Millikin University Student Learning in the Nursing Major ... · complete the program in eighteen months. In the spring of 2015, the CNL track was retired after noting CNL graduate’s

Millikin University

Student Learning in the Nursing Major:

MSN Nursing Programs

College of Professional Studies: School of Nursing

Prepared by Karla Luxner

May 26, 2016

MSN Goals

The School of Nursing (SON) MSN program goals are:

(1) To foster development of leaders committed to advancing professional nursing

excellence

(2) To prepare nursing leaders who integrate knowledge, skills, and values in their

professional practice within a global community

(3) To achieve a community of life-long learners who are able to actively shape the

future of nursing and health care.

MSN Learning Outcomes The SON MSN program prepares graduates who:

(1) Demonstrate leadership that enhances patient centered outcomes through

management of the care environment and evidence-based practice

(2) Develop advanced nursing knowledge for quality improvement of patient

outcomes in diverse populations and health care delivery effectiveness through

interdisciplinary teams

(3) Provide nursing leadership through the health care delivery system including

expanding the independent role of the nurse, ensuring evidence-based

educational outcomes, engaging in political processes, and improving access to

health care.

Overview: The MSN program goals guide the curriculum and provide the foundation for

achievement of the student learning outcomes. Both the goals and the learning outcomes

for the MSN program are consistent with the mission of Millikin University to prepare

students for professional success, democratic citizenship in a global environment, and a

personal life of meaning and value. Demonstrating leadership that improves patient

outcomes and developing advanced nursing knowledge prepares graduate students for

professional success. A commitment to improving outcomes for diverse populations

prepares graduate students to be responsible citizens in a global environment. Gaining the

skills to shape the future of nursing and health care through expanding the independent

role of the nursing, applying evidence-based knowledge, engaging in political processes,

and improving access to care supports a life of meaning and value in nursing.

The Higher Learning Commission (HLC) granted approval in 2005 for the Millikin

University Master of Science in Nursing (MSN) program. The MSN program accepted

the first class in fall 2006, and the first eight MSN students graduated in December 2007.

The MSN degree is offered in four tracks. The first class of MSN students was offered

two tracks: Clinical Nurse Leader (CNL) and Nurse Educator (NE). In 2009, Millikin

2

was informed that the SON would be receiving Congressionally-directed funds to

develop the Master’s Entry into Nursing Practice (MENP) track, for individuals with a

bachelor’s degree in a non-nursing field who wanted to pursue the MSN in an accelerated

format. The pre-licensure registered nurse curriculum received approval from the Illinois

Board of Nursing (IDFPR) on November 6, 2009, and the first cohort of ten students

began the MENP track three in July 2012.

A partnership with Decatur Memorial Hospital was initiated in summer 2010 for Millikin

to be the academic institution to offer the Nurse Anesthesia Program (NAP). Acceptance

of this program was based on the expectation that the degree would become a doctor of

nursing practice (DNP) by 2015. After approval from the required regulatory bodies, the

first cohort of 14 Millikin-DMH nurse anesthesia (NAP) students were admitted into the

MSN program in spring 2011 as the fourth MSN track. The last cohort of MSN NAP

students will graduate in December of 2015 with the change to a DNP program.

In May 2008, the MSN program received initial full accreditation for five years from the

Commission on Collegiate Nursing Education (CCNE) with the next accreditation visit

scheduled for fall 2012. In October 2012, the CCNE MSN accreditation visit occurred

and the full 10 year accreditation was conferred.

Learning Story

Since 2006, the graduate nursing program has grown from offering two tracks for BSN-

prepared students seeking an MSN degree to the current four MSN tracks and two new

DNP tracks. Each course contributes to achieving the program-specific student learning

outcomes as shown in the curriculum maps below:

MSN Track 1 and 2 (CNL & NE) Courses Related to Student Learning Outcomes:

Nursing Courses Outcome 1 Outcome 2 Outcome 3

NU505 Evidence-Based Practice X

NU510 Diverse Populations X

NU515 Application of Theory to Practice X

NU525 Project Seminar X

NU530 Health care Policy and Economics X

NU535 Principles of Teaching and Learning X

NU542 Pathophysiology X

NU544 Advanced Health Assessment X

NU545 Advanced Pharmacology X

NU550 CNL: Clinical Outcomes & Care Mgt X

NU555 Educator Responsibilities and Roles X

NU560 Research Methods X

NU570 CNL Residency X

NU575 Educator Residency X

NU590 Advanced Nursing Project X

Students in the CNL and NE tracks must have a BSN degree and hold unencumbered

licensure as Registered Nurses in Illinois. Full time and part time study options are

3

available. Classes are typically scheduled on Fridays in an effort to accommodate the

schedule of the working professional nurse. For increased flexibility, most courses are

offered in 8-week blocks with additional content offered online. Full time students can

complete the program in eighteen months. In the spring of 2015, the CNL track was

retired after noting CNL graduate’s reported difficulty in finding appropriate employment

in this area, increasingly complex CNL academic requirements, and declining interest

from prospective students.

MSN Track 3 (MENP) Courses Related to Student Learning Outcomes

Nursing Courses Outcome 1 Outcome 2 Outcome 3

NU501 Nursing Foundations X NU504 Care of Adults I X NU514 Care of Adults II X NU524 Mental Health Nursing I X NU534 Mental Health Nursing II X NU543 Advanced Care of Adults I X NU546 Advanced Care of Adults II X NU531 Care of Women and Newborns X NU541 Care of Infants, Children, & Adolescents X NU549 Public Health Nursing I X NU551 Public Health Nursing II X NU569 Nursing Leadership X NU505 Advanced Topics: Evidence-Based Practice X

NU510 Advanced Topics: Diverse Populations X

NU515 Application of Theory to Practice X

NU525 Project Seminar X

NU530 Health care Policy and Economics X

NU535 Principles of Teaching and Learning X

NU542 Pathophysiology X

NU544 Advanced Health Assessment X

NU545 Advanced Pharmacology X

NU550 CNL: Clinical Outcomes & Care Mgt. X

NU555 Educator Responsibilities and Roles X

NU560 Research Methods X

NU570 CNL Residency X


The MENP track is designed for individuals who hold a bachelor’s degree in a non-

nursing field, and want to earn an MSN degree. The curriculum for pre-licensure MENP

students is an accelerated, rigorous 30 month plan of study requiring 46 credits in pre-

licensure courses in addition to the 36 credits required in the existing MSN curriculum

for the CNL advanced generalist role. MENP graduates are expected to meet the

accreditation standards for both the BSN and MSN degree upon completion of the

program. Courses specifically designed for MENP students to achieve the pre-licensure

nursing knowledge and skills are typically scheduled Monday through Thursday for

classroom and clinical experiences. MENP students join licensed MSN students on

Fridays for didactic courses with a major focus on achieving the MSN learning outcomes

4

in the program. Combining the pre-licensure MENP students and the licensed MSN

students in courses has been observed by faculty to create a rich learning environment for

both groups of students. Students who find the MENP curriculum too strenuous are often

able to move into the BSN program.

MSN Track 4 (NAP) Courses Related to Student Learning Outcomes:

Nursing Courses Outcome 1 Outcome 2 Outcome 3 NU 500: Roles & Resp. for Nurse Anesthesia X NU 505: Evidence-Based Practice X NU 506: Anatomy for Nurse Anesthesia X NU 507: Pharmacology for Nurse Anesthesia X NU 508: Basic principles of Nurse Anesthesia X NU 509: Physical Science for Graduate Nurses X NU 511: Physiology for Nurse Anesthesia X NU 515: Nursing and Interdisciplinary Theory X NU 516: Adv. Principles of Nurse Anesthesia I X NU 518: Adv. Principles of Nurse Anesthesia II X NU 520: Nurse Anesthesia Clinical Practicum I X NU 521: Clinical Conference I X NU 523: Adv. Principles of Nurse Anesthesia III X NU 527: Nurse Anesthesia Clinical Practicum II X

NU 528: Clinical Conference II X

NU 530: Healthcare Policy & Economics X

NU 532: Nurse Anesthesia Clinical Practicum III X

NU 533: Clinical Conference III X

NU 536: Nurse Anesthesia Clinical Practicum IV X

NU 537: Clinical Conference IV X

NU 538: Nurse Anesthesia Clinical Practicum V X

NU 539: Clinical Conference V X

NU 542: Advanced Physiology X

NU 544: Advanced Health Assessment X

NU 545: Advanced Pharmacology X

NU 560: Research Methods X

NU 569: Nursing Leadership X


Coursework in the MSN Nurse Anesthesia Track prepares qualified, experienced

Registered Nurses in the Advanced Practice Nursing specialty of nurse anesthesia.

Qualified candidates for the MSN degree (NAP track) are registered nurses who hold a

baccalaureate degree in nursing from an accredited program and who have completed

pre-requisite academic and professional requirements. The NAP is jointly conducted by

Millikin University and Decatur Memorial Hospital (DMH). A strong emphasis is placed

upon performance learning opportunities focusing on advanced knowledge and technical

skills required for nurse anesthesia practice. The curriculum consists of 72 credit hours

including the required clinical practicum consisting of approximately 2500 hours of

clinical experiences which is conducted at DMH and their affiliate institutions. Graduates

of this program will be eligible to take the National Certification Examination offered by

5

the Council on Certification of Nurse Anesthetists. NAP students are admitted once a

year and the first cohort began the program in June 2011. This track is being phased out

and replaced by the DNP.

Assessment Methods

CNL and NE students for the MSN program were accepted for the first time in the fall of

2006, and a process for systematic collection of assessment data was initiated. The

faculty agreed to use the same assessment plan for MENP and NAP students. Established

learning outcomes for each course contribute to student achievement of the program

learning outcomes. During the 2014-2015 academic year data were collected from the

following sources, found in the appendices:

Appendix A: School of Nursing Standard

Appendix B: Community Advisory Group

Appendix C: Aggregate Data on MSN Residency Outcomes

Appendix D: Exit Survey (online)

Appendix E: Alumni Survey

Appendix F: Employer Survey

Appendix G: Evaluation of Clinical Agencies (MENP)

Appendix H: EBI Survey (Educational Benchmarking)

The results of the above assessments were reported to the Nursing Graduate Studies

Committee and the Nurse faculty Organization in fall 2015 for analysis, discussion, and

decision-making by the entire nursing faculty. Results of the assessment reports are

included in the Appendices.

