Neonatal intensive care nursing curriculum challenges based on context, input, process, and product evaluation model: A qualitative study

Background: Weakness of curriculum development in nursing education results in lack of professional skills in graduates. This study was done on master's students in nursing to evaluate challenges of neonatal intensive care nursing curriculum based on context, input, process, and product (CIPP) evaluation model. Materials and Methods: This study was conducted with qualitative approach, which was completed according to the CIPP evaluation model. The study was conducted from May 2014 to April 2015. The research community included neonatal intensive care nursing master's students, the graduates, faculty members, neonatologists, nurses working in neonatal intensive care unit (NICU), and mothers of infants who were hospitalized in such wards. Purposeful sampling was applied. Results: The data analysis showed that there were two main categories: “inappropriate infrastructure” and “unknown duties,” which influenced the context formation of NICU master's curriculum. The input was formed by five categories, including “biomedical approach,” “incomprehensive curriculum,” “lack of professional NICU nursing mentors,” “inappropriate admission process of NICU students,” and “lack of NICU skill labs.” Three categories were extracted in the process, including “more emphasize on theoretical education,” “the overlap of credits with each other and the inconsistency among the mentors,” and “ineffective assessment.” Finally, five categories were extracted in the product, including “preferring routine work instead of professional job,” “tendency to leave the job,” “clinical incompetency of graduates,” “the conflict between graduates and nursing staff expectations,” and “dissatisfaction of graduates.” Conclusions: Some changes are needed in NICU master's curriculum by considering the nursing experts' comments and evaluating the consequences of such program by them.

Abstract licence: CC BY-NC-SA

A person counts once a day per paper. We keep no cookie and no address: a reader is a hash that changes every day. Any month under five reads shows no number.