Evaluation of doctoral nursing education in Japan by students, graduates, and faculty: A comparative study based on a cross-sectional questionnaire survey
posted on 2012-05-15, 00:00authored bySatoko Nagata, Misuzu F Gregg, Yuko Miki, Azusa Arimoto, Sachiyo Murashima, Mi Ja Kim
Evaluation of doctoral education in nursing is needed with the rapid increase in doctoral nursing programs in Japan. This study aimed to compare the evaluations of doctoral nursing education by students, graduates, and faculty. All 46 doctoral nursing programs in Japan were target settings. 127 students who had been in the doctoral program, 24 graduates and 87 faculty members had responded to the survey. A questionnaire with 17 items for program evaluation, 12 items for faculty evaluation, 9 items for resource evaluation, and 3 for overall evaluations was distributed in November and December 2008. Responses to 1 program evaluation item, 2 faculty evaluation items and 4 resource evaluation items indicated significant differences among evaluators. While 79.2% of graduates responded positively that the number of faculty members was sufficient to facilitate learning, only 36.1% of faculty members and 49.6% of students responded affirmatively. Graduates' ratings were the most positive and faculty members were the least positive, especially for infrastructure or equipment such as libraries, computers, and the number of technical and support staff. The significant differences among the evaluators suggested that having evaluators in various roles is important to evaluate the quality of doctoral nursing education.
Funding
This study was financially supported by the research project on University Evaluation and Accreditation commissioned by the Japan Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology in 2008.
History
Publisher Statement
NOTICE: this is the author’s version of a work that was accepted for publication in Nurse Education Today. Changes resulting from the publishing process, such as peer review, editing, corrections, structural formatting, and other quality control mechanisms may not be reflected in this document. Changes may have been made to this work since it was submitted for publication. A definitive version was subsequently published in Nurse Education Today, [June 12, 2011] DOI: 10.1016/j.nedt.2011.05.019.
The original publication is available at www.elsevier.com.