Standards and Trend Data

Results from the above assessment reports and trend data are presented in the following

discussion:

School of Nursing Standard (Appendix A)

The School of Nursing set standards for assessment with the benchmark set at 3.0 or the

category of “green light.” The trend data gathered from the MSN program are

consistently above the benchmark. Even though the School of Nursing faculty determined

that no significant changes need to be implemented at this time, faculty carefully examine

assessment data in light of anticipated changes in health care and the preparation Millikin

nursing graduates will need to be successful in the future. Faculty also seriously consider

informal communication with students about their perceptions of the program and ways

that faculty can support them in being successful and accomplishing their goals.

Observations of experienced faculty and preceptors are also considered in interpreting

data and identifying areas of the program that can be improved to maintain excellence in

nursing education. There is the expectation that faculty teaching in the MSN program is

educationally prepared and current in evidence-based clinical and educational practices to

prepare graduates who are well-prepared to meet the challenges of a rapidly changing

profession.

6

Community Advisory Group (Appendix B) The group convened on April 2, 2015 at

Millikin University. Ten representatives from clinical agencies joined the SON faculty

for lunch and discussions about practice changes and how Millikin can better prepare

students for nursing practice. The members of the group provided updates about evolving

changes in their agencies and at Millikin. Community members were asked to complete

the Employer Surveys.

Aggregate Data on MSN Residency Outcomes (Appendix C).

Aggregate Data on Residency Outcomes are obtained from Practice Performance

Evaluations and were analyzed to assess the MSN program. Each item could be rated on

a scale of 1 to 5, with 5 being superior and 1 being poor performance. The ratings for the

CNLs on the 32 items on the evaluation ranged from a low of 3.94 to a high of 4.79.

Scores on all items were well above the 3.0 benchmark set by the School of Nursing

faculty. The overall mean for the data collected in 2013 was 4.38 (0.39). No changes are

recommended at this time. Results indicated that CNL students are successful in their

advanced generalist roles.

The rating of NE Practice Performance Evaluation used a scale of 1 to 5 with 5 indicating

superior performance. Ratings for the Nurse Educators on the 30 items remained above

the bench mark of 3.0. With only one NE student during this period, analysis of trends is

not possible. All scores were above the benchmark. At this time there are no changes

recommended. Results indicated that the NE student was successful in the advanced

educator role.

MSN Exit Survey (Appendix D). Exit Survey data were collected on the MSN December

2015 graduates through the online questionnaire. The survey focused on the extent to

which students were meeting MU and School of Nursing outcomes. There were 15

graduates in 2014- 2015. Eleven (73%) of the MSN graduates responded to the on-line

survey. Two MSN tracks were represented as follows: One each in the Clinical Nurse

Leader Track and ten in the NAP track. The lowest rating was 3.20 and highest was 4.67.

All scores were above the 3.0 benchmark.

MSN Alumni Survey (Appendix E). Online surveys were sent in August 2015 to all MSN

graduates from 1 year post graduation and resent in December 2015. No responses were

obtained from the MSN alumni survey.

MSN Employer Survey (Appendix F). The results of the Employer Survey for MSN

graduates was collected and compiled in May 2015. The survey is comprised of nine

items related to performance of MSN graduates in the work setting. Employers rated each

item from 1 to 5, with 5 being the highest rating.

Scores ranged from a low of 2.00 on the statement regarding the MSN 5-year graduates

demonstration of the ability to “Develop or participate in research studies that effectively

add to the body of evidence based nursing knowledge?” to a high of 4.4 on 1-year

graduates for “Demonstrate leadership that enhances patient centered outcomes through

management of the care environment and evidence-based practice? Anecdotal notes

7

reveal strong professional values, core knowledge, and skills gained from the Millikin

curriculum.

The overall mean for all nine items was 3.57 for 1-year graduates and 3.56 for 5-year

graduates, with all items above the 3.0 benchmark except for one employer who scored

one 5-year employees at a level 2 on the item: “Develop or participate in research studies

that effectively add to the body of evidence-based nursing knowledge?” The last two

items on the survey ask about general impressions of Millikin graduates and the items

were scored at 4.57 and 4.71. There were many positive comments, and no negative

comments on the open ended items. Results indicated that the curriculum advances the

mission of the University and the SON as well as the SON program goals. Responses

from employers demonstrate that graduates accomplish the expected student outcomes of

the SON.

Evaluation of Clinical Agencies (Appendix G) Track 3 MENP only

Data based on clinical experiences in the 2014-2015 academic year and reported in Fall

2015 indicated that clinical sites where MENP nursing students practice provide good

opportunities for achieving learning outcomes. The evaluation includes data for

undergraduate students’ clinical experiences as well as track 3 MENP students. Scores

ranged from a low of 3.92 on two items: “integrate nursing research in providing care”

and “observe nurses who serve as role models in providing evidence-based care.” to a

high of 4.92 on the item “deliver and manage care to patients requiring a variety of services."

The mean score for all items was 4.45. This was up from a mean of 4.36 reported in

2014. Scores for all years have been consistently above the 3.0 bench mark indicating

that the clinical agencies provided opportunities for clinical experiences that allowed

students to achieve learning outcomes.

Educational Benchmarking Survey. (Appendix H) The EBI survey is administered every

two years at Millikin to determine student satisfaction with the program and allows

comparison with all other programs nationwide that participate in the survey. The survey

was administered in spring 2015 and results were reviewed and analyzed in the in fall of

2015. “Overall Satisfaction” demonstrated a sharp downward trend from 81.1%, mean of 5.86

(above comparison groups) in 2013 to 46.7%, mean of 3.80 in 2015. The predicting factor

“Administrative and Academic Advising” demonstrated a similar downward trend from 78.5%,

mean of 5.71 (above comparison groups) in 2013 to 61.1%, mean of 4.67 in 2015. “Overall

Learning” demonstrated a downward trend from 85.4%, mean of 6.12 (equal to comparison

groups) in 2013 to 77%, mean of 5.62 in 2015. There were no predicting factors identified.

“Overall Program Effectiveness” demonstrated a sharp downward trend from 82%, mean of 5.92

(above comparison groups) in 2013 to 63.3%, mean of 4.80 (above comparison groups) in 2015.

There were no predicting factors identified. From the 2014-15 EBI data, for the indicator areas of

Overall Satisfaction, Overall Learning and Overall Program Effectiveness, we are statistically

lower in performance than all of our external benchmarking groups (Select 6, Carnegie Group,

and All Other Institutions). These areas all demonstrated serious downward trends from previous

years in which we were above or equal to our comparative groups.

In the overall analysis of the 2014-15 data, “responsive[ness]” of both administration and faculty

to student needs and concerns, “feedback” from faculty and “effective” teaching, are identified as

8

serious problem areas for attention, consideration, and improvement by the Graduate Studies

Committee and Nurse Faculty Organization.

Initiatives for Change

Even though assessment indicators are generally positive, assessment summaries and

information from additional sources provide data that is used for continued program

development. Task forces were put in place in the fall of 2014 to examine the viability

and feasibility of the CNL and MENP tracks and to explore an option for an ADN-MSN

track.

9

Appendix A

Rubric for Performance Assessment and Standards

School of Nursing: Master of Science in Nursing

Rating 5 4 3 2 1

Demonstrate

leadership that

enhances patient

centered

outcomes

through

management of

the care

environment and

evidence-based

care.

Consistently goes

beyond

expectations in

demonstrating

leadership that

enhances patient

centered outcomes

through

management of the

care environment

and evidence-based

care.

Demonstrates

strong

leadership that

enhances

patient centered

outcomes

through

management of

the care

environment

and evidence-

based care.

Competently

demonstrates

leadership that

enhances

patient centered

outcomes

through

management of

the care

environment

and evidence-

based care.

Marginally

demonstrates

leadership that

enhances

patient centered

outcomes

through

management of

the care

environment

and evidence-

based care.

Unable to

demonstrate

leadership that

enhances

patient centered

outcomes

through

management of

the care

environment

and evidence-

based care.

Develop

advanced

nursing

knowledge for

quality

improvement of

patient

outcomes in

diverse

populations and

health care

delivery

effectiveness

through

interdisciplinary

teams.

Consistently goes

beyond

expectations and

demonstrates

mastery in

developing

advanced nursing

knowledge for

quality

improvement of

patient outcomes in

diverse populations

and health care

delivery

effectiveness

through

interdisciplinary

teams.

Demonstrates

strong ability to

develop

advanced

nursing

knowledge for

quality

improvement of

patient

outcomes in

diverse

populations and

health care

delivery

effectiveness

through

interdisciplinary

teams.

Competently

develops

advanced

nursing

knowledge for

quality

improvement of

patient

outcomes in

diverse

populations and

health care

delivery

effectiveness

through

interdisciplinary

teams.

Marginally able

to develop

advanced

nursing

knowledge for

quality

improvement of

patient

outcomes in

diverse

populations and

health care

delivery

effectiveness

through

interdisciplinary

teams.

Unable to

develop

advanced

nursing

knowledge for

quality

improvement of

patient

outcomes in

diverse

populations and

health care

delivery

effectiveness

through

interdisciplinary

teams.

