Australian nursing and midwifery curriculum design blind spots: a qualitative study through the prism of unplanned pregnancy

IF 1.9 Q2 NURSING Teaching and Learning in Nursing Pub Date : 2024-07-02 DOI:10.1016/j.teln.2024.05.014
Lydia Mainey PhD , Sandra Downing MAE , Mary-Clare Balnaves , Joyce Cappiello PhD , Jemma King MPH , Ann Peacock PhD , Lisa Peberdy PhD , Judith Dean PhD
{"title":"Australian nursing and midwifery curriculum design blind spots: a qualitative study through the prism of unplanned pregnancy","authors":"Lydia Mainey PhD ,&nbsp;Sandra Downing MAE ,&nbsp;Mary-Clare Balnaves ,&nbsp;Joyce Cappiello PhD ,&nbsp;Jemma King MPH ,&nbsp;Ann Peacock PhD ,&nbsp;Lisa Peberdy PhD ,&nbsp;Judith Dean PhD","doi":"10.1016/j.teln.2024.05.014","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>There is rising concern about the work readiness of nursing and midwifery graduates. Using the prism of unplanned pregnancy to understand Australian academics' perspectives of teaching this topic may highlight challenges associated with the current national education accreditation model and contribute to the dearth of international research on nursing and midwifery education accreditation.</p></div><div><h3>Aim</h3><p>This study aimed to explore Australian academics' perspectives on teaching unplanned pregnancy prevention and care to undergraduate nursing and midwifery students.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>A constructivist qualitative study of undergraduate nursing and midwifery academics in Australia.</p></div><div><h3>Findings</h3><p>We constructed three major themes from the thematic analysis: <em>accreditation barriers and conflicting agendas, important but not important enough</em> and <em>protecting against the \"unmentionable\".</em></p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>These findings highlight participants' misunderