1

The University of Texas at Tyler College of Nursing

Nurs 5327 Nursing Education Curriculum Development
TEMPLATE: Critique of Course Description and Learning Outcomes:
Student: Diana Barnett
Instructions:
1. Download and analyze the assigned nursing course description.
2. Complete this template without changing it except to enter with your conclusions in
practical wording.
3. Use at least ONE NURS 5327 course reference to support of your information.
Paraphrase text references directly from text chapters, citing chapter authors, and go
beyond lecture citations.
4. Save the entire template with your name in the title and submit in the Assignment link.
I. Nursing course specifications: (10%) (4-6 lines total)
See https://www.tccns.org/ Texas common Course Numbering System
Standard course numbering and title:
According to the Texas Common Course Numbering System, NURS 3310 is a 3 credit
course for junior level students.
Course Credit: Appropriateness of format for credit distribution: The course incudes one
credit for theory and two credits for laboratory application. Perhaps the credits should be
divided differently: one for theory, one for lab/simulation and one for clinical.
Prerequisites (How clearly specified): Prerequisites were very clearly shared, including
program admission and three specific prerequisite courses. The student may also be
enrolled in the three prerequisite courses, while at the same time taking NURS 3310 and
3306. The document makes clear that 3310 and 3306 are companion courses to be taken
simultaneously or dropped together.
II. Course Description: (20%) (4-6 lines EACH area separately)
My critique on how well the course meets these criteria for effective nursing program
elements to give reassurance to key stakeholders that the emphasis is on these
components.
1. Nursing emphasis (Level of nursing judgment. Stage and acuity of care from preventive to
critical. Care settings ): This is a beginning course on assessment, with emphasis on the students
ability to perform a comprehensive assessment on a patient of any age, sharing and evaluating
their physical, mental and family/social characteristics and abilities. Assessments will be done in
both the skills lab and clinical settings at the nursing home. Acuity of patient care may vary,
depending on the unique health status of the nursing home resident.

2. Target population (Age or developmental stage. Health care status). Any aged patient is
appropriate, from infant to elderly, according to the phrase across the lifespan in the course
description, yet the learning outcomes refer to assessment of adult patients and ultimately the
clinical environment for students is at a nursing home.

3. Health challenges (Physical, Developmental, Sociocultural, Spiritual needs) : The course

description allows for wide variance in patients health and social development, so that
students may interact with all types of individuals, including those with varying
disabilities. Later in the Learning portfolio section and Mastery Skills, the clinical

Spring 2016 Adapted and Used with permission from J. McVey, PhD, RN

2
environment is referred to as a Nursing Home, which could mean the majority of
patients are advanced in age.
4. Learning experiences: (Lecture with testing. Other assignments): Planned learning
experiences for this course have great variety: reading, writing, written tests, lab with a
Sim Man, hands-on assessment with clinical subjects, use of programs through
Blackboard computer-based learning to become proficient with vital signs, lung and heart
sounds, cultural awareness, nursing logic and communication. There is interaction
between the student and patient with both a verbal history and hands-on physical.
Technology is incorporated into the assessment and documentation of findings.
Collaboration with other nurses on the findings is important, and the next steps will be
focused on healing, preserving health, or preventing future illness. The student has the
opportunity to teach about health. All aspects of the nursing process are touched on.
Durham and Baker (2015) spoke of the learning process being a scaffolding or
framework that builds upon student experiences. New students need opportunities in safe
lab settings to try their nursing skills and build their confidence before moving to
simulation and ultimately the clinical setting with actual patients. As they move from
novice to expert, their skills and competence grows.
Reference in APA format:
Durham, C. F., & Baker, D. E. (2015). Learning laboratories as a foundation for nursing
excellence. In M. H. Oermann, Teaching in nursing and role of the educator (pp.
120). New York, NY: Springer Publishing Company, LLC.
III. Learning Outcomes: (30%) (4-6 lines each *area) My critique how well the
learning outcomes assure stakeholders that the emphasis is on these components.
1. Nursing emphasis (Level of nursing judgment. Stage and acuity of care from preventive to
critical. Care settings ): Emphasis is very good on specific nursing skills and roles in this course.
Not only is there text reading and lab practice with other students that includes simulation
technology, but attention to health versus illness, patient teaching skills, communication with
other nurses, awareness of cultural differences, documentation, and participation in grand rounds
with other professionals. This is a well-rounded nursing care experience.

2. Target population (Age or developmental stage. Health care status.): The target population
began being described as across the life span, but then limited assessment to adult patients, and
later narrowed to nursing home residents. I would have liked to see other aged patient
opportunities offered for a more well-rounded assessment experience.