Provide nursing

leadership

through the

health care

delivery system

including

expanding the

independent role

of the nurse,

ensuring

evidence-based

educational

outcomes,

Consistently goes

beyond

expectations in

demonstrating

masters of

leadership skills in

the health care

delivery system

including

expanding the

independent role of

the nurse, ensuring

evidence-based

Provides strong

leadership

through the

health care

delivery system

including

expanding the

independent

role of the

nurse, ensuring

evidence-based

educational

outcomes,

Provides

competent

leadership

through the

health care

delivery system

including

expanding the

independent

role of the

nurse, ensuring

evidence-based

educational

Marginally

provides

leadership

through the

health care

delivery system

including

expanding the

independent

role of the

nurse, ensuring

evidence-based

educational

Unable to

provide nursing

leadership

through the

health care

delivery system

including

expanding the

independent

role of the

nurse, ensuring

evidence-based

educational

10

engaging in

political

processes, and

improving

access to health

care.

educational

outcomes,

engaging in

political processes,

and improving

access to health

care.

engaging in

political

processes, and

improving

access to health

care.

outcomes,

engaging in

political

processes, and

improving

access to health

care.

outcomes,

engaging in

political

processes, and

improving

access to health

care

outcomes,

engaging in

political

processes, and

improving

access to health

care.

Rubric Evaluation Standard: Green Light

4.5 - 5.0 = Mastery

3.5 - 4.4 = Strong performance

3.0 - 3.4 = Competent

Yellow Light

2.5 - 2.9 = Marginal performance

Red Light

< 2.5 = Not acceptable

11

Appendix B Millikin University

Community Advisory Group April 22, 2015

Annual Summary Report

Call to order Meeting was called to order by Pamela Lindsey, Director,

School of Nursing at 11:30 am in Richard’s Treat University

Center, Fireplace Room

Community Members

Present

Linda Fasick, Community Health Improvement Center;

Nancy Ford, Hickory Point Christian Village

Laurie Brown, Hickory Point Christian Village

Darla Coit, Imboden Creek

Carol Carlton, Macon County Health Dept.

Deb Fitton, Macon County Health Dept.

Sharon Norris, Decatur Memorial Hospital

Sue Kiefer-Griffin, Decatur Memorial Hospital

Shelly Baldwin, Richland Community College

Ellen Colbeck, Richland Community College

Faculty Members

Present

Jo Carter, Jamie Nickell, Julie Kennedy, Sheryl Samuelson,

Charlotte Bivens, Vicki Caldwell, Barb Connelley, Mary Jane

Linton, Kristin Pritts, Pam Laskowski, Isabel Ososki, Gina

Canny, Rhonda Gee, Lori Stone, Pam Lindsey, Karla Luxner,

Kathy Booker, John Blakeman ( Student Representative), Dawn

Johnson (Administrative Assistant), Bonnie Niemeyer

(Administrative Assistant)

Summary of

Discussion:

Faculty and community advisory group members had the

opportunity to visit and share ideas during the lunch.

Following the lunch each faculty member and community

advisory group member introduced themselves stating the

institution they were representing and their current role in the

institution. Pam Lindsey, Director of the School of Nursing,

shared information regarding the following changes in the

School of Nursing:

In attempting to align the undergraduate curriculum with the Master’s Entry into Nursing Practice (MENP) curriculum, NU 200: Foundations of Professional Nursing was added to the curriculum to provide students with foundational content and beginning nursing skills. This was implemented so that students would be ready to go to clinical practice earlier in NU 202: Care of Adults1 (new name). Additionally, one hour was added tp NU 202, and content was changed to align the course content with the MENP NU 501: Care of Adults 1 and NU 514: Care of Adults 2 courses.

NU 475: Professional Nursing Intern Capstone was also added to the senior year. This course provides students

12

concentrated/focused clinical experiences with a selected professional nurse in a designated clinical area. The capstone requires 48 hours of clinical experience in full-shift blocks over a 6-week period.

Professor Bivens also shared information regarding a nursing simulation course developed and piloted by John Blakeman, MSN student and new faculty, and Professor Bivens. Simulation that offers reality-based patient care experiences serves to increase self-confidence in communication, psychomotor skills, and professional role development for working in interdisciplinary teams. The simulation course was a success and students provided positive feedback addressing the invaluable hands-on learning experiences with critical thinking, as well as building confidence in expectations of the professional role.

Dr. Lindsey also reported that MU is in the process of developing a curriculum to offer an RN-MSN. There was a good discussion from members of the advisory group about the offering. There was positive feedback about the need for the course. At the same time, the group shared some obstacles. The community members shared that the greatest obstacle is financial commitment. The educators from Richland Community College (RCC) School of Nursing shared that RN-MSN program is a good idea; however, students should have the option to opt out of the program when “life gets in the way.” The faculty at RCC find that this is a problem for students in their curriculum.

Following the updates in the School of Nursing, each member

of the advisory group shared news/updates from their

institution. Each member echoed the increasing difficulty of

hiring registered nurses. Individuals from the assisted living

facilities and the nursing homes shared that the state requires a

certain number of RN’s for daily coverage in nursing home

facilities, and this poses a significant problem. Additionally,

the representatives shared that this is due to the shortage of

nurses and perhaps the stereotype of nursing homes and lack of

experience in those types of facilities during their educational

curriculum. The representatives from extended care facilities,

assisted living facilities and nursing home facilities also

emphasized that they would like more students to have

experience at their facilities.

Representatives from Decatur Memorial Hospital shared that

they would be converting to the EPIC electronic record system

this summer. This change will require that all users, including

faculty and students assigned to DMH, be oriented to the

system. There will be classes offered in the summer in

preparation for the system going live in August. Faculty will be

13

required to attend a 2-eight-hour classes. Also all student and

faculty will be required to attend a 4-hour orientation prior to

patient care experiences at DMH. The system will go live

August 1, 2015. The MENP classes will be immersed in

clinical experiences during time that EPIC goes live.

Arrangements have been made for MENP orientation.

Adjournment Meeting adjourned at 1:30 pm by Pam Lindsey

Respectfully Submitted,

Mary Jane Linton, EdD, RN, CNE, CNL

Professor

14

Appendix C Millikin University - School of Nursing

Aggregate Data on MSN Residency Outcomes

CNL Competency Outcomes Analysis

December 2014 and December 2015

During the 2013-14 analysis of outcomes from the CNL program, the GSC recommended

changes in outcome appraisal. The analysis had previously included reporting of every

mean score of 32 competencies based on appraisals from preceptors, student self-

evaluations and final faculty clinical appraisal. While this generated significant data, it

was often not easily evaluated for comparison. For both 2014 and 2015, all enrolled

students successfully completed the NU 570 Residency course and using a combination

of rankings from the following data points, all students achieved scores above 3 on every

clinical competency based on rankings of 1 (poor) to 5 (superior). The following tables

are presented for comparison of CNL outcomes for the 2014 and 2015 classes comparing

the top 5 competency scores (table 1) and the 5 lowest competency scores (table 2). The

analysis of all 32 competencies included the cumulative mean scoring for each student in

the NU 570 course which included student’s self-evaluation, each of 3 preceptor’s

scoring, and the final faculty scoring. The CNL competencies evaluation tool was

initially derived from the national certification guidelines and consisted of 32

competencies organized under the following CNL roles:

Advocate (8 competencies)

Member of the Profession (1 competency)

Team Manager (4 competencies)

Information Manager (2 competencies)

Systems Analyst (4 competencies)

Clinician (3 competencies)

Outcomes Manager (4 competencies)

Educator (6 competencies)

Table 1. Comparison of top 5 Mean Scores from 2014 and 2015 NU 570: CNL Residency

Appraisal*

CNL

Competency

Category

2014

Highest 5 Rankings

2014

CNL Competency

(4.71-4.86/5.0)

CNL

Competency

Category

2015

Highest 5 Rankings

2015

CNL Competency

(4.52-4.6/5.0)

Educator 29.Creates or reviews an

educational module with patient

and families and/or staff

Advocate 4. Identifies, disseminates and

applies evidence for practice and for

changing practice

Systems

Analyst

16.Participates in establishing and

reviewing interdisciplinary patient

care plans with the health care

team

Clinician 22. Contributes to interdisciplinary

plans of care based on best practice

guidelines and current evidence

Team

Manager

13.Participates in multidisciplinary

team meeting with incorporation of

the patient and/or family as part of

the team meeting

Systems

Analyst

17. Applies evidence-based practice

as basis for client care decisions

Systems 17.Applies evidence-based practice Team Manager 12.Participates and presents to the

15

Analyst as basis for client care decisions multidisciplinary team evidence-

based recommendations that

improve patient care outcomes and

efficiency

Advocate 6.Identifies potential equity and

justice issues within the health care

setting related to client care

Member of a

Profession

9. Actively participates in agency

unit and/or organization-wide

committee(s)

*Student numbers: 2014 n=5; 2015 n=4. Appraisal means derived from 32 competency

numeric ratings by student, faculty, and all preceptors.

Table 2. Comparison of Lowest 5 Mean Scores from 2014 and 2015 NU 570: CNL

Residency Appraisal*

CNL

Competency

Category

2014

Lowest 5 Rankings

2014

4.09-4.38/5.0

CNL

Competency

Category

2015

Lowest 5 Rankings

2015

3.88-3.94/5.0

Team

Manager

10. Designs, coordinates &

evaluates plans of care for a cohort

of patients incorporating

patient/family input and team

members

Advocate 6. Identifies potential equity and

justice issues within the health care

setting related to client care

Advocate 1. Identify clinical and cost

outcomes that improve safety,

effectiveness, timeliness,

efficiency, quality & client-

centered care

Advocate 8. Analyzes the care of a patient

cohort and the care environment in

light of ANA Nursing Standards

and the Code of Ethics

Clinician 20. Plans and delegates care for the

patients with multiple chronic

health problems, identifying

nursing interventions to impact

outcomes of care

Team Manager 10. Designs, coordinates &

evaluates plans of care for a cohort

of patients incorporating

patient/family input and team

members

Educator 30. Participates and/or develops a

health education plan for a unit-

specific issues common to multiple

clients

Outcomes

Manager

24. Revises patient care based on

analysis of outcomes and evidence-

based knowledge

Outcomes

Manager

24. Revises patient care based on

analysis of outcomes and evidence-

based knowledge

Outcomes

Manager

Coordinates care for a group of

patients based on evidence-based

guidelines and quality care

standards

*Student numbers: 2014 n=5; 2015 n=4. Appraisal means derived from 32 competency

numeric ratings by student, faculty, and all preceptors.

