 1

QUESTION 4:(FACULTY ONLY): What human resource was needed in order to effectively implement this program? (Human resource is defined as: time-effort, availability of time to commit to mentoring, administration, preparation for courses, student-faculty ratios, available faculty personnel to teach, etc.) See Page 14 for faculty responses.

QUESTION 1:What worked well in this program to support your learning?

(themes highlighted)

A. SUMMARY OF STUDENT RESPONSES


  • Flexibility with schedule, online video/audio lectures at the end of the program
  • It helped many hospital workers to become nurses.
  • Effective communication among teachers and student. Materials that are related to and consistent to the test/exam.
  • The fact that it was an on line program made it possible for me to participate in it, its flexibility with my schedule at work, and opportunity to plan my own study hours enabled me to control my schedule and study time to a reasonable extent. The provision of study materials, lectures, monthly stipends and appropriate texts helped a great deal. Some of the instructors were very helpful, ready to assist if approached. This is the pilot program and so I highly commend the organizers, the school and the instructors for it. Provision of some lectures in audio format on the Angel website by Denise Filiatrault-the lead instructor, for example, was helpful, [it was the only one] this was introduced towards the middle or end of the LPN program. Selection of the right Instructors for any program plays an important role, and we did have some who I consider right for the program: The right instructors here mean the right person with the right knowledge and skill of teaching and training, the patience and tolerance; who is wholeheartedly committed to students’ success rather than just teaching. Denise Filiatrault, Jessica Gonzales, Melanie Jorgenson are excellent Instructors and deserve commendations. Melanie Jorgenson for example is gifted and endowed with the natural ability to teach at clinical labs; what stands out in her is that she has this strong desire to see students succeed and willingness to devote time to teach what a student does not understand without losing her cool. She just wants to see students succeed, she is just fantastic. An instructor like her is a great asset to the program. In the campus, having someone like Belinda Tillman as the NEEDL Program Manager was an excellent decision. Belinda was always available for consultation and assistance in helping you navigate around difficult issues and administrative matters that students found difficult to handle. She inspired me and other students; and was always willing to help locate appropriate resources that would enhance student performance in the program.
  • The flexibility of the online class has helped me manage my time well.
  • Accessing information online and learning online.
  • In general, the ability to learn via an online format. This enabled me to work and attend class although it was at times challenging.
  • Course outlines of assignment deadlines in syllabus and for view on calendar in Angel -Unit outlines to guide learning/reading/highlighting most important information regarding that system -Skills labs -Clinical sites were for the most part appropriate to our learning -Flexibilty of when we could take our unit exams -Tegrity -Theory instructors for the most part were all very flexible and encouraging (Denise, Marti) –

B. SUMMARY OF FACULTY RESPONSES
(themes highlighted)

  • flexibility of office hours and tutoring help
  • clinical experiences, on-campus lectures and labs
  • I appreciated the online availability. it was nice being able to talk to the students and super easy to do online.
  • Communicating often with them and having them on campus as much as possible.
  • Effective communication
  • Extra time provided in clinical was very helpful for student learning.
  • I cannot think of anything other than having the previous instructor talking about the students. Short care plans worked for the students but still they were very confused what they needed to do. The math exam helped to assess the students strength and weakness and it was helpful to guide them better.
  • The interaction that the students had with Denise Filiatrault worked well, but I think Denise went above and beyond the call of duty to make the students feel connected. I think the Videoed lectures that Denise provided worked well. I also think the all day labs were effective.

QUESTION 2:What didn’t work well (to support your learning)?

