- 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: Tables List of Tables 1. Identifica
- 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 and 134:
Key: 1 = Strongly Agree 2 = Agree 3
- Page 135 and 136:
Table of Specifications for Student
- 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