In October 2013, a new white paper was issued on the CNL role by the American

Association of Colleges of Nursing and the competencies were reorganized by the AACN

Master’s Essentials (9 curricular components with 66 subcategories) including

corresponding CNL competencies totaling 69 in number. In an analysis in July 2014, Dr.

Booker and Professor Kristin Pritts, CNL examined the white paper for congruence with

the tool initially developed by Dr. Prasun. Consulting with other faculty, the original

competencies were retained and selective components of additional competencies

congruent with the October 2013 Competencies and Curricular Expectations for CNL

Education and Practice (AACN) were incorporated into CNL courses, as appropriate

(e.g. NU 550 CNL Outcomes and Care Management and into NU 570 CNL Residency

courses).

16

Summary: Students appraisals for all 32 outcome competencies exceeded the SON

standard of 3 (“average”) or better in both 2014 and 2015 graduating classes. Both groups

shared “Applies evidence-based practice as basis for client care decisions” in the top 5

rankings. Based on the lowest areas of ranking, the focus in the NU 570 CNL Residency

course incorporated student readings and presentations on outcomes, coordination of

care, and chronicity. Reviews of prior coursework applying the Institute of Medicine

safety goals and evidence-based care were also strengthened. The CNL students in both

cohorts were engaged, completed weekly reflections and discussions of selected

competencies, tracked their progress weekly and did very well in this course. While the

2014 cohort consisted of 5 students, only 4 were eligible to take the CNL exam due to

one student’s delay in completing in the NU 590 Project Seminar course. All 4 takers

passed in 2014 (100%). In 2015, all 4 students took the exam but only 2 passed (50%).

The two who failed received the exact same score of 84, with 88 required to pass the

exam. Both were encouraged to repeat the exam in the near future.

CNL Outcomes Report/Professor Booker/3-2-16


superior performance. Ratings for the Nurse Educators on the 30 items remained above

the bench mark of 3.0. With only one NE student during this period, analysis of trends is

not possible. All scores were above the benchmark. At this time there are no changes

recommended. Results indicated that the NE student was successful in the advanced

educator role.

NE Competency Outcomes Analysis

December 2014 and December 2015


superior performance. With only one NE student during this period, analysis of trends is

not possible. All scores were above the benchmark of 3.0. At this time there are no

changes recommended. Results indicated that the NE student was successful in the

advanced educator role.

17

Appendix D

Millikin University School of Nursing MSN Exit Survey

Summary for 2014 – 2015 academic year: MSN graduates (N = 11)

Class Descriptors:

Eleven of fifteen 2014-2015 MSN graduates (73.3%) responded to the on-line

questionnaire.

Three of the eleven respondents were male.

One respondent (9%) was in CNL track and ten (91%) were in the Nurse

Anesthesia track

Ten (91%) were admitted directly to the MSN program and one was admitted first

as a student-at-large.

Nine (81%) identified themselves as white (non-Hispanic/Latino) and one (9%)

identified as black. One student did not respond to the question.

The ages ranged from 28-41; the mean age was 32 years; the median age was 32

and the mode was 32, with 1 student who did not respond.

Asking primarily about professional success:

At the time of the completion of the survey, three graduates (27%) were employed

within the professional field of nursing within their major area.

At the time of the completion of the survey, no graduates were employed within

the professional field of nursing outside of the major area of their MSN.

Five (45%) were currently unemployed but two reported actively interviewing for

new role.

Five (45%) MSN graduates indicated they ultimately planned to earn their

doctoral degree in Nursing; the remaining 55% reported that the MSN was the

final destination degree.

The certifications presently held by the MSN graduates included the following:

BLS (n=1), ACLS (n-1), and PALS (n=1)

Four reported CCRN

The certifications the MSN graduates planned to pursue included the following:

FNP (n=1)

Certified Registered Nurse Anesthetist (=4)

Annual professional salaries were reported as:

Greater than $40,000 but less than or equal to $50,000 0 (0%)

Greater than $50,000 but less than or equal to $60,000 0 (0%)

Greater than $100,000 6 (55%)

No applicable/Chose not to respond 5 (45%)

18

The respondents reported that the percentage that their annual salaries constituted

of their household incomes as follows:

Two (18%): income) makes up 0%- 25 % of their household income.

One (9%) income makes up 26 % - 50 % of their household income.

Two (18%) income makes up 51 % – 75 % of their household income;

Three (27%) income makes up 76% - 100% of their household incomes.

Three respondents (27%) chose not to respond

Asking primarily about professional success:

On a scale from 1 - 5 (with 5 being the highest rating, please respond to the

following):

Total “professional success” indices = 3.76 (2012)

Total “professional success” indices = no data (2011)




2014-1

5

mea

n s

ocr

e

2013-1

4

mea

n s

core

2012

men

sco

re

1 To what degree do you demonstrate leadership that enhances

patient-centered outcomes through management of the care

environment and reliance upon evidence-based nursing

practice?

4.67

4.54

4.00

2 To what degree do you develop advanced nursing knowledge

for quality improvement of patient outcomes in diverse

populations and health care delivery effectiveness through

interdisciplinary collaboration?

4.56

4.46

4.00

3 To what degree do you provide nursing leadership through

the health care delivery system including expanding the

independent role of the nurse, ensuring evidence-based

educational outcomes, engaging in political processes, and

improving access to health care?

4.44

4.31

3.60

4 To what degree do you inform your nursing practice with

research, evidence-based practice, and continuing

professional education?

4.40

4.38

4.00

5 To what degree do you participate in the development of

evidence-based practice or research studies in your practice?

3.5

4.0

3.20

19

Asking primarily about a life of personal meaning and value:


following):

Total “life of personal meaning and value” indices = 4.06

(2012)

Total “life of personal meaning and value” indices = no data

(2011)


(2010)


(2009)


(2008)

2014-1

5

mea

n s

core

2013-1

4

mea

n s

core

2012

mea

n s

core

6 To what degree did the Millikin University School of Nursing

contribute to your development of a personal life of meaning

and value?

3.7

3.0

4.17


encourage your involvement in professional and community

activities?

3.45

3.36

3.83


guide you to understand and respond to legal/ethical issues in

your professional practice?

3.73

3.86

4.17

Asking primarily about democratic citizenship:


following):

Total “democratic citizenship” indices = 4.05 (2012)

Total “democratic citizenship” indices = no data (2011)




2014-1

5

mea

n s

core

2013-1

4

mea

n s

core

2012

mea

n s

core


promote your involvement in patient advocacy?

3.82

4.36

4.50


promote your involvement in legislative/campaign activities?

3.36

3.54

3.33

20


promote your commitment to the public’s health?

3.27

3.57

4.20


promote your involvement in the advancement of professional

nursing (through participation in professional organizations

and leadership roles in your community)?

3.20

3.54

4.17

Asking primarily about program/curriculum:


following):

Programmatic/curricular indices = 4.35 (2012)

Programmatic/curricular indices = no data (2011)




2014-1

5

mea

n s

core

2013-1

4

mea

n s

core

2012 m

ean

score

13 To what degree did the School of Nursing foster the

development of you into a leader committed to advancing

professional nursing excellence?

3.73

3.86

4.00

14 To what degree did the School of Nursing prepare you to be a

nursing leader who integrates knowledge, skills, and values in

your professional practice within a global community?

3.90

3.79

4.50

15 To what degree did the School of Nursing achieve its goal of

making you a life-long learner who is able to actively shape the

future of nursing and health care?

3.73

3.54

4.33

16 To what degree did the School of Nursing prepare you for your

current employment (if not currently employed, for your most

recent employment)?

4.27

3.93

4.50

17 To what degree did the School of Nursing prepare you for

additional formal education?

4.00

3.86

4.60

18 To what degree would you be likely to recommend the Millikin

University School of Nursing to friends or acquaintances?

3.36

3.43

4.17

21

Kindly provide thoughts related to your Millikin University School of Nursing

education which would have helped you better achieve the established student learning

outcomes related to

A. Professional Values: Honoring diversity and human dignity, social

justice, patient and professional autonomy

o Gained a great understanding of this

B. Core Knowledge: Legal and ethical influences, change, health

promotion, risk reduction, health maintenance & restoration, advocacy

(2 respondents)

o Gained a great understanding of this

C. Skills: Nursing process, leadership, communication, resource

management, critical thinking, research, evidence and theory-based

practice

Well advanced with program

We are not allowed to critically think during clinical at DMH

because we are micromanaged by the anesthesiologists and

CRNAs. If you offer your opinion, they spread the word that

you are a problem student.

I feel that every new nurse after graduation does not feel

confident in his/her skills. I am not sure clinical skills could

have been instilled anymore than they had already.

Gained a great understanding of this

Please provide us with the names and telephone contact information of any individuals

you believe would be good candidates for the MSN program.

I wouldn't send anyone to this program. It was insulting

Not sure of anyone at this time

What were the greatest barriers you faced when deciding to attend Millikin University

and/or begin an MSN program?

expensive, long distance from home

TIme management

When I decided to attend, the cost was the greatest barrier.

Giving up employment to attend graduate school full time.

Nothing..it's the only school I applied to and was willing to attend

22

Compiler summary for faculty consideration:

In general, all responses all means and indices are at or above the MSN

benchmark of 3.00. Several items show a downward trend although remain

above the 3.0 benchmark. These include items: #5, #9, #10, #11, and # 12.

The highest mean for the 2014-15 respondents was 4.67 for the professional

success category question “To what degree do you demonstrate leadership that

enhances patient-centered outcomes through management of the care

environment and reliance upon evidence-based nursing practice?

The lowest mean of the 2014-15 was 3.20 for “To what degree did the

Millikin University School of Nursing promote your involvement in the

advancement of professional nursing (through participation in professional

organizations and leadership roles in your community)?”

Concerns were also continued from earlier years relating to financial and work

issues and time commitment.

In general, responses demonstrate that the curriculum does advance the

mission of the University and the School of Nursing with areas of concern

which bear monitoring and discussion in the coming year.

