Skip to main content

Table 3 Students’ satisfaction with supervision, preceptor’s role and professional progress in the two supervision models

From: Nursing students’ perception of the clinical learning environment and supervision in relation to two different supervision models – a comparative cross-sectional study

  

Model A

N (%)

Model B

N (%)

p value

Effect sizea

Preparedness for supervision (alpha = 0.71)

   

0.000

0.29

I was adequately prepared for the clinical placement

not at all

fairly small degree

fairly high degree

very high degree

0 (0.0%)

12 (7.1%)

127 (75.1%)

30 (17.8%)

1 (1.4%)

9 (12.3%)

43 (58.9%)

20 (27.4%)

0.043

 

My knowledge about the expected learning outcomes was adequate

not at all

fairly small degree

fairly high degree

very high degree

0 (0.0%)

15 (8.8%)

114 (67.1%)

41 (24.1%)

0 (0.0%)

7 (9.5%)

45 (60.8%)

22 (29.7%)

0.619

 

The ward had dedicated resources for supervision

not at all

fairly small degree

fairly high degree

very high degree

1 (0.6%)

12 (7.1%)

41 (24.4%)

114 (67.9%)

2 (2.7%)

12 (16.2%)

29 (39.2%)

31 (41,9%)

0.001

 

There was an explicit structure for receiving students

not at all

fairly small degree

fairly high degree

very high degree

5 (3.0%)

9 (5.3%)

42 (24.9%)

113 (66.9%)

3 (4.1%)

18 (24.3%)

30 (40.5%)

23 (31.1%)

0.000

 

The ward could be regarded as a good learning environment

not at all

fairly small degree

fairly high degree

very high degree

1 (0.6%)

8 (4.7%)

36 (21.2%)

125 (73.5%)

1 (1.4%)

7 (9.5%)

28 (37.8%)

38 (51.4%)

0.009

 

The ward had an explicit model for supervising students

not at all

fairly small degree

fairly high degree

very high degree

3 (1.8%)

26 (15.5%)

73 (43.5%)

66 (39.3%)

4 (5.5%)

29 (39.7%)

29 (39.7%)

11 (15.1%)

0.000

 

The preceptor’s role (alpha = 0.76)

   

0.161

0.10

My identity as a nurse has been reinforced

not at all

fairly small degree

fairly high degree

very high degree

1 (0,6%)

10 (5,9%)

64 (37,6%)

95 (55,9%)

1 (1,4%)

6 (8,1%)

28 (37,8%)

39 (52,7%)

0.837

 

The preceptor made room for reflection

not at all

fairly small degree

fairly high degree

very high degree

5 (3.0%)

38 (22.8%)

63 (37.7%)

61 (36.5%)

6 (8.1%)

19 (25.7%)

32 (43.2%)

17 (23.0%)

0.092

 

The preceptor gave feedback when tasks were completed

not at all

fairly small degree

fairly high degree

very high degree

5 (3.0%)

38 (22.5%)

72 (42.6%)

54 (32.0%)

4 (5.5%)

14 (19.2%)

30 (41.1%)

25 (34.2%)

0.743

 

The preceptor encouraged my asking questions

not at all

fairly small degree

fairly high degree

very high degree

3 (1.8%)

18 (10.6%)

66 (38.8%)

83 (48.8%)

2 (2.7%)

8 (10.8%)

22 (29.7%)

42 (56.8%)

0.564

 

The preceptor showed an interest in my studies and exam tasks

not at all

fairly small degree

fairly high degree

very high degree

9 (5.4%)

59 (35.1%)

75 (44.6%)

25 (14.9%)

4 (5.5%)

25 (34.2%)

24 (32.9%)

20 (27.4%)

0.112

 

It is beneficial to have several preceptors during a teaching period

not at all

fairly small degree

fairly high degree

very high degree

13 (7.7%)

38 (22.5%)

74 (43.8%)

44 (26.0%)

8 (11.9%)

22 (32.8%)

20 (29.9%)

17 (25.4%)

0.148

 

More than one preceptor contributed to the assessment of my learning outcomes

not at all

fairly small degree

fairly high degree

very high degree

14 (8.9%)

23 (14.6%)

67 (42.7%)

53 (33.8%)

18 (27.7%)

13 (20.0%)

19 (29.2%)

15 (23.1%)

0.001

 

Professional progress (alpha = 0.76)

   

0.000

0.30

My independence has increased

not at all

fairly small degree

fairly high degree

very high degree

0 (0.0%)

1 (0.6%)

62 (36.5%)

107 (62.9%)

0 (0.0%)

4 (5.5%)

29 (39.7%)

40 (54.8%)

0.036

 

My capacity for critical thinking has increased

not at all

fairly small degree

fairly high degree

very high degree

0 (0.0%)

6 (3.5%)

84 (49.4%)

80 (47.1%)

0 (0.0%)

1 (1.4%)

40 (54.8%)

32 (43.8%)

0.540

 

My problem-solving ability has improved

not at all

fairly small degree

fairly high degree

very high degree

0 (0.0%)

10 (5.9%)

102 (60.0%)

58 (34.1%)

0 (0.0%)

9 (12.5%)

38 (52.8%)

25 (34.7%)

0.194

 

I have attained the learning outcomes of the course

not at all

fairly small degree

fairly high degree

very high degree

0 (0.0%)

2 (1.2%)

89 (53.3%)

76 (45.5%)

0 (0.0%)

2 (2.7%)

46 (63.0%)

25 (34.2%)

0.211

 

I got a comprehensive picture of the patients during my clinical placement

not at all

fairly small degree

fairly high degree

very high degree

0 (0.0%)

3 (1.8%)

45 (26.5%)

122 (71.8%)

0 (0.0%)

5 (7.0%)

25 (35.2%)

41 (57.7%)

0.031

 

Collaboration with peers developed my ability of constructive problem-solving

not at all

fairly small degree

fairly high degree

very high degree

5 (2.9%)

12 (7.1%)

68 (40.0%)

85 (50.0%)

7 (11.1%)

20 (31.7%)

29 (46.0%)

7 (11.1%)

0.000

 

Collaboration with peers developed my ability to reflect on different care situations

not at all

fairly small degree

fairly high degree

very high degree

4 (2.4%)

7 (4.1%)

58 (34.1%)

101 (59.4%)

7 (11.1%)

13 (20.6%)

23 (36.5%)

20 (31.7%)

0.000

 
  1. aEffect size based on Mann-Whitney test results