(themes highlighted)

A. SUMMARY OF STUDENT RESPONSES

  • Lack of lectures during most of the duration
  • Limited face- to- face interaction between the students and the instructors, especially, in the theory portion. Students have to read a lot. To many case studies with limited realistic approach. Long hours for labs.
  • Too many homework and test not enough time to absorb material especially when student are working at the same time. Not enough lab time, or lab time is too rush to do individual hands on Teaching materials such as power point lack the important content,usually insufficient information. Too many books to study from. Full time Online classes do not work for me.
  • The fact that it was an on line program presented a natural challenge and so required well prepared lectures notes by instructors to guide students success. Some instructors lecture notes, in my opinion were not prepared in such a way that students who are basically doing this program on line would grasp the most important details needed for success. The quality of lecture notes should be of the highest standard bearing in mind that the instructors may not have the chance of seeing the student and vice versa. Lecture notes must address the critical areas of the subject- the "why and how" of each topic. The clinical labs needed more time and practical demonstration. The clinical aspect of the program needs better arrangement so that there will be more hands-on training, demonstrations at clinical labs, to enhance student’s knowledge and performance at clinical sites. Inadequate clinical labs practice was a challenge to me.
  • It would have been nicer to have more face time with our instructors, meaning more classes on campus.
  • Not having the 1 on 1 with the instructor.
  • Not all instructors had the same level of commitment to teaching the courses. The content that came from Lower Columbia Community College appeared to be not reviewed or correlated with reading and some of the testing really was not related to the reading creating a challenge.
  • -Lack of pediatric clinical sites -Lack of clinical opportunity in areas such as ED, ICU -Some theory instructors gave the vibe that they did not care about our success and were impersonal

B. SUMMARY OF FACULTY RESPONSES:
(themes highlighted)

  • confusion with ANGEL, downtime of systems
  • volume of reading required
  • the most problems I had was also with communicating via email. sometimes the etiquette was off and wrong impressions were given which led to tension. definitly meeting the students face to face at least once helped out.
  • Too much reading and not enough time with theory instructors.
  • Confusion is instructions for students from their theory was very challenging. Also, students reported that they didn't get their questions adequately answered nor in a timely manner regarding their online theory for Family Nursing (OB and Peds)
  • The clinical days were very short. These students needed more clinical hours. The skill check list should have been provided to the faculty much earlier so they student could have more time to work on the skills. Many students were doing a lot of skills for the first time and that is very sad for the last quarter of med-surg before graduating. The faculty team work and understanding and guidance to support the student. The previous faculty knew the students very well therefore that information about each and everyone helped me to know them better and ways to approach them.

QUESTION 3: WHAT SUGGESTIONS DO YOU HAVE FOR CHANGING THE PROGRAM? (themes highlighted)