23

Appendix E

MSN Alumni Survey

The School of Nursing graduate alumni survey is administered at 18 - 24 months and

51/2 to 6 years following the graduation. The survey assesses the mission, program

goals, and student learning outcomes. Beginning summer of 2007, the alumni surveys

were piloted electronically for the first time in an effort to increase the participation of

individuals of an internet-savvy generation. The alumni survey request is sent annually

via e-mail by using Alumni & Development-generated e-mail addresses with the

electronic survey link and through printed SON Newsletters with the link to the webpage

with the survey on it.

No responses were obtained from the MSN alumni survey for the third year in a row.

24

Comparative MSN Alumni Surveys

(Results: 2015 back to 2010)

The survey asks alumni about the influence of the Millikin University School of Nursing

upon their professional success, life of personal meaning and value, and democratic

citizenship as well as their perceptions about the program/curriculum. On this scale, 5 is

the highest rating possible.

Professional Success:

2015

2014

2013

2012

n =

1

2011

n =

5

2010

n =

3

Indice: Professional Success

(this is the mean of the following

5 items in total)

-- - -- 3.60 3.52 3.07

1 To what degree do you

demonstrate leadership that

enhances patient-centered

outcomes through management of

the care environment and reliance

upon evidence-based nursing

practice? (2009: To what degree do you demonstrate the

core knowledge, competencies, and values of

professional nursing in your practice?)

-- - -- 4.00 3.80 3.67

2 To what degree do you develop

advanced nursing knowledge for

quality improvement of patient

outcomes in diverse populations

and health care delivery

effectiveness through

interdisciplinary collaboration? (2009: To what degree do you integrate

theoretical knowledge and investigation as the

basis for critical thinking and decision-making

in the planning and provision of evidence-

based nursing practice for diverse populations

in your practice?)

-- - -- 4.00 3.60 3.00

3 To what degree do you provide

nursing leadership through the

health care delivery system

including expanding the

independent role of the nurse,

ensuring evidence-based

-- - -- 5.00 3.00 2.67

25

educational outcomes, engaging in

-political processes, and improving

a-ccess to health care? (2-009: To what degree do you demonstrate a

0c-ommitment to ongoing personal and pr-

ofessional development through formal and -

informal experiences in your practice?)

4 To what degree do you inform your

nursing practice with research,

evidence-based practice, and

continuing professional education?

-- - -- 3.00 4.00 3.67

5 To what degree do you participate

in the development of evidence-

based practice or research studies

in your practice?

-- - -- 2.00 3.20 2.33

Life of personal meaning and value:

2015

2014

2013

2012

n =

1

2011

n =

5

2010

n =

3

Indice: Life of Personal

Meaning and Value (this is

the mean of the following 3

items in total)

-- - -- 5.00 4.07 4.22

1 To what degree did the

Millikin University School of

Nursing contribute to your

development of a personal life

of meaning and value?

-- - -- 5.00 4.00 4.00



Nursing encourage your

involvement in professional

and community activities?

-- - -- 5.00 4.40 4.67



Nursing guide you to

understand and respond to

legal/ethical issues in your

professional practice?

-- - -- 5.00 3.80 4.00

26

Democratic citizenship:


following):

2015

2014

2013

2012

n =

1

2011

n =

5

2010

n =

3

Indice: Democratic citizenship

(this is the mean of the following 4

items in total)

-- - -- 5.00 3.85 3.92

1 To what degree did the Millikin

University School of Nursing

promote your involvement in patient

advocacy?

-- - -- 5.00 4.60 4.67



promote your involvement in

legislative/campaign activities?

-- - -- 5.00 2.80 2.67



promote your commitment to the

public’s health? (2009: To what degree did the Millikin

University School of Nursing promote the

infusion of public health concepts in your life?)

-- - -- 5.00 4.00 4.00



promote your involvement in the

advancement of professional

nursing (through development of

and participation in research,

participation in professional

organizations, and leadership roles

within the global community)?

-- - -- 5.00 4.00 4.33

27

Program/curriculum:

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

n =

3

Indice: Program/Curriculum (this

is the mean of the following 6 items

in total)

-- - -- 4.83 4.59 4.72

1 To what degree did the School of

Nursing foster the development of

you into a leader committed to

advancing professional nursing

excellence? (2009: To what degree did the School of Nursing

help to develop within you a commitment to

professional nursing excellence?)

-- - -- 5.00 4.60 4.67


Nursing prepare you to be a nursing

leader who integrates knowledge,

skills, and values in your professional

practice within a global community? (2009: To what degree did the School of Nursing

prepare you to synthesize knowledge, skills, and

values for professional practice in a global

community?)

-- - -- 5.00 4.40 4.00


Nursing achieve its goal of making

you a life-long learner who is able to

actively shape the future of nursing

and health care? (2009: To what degree did the School of Nursing

prepare you to be a life-long learner able to

envision and shape the future of nursing and

health care?)

-- - -- 5.00 4.40 5.00


Nursing prepare you for your current

employment (if not currently

employed, for your most recent

employment)?

-- - -- 4.00 5.00 4.67


Nursing prepare you for additional

formal education?

-- - -- 5.00 4.75 5.00

6 To what degree would you be likely

to recommend the Millikin University

School of Nursing to friends or

-- - -- 5.00 4.40 5.00

28

acquaintances?

Comments (1) to the query “Please feel free to share with us any feedback you feel

would be helpful regarding the School of Nursing program and/or curriculum.”

29

Appendix F Millikin University School of Nursing

Employer Survey Results from May, 2015

The School of Nursing faculty determined during the 2008 – 2009 academic year that an

instrument which was more intentional and objective should be used in addition to the valuable,

anecdotal feedback received from the Community Advisory Group. This School of Nursing

Employer Survey was implemented first in May 2009, as was a new mechanism for

administrating it. It was designed to assess employer estimations of our BSN students (1 and 5

years after graduating from the Millikin University nursing program) and of our MSN students.

Beginning 2014, a 1- and 5- year assessment of our MSN graduates will be implemented.

The employer survey was given to all agency representatives at the annual spring Community

Advisory Group meeting. The survey was also mailed to those Community Advisory group

members who were not in attendance at the meeting.

Five representatives responded to the survey within our Community Advisory Group completed

the survey:

The five organizations were: Macon County Health Department, Decatur Public

School District #61, Decatur Memorial Hospital, Memorial Medical Center, St. John’s

Hospital,

In total, they employ a range of 2 to 900 professional registered nurses, although one

respondent did not report the number of RNs employed within their institution.

Of the three Decatur institutions who reported that they employ professional registered

nurses, estimated that 0-6 % of that workforce consisted of graduates from Millikin

University.

Most agencies did not provide percentages of graduates from Millikin University.

30

Employer Surveys Assessment of BSN Millikin Graduates

(May, 2015)

The survey asks employers “To what degree do your Millikin BSN graduates” (BSN graduates

employed in their organization: 1-year and 5-years post-graduation) meet each of the following

criterion.

On this scale, 5 is the highest rating possible. A mean of three is the benchmark.

20

15

20

14

20

13

1 Demonstrate the core knowledge,

competencies, and values of professional

nursing?

1 yr 4.00

(n=6)

4.33

(n=3)

4.50

Demonstrate the core knowledge,

competencies, and values of professional

nursing?

5 yr 5.00

(n=2)

4.67

(n=3)

5.00

2 Integrate theoretical knowledge and

investigation as the basis for critical thinking

and decision-making in the planning and

provision of evidence-based nursing practice

for diverse populations?

1 yr 4.00

(n=6)

3.67

(n=3)

4.17

Integrate theoretical knowledge and

investigation as the basis for critical thinking

and decision-making in the planning and

provision of evidence-based nursing practice

for diverse populations?

5 yr 4.5

(n=2)

4.67

(n=3)

4.75

3 Demonstrate a commitment to ongoing

personal and professional development by

seeking new knowledge and skills through

formal and informal experiences?

1 yr 4.33

(n=6)

4.0

(n=3)

4.33

Demonstrate a commitment to ongoing

personal and professional development by

seeking new knowledge and skills through

formal and informal experiences?

5 yr 4.5

(n=2)

5.0

(n=3)

4.75

4 Use the nursing process to assess, plan,

implement, evaluate, and revise patient care?”

1 yr 3.67

(n=6)

4.67

(n=3)

4.50

Use the nursing process to assess, plan,


5 yr 3.5

(n=2)

4.67

(n=3)

4.75

31

20

15

20

14

20

13

5 Communicate, advocate, and collaborate

effectively with diverse patients, families,

peers, and other professionals?

1 yr 4.00

(n=6)

4.0

(n=3)

4.00

Communicate, advocate, and collaborate

effectively with diverse patients, families,

peers, and other professionals?

5 yr 4.5

(n=2)

5.0

(n=3)

4.75

6 New 2012: To what degree do your BSN

graduates participate in activities to improve

patient care delivery and outcomes (e.g.

patient advocacy, policy development,

committee involvement)?

(Previously asked: “Effectively use

knowledge of social, ethical, and political

issues?”)

1 yr 3.83

(n=6)

4.0

(n=3)

3.80

New 2012: To what degree do your BSN

graduates participate in activities to improve

patient care delivery and outcomes (e.g.

patient advocacy, policy development,

committee involvement)?

(Previously asked: “Effectively use

knowledge of social, ethical, and political

issues?”)

5 yr 4.5

(n=2)

5.0

(n=3)

4.00

7 Demonstrate leadership skills and

accountability?

1 yr 3.5

(n=6)

4.0

(n=3)

4.17

Demonstrate leadership skills and

accountability?

5 yr 4.5

(n=2)

4.67

(n=3)

4.75

8 Participate in the development and use of

evidence-based practice or research studies?

1 yr 3.17

(n=6)

3.67

(n=3)

3.50

Participate in the development and use of


5 yr 4.00

(n=2)

4.67

(n=3)

4.00

9 Demonstrate proficiency in basic technical

nursing skills?

1 yr 4.2

(n=5)

4.67

(n=3)

4.50

Demonstrate proficiency in basic technical

nursing skills?

5 yr 4.5

(n=2)

4.67

(n=3)

5.00

32

Employer Surveys Assessment of MSN Millikin Graduates

(May, 2014)

The survey asks employers “To what degree do your Millikin MSN graduates …” (MSN

graduates employed in their organization). Beginning in 2014, we will assess both 1-year and 5-

years post-graduation.


