This speech discusses how the professorship intends to support practitioners in the nursing domain and contribute to shaping nursing leadership and each person's professional individuality. The title of the speech, “Notes on Nursing 2.0,” is particularly intended to emphasize the need for these changes in the nursing domain. Not by assuming that nothing has changed in care and nursing since Nightingale's time. There has. Being educated in the professional domain is not only a given but a requirement. The knowledge domain of care and nursing has developed far and wide in nursing diagnostics and standards. Nursing science research, which Nightingale once started as the first female statistician in the British Kingdom, has firmly established itself in education and practice. Wanting to be of significance to others out of compassion is still the professional motivation, but there is no longer a subservient servitude (Cingel van der, 2012). At the same time, wholehearted leadership is not yet taken for granted in daily practice and optimal professional practice falters due to an equality principle of differently educated caregivers and nurses that has been held for too long. That is the need for change to which this 2.0 version “Notes on Nursing” and the lectorate want to contribute in the coming years. Chapter 1, through the metaphors in the story “The Cat Who Looked at the King,” describes the vision of emancipatory action research and the change principles that the lectorate will deploy. Chapter 2 contains the reason, mission and lines of research that are interrelated within the lectorate. Chapters 3 and 4 address the themes of identity and leadership, discussing their interrelationship with professional practice and developing a research culture. In addition, specific aspects that influence practice and work culture today are addressed, and how the lectorate contributes specifically to the development of nursing leadership and the formation of professional identity in the relevant domain is described. Chapter 5 contains a summary of the principles on which the research program is based, as well as information on current and future projects. Chapter 6 provides background information on the lector and the members of the knowledge circle.
DOCUMENT
Background: The aim of this study is to validate a newly developed nurses' self-efficacy sources inventory. We test the validity of a five-dimensional model of sources of self-efficacy, which we contrast with the traditional four-dimensional model based on Bandura's theoretical concepts. Methods: Confirmatory factor analysis was used in the development of the newly developed self-efficacy measure. Model fit was evaluated based upon commonly recommended goodness-of-fit indices, including the χ2 of the model fit, the Root Mean Square Error of approximation (RMSEA), the Tucker-Lewis Index (TLI), the Standardized Root Mean Square Residual (SRMR), and the Bayesian Information Criterion (BIC). Results: All 22 items of the newly developed five-factor sources of self-efficacy have high factor loadings (range .40-.80). Structural equation modeling showed that a five-factor model is favoured over the four-factor model. Conclusions and implications: Results of this study show that differentiation of the vicarious experience source into a peer- and expert based source reflects better how nursing students develop self-efficacy beliefs. This has implications for clinical learning environments: a better and differentiated use of self-efficacy sources can stimulate the professional development of nursing students.
DOCUMENT
There is a wide range of literature suggesting that implicit learning is more effective than explicit learning when acquiring motor skills. However, the acquisition of nursing skills in educational settings continues to rely heavily on detailed protocols and explicit instructions. This study aimed to examine the necessity for comprehensive protocols in the acquisition of nursing skills. In the context of bandaging techniques, three studies were conducted to investigate whether students who practiced with an instruction card containing minimal instructions (implicit group) performed comparably to the students who practiced with a protocol containing step-by-step instructions (explicit group). Study 1 was designed to determine whether both groups performed equally well in applying a bandage during training. Study 2 and 3 were designed to determine if both groups performed equally well during a retention and transfer (multitasking) test, administered after a series of three training sessions. In comparison with the explicit group, the implicit group demonstrated comparable performance with their practice attempts in Study 1 and performed equally well during the retention and transfer test in Study 2. Furthermore, several results from Study 3 indicated better performance of the implicit group. In conclusion, the use of protocols with explicit step-by-step instructions may not be essential for the acquisition of nursing skills. Instead, instructional methods that facilitate implicit learning may be preferable, as students in the implicit group demonstrated at least comparable performance in all studies and tended towards greater consistency when multitasking.
DOCUMENT
