IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/jocnur/v24y2015i19-20p2797-2806.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Biosciences in nurse education: is the curriculum fit for practice? Lecturers' views and recommendations from across the UK

Author

Listed:
  • Vanessa Taylor
  • Sarah Ashelford
  • Patricia Fell
  • Penelope J Goacher

Abstract

Aims and objectives This study aims to review the biosciences component of preregistration nursing programmes in higher education institutions across the UK through the experiences and perceptions of lecturers involved in nursing education. Background Studies suggest that some qualified nurses lack confidence in explaining the bio‐scientific rationale for their clinical practice. Biosciences can be difficult to understand and integrate into clinical decision‐making and require protected time within preregistration nurse education. In the absence of explicit national guidelines, it is unclear as to the depth and extent biosciences are taught across different institutions and the level achieved at the point of registration. Design A survey approach was adopted to generate quantitative and qualitative feedback. Methods Data were collected using a semi‐structured questionnaire seeking the experiences and views of lecturers involved in teaching biosciences to nursing students across the UK. Data received from 10 institutions were analysed using descriptive statistics and thematic analysis. Results Lecturers reported that the hours of taught biosciences ranged from 20–113 hours, principally within the first year. This represents between 0·4–2·4% of time within a preregistration nursing programme (4600 hours). Large group lectures predominate, supplemented by smaller group or practical work, and online materials. The biosciences are assessed specifically in half the institutions surveyed and as part of integrated assessments in the rest. In relation to student feedback, all respondents stated that students consistently requested more time and greater priority for biosciences in their programme. Conclusions This survey suggests that the number of hours spent teaching biosciences is minimal and varies widely between higher education institutions. All respondents expressed concern about the challenges of teaching difficult bio‐scientific concepts to large groups in such a limited time and called for greater clarity in national guidelines to ensure that all nurses are adequately educated and assessed in bioscience subjects. Relevance to clinical practice Failure to understand the biosciences underpinning care has implications for safe and competent nursing.

