Skip to main content

Table 3 Correlations between all the CLES + T items and nursing students’ satisfaction (n = 463)

From: Nursing students’ satisfaction of the clinical learning environment: a research study

CLES + T items

Corr. Coefficient

p-value

Pedagogical atmosphere (PA)

 PA1 The staff was easy to approach

.429

< 0.001

 PA2 I felt comfortable going to the ward at the start of my shift

.265

< 0.001

 PA3 During staff meetings (e.g., before shifts) I felt comfortable taking part in the discussions

.447

< 0.001

 PA4 There was a positive atmosphere on the ward

.471

< 0.001

 PA5 The staffs were generally interested in student supervision

.368

< 0.001

 PA6 The staff learned to know the students by their personal names

.194

< 0.001

 PA7 There were sufficient meaningful learning situations on the ward

.372

< 0.001

 PA8 The learning situations were multi-dimensional in terms of content

.371

< 0.001

 PA9 The ward can be regarded as a good learning environment

.476

< 0.001

Leadership style of the ward manager (WM), Premises of Nursing on the ward (NC)

 WM10 The WM regarded the staff on his/her ward as a key resource person*

.344

< 0.001

 WM11 The WM was a team member*

.279

< 0.001

 WM12 Feedback from the WM could easy be consider a learning situation*

.352

< 0.001

 WM13 The effort on individual employee was appreciated*

.302

< 0.001

 NC14 The ward nursing philosophy was clearly defined*

.316

< 0.001

 NC15 Patients received individual nursing care*

.317

< 0.001

 NC16 There were no problem in the information flow related to patients’ care*

.244

< 0.001

 NC17 Nursing Documentation (e.g., nursing plans, daily procedures etc.) was clear*

.363

< 0.001

Supervisory relationship (SR)

 SR18 My supervisor showed a positive attitude towards supervision*

.440

< 0.001

 SR19 I felt that I received individual supervision *

.469

< 0.001

 SR20 I continuously received feedback from supervisor*

.500

< 0.001

 SR21 Overall I am satisfied with the supervision I received*

.568

< 0.001

 SR22 The supervision was based on a relationship of equality and promoted my learning*

.505

< 0.001

 SR23 There was a mutual interaction in the supervisory relationship*

.495

< 0.001

 SR24 Mutual respect and approval prevailed in the supervisory relationship*

.508

< 0.001

 SR25 The supervisory relationship was characterized by a sense of trust*

.509

< 0.001

Role of the nurse teacher (NT)

 NT26 The NT was capable of integrating theoretical knowledge and everyday practice*

.333

< 0.001

 NT27 The NT was capable of operational sing the learning goals of this placement*

.323

< 0.001

 NT28 The NT helped me to reduce the theory-practice cap*

.317

< 0.001

 NT29 The NT was like a member of the nursing team*

.309

< 0.001

 NT30 The NT was able to give his or her expertise to the clinical team*

.352

< 0.001

 NT31 The NT and the clinical team worked in supporting my learning*

.362

< 0.001

 NT32 The meetings between myself mentor and NT were comfortable experience*

.418

< 0.001

 NT33 In our common meetings I felt that we are colleagues*

.416

< 0.001

 NT34 Focus on meetings was in my learning needs*

.349

< 0.001

  1. *Correlation is significant at p = 0.01