20

15

20

14

20

13

10 Demonstrate leadership that enhances patient

centered outcomes through management of

the care environment and evidence-based

practice?

1 yr 4.4

(n=5)

3.37

(n=3)

5.00

Demonstrate leadership that enhances patient



practice?

5 yr 4.0

(n=1)

4

(n=1)

n/a

11 Demonstrate advanced nursing knowledge

used for quality improvement of patient

outcomes in diverse populations and health

care delivery effectiveness through

interdisciplinary teams?

1 yr 4.00

(n=5)

3.67

(n=3)

5.00

Demonstrate advanced nursing knowledge

used for quality improvement of patient

outcomes in diverse populations and health

care delivery effectiveness through

interdisciplinary teams?

5 yr 4.00

(n=1)

4.0

(n=1)

n/a

12 Provide nursing leadership through the health

care delivery system by expanding the

independent role of the nurse?

1 yr 3.75

(n=4)

3.67

(n=3)

5.00

Provide nursing leadership through the health

care delivery system by expanding the

independent role of the nurse?

5 yr 4.00

(n=1)

5.0

(n=1)

n/a


care delivery system by ensuring evidence-

based educational and/or patient outcomes?

1 yr 3.8

(n=5)

3.67

(n=3)

5.00




5 yr 4

(n=1)

5.0

(n=1)

n/a

33

20

15

20

14

20

13


care delivery system by engaging in political

processes and improving access to health

care?

1 yr 3.0

(n=4)

3.0

(n=3)

4.00


care delivery system by engaging in political

processes and improving access to health

care?

5 yr 3.0

(n=1)

4.0

(n=1)

n/a

15 Develop or participate in research studies that

effectively add to the body of evidence-based

nursing knowledge?

1 yr 2.75

(n=4)

3.5

(n=3)

4.33

Develop or participate in research studies that


nursing knowledge?

5 yr 2.0

(n=1)

2

(n=1)

n/a

16 Respond to and promote understanding of

legal/ethical issues in professional practice?

1 yr 3.2

(n=5)

3.33

(n=3)

5.00

Respond to and promote understanding of

legal/ethical issues in professional practice?

5 yr 4.0

(n=1)

4.0

(n=1)

n/a

17 Involve themselves in the advancement of

professional nursing (through development of

and participation in research, participation in

professional organizations, and leadership

roles within the global community)?

1 yr 3.2

(n=5)

4.5

(n=3)

5.00

Involve themselves in the advancement of





5 yr 3.0

(n=1)

5.0

(n=1)

n/a

18 Integrate knowledge, skills, and values in

their professional practice and show

commitment to life-long learning to actively

shape the future of nursing and health care.

1 yr 4.0

(n=5)

4.0

(n=3)

5.00

Integrate knowledge, skills, and values in

their professional practice and show

commitment to life-long learning to actively

shape the future of nursing and health care.

5 yr 4.0

(n=1)

5.0

(n=1)

n/a

34

Employer Surveys Assessment of

“General Millikin Nursing Graduate Items”

(May, 2014)

The survey asks employers “To what degree do you …” to the following two items.


20

15

20

14

20

13

19 Do you feel Millikin University School of

Nursing graduates are prepared for professional

practice?

4.57

(n=7)

4.6

(n=5)

4.63

20 Are you satisfied with the educational

preparation of Millikin University School of

Nursing graduates?

4.71

(n=7)

4.6

(n=5)

4.50

Kindly provide thoughts related to your Millikin University School of Nursing graduates in

regard to:

D. Professional Values: Honoring diversity and human dignity, social justice,

patient and professional autonomy

All of the students have shown willingness to learn while working with a diverse population.

Need renewal emphasis on caring theory-any practices to coincide with DMH implementation of relationship based care.

Excellent

Accepting, non-judgemental, ability to role model to others honoring differences of individuals.

E. Core Knowledge: Legal and ethical influences, change, health promotion,

risk reduction, health maintenance & restoration, advocacy

Excellent

35

C. Skills: Nursing process, leadership, communication, resource management,

critical thinking, research, evidence and theory-based practice

Continued work on priority setting for BSN students as well as critical thinking in crisis situations.

Excellent – a 2012 graduate is now the chair of our Unit Based Council. She also assumes duties as charge nurse. A quiet, thoughtful, competent leader.

Please feel free to add any other comments suggestions:

Our MSN grad was well prepared for professional practice.

Rose has been a wonderful addition to our staff in the Nursing/Level II. She is eager to learn. She has great critical thinking skills which is so necessary for our newborn resuscitations.

Compiler Summary for SON faculty consideration: BSN Results

All BSN means are at 3.00 or above, well exceeding the SON benchmark of 3.00.

Except for item #3, the means increased from the Year 1 experience to the Year 5 experience for

the BSN graduates. Based on results, three areas for consideration as areas of improvment are the

following items:

#4 use of the nursing process; # 7 demonstration of leadership skills and accountability; and

#8 participation in development and use of evidence based practice and research.

One mean score dropped significantly in the BSN for both 1-year and 5-year post graduation,

but remained above the 3.0 benchmark.

2015 2014 2013

Two mean scores dropped significantly in the BSN for 1 year post graduation but remained above the 3.0 benchmark. 2015 2014 2013

7 Demonstrate leadership skills and

accountability?

1 yr 3.5

(n=6)

4.0

(n=3)

4.17

8 Participate in the development and use of


1 yr 3.17

(n=6)

3.67

(n=3)

3.50

4 Use the nursing process to assess, plan,


1 yr 3.67

(n=6)

4.67

(n=3)

4.50

Use the nursing process to assess, plan,


5 yr 3.5

(n=2)

4.67

(n=3)

4.75

36

Compiler Summary for SON faculty consideration: MSN Results

All but one MSN means are at 3.00 or above, exceeding the SON benchmark of 3.00. The

number of respondents to the survey was low, so results should be evaluated with caution.

Items for consideration as areas of needed improvement are: #13, #15, and #17

One mean score increased significantly in the MSN for 1 year post graduation

2015 2014 2013

10 Demonstrate leadership that enhances patient



practice?

1 yr 4.4

(n=5)

3.37

(n=3)

5.00

One mean fell below 3.00 in the MSN, 1- and 5-year post graduation area; only one

participant responded to this question for 5-year post graduation, so results should be

evaluated with caution.

2015 2014 2013

15 Develop or participate in research studies that


nursing knowledge?

1 yr 2.75

(n=4)

3.5

(n=3)

4.33

Develop or participate in research studies that


nursing knowledge?

5 yr 2.0

(n=1)

2

(n=1)

n/a

One mean score dropped significantly for both 1- and 5 year post graduation, however, it did fall

at 3.0 benchmark or above.

2015 2014 2013

17 Involve themselves in the advancement of





1 yr 3.2

(n=5)

4.5

(n=3)

5.00

Involve themselves in the advancement of





5 yr 3.0

(n=1)

5.0

(n=1)

n/a

One mean score dropped significantly for 5-year post graduation, however, there was only one

respondent for this question




5 yr 4

(n=1)

5.0

(n=1)

n/a

37

Anecdotal notes reveal strong professional values, core knowledge, and skills in the

curriculum.

The employer summaries reveal a curriculum which advances the mission of the University

and the School of Nursing as well as the SON program goals.

Responses demonstrate that graduates accomplish the expected student outcomes of the

School of Nursing and provide a valuable professional in the workplace.

38

Appendix G

MILLIKIN UNIVERSITY

School of Nursing

Evaluation of Clinical Agency

2014-2015

N = 14

Name of Agency _________________________________________________________

Course Number ________________________________Faculty ____________

Date Evaluated _________________________________

Please rate each of the following items as follows:

5 = strongly agree 4 = agree 3 = neutral

2 = disagree 1 = strongly disagree

2011/

2012

Aver

age

2012/

2013

Aver

age

2013/

2014

Aver

age

2014/

2015

Aver

age

I. Demonstrate core knowledge, competencies, and values of

professional

nursing. The agency provides opportunities for students to:

1. provide care along a continuum including health promotion,

risk reduction, and disease prevention, illness/disease

management by using ethical decision making

4.70 4.62 4.80 4.78

2. develop skills in communication and collaboration 4.57 4.68 4.55 4.71

3. deliver and manage care to patients requiring a variety of services 4.68 4.56 4.88 4.92

4. develop technical skills including case management and

management of

resources

4.25 4.12 3.72 4.5

II. Integrate theoretical knowledge and investigation as the basis for

critical thinking and decision making in the planning and provision

of

evidence-based nursing practice for diverse populations. In

addition,

the agency provides opportunities for students to -

5. provide care for diverse ages, ethnicity, and health states 4.60 4.50 4.55 4.85

6. manage and critically analyze health related data 4.38 4.38 4.44 4.07

7. apply information and health care technology in providing care 4.42 4.62 4.38 4.64

8. integrate nursing research in providing care 4.00 4.00 3.63 3.92

III. Demonstrates a commitment to ongoing personal and professional

development through formal and informal experiences.

Furthermore,

the agency provides opportunities for students to -

9. develop management and delegation skills with peers and others 4.20 4.28* 4.13 4.14

10. observe nurses who serve as role models in providing evidence-

based

4.26 4.56 4.00 3.92

39

care

11. participate in an environment demonstrating professional values

(altruism, autonomy, human dignity, integrity, social justice)

4.57 4.75 4.83 4.5

Summary Comments

N=14

St. Mary’s Hospital-5 units, 6 courses (2 undergraduate & 4 graduate) & 3 faculty.

