Evaluation of the affective domain questionnaire to assess changes in learning across four timed measurements
Dale Hilty, Anne Hinze and Kali Clark
Mt. Carmel College of Nursing, USA
: J Nurs Patient Care
Introduction & Aim: While completing a senior level course emphasizing the importance of interprofessional communication among health care professionals, Bachelor of Science in Nursing (BSN) Students academic learning was assessed across four time periods. Method: 1st assessment: Pre-test regarding the role and function of 10 health care professionals (Advance Practice Nurses, Chaplains, Ethicists, Interpreters, Occupational & Physical Therapists, Pharmacists, Registered Dietitians, Respiratory Therapists, Social Workers and Physicians); intervention 1: six or seven students formed small groups and selected one of the ten health care professionals. Students wrote a paper focusing the historical basis, education, training, legislative concerns, holistic specialization and license/certification. Students presented the paper to the class prior to submitting it for a grade. 2nd assessment: intervention 2: a guest speaker from each of the 10 professional disciplines visited the class and shared the scope of practice, unique contributions, working relationships with Registered Nurses and holistic recommendations. 3rd assessment: Intervention 3: students assumed the role of a Registered Nurse in an interprofessional simulation including the patient, family and the 10 licensed professionals. 4th assessment: Intervention 4: in an educational intervention (Hilty Gill-Rocha, Ross, Hinze, & Clark, 2018; Hilty, Hinze, & Clark, 2018), the researchers found the Affective Domain Questionnaire (ADQ) consisted of three common factors with coefficient alpha reliability estimates ranging from 895 to 931. Results: The first timed assessment measured changes in learning based on intervention 1. Using SPSS 25, the dependent t-test findings showed significant differences on the three ADQ common factors comparing data from Assessments 1 and 2 (questions evaluated term paper and class presentation). The second timed assessment measured changes in learning based on intervention 2. Significant differences were found comparing Assessments 1 and 3 (questions evaluated guest speaker presentations). The second timed assessment measured changes in learning based on intervention 3. Significant differences were found comparing Assessments 1 and 4 (questions evaluated the interprofessional simulation). All differences were significant at p=0.001. Coefficient alpha reliability estimates are presented in a table.
Dale M Hilty, Associate Professor at the Mt. Carmel College of Nursing. He received his PhD in counseling psychology from the Department of Psychology at The Ohio State University. He has published studies in the areas of psychology, sociology, and religion. Between April 2017 and April 2018, his ten research teams published 55 posters at local, state, regional, national, and international nursing conferences.