IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/nuhsci/v19y2017i1p22-28.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Final year Australian nursing students’ experiences with bioscience: A cross‐sectional survey

Author

Listed:
  • Christopher J. Gordon
  • Peter B. Hudson
  • Mark B. Plenderleith
  • Murray Fisher
  • Judy A. Craft

Abstract

Nursing students have reported bioscience to be challenging and difficult to understand. This might have a negative impact upon their ability to understand patients’ clinical conditions and nursing practice. We sought information about students’ experiences with bioscience. A total of 126 final year nursing students completed a questionnaire. The findings showed that the majority of participants considered bioscience subjects to require more work compared to nursing subjects (65.9%), and that they would like a better understanding of bioscience (73.8%), but understood that bioscience forms the foundation of nursing practice (76.2%). Younger participants without secondary school science rated bioscience harder than nursing subjects and spent more time studying bioscience compared to older participants. Participants without any secondary school science lacked an ability to apply bioscience concepts to patient conditions. These results showed that nursing students, especially those without secondary school science, would benefit from improved bioscience integration with nursing practice. Nursing and bioscience educators should consider greater alignment of bioscience with nursing practice subjects, especially earlier in the curriculum.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:nuhsci:v:19:y:2017:i:1:p:22-28
    DOI: 10.1111/nhs.12310
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/nhs.12310
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/nhs.12310?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. 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.
    2. Martin Christensen & Judy A Craft & Lisa Wirihana & Christopher J Gordon, 2015. "Pathophysiology team teaching: Bioscientist contribution to knowledge integration in a nursing subject," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 24(23-24), pages 3739-3741, December.
    3. Raph Morgan, 2006. "Using clinical skills laboratories to promote theory–practice integration during first practice placement: an Irish perspective," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 15(2), pages 155-161, February.
    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. 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. 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.
    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.
    3. Sheila M. Mortimer‐Jones & Peter G. Wall & Susan Russell, 2018. "Quantitative analysis of anxiety levels of nursing students studying bioscience in Australia," Nursing & Health Sciences, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 20(4), pages 452-457, December.
    4. 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.
    5. 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.

    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:nuhsci:v:19:y:2017:i:1:p:22-28. 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)1442-2018 .

    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.