Maternal-Newborn (NU 400 & NU 531—S. Jesek-Hale

St. Mary’s Pre-Natal Clinic (NU 531—S. Jesek-Hale

6th floor CVU (NU 543---K Booker)

ICU (NU546—-K. Booker)

Behavioral Health Unit (NU 410—P. Laskowski

Decatur Memorial Hospital-2 unit 2 courses (1 undergraduate & 1 graduate) &3

faculty

Introductory Practicum Nursing (NU 202---G. Canny)

Introductory Practicum Nursing (NU 202---K. Pritts)

Nurse Educator Residency (NU 575---M.J. Linton)

St. John’s Children’s Hospital-1 unit 2 courses (1 undergraduate) & 1 faculty

Pediatric Unit (NU 400---V. Caldwell))

Hickory Point Christian Village-1 unit, 1 course (1 undergraduate) & 1 faculty

Introductory Practicum Nursing (NU 202---B. Connelley)

Community Health Improvement Center (soon to be)

Wabash Crossings Health Center—1 unit, 1 course (1 undergraduate) & 1 faculty

Community Health Nursing (NU 430---J. Carter)

Macon Resources-1 unit, 3 courses (1 undergraduate & 2 graduate) & 1 faculty

Mental Health-Mental Illness (NU 410, NU 525 & 534---S. Samuelson)

Written Comments

St. Mary’s

Maternal Newborn Unit—very good census, variety of patient experiences with

supportive staff.

Behavioral Health Unit—although management delegation of skills is not major focus

in NU 410, the students could have some opportunities in this area.

CVU-6th Floor-Very strong teamwork & willingness to work with students.

ICU—excellent opportunities to deliver and manage care

Decatur Memorial Hospital

4100-Good for fundamentals clinicals with solid experience with disease states that are

prevalent in US.

40

St. John’s Children’s Hospital-

Peds Unit-Staff are very welcoming to the students. The staff ae willing to take time to

explain and teach our students.

Community Health Improvement Center-

The clinical setting provides collaborative opportunities for students with MD’s, Mid-

level providers, nutritionists, counselors, insurance companies, and resources in the community.

Students have the opportunity to manage resources. Evidence based strategies designed to

improve care (e.g.-management of chronic pain, non-emergent use of services) are engaged by

students with an emphasis on the health system effects and strategies.

Macon Resources-NU 410-Thje range of client diversity provides a rich clinical experience.

Excellent interdisciplinary collaboration. NU 525 & 534—Dementia assessment project allowed

students to work through the process of institutional change. Excellent interdisciplinary

collaboration.

Hickory Point Christian Village---No written comments.

Sjh:9/18/15

41

Appendix H

School of Nursing

Graduate Educational Benchmarking (EBI) Exit Assessment

The EBI Exit Assessment is survey which measures graduating students’ satisfaction

with their nursing program. The survey is intended to be diagnostic and provides three

types of analysis: self-assessment, comparative assessment, and continuous assessment.

At Millikin University (MU), the survey is completed every two years by graduating

graduate nursing students. In regards to the comparative assessment, the study data

compared MU School of Nursing to a select 6 comparison groups who are chosen by the

Director of the School of Nursing. Additional comparison is made with 4 institutions of

MU’s Carnegie class as well as all 165 participating institutions.

The Survey consists of 23 Factors (statistical groupings of questions):

FACTOR 1 Quality of Faculty and Instruction

FACTOR 2 Quality and Availability of Curriculum

FACTOR 3 Administration and Academic Advising

FACTOR 4 Quality of Support Services

FACTOR 5 Sciences and Humanities

FACTOR 6 Leadership Skills

FACTOR 7 Quality Improvement and Safety

FACTOR 8 Research

FACTOR 9 Healthcare Technologies

FACTOR 10 Policy and Advocacy

FACTOR 11 Interprofessional Teamwork

FACTOR 12 Prevention and Population Care

FACTOR 13 Evidence-Based Knowledge

FACTOR 14 Advanced Health Assessment

FACTOR 15 Differentiation of Findings

FACTOR 16 Acute and Chronic Conditions

FACTOR 17 Prescription Drugs

FACTOR 18 Patient Care

FACTOR 19 Course Work

FACTOR 20 Clinical Laboratory Procedures

FACTOR 21 Clinical Epidemiological Principles

FACTOR 22 Overall Satisfaction

FACTOR 23 Overall Learning

In the 2015 survey, 15 surveys were attempted and 15 surveys were returned for an

overall response rate of 100%. Of the 15 surveys returned, all were Full Time Graduate

Students.

42

Self-Assessment: MU Major Indicators of Performance 2015

Satisfaction, Learning and Overall

The Overall factor is a combination of Satisfaction and Learning, and provides a measure

of the overall student experience. The dependent variable, Overall Program effectiveness,

acts as the proxy for the indicator and is composed of questions from the dependent

variables in Satisfaction and Learning. Ultimately, the student experience is a balance

between customer satisfaction and student learning, thus understanding the predictors of

Overall Program Effectiveness allows allocation of resources to the area(s) that will most

benefit students.

Scale for Factor Performance: Extremely poor: mean <1.5 to Superior: mean > 6.5.

The goal value, set by Skyfactor, is a value of 5.50 on a 7-point scale or a value of 75%

on the performance scale. Different performance indicators are given based on its

relationship with the goal. A indicates that the goal was met. An ! indicates the goal is

within reach. An X indicates the performance is “well below goal”.

SATISFACTION

Factor 22 Overall Satisfaction: Mean3.80, SD 1.84, Performance: 46.7%

Comparative Analysis

In Overall Satisfaction, we are statistically lower in performance than all of our external

benchmarking groups (Select 6, Carnegie Class, and All Institutions).

Contributing Factors

Predicting Factor Ranking Contribution Mean SD Performance of

Factor

F3: Administrative and

Academic Advising

1st Predictor 74% 4.67 1.20 61.2% X

Non Predicting Factors Ranking Contribution Mean SD Performance of

Factor

Quality and Availability of

Curriculum

Not a

Predictor

0%

5.28

1.13

71.3% !

Quality of Support Services Not a

Predictor

0%

5.13

1.36

68.8% X

Quality of Faculty and

Instruction

Not a

Predictor

0%

4.71

1.32

61.8% X

Factor 3 Administration and Academic Advising X (“Well below goal”)

Satisfaction with:

Q048 Availability of courses! Mean

5.31

SD

1.64

Performance

71.8%

Q041 Faculty academic advising! Mean

5.21

SD

Performance

70.2%

43

1.42

Q042 Non-faculty academic advising! Mean

5.20

SD

1.33

Performance

70.0%

Q047 Responsiveness of the program administration to student

concerns X

Mean

3.47

SD

1.75

Performance

41.2%

Factor 4 Quality of Support Services X (“Well below goal”)

Satisfaction with:

Q043 Classroom facilities! Mean

5.33

SD

1.30

Performance

72.2%

Q045 Access to medical computer technology! Mean

5.33

SD

1.45

Performance

72.2%

Q046 Training to use medical computer technology X Mean

4.73

SD

1.88

Performance

62.2%

Factor 1 Quality of Faculty and Instruction X (“Well below goal”)

Satisfaction with:

Q034 // Relate concepts to clinical situations X

Mean

5.13

SD

1.50

Performance

68.8%

Q036 // Engage students in discussions X

Mean

5.13

SD

1.71

Performance

68.8%

Q040 // Act as effective role models X

Mean

5.07

SD

1.71

Performance

67.8%

Q028 // Accessibility of faculty outside of class X Mean

5.07

SD

1.39

Performance

67.8%

Q039 // Interact with students one-on-one X

Mean

4.80

SD

1.64

Performance

63.3%

Q027 // Faculty oversight of clinical experiences X Mean

4.73

SD

1.73

Performance

62.2%

Q035 // Draw on experience of students X

Mean

4.71

SD

1.62

Performance

61.8%

Q026 // Faculty oversight of classroom experiences X

Mean

4.53

SD

1.63

Performance

58.8%

Q037 // Lecture effectively X

Mean

4.00

SD

1.67

Performance

50.0%

44

Q032 // Responsiveness of faculty to your concerns X

Mean

3.73

SD

1.95

Performance

45.5%

LEARNING

Factor 23 Overall Learning Mean 5.62, SD 1.10 Performance: 77%


In Overall Satisfaction, we are statistically equal in performance with all of our external

benchmarking groups (Select 6, Carnegie Class, and All Institutions).



Factor

NONE


Factor

NONE

OVERALL

Factor 24 Overall Program Effectiveness Mean 4.80 X, SD 1.31

Performance: 63.3%


In Overall Program Effectiveness, we are statistically lower in performance than all of our

external benchmarking groups (Select 6, Carnegie Class, and All Institutions).



Factor

NONE


Factor

NONE

EBI Millikin Factor Trend Data (^ , = above, equal to comparison groups. X “well below

goal”).

Factor 2009

Mean

2013

Mean

2015

Mean


6.42^ 6.37^ 4.71X

FACTOR 2 Quality and Availability of

Curriculum

6.24^ 6.31^ 5.28

FACTOR 3 Administration and Academic

Advising

6.26^ 5.71^ 4.67X

45

FACTOR 4 Quality of Support Services

6.06= 5.82= 5.13X


- - 5.89

FACTOR 6 Leadership Skills

- - 5.41


- - 4.93X

FACTOR 8 Research

- - 5.36

FACTOR 9 Healthcare Technologies

- - 5.30


- - 5.21

FACTOR 11 Interprofessional Teamwork

- - 5.42

FACTOR 12 Prevention and Population Care

- - 5.39

FACTOR 13 Evidence-Based Knowledge

- - 5.18X

FACTOR 14 Advanced Health Assessment

- - 5.36

FACTOR 15 Differentiation of Findings

- - 5.60

FACTOR 16 Acute and Chronic Conditions

- - 5.74

FACTOR 17 Prescription Drugs

- - 5.84


- - 5.32

FACTOR 19 Course Work

- - 4.52X


- - 4.05X


- - 4.73X


5.50^ 5.86^ 3.80X

FACTOR 23 Overall Learning

- 6.12= 5.62

EBI Performance Description:

Superior: >6.5

Excellent: 5.5-6.5

Good: 4.5-5.5

Fair: 3.5-4.5

Poor: 2.5-3.5

Very Poor: 1.5-2.5

Extremely Poor: <1.5

46

All Factors by Performance

X indicates “well below goal”

Highlighted yellow are issues relating to the identified indicators.

