IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/igg/jsita0/v6y2015i2p40-49.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comparison of Baccalaureate Nursing Students' Experience of Video-Assisted Debriefing versus Oral Debriefing following High-Fidelity Human Simulation

Author

Listed:
  • Colleen Royle

    (Minnesota State University, Mankato, Mankato, MN, USA)

  • Kathleen Hargiss

    (Independent Researcher, Bradenton, FL, USA)

Abstract

High-Fidelity Human Simulation (HFHS) is used in many disciplines, including nursing, as an innovative teaching pedagogy that offers an active learning process. The simulation process involves a number of stages with the most critical stage identified as debriefing. The main focus of debriefing is to stimulate reflection and encourage communication while exploring the emotions of the participants. These emotions assist in framing the experience that aids in enhancement of learning for the student. This quantitative, quasi-experimental study explored the comparison of two debriefing processes, video-assisted and oral, by assessing the students' opinion of the debriefing experience and the students' rating of the importance of the debriefing experience. Participants were first semester baccalaureate nursing students. The overall finding and the four subscales for both dependent variables showed no statistical significance. This article provides further evidence to guide educators to a preferred method of debriefing students after a simulated experience.

Suggested Citation

  • Colleen Royle & Kathleen Hargiss, 2015. "Comparison of Baccalaureate Nursing Students' Experience of Video-Assisted Debriefing versus Oral Debriefing following High-Fidelity Human Simulation," International Journal of Strategic Information Technology and Applications (IJSITA), IGI Global, vol. 6(2), pages 40-49, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:igg:jsita0:v:6:y:2015:i:2:p:40-49
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://services.igi-global.com/resolvedoi/resolve.aspx?doi=10.4018/IJSITA.2015040103
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:igg:jsita0:v:6:y:2015:i:2:p:40-49. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Journal Editor (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.igi-global.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.