Nurse educator competence in four European countries—A comparative cross‐sectional study

Aim: The aim of this article is to describe and compare the nurse educator competences in four European countries using three different evaluators: nurse educators (n = 329), heads of a nursing subject (n = 60) and student nurses (n = 1058). Design: The study was conducted as a comparative cross‐sec...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Nursing Open 2023-12, Vol.10 (12), p.7848-7859
Hauptverfasser: Elonen, Imane, Kajander-Unkuri, Satu, Cassar, Maria, Wennberg-Capellades, Laia, Kean, Susanne, Sollár, Tomáš, Saaranen, Terhi, Pasanen, Miko, Salminen, Leena
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Aim: The aim of this article is to describe and compare the nurse educator competences in four European countries using three different evaluators: nurse educators (n = 329), heads of a nursing subject (n = 60) and student nurses (n = 1058). Design: The study was conducted as a comparative cross‐sectional survey in Finland, Malta, Slovakia and Spain between May 2021 and February 2022. Methods: The data were collected with an online survey. The instrument used was a 20‐item Tool for Evaluation of Requirements of Nurse Teachers, utilizing a 5‐point Likert‐type scale. The data were analysed statistically and reported according to STROBE guidelines. Results: Nurse educators' competence evaluated positively in all the groups of evaluators, with a mean of >3.5. The self‐evaluation of nurse educators' competence was higher than the other evaluators' evaluations. Having a degree in nursing, having completed some pedagogical studies and longer work experience as a nurse educator had a positive association with higher self‐evaluated competence among nurse educators. Conclusions: Nurse educator competence is at a good level in the selected European countries, but further studies are required to find the reasons behind the differences in evaluations. Public Contribution: Each participating educational institution named a contact person who distributed the surveys to the participants and returned the study's metadata to the researchers.
ISSN:2054-1058
2054-1058
DOI:10.1002/nop2.2033