Educational Problems
Conditions
Keywords
case- based learning, critical thinking, self-efficacy, nursing education, nursing
Brief summary
Second-year nursing students are randomly assigned to experimental and control groups. The case-based teaching method was applied to the experimental group and the classical teaching method was applied to the control group. After the initiative, both groups observed differences in perceived competence and critical thinking levels. In addition, the focus groups were interviewed with the experimental group and the opinions and suggestions about the initiative were evaluated qualitatively and the total mix method was used.
Detailed description
Nursing secondary school students were randomized into two groups. Case-based training was given to the experimental group, and classical training was given to the control group. Critical thinking scale and self-efficacy scale both before and after the training were applied to both groups. Posttest scores were calculated and compared for both groups. The focus group consultation with 10 people from the experimental group was carried out and the opinions and suggestions about the initiative were taken and evaluated. Permission was obtained in writing from all institutions before and after the participants, and the study was conducted by creating ethical conditions.Four separate training cases were given to the experimental group. the control group continued the classical training and no intervention was made.
Interventions
BEHAVIORALCase- based Learning
critical thinking, self efficacy, focus group interview
Sponsors
Selcuk University
Study design
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
OTHER
Masking
SINGLE (Outcomes Assessor)
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to 26 Years
Healthy volunteers
Yes
Inclusion criteria
* Become a nursing 2nd year student * Want to participate in the research * Not to be in the health profession * Having passed the course of internal medicine nursing * Being the first to see the surgical diseases nursing course * Be able to devote time for case discussions outside of class
Exclusion criteria
\- Being a foreign national (Unable to speak / understand Turkish effectively)
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| CRITICAL THINKING TENDENCY SCALE | 4 months | It was developed by a Turkish researcher and reliability of validity was done. The scale covers 49.161% of the variance. Factor loads range from 0.33 to 0.71. Sub-dimensions: metacity, flexibility, systematicness, determination and patience, open mindedness. The scale consists of 49 questions in total. Scale your scale; I totally agree (5), I mostly agree (4), Partially agree (3), I mostly do not agree (2), I never agree (1). The test retest correlation coefficient of the scale was 0.761 and the correlation coefficient between the two half scores was 0.95. The Cronbach Alpha coefficient is 0.963. Confirmatory factor analysis was performed with the AMOS program (Ratio = 2778.981, Sd = 1073, X2 / Sd = 2.590, GFI = 0.903, CFI = 0.932, RMSEA = 0.038). The total score ranges from 49 to 245, with a high score indicating a high tendency to think critically |
| Effect of case-based learning method on self-efficacy level | 4 months | The German version was originally used by Schwarzer. It was originally prepared as 20 items, then reduced to 10 items. Over time, it has been translated and used in more than twenty languages. Item total correlations are between 0.30 and 0.77. Reliability of Turkish validity was done; Alpha internal consistency coefficient was 0.79-0.63, total alpha coefficient was 0.83. Test-retest reliability coefficient of the scale is r = 0.80, p \<0.001. Factor analys's results of the Turkish version show that it accounts for 47% of the total variance. The item total score correlation coefficients are between 0.37 and 0.59. The items of the scale have scores ranging from 1 to 4, with a total score ranging from 10 to 40. High score is considered as high self-efficacy perception. |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Focus group interview | 4 months | Group suggestions and comments (qualitative study) |
Countries
Turkey (Türkiye)
Outcome results
None listed