- Page 1 and 2:
STUDENT EVALUATION OF CLINICAL EDUC
- Page 3 and 4:
significant for any of the four sca
- Page 5 and 6:
Table of Contents List of Tables vi
- Page 7 and 8:
Tables List of Tables 1. Identifica
- Page 9 and 10:
Student Evaluation of Clinical Educ
- Page 11 and 12:
development of different skills and
- Page 13 and 14:
Examples of applied learning enviro
- Page 15 and 16:
hear about a topic, but must contac
- Page 17 and 18:
with others and participation in a
- Page 19 and 20:
ideal applied learning environment
- Page 21 and 22:
contingencies present in the learni
- Page 23 and 24:
that many aspects of the clinical e
- Page 25 and 26:
The second instrument-based clinica
- Page 27 and 28:
Empirical Investigations of the Tra
- Page 29 and 30:
etween 18 and 31% of variance in sc
- Page 31 and 32:
.32 for the student actual form and
- Page 33 and 34:
significantly differentiated betwee
- Page 35 and 36:
were lower than preferred scores fo
- Page 37 and 38:
Table 1. Identification and Frequen
- Page 39 and 40:
Although the above-mentioned learni
- Page 41 and 42:
The original two-page SECEE instrum
- Page 43 and 44:
espondents. Analysis of item respon
- Page 45 and 46:
sites having few respondents. If in
- Page 47 and 48:
Chapter 3 Methods The following sec
- Page 49 and 50:
added, based on the applied cogniti
- Page 51 and 52:
Limiting the number of items while
- Page 53 and 54:
clinical sites, for the purposes of
- Page 55 and 56:
Descriptive Analysis Data from the
- Page 57 and 58:
Study participants responded “can
- Page 59 and 60:
Table 2 SECEE Inventory Forced-choi
- Page 61 and 62:
Item 22. Students helped each other
- Page 63 and 64:
Table 3 Scale Means and Standard De
- Page 65 and 66:
sites more favorably (M = 11.81) th
- Page 67 and 68:
Table 6 Reliability Coefficients fo
- Page 69 and 70:
assists in reducing the confounding
- Page 71 and 72:
Table 8 ANOVA Results, Student Leve
- Page 73 and 74:
Table 10 Scale Score Means and Stan
- Page 75 and 76:
Sophomore SMA students rated the Le
- Page 77 and 78:
Support at site group 5 more positi
- Page 79 and 80:
Table 12 Scale Score Means and Stan
- Page 81 and 82:
SMA 14 n = 7 Site Group Comm. / 17
- Page 83 and 84: Analysis of Narrative Inventory Dat
- Page 85 and 86: Analysis of the narrative student c
- Page 87 and 88: Student comments reflecting scaled
- Page 89 and 90: Table 17 Frequencies of Student Res
- Page 91 and 92: Table 18 Frequencies of Student Res
- Page 93 and 94: Chapter 5 Discussion and Conclusion
- Page 95 and 96: their own clients as a hindrance to
- Page 97 and 98: the Department Atmosphere scale, an
- Page 99 and 100: end of semester perception of the l
- Page 101 and 102: minimal grouping of sites was requi
- Page 103 and 104: the instrument, the investigator fe
- Page 105 and 106: also may have averted a higher inci
- Page 107 and 108: number of students reporting that n
- Page 109 and 110: 6. Add a fifth response item to the
- Page 111 and 112: with individual patients, and are a
- Page 113 and 114: separately at each item pertaining
- Page 115 and 116: Conclusion The applied learning asp
- Page 117 and 118: References American Association of
- Page 119 and 120: Fraser, B. J. & O’Brien, P. O. (1
- Page 121 and 122: Reilly, D. E. & Oerman, M. H. (1992
- Page 123 and 124: Appendix A Original SECEE Instrumen
- Page 125 and 126: Key: 1 = very seldom 2 = sometimes
- Page 127 and 128: Inventory Scale Item Number Communi
- Page 129 and 130: Appendix C Revised SECEE Instrument
- Page 131 and 132: Key: 1 = Strongly Agree 2 = Agree 3
- Page 133: Key: 1 = Strongly Agree 2 = Agree 3
- Page 137 and 138: Appendix E 129
- Page 139 and 140: Appendix F 131
- Page 141 and 142: KARI SAND-JECKLIN 2003 White Oak Dr
- Page 143 and 144: Staff Nurse: employed part-time at