IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/jocnur/v25y2016i17-18p2683-2693.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Is LabTutor a helpful component of the blended learning approach to biosciences?

Author

Listed:
  • Amelia Swift
  • Nikolaos Efstathiou
  • Paula Lameu

Abstract

Aims and Objectives To evaluate the use of LabTutor (a physiological data capture and e‐learning package) in bioscience education for student nurses. Background Knowledge of biosciences is important for nurses the world over, who have to monitor and assess their patient's clinical condition, and interpret that information to determine the most appropriate course of action. Nursing students have long been known to find acquiring useable bioscience knowledge challenging. Blended learning strategies are common in bioscience teaching to address the difficulties students have. Student nurses have a preference for hands‐on learning, small group sessions and are helped by close juxtaposition of theory and practice. Design An evaluation of a new teaching method using in‐classroom voluntary questionnaire. Methods A structured survey instrument including statements and visual analogue response format and open questions was given to students who participated in Labtutor sessions. The students provided feedback in about the equipment, the learning and the session itself. Results First year (n = 93) and third year (n = 36) students completed the evaluation forms. The majority of students were confident about the equipment and using it to learn although a few felt anxious about computer‐based learning. They all found the equipment helpful as part of their bioscience education and they all enjoyed the sessions. Conclusion This equipment provides a helpful way to encourage guided independent learning through practice and discovery and because each session is case study based and the relationship of the data to the patient is made clear. Our students helped to evaluate our initial use of LabTutor and found the sessions enjoyable and helpful. LabTutor provides an effective learning tool as part of a blended learning strategy for biosciences teaching. Relevance to clinical practice Improving bioscience knowledge will lead to a greater understanding of pathophysiology, treatments and interventions and monitoring.

Suggested Citation

  • Amelia Swift & Nikolaos Efstathiou & Paula Lameu, 2016. "Is LabTutor a helpful component of the blended learning approach to biosciences?," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 25(17-18), pages 2683-2693, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:jocnur:v:25:y:2016:i:17-18:p:2683-2693
    DOI: 10.1111/jocn.13175
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/jocn.13175
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/jocn.13175?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
    ---><---

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Jane Koch & Lucie M. Ramjan & Bronwyn Everett & Anna Maceri & Kate Bell & Yenna Salamonson, 2020. "“Sage on the stage or guide on the side”—Undergraduate nursing students’ experiences and expectations of bioscience tutors in a blended learning curriculum: A qualitative study," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(5-6), pages 863-871, March.
    2. 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.

    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:25:y:2016:i:17-18:p:2683-2693. 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: 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.