Highlighted green are issues with a mean of 4.00 and below.

Select 6 Comparison Group Carnegie Class Data (4 Institutions) All Participating Institutions

(165 Institutions)

Factor MU

Ranking

Within 7

Institutions

MU Ranking

within 4

Carnegie

Class

Institutions

MU Ranking

with All 165

Institutions


How satisfied are you with:

Q026 Faculty oversight of classroom experiences X

Q027 Faculty oversight of clinical experiences X

Q028 Accessibility of faculty outside of class X

Q032 Responsiveness of faculty to your concerns X

Satisfaction with the faculty's ability to:

Q034 Relate concepts to clinical situations X

Q036 Engage students in discussions X

Q040 Act as effective role models X

Q039 Interact with students one-on-one X

Q027 Faculty oversight of clinical experiences X

Q035 Draw on experience of students X

Q037 Lecture effectively X

7 4 153/159

FACTOR 2 Quality and Availability of Curriculum 7 3 149/159

How satisfied are you with the faculty’s ability to?

Q038 Effectively sequence course curriculum X

FACTOR 3 Administration and Academic Advising 7 4 148/149

Satisfaction with:

Q047 Responsiveness of the program administration to

student concerns X

FACTOR 4 Quality of Support Services 6 4 135/158

Satisfaction with:

Q046 Training to use medical computer technology X


To what degree did the MSN program prepare you to

integrate scientific findings from the following in order to

support continual improvement of nursing care across

diverse settings:

Q053 Quality improvement X

Q050 Biopsychosocial fields X

Q054 Organizational sciences X

Q052 Public health X

Q051 Genetics X

7 4 145/153

FACTOR 6 Leadership Skills 7 3 144/154

To what degree did the program enhance leadership skills

that:

47

Q060 Promote a systems perspective X


Regarding quality improvement and safety, to what degree

did the MSN program enhance your ability to:

Q061 Use appropriate methods to measure quality X

Q062 Use appropriate tools to measure quality X

Q063 Apply performance measures to quality improvement

X Q064 Apply standards related to quality improvement X

Q065 Apply quality principles within an organization X

7 4 143/154

FACTOR 8 Research 7 3 135/154

To what degree did the program enhance your ability to:

Q068 Work as a change agent X

FACTOR 9 Healthcare Technologies 7 3 127/154


Q075 Employ advocacy strategies to influence health and

health care X

Q074 Intervene at the system level through the policy

development process X

7 4 142/154

FACTOR 11 Inter-professional Teamwork 7 3 135/154

FACTOR 12 Prevention and Population Care 7 4 141/154

FACTOR 13 Evidence-Based Knowledge 7 4 150/154

To what degree did the MSN program enhance your ability

to use:

Q083 Knowledge of illness and disease management to

provide evidence-based care X

Q084Advanced knowledge of environmental and

population characteristics to

improve health care X

FACTOR 14 Advanced Health Assessment 6/6 NR 113/118

To what degree did your didactic and clinical courses

prepare you in the following content areas?

Q107 Performing physical exam X

FACTOR 15 Differentiation of Findings 4/6 NR 68/118

FACTOR 16 Acute and Chronic Conditions 4/6 NR 79/118

FACTOR 17 Prescription Drugs 2/6 NR 32/118




Q142 Evidence-based practice (application of research and

scientific evidence into

clinical practice) X

Q121 Ability to identify signs and symptoms of common

emotional illnesses X

Q122 Recognize the importance of the provision of comfort

care to the dying as an

integral component of care X

6/6 NR 107/118

FACTOR 19 Course Work 6/6 NR 99/118

48



Q128 Interdisciplinary team concepts X

Q129 Understanding complementary and alternative

modalities (the role in the

patient management plan) X

Q127 Principles of immunology X

Q130 Understanding the International Classification of

Diseases Procedural and

Diagnostic Coding and current procedural terminology X

Q126 Role of genetics in clinical care X

Q125 Principles of genetics X




Q132 Performing procedures X

Q133 Interpreting common screening and diagnostic tests

X Q131 Ordering procedures X

Q134 EKG interpretation X

Q136 X-ray interpretation X

Q135 Suturing X

6/6 NR 99/117




Q137 Recognizing populations at risk X

Q139 Understanding effective prevention and intervention

X Q138 Understanding the effectiveness of prevention and

intervention X

6/6 NR 117/117


Regarding your experience at the MSN program, to what

degree:

Q094 Did the nursing school provide a positive academic

experience? X

Q093 Would you to recommend this master's program to a

close friend? X

7/7 4/4 156/158

FACTOR 23 Overall Learning 6/7 3/4 136/158

Narrative Summary

Self and Comparative Assessment:

The indicators for the 2014-2015 EBI are “Satisfaction”, “Learning” and “Overall”. The

“Satisfaction” indicator is a collection of factors that measures satisfaction on areas such as

services, programming, or facilities. The dependent variable, within this indicator, is “Overall

Satisfaction”. It acts as a proxy for the indicator. The “Learning” indicator is a collection of

factors that measure student learning outcomes. The dependent variable, within this indicator, is

“Overall Learning”. It acts as a proxy for the indicator. The “Overall” factor is a combination of

49

“Satisfaction” and “Learning”, and provides a measure of the overall student experience. The

dependent variable, “Overall Program Effectiveness”, acts as the proxy for the indicator and is

composed of questions from the dependent variables in “Satisfaction” and “Learning”.

Ultimately, the student experience is a balance between customer satisfaction and student

learning, thus understanding the predictors of “Overall Program Effectiveness” allows allocation

of resources to the area(s) that will most benefit students. The Scale for factor performance in this

year’s assessment ranges as follows: Extremely poor: mean <1.5 to Superior: mean > 6.5. The

goal value, set by Skyfactor, is a value of 5.50 on a 7-point scale or a value of 75% on the

performance scale. Different performance indicators are given based on the relationship with the

goal value.

“Overall Satisfaction” demonstrated a sharp downward trend from 81.1%, mean of 5.86 (above

comparison groups) in 2013 to 46.7%, mean of 3.80 in 2015. From 2009 to 2013, this indicator

demonstrated a small but steady upward trend from 75%, mean of 5.50 (above comparison

groups) in 2009 to 81.1%, mean of 5.86 (above comparison groups in 2013. The predicting factor

“Administrative and Academic Advising” demonstrated a similar downward trend from 78.5%,

mean of 5.71 (above comparison groups) in 2013 to 61.1%, mean of 4.67 in 2015. From 2009 to

2013, this factor demonstrated a small but steady downward trend from 87.6%, mean of 6.26


“Overall Learning” demonstrated a downward trend from 85.4%, mean of 6.12 (equal to

comparison groups) in 2013 to 77%, mean of 5.62 in 2015. There are no predicting factors

identified.

“Overall Program Effectiveness” demonstrated a sharp downward trend from 82%, mean of 5.92


From 2009 to 2013, there was a steady upward trend from 72.9%, mean of 5.38 (equal to

comparison groups) in 2009 to 82%, mean of 5.92 (above comparison groups) in 2013. There are

no predicting factors identified.

The predicting and non-predicting factors of for “Overall Satisfaction” that were identified as

“well below goal” (Administrative and Academic Advising, Quality of Support Services, Quality

of Faculty and Instruction) were analyzed in terms of the specific questions for those factor, in an

effort to determine specific items where the program is clearly “well below goal” as per

SkyFactor. Under the Administrative and Academic Advising factor, item Question 047

“Responsiveness of the program administration to student concerns”, demonstrated a mean of

3.47 with a performance percentage of 41.2% and was identified by SkyFactor as “well below

goal”. Under the Quality of Support Services factor, item Question 046 “Training to use medical

computer technology” demonstrated a mean of 4.73 with a performance percentage of 62.2% and

was identified by SkyFactor as “well below goal”.

Finally, Under the factor Quality of Faculty and Instruction, several items were identified as “well

below goal”. Two items with a mean of 4.00 or below were Question 037 “Lecture effectively”

(mean 4.0, performance percentage 50.0%) and Question 032 “Responsiveness of faculty to your

concerns” (mean 3.73, performance percentage of 45.5%). These three factors (Administrative

and Academic Advising, Quality of Support Services, Quality of Faculty and Instruction) have all

demonstrated downward trends from 2009-2015 and as stated above, they comprise the predictive

and non-predictive factors of “Overall Satisfaction”.

In further assessment of the trend data, factors for which we do not have previous year

comparison, but that SkyFactor has identified as “well below goal” include FACTOR 7 Quality

50

Improvement and Safety, FACTOR 13 Evidence-Based Knowledge, FACTOR 19 Course

Work, FACTOR 20 Clinical Laboratory Procedures, and FACTOR 21 Clinical

Epidemiological Principles.

In analysis of specific issues under those factors, it is only under FACTOR 20 Clinical

Laboratory Procedures that we demonstrate responses of 4.0 or below:

“To what degree did your didactic and clinical courses prepare you in the following content

areas?”

Q136 X-ray interpretation X

Q135 Suturing X

Comparative Assessment and Summary:

From the 2014-15 EBI data, for the indicator areas of Overall Satisfaction, Overall Learning and

Overall Program Effectiveness, we are statistically lower in performance than all of our external

benchmarking groups (Select 6, Carnegie Group, and All Other Institutions). These areas all

demonstrated serious downward trends from previous years in which we were above or equal to

our comparative groups.

In the overall analysis from these 2014-15 data, “responsive” of both administration and faculty

to student needs and concerns, “feedback” from faculty and “effective” teaching, are identified as

serious problem areas for our attention, consideration, and improvement.

Faculty Action at GSC meeting November, 2015:

It is recommended that the committee engage in discussion regarding issues of responsiveness

and feedback to graduate students. Further, it is recommended that the committee discuss best

practices in graduate level teaching methods to identify areas where we can improve the quality

of and demonstrate consistency across our graduate courses.

Respectfully submitted,

Marcena L. Gabrielson

October 27, 2015

Documents

Millikin University Student Learning in the Nursing Major ... · complete the program in eighteen months. In the spring of 2015, the CNL track was retired after noting CNL graduate’s