A. SUMMARY OF STUDENT RESPONSES:

  • Consistent online audio/video lectures
  • More class work in the school. More days, but short for labs.
  • Consistency among instructors. Teaching material such as power point should contain information relevant or apply to the test/exam and help one to learn. More class time.
  • It has been said that the greatest room in the world is the room for improvement. By all standards I consider the program a success. Well, as we all know, “the road to perfection is always under construction” here are some suggestions for improvement. Select more Instructors who are dedicated to the nursing profession, and have demonstrated previous commitment to student's success; Instructors who are willing to go the extra-mile to assist students to succeed. This program needs Trainers not just Teachers. The essence of training is learning. Take this: A program like this requires instructors who will say to themselves “If my student hasn’t learned, I have not taught." It requires Instructors who will treat all students equally and assist them develop confidence in themselves, and in their chosen career. While teaching, they should always bear in mind that every student is different. Online video-with lecture notes: Instructors should be made to provide online video lectures to assist students- this would make this program a huge success and one of the best around here. Lecture notes and books alone are not enough, we are dealing with people's lives and we need to do it right. Getting it right the first time is very important. Knowledge is essential, and combination of lecture notes with online video lectures will be an excellent improvement. How about having 1 -2 days each quarter for students to meet in the class room with each instructor for a face to face chat and ask questions?
  • Prepare all future students for the challenges ahead.[This was done but requires more emphasis with new students] Tell them all the hard truths they need to know to succeed- this program is fast-paced: May be reducing working hours to 0.4 FTE. to enhance concentration and performance would not be a bad idea. Funding is required, to give little more stipends than is currently applicable. This I know is a hard nut to crack and may continue to be a challenge to the program.
  • Success at clinical sites: Inform students ahead of time what would constitute failure at the clinical sites and prepare their minds on what the remedies would be. Instructors are at clinical sites in my opinion to ensure student's success as well as guarantee patients safety. A new approach to student's in ability to perform certain skills at clinical sites is needed. Inability of student to perform to instructors’ standard at clinical site in my opinion indicates need for more training and skills development- a major reason why the student is in school, and why Clinical Instructors are on site. The current approach adopted creates fear in students rather than making them look forward with joy and happiness to clinical days, they go with fear and trepidation[Not all Clinical instructors in my experience do this, just that you need only one instructor to mess you up and you are done]. Students should not be in this mode for clinical. Organizers of this program should have a plan to handle and provide opportunity for such students to relearn and move on rather than dropping out. It is not enough to get students into the program; even if a student has to drop out, shouldn’t the school, the organizers and the student(s) have a little conference to see possible ways of helping the student succeed? This is hard to take but a student’s failure indicates more than shortcomings on the part of the student alone. How about providing extra training and assessment of such student to demonstrate required skills to ensure compliance rather than allowing students to drop out of school. Such student needs training and NOT dropping out of school. A win-win approach is needed here in my opinion. The question should be" how do we help such students to do the excellent job that is required of them ; how about setting up skills program he /she has to attain to be able to complete the program rather than dropping out of school. This requires attention because the chances of this occurring in every cohort group are ever present. If there is a will on the part of the school and organizers of this program, there will be a way.
  • How about a "shadow" program at the student's place of employment as part of this program. This could be made possible thru their employers to assist student develop clinical skills. If they “shadow" along, while in the program, this will enhance clinical skills development and help perfect performances.
  • An idea from the education fund: An excellent approach is that which the education fund make tutors available for students taking "tough classes" it works wonders! If this program is seen as partnering with a school for students success, charge selected instructors for this program with students success, let them know they have to pay attention to not only the best students, they need to focus attention on students who are considered above average too.[This may be a problem if the school is seen as doing the organizers of NEEDL a favor by admitting their students]. Permit me to borrow the saying of one of the most caring person whoever walked on the surface of the earth- The Lord Jesus Christ who said “I did not come because of those who have eyes but to give sight to those who cannot see”. Above average/average students are just like those who have eyes but are not seeing clearly, a second touch might be needed from their instructors. I see nurses at work who said they were just average students in their program but who are excellent nurses in practice. Everyone deserves equal chance. [This does not relieve the students of the obligation to work hard to succeed in the program].
  • Stay in touch with students as always to know if they are having challenges, visits to clinical labs session will help here. Students are likely to discuss their academic challenges in such situations. In the final analysis, I am short of words to fully appreciate all the people that have taken part in putting this program together. They should be very proud of their achievement. It has been said that there are three types of people in this world; those who watch things happen, those who ask “what happened?”, and those who make things .Y O U ALL MADE THIS TO HAPPEN … THANK YOU!!!
  • The Tegrity video that Denise F. put out was as huge help for us since we don't have a lot of face time with our instructors.
  • All lectures available on Tegrity.
  • My initial suggestion would be to set a different level of expectation regarding the union involvement. Telling people that the union was working with our supervisors to make sure we would be allowed to attend classes and clinicals just wasn't realistic. My manager was never contacted and had no idea about this program. Unfortunately another result was constant complaining about I need to work I can't do this or that. The reality is we are in school, work can't be an excuse when this was supposed to be a priority commitment.
  • -More time in classroom and less online, more like a hybrid, so areas of importance can be highlighted. -More tegrity videos -Online instructors that actually want to teach online

B. SUMMARY OF FACULTY RESPONSES