Suggested Citation

  • Vanessa Taylor & Sarah Ashelford & Patricia Fell & Penelope J Goacher, 2015. "Biosciences in nurse education: is the curriculum fit for practice? Lecturers' views and recommendations from across the UK," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 24(19-20), pages 2797-2806, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:jocnur:v:24:y:2015:i:19-20:p:2797-2806
    DOI: 10.1111/jocn.12880
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/jocn.12880
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/jocn.12880?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ben D. MacArthur & Richard O. C. Oreffo, 2005. "Bridging the gap," Nature, Nature, vol. 433(7021), pages 19-19, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Patricia Lynne Fell & Kerry Dobbins & Philip Dee, 2016. "Bioscience learning in clinical placement: the experiences of pre‐registration nursing students," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 25(17-18), pages 2694-2705, September.
    2. Christopher J. Gordon & Peter B. Hudson & Mark B. Plenderleith & Murray Fisher & Judy A. Craft, 2017. "Final year Australian nursing students’ experiences with bioscience: A cross‐sectional survey," Nursing & Health Sciences, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 19(1), pages 22-28, March.
    3. Tonks N. Fawcett & Anne Waugh & Graeme D. Smith, 2016. "Editorial: The primacy of the biosciences: a forgotten priority in nurse education?," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 25(17-18), pages 2680-2682, September.
    4. Hanne Maria Bingen & Simen A. Steindal & Rune Johan Krumsvik & Bodil Tveit, 2020. "Studying physiology within a flipped classroom: The importance of on‐campus activities for nursing students’ experiences of mastery," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(15-16), pages 2907-2917, August.
    5. Kari Toverud Jensen & Unni Knutstad & Tonks N. Fawcett, 2018. "The challenge of the biosciences in nurse education: A literature review," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(9-10), pages 1793-1802, May.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Booth, Heather, 2006. "Demographic forecasting: 1980 to 2005 in review," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 22(3), pages 547-581.
    2. Ercan Tomakin, 2014. "Teaching English Tenses (grammar) in the Turkish Texts; A Case of Simple Present Tense: Is?l Maketi Iter," International Journal of Learning and Development, Macrothink Institute, vol. 4(1), pages 115-131, March.
    3. Peter Viggo Jakobsen, 2009. "Small States, Big Influence: The Overlooked Nordic Influence on the Civilian ESDP," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 47(1), pages 81-102, January.
    4. Radha Jagannathan & Michael J. Camasso & Bagavan Das & Jale Tosun & Sadagopan Iyengar, 2017. "Family, society and the individual: determinants of entrepreneurial attitudes among youth in Chennai, South India," Journal of Global Entrepreneurship Research, Springer;UNESCO Chair in Entrepreneurship, vol. 7(1), pages 1-22, December.
    5. Tautenhahn, Susanne & Heilmeier, Hermann & Jung, Martin & Kahl, Anja & Kattge, Jens & Moffat, Antje & Wirth, Christian, 2012. "Beyond distance-invariant survival in inverse recruitment modeling: A case study in Siberian Pinus sylvestris forests," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 233(C), pages 90-103.
    6. Vincenzo Galasso, 2020. "Market Reactions to Quest for Decentralization and Independence: Evidence from Catalonia," CESifo Working Paper Series 8254, CESifo.
    7. Thijs Fassaert & Matty A.S. De Wit & Wilco C. Tuinebreijer & Jeroen W. Knipscheer & Arnoud P. Verhoeff & Aartjan T.F. Beekman & Jack Dekker, 2011. "Acculturation and Psychological Distress Among Non-Western Muslim Migrants - a Population-Based Survey," International Journal of Social Psychiatry, , vol. 57(2), pages 132-143, March.
    8. Jakub Bijak & Jason D. Hilton & Eric Silverman & Viet Dung Cao, 2013. "Reforging the Wedding Ring," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 29(27), pages 729-766.
    9. Philippe De Donder & Michel Le Breton & Eugenio Peluso, 2012. "Majority Voting in Multidimensional Policy Spaces: Kramer–Shepsle versus Stackelberg," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 14(6), pages 879-909, December.
    10. Grace Kite, 2014. "Linked in? Software and Information Technology Services in India’s Economic Development," Journal of South Asian Development, , vol. 9(2), pages 99-119, August.
    11. Spyros Arvanitis & Ursina Kubli & Martin Woerter, 2006. "University-Industry Knowledge Interaction in Switzerland: What University Scientists Think about Co-operation with Private Enterprises," KOF Working papers 06-132, KOF Swiss Economic Institute, ETH Zurich.
    12. Falco, Paolo & Zaccagni, Sarah, 2020. "Promoting social distancing in a pandemic: Beyond the good intentions," OSF Preprints a2nys, Center for Open Science.
    13. León, Esperanza & Steele, Miriam & Palacios, Jesús & Román, Maite & Moreno, Carmen, 2018. "Parenting adoptive children: Reflective functioning and parent-child interactions. A comparative, relational and predictive study," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 352-360.
    14. Danilo Bertoni & Daniele Cavicchioli & Franco Donzelli & Giovanni Ferrazzi & Dario G. Frisio & Roberto Pretolani & Elena Claire Ricci & Vera Ventura, 2018. "Recent Contributions of Agricultural Economics Research in the Field of Sustainable Development," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 8(12), pages 1-20, December.
    15. Chantal Kroll & Roger Keller & Urte Scholz & Sonja Perren, 2011. "Evaluating the decisional balance construct of the Transtheoretical Model: are two dimensions of pros and cons really enough?," International Journal of Public Health, Springer;Swiss School of Public Health (SSPH+), vol. 56(1), pages 97-105, February.
    16. Stylos, Nikolaos & Vassiliadis, Chris A. & Bellou, Victoria & Andronikidis, Andreas, 2016. "Destination images, holistic images and personal normative beliefs: Predictors of intention to revisit a destination," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 40-60.
    17. Chatelain, Jean-Bernard & Ralf, Kirsten, 2018. "Publish and Perish: Creative Destruction and Macroeconomic Theory," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 46(2), pages 65-101.
    18. Nikolaos Satsios & Spyros Hadjidakis, 2018. "Applying the Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB) in Saving Behaviour of Pomak Households," International Journal of Financial Research, International Journal of Financial Research, Sciedu Press, vol. 9(2), pages 122-133, April.
    19. Law, Tony & Zhang, Weitao & Zhao, Jingyang & Arhonditsis, George B., 2009. "Structural changes in lake functioning induced from nutrient loading and climate variability," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 220(7), pages 979-997.
    20. Kotler, Philip & Manrai, Lalita A. & Lascu, Dana-Nicoleta & Manrai, Ajay K., 2019. "Influence of country and company characteristics on international business decisions: A review, conceptual model, and propositions," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 28(3), pages 482-498.

    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:wly:jocnur:v:24:y:2015:i:19-20:p:2797-2806. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1365-2702 .

    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.