3. Health challenges (Physical, Developmental, Sociocultural, Spiritual needs) : Health

challenges will surely be found as nursing home patients may be healthy or face a variety
of illnesses or disabilities. Developmentally challenged individuals may not be advanced
in age, yet are cared for in a nursing home setting. Many cultures and faiths may be
represented in this population.
4. Learning Domains (Cognitive, Affective, Psychomotor): Students in this course will
have experiences that encourage deep thought, emotional patient involvement and utilize

Spring 2016 Adapted and Used with permission from J. McVey, PhD, RN

3
psychomotor skills to question, think and assess the patients physically. Hagler and
Morris (2015) described the three domains of learning: cognitive, affective and
psychomotor. Cognitive learning concerns thinking and subsequent behavior as an
outcome of thought. The affective domain includes emotion, values and beliefs that
influence both our perspective/attitude as well as our behavior. The psychomotor domain
is specific to skilled actions utilized in the profession.
Reference in APA format:
Hagler, D., & Morris, B. (2015). Teaching methods. . In M. H. Oermann, Teaching in
nursing and role of the educator (pp. 35-36). New York, NY: Springer Publishing
Company, LLC.
IV. Teaching/ Learning Strategies and Assignments (20%) (5-6 lines each area)
Congruency of strategies and assignments with course description: The course
description and learning strategies work well together to teach assessment basics for a
complete health appraisal, while being mindful of individual patient backgrounds and
needs. Students move from book learning to lab/simulation, then to caring for actual
patients, which gives them an increasing sense of competence. Written testing is a
secondary check on their cognitive learning of course content.
As Oermann (2015) espoused, tests are one of the most common learning assessment
choices, but there are many other methods for student assessment, including formal
writing, group activities, case studies, journaling, media technology, discussions,
simulation and serious self-evaluation. This course uses many types of learning activities
to enrich the students experience.
Congruency of strategies and assignments with course objectives: Learning outcomes
will be achieved with this variety in the course to learn, practice and validate these
important nursing abilities. The only learning outcome not specifically addressed was
about regulatory requirements in relation to physical assessment.
Reference in APA format:
Oermann, M. (2015). Assessment methods. In M. H. Oermann, Teaching in nursing and
role of the educator (pp. 195). New York, NY: Springer Publishing Company, LLC.
V. Grading Procedures: (20%) (2-4 lines each area)
Critique of Grading Criteria (Specificity and appropriateness)
1. Specific grade weights for assignments listed to total 100% and assigned grade
categories in decimal terms (ending in zero or 5 for easy calculation): The list of
graded assignments percentages did add up to 100%, and they all ended in 0 or 5,
so addition was easily done.

Spring 2016 Adapted and Used with permission from J. McVey, PhD, RN

4
2. Comparison of grade weighting between written tests and other graded
assignments: The 5 written exams were too heavily weighted (80% total), since
the thrust of the course is more about the psychomotor ability to accomplish the
hands-on assessment and communicate with the patient about their history and
sense of health or illness. The health history assignment was only worth 5%,
definitely too low in proportion to the exams. Lab skills were all PASS/FAIL, but
not mention of criteria to meet that would indicate that the student was achieving
the proper skills. Oermann (2015) shared that grades are established by adding
the cumulative scores from all types of assignments during a course. She further
added that there should be attention to the weight or importance of activities,
considering those that have the most emphasis on the overall objectives of the
course and giving them higher influence on the students final grade.
3. Critique of EQUALITY of Grading Scale categories A through F (comparison of
% points in each for grades A, B, C, and D): The letter grading system is not
equally weighted. For an A there is a ten-point spread, B is 9 points, C only 4
points and D is a 14 point spread. A better system might be: A 91-100, B 81-90,
C 71-80, D 61-70, F 60 and below.
4. Overall clarity, effectiveness, and fairness of grading Criteria: The organization,
criteria and points for the letter grading need work. It would be better to list the
graded assignments in weighted order, with the two 5% categories at the end of
the list. Grading criteria for the PASS/FAIL labs and clinical assignments should
be delineated. Change the range of letter grade points to be more evenly spaced
for fairness. I also have concerns about the optional learning portfolio, which
includes quite a lot of work for only one extra point, and the way the point would
be helpful was written in a very long and confusing manner.

Reference in APA format:

Oermann, M. (2015). Assessment methods. In M. H. Oermann, Teaching in nursing and
role of the educator (pp. 193). New York, NY: Springer Publishing Company, LLC.

Spring 2016 Adapted and Used with permission from J. McVey, PhD, RN