Keywords: reflexive research example
"how you organized the questioning. . . it offered me ideas in my own brain in how I needed the interview to travel" (from interview transcript)
Incident:
The key point through the interview, I thought, was when J. spoke about how precisely he sought the interview to travel and what questions and information he wished to find out. For me personally, J. had reached the point I wanted him to access, where he realised you'll be able to control and change an interview utilizing a structured strategy. I suggested to him as further learning to develop in the future, using examples of questions about self harm and recommending using formal interview tools in informal ways.
I didn't ask J. what he designed by "ideas in my head". I hesitated to ask him what he intended and encourage him to think about this.
Reflective observation:
Looking on the transcript and analysing it, I think I missed the motorboat with J. here. I perhaps let an opportunity forward to explore his learning with him in better depth. We're able to have mentioned how to develop skills in interviewing and what he wished to learn next. This would have migrated the emphasis away alcoholic beverages and drawback symptoms towards his skill development. It might also have been a good chance to practice critical occurrence analysis.
I think there have been two explanations why I got "wary" of delving deeper at this point with J. and trying to help him think about his learning:
First, I hadn't caused him for 14 days which was regrettably due to training and holiday schedules. This supposed I had developed no chance to work with him and monitor and evaluate him directly. I needed set him recommendations in how to interview and recognized he could easily get support from other personnel nurses. However, I needed only what he was giving me during the interview to evaluate and present him reviews.
Secondly, I had developed began the interview with a clear idea that we were heading to pay his CAP booklet in a few areas. I must say i sensed some pressure inside myself to cover the whole examination aspect rather than risk going off at a tangent. I deemed the goal of the diagnosis as supplying J. feedback on how he had found his competencies. I knew that a lot of students saw doing their CAP booklets as a priority.
Perhaps easily had helped J. explore his learning it may have been more useful for his future. I felt he was thinking about the topic and seemed encouraged to learn. He reported making several attempts to talk to different patients on the ward about their drinking alcohol. He did web page link what he previously discovered to his next location and how he could use it. It really is just a little ironic i was not adaptable and adaptable in my method of interviewing. But we were both learning: J. as students nurse and myself as students mentor!
Related theory:
Rowantree (2003) describes six different purposes for examination: including selection, requirements, drive for students, feedback to students, responses to teachers, and preparation for life. Selection here can be conceived as both usage of a course or job and moving or completing a course of education.
There are volume of purposes here that are not necessarily compatible or simply easily reconcilable. Selection and preserving standards is seen as competitive and even as almost elitist. Responses is referred to as "the life-blood of learning" (Rowantree, 2003: p416), where analysis is meant to teach the college student something. Preparation forever is seen as inspirational which maybe at odds with maintaining benchmarks, in the sense of maintaining a status quo.
Jarvis and Gibson (2001) talk about the two common types of evaluation current in nursing education: formative and summative analysis. They express formative examination as diagnostic to try and find out what the college student has learned and still must learn. Summative assessment is approximately making a judgement of whether a nurse has discovered enough to become skilled (Bradshaw, 1989).
Duffy and Hardicre (2007) in their first article on faltering nursing students express a three stage process of an initial meeting which is formative; a middle placement reaching which is formative with constructive responses and your final summative meeting where both the student and coach should know what to expect. Partly 2 on managing failing students they state that reviews should be regular and ongoing (Duffy and Hardicre, 2007). This prescriptive approach to assessment is about meeting benchmarks and ensuring public and patient safe practices. Even though these are discussing the faltering student their way if used must apply to all students to become consistent, reasonable and well balanced.
The mentor has to balance the idea of educating and learning with a obligation of making certain the student is safe to apply. On the one hand the mentor should provide responses that facilitates the student discovering what they have discovered and what they still have to learn. On the other the mentor is accountable for the safety of patients in their care and attention. Beattie (1991) argues that this can make examination far better by ensuring persistence to meet the accountability need. This is not easy and involves gathering a whole lot of information about understanding how to make a judgement predicated on this data.
However, if our aim is to make a occupation of reflective practitioners then assessment must perhaps include an wide open ended formative component as well. Driscoll (Baird and Winter, 2005) makes the point that "there is no end-point in learning about practice. " Perhaps mentors have to allow their students the liberty to explore their learning. During assessment students must have opportunities to reveal and also to broaden their understanding. Students perhaps should get choice and participation in the training process. That is in line with teaching nursing students as individuals who are internally motivated, home directing and who bring previous experience with their learning. (Knowles, 1990)
The concern is to foster this desire and motivation to learn when it occurs. Biggs (1987) talked about the dissimilarities between deep and superficial learning. Assessment that encourages anxiousness and recall of knowledge can result in superficial learning. Where deep learning is marketed by desire to learn and should become more effective in creating professional nurses.
One way to foster "deep" learning could be to use questioning skills. It is possible to ask questions that will broaden learning and develop critical thinking. There are different types of questions: sealed; open; questions looking for simple answers; questions that promote talk. The coach should form a question at an appropriate cognitive level for the nursing student. The mentor can ask some questions targeted at obtaining a response from the scholar and encouraging a growing complexity if appropriate. (Nicholl and Tracey, 2007)
In exploring some of the books on assessment, it seems clear there are two intertwined elements present: the formative strand is approximately what has been learned and what still needs to be discovered; the summative strand is approximately making a judgement about achieving a proficiency standard to be professional and safe in practice. The task for the mentor is to meet both strands sufficiently in their evaluation of college student nurses.
Future Action:
There are some things I'd try and do differently. I would try and structure examination over the whole placement as recommended in Duffy's model (Duffy and Hardicre, 2007). However, I'd try to find a location both formative and summative elements within the diagnosis process, while seeking to clearly have different interviews for each.
I wish to observe my university student directly in learning situations, as well as get information from acquaintances and of course from the scholar. I'd now see reviews as having to be based on a sound judgement based on facts to become helpful for the nursing college student. Even where the college student is more senior and capable I would still prefer to have some element of immediate observation to justify my diagnosis. Another part I would consider is planning my responses and possibly supplying it in writing beforehand. This could remove nervousness on the student's part about "passing" and perhaps allow the perfect time to explore formative aspects of the analysis.
I think growing as a coach would require becoming skilled at encouraging learning during evaluation while giving reviews and passing students or not. If I had another illustration like with J. here, I would like to try and ask a few pre-determined questions to delve a little deeper into what he was expressing.
