PubMed Health⌕ Search
Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 11291005

Nursing doctoral program evaluation: Alumni outcomes.

J A Sakalys·M L Stember·J K Magilvy
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Meaningful examination of program outcomes is one of the most challenging tasks facing faculty and administrators involved in the design and delivery of educational programs. This article reports the outcomes for one doctoral program in nursing and elucidates salient conceptual and methodologic issues in educational outcomes research for this discipline. Career development, scholarly productivity, and professional leadership were the foci of this outcomes study. Three instruments were used; data were provided by alumni, graduate faculty, and alumni supervisors. Data analysis techniques included content analysis and descriptive and correlational statistics. Results showed that graduates embarked on diverse career paths with the majority employed in academic institutions. Most graduates reported active involvement in research, publications, presentations, and professional leadership. Employment pattern differences were noted between academic year and summer-only program graduates with associated divergence in career emphasis, research productivity, and job satisfaction. A positive correlation of time since degree conferral with scholarly productivity and professional leadership was noted. Recommendations for future research include refining outcomes, linking process to outcome, using longitudinal designs, and attending to unique nursing student and doctoral program characteristics.

Explore related subjects

AchievementCareer MobilityColoradoEducation, Nursing, GraduateHumansLeadershipNursing Education ResearchNursing ResearchOutcome and Process Assessment, Health CareProgram EvaluationSurveys and QuestionnairesJournal Article

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

J A Sakalys, M L Stember, J K Magilvy. Nursing doctoral program evaluation: Alumni outcomes.. https://doi.org/10.1053/jpnu.2001.22277

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2002

Sex differences in stress responses: social rejection versus achievement stress.

BACKGROUND: Sex differences in stress responses may be one mechanism underlying gender differences in depression. We hypothesized that men and women would show different adrenocortical responses to different stressors. In particular, we predicted that women would show greater responses to social rejection stressors, whereas men would demonstrate greater responses to achievement stressors. METHODS: Following a rest session in which they habituated to the laboratory, 50 healthy volunteers (24 men and 26 women, mean age 19.1, SD = 1.13) were randomly assigned to achievement or rejection stress conditions. The achievement condition involved a mathematical and a verbal challenge; the rejection condition involved two social interaction challenges. Self-reported affect and salivary cortisol were measured throughout each stress session (baseline, stress, and poststress periods). RESULTS: There were no sex differences in mood ratings following the stressors; however, cortisol responses showed the predicted gender by condition by time interaction. Men showed significantly greater cortisol responses to the achievement challenges, but women showed greater cortisol responses to the social rejection challenges. CONCLUSIONS: Women appear more physiologically reactive to social rejection challenges, but men react more to achievement challenges. Women's greater reactivity to rejection stress may contribute to the increased rates of affective disorders in women.

Achievement↗
PubMed2002

How well do second-year students learn physical diagnosis? Observational study of an Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE).

BACKGROUND: Little is known about using the Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) in physical diagnosis courses. The purpose of this study was to describe student performance on an OSCE in a physical diagnosis course. METHODS: Cross-sectional study at Harvard Medical School, 1997-1999, for 489 second-year students. RESULTS: Average total OSCE score was 57% (range 39-75%). Among clinical skills, students scored highest on patient interaction (72%), followed by examination technique (65%), abnormality identification (62%), history-taking (60%), patient presentation (60%), physical examination knowledge (47%), and differential diagnosis (40%) (p <.0001). Among 16 OSCE stations, scores ranged from 70% for arthritis to 29% for calf pain (p <.0001). Teaching sites accounted for larger adjusted differences in station scores, up to 28%, than in skill scores (9%) (p <.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Students scored higher on interpersonal and technical skills than on interpretive or integrative skills. Station scores identified specific content that needs improved teaching.

Achievement↗