NURS FPX 6111 Assessment 3 Course Evaluation Template

Student Name

Capella University

NURS-FPX 6111 Assessment and Evaluation in Nursing Education

Prof. Name

Date

Part One: Standardized Course Evaluation Template

In the ever-evolving landscape of education, feedback holds significant sway in shaping course content and delivery methodologies. At [University Name], we regard our students as pivotal stakeholders in the teaching-learning process. Your insights serve as guiding beacons, illuminating areas of success and areas ripe for improvement. This evaluation form not only underscores our commitment to continual enhancement but also highlights our belief in fostering a collaborative educational environment. We assure you of the anonymity of your responses and deeply value your time and candor.

Evaluation of the Course “Clinical Healthcare Ethics for Pediatric Nurses”

Course Objectives

The primary objectives of this course are to ensure that you:

Your comments regarding course objectives:

Learning Outcomes

The course aims to equip you with skills in the following domains:

Your comments on learning outcomes:

Teaching Approaches

Please rate the instructor based on the following criteria:

Your comments on teaching approaches:

Program Outcome

Reflect on the following components of the course:

Your comments on program outcomes:

Evidence to Support Assessment Strategies

The development of our template was grounded in multiple evidence-based strategies. Academic literature emphasizes the importance of encapsulating all three learning domains—cognitive, psychomotor, and affective—in evaluations, a principle our template ardently upholds (Agustian, 2022; Lo & Yang, 2022). This theoretical foundation was enriched by feedback from educators and students, ensuring the template’s practical relevance. A comprehensive benchmarking process, analyzing templates from esteemed educational institutions, guided us in incorporating the most effective assessment strategies. Lastly, piloting the template with a select group ensured its precision through iterative refinements based on direct feedback.

Part Two: Executive Summary

A dependable academic program relies heavily on the accuracy of its evaluative methods. Acknowledging this, we have crafted a standardized course evaluation template meticulously spanning the three integral learning domains: cognitive, psychomotor, and affective. The inclusion of these domains is not arbitrary; scholarly evidence suggests their paramount importance in understanding the educational experience (Smith & Agustian, 2022; Lo & Yang, 2022).

Our template’s design is underpinned by the assumption that holistic student experiences can be quantified and that a mixed-method approach captures a fuller view of learning outcomes. Grounded in research, this approach ensures both breadth and depth in feedback collection. Quantitative metrics, such as Likert scales, offer standardized insights into student perceptions (Kondakci et al., 2022), while qualitative inquiries unearth detailed narratives (Wilson et al., 2023).

Criteria for evaluating this strategy include its capacity for comprehensive feedback, alignment with learning outcomes, and adaptability to diverse settings. Our template shines in reliability and validity, maintaining a high standard of content validity and aligning closely with course objectives (Varghese & Timmons, 2022). Despite its imperfections, recognizing these gaps is our first step toward improvement, inspiring us to refine our evaluation tool continuously.

In conclusion, our evaluation template is not static but dynamic, rooted in research and pedagogical best practices. Its design promotes actionable insights, contingent on continuous updates, ensuring it remains a gold standard in course evaluations.

References

Agustian, H. Y. (2022). Considering the hexad of learning domains in the laboratory to address the overlooked aspects of chemistry education and fragmentary approach to the assessment of student learning. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 23(3), 518–530. https://doi.org/10.1039/D1RP00271F

Kondakci, Y., Zayim Kurtay, M., Kaya Kasikci, S., & Önen, Ö. (2022). Graduate student perceptions of preparedness for responsible conduct of research: A mixed methods study. Ethics & Behavior, 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508422.2022.2149524

Lo, K.-W., & Yang, B.-H. (2022). Development and learning efficacy of a simulation rubric in childhood pneumonia for nursing students: A mixed methods study. Nurse Education Today, 119, 105544. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2022.105544

NURS FPX 6111 Assessment 3 Course Evaluation Template

Mello, R. F., Neto, R., Fiorentino, G., Alves, G., Verenna Arêdes, Galdino, V., Taciana Pontual Falcão, & Dragan Gašević. (2022). Enhancing instructors’ capability to assess open-response using natural language processing and learning analytics. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 102–115. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-16290-9_8

Varghese, D., & Timmons, D. (2022). Establishing and reporting content validity evidence of periodic, objective treatment review and nursing evaluation. Nursing Communications, 6(0), e2022022. https://doi.org/10.53388/in2022022

Wilson, S. T., Urban, R. W., & Smith, J. G. (2023). Online prelicensure nursing students’ experiences of academic incivility during COVID ‐19: A qualitative inquiry. Journal of Advanced Nursing. https://doi.org/10.1111/jan.15656

NURS FPX 6111 Assessment 3 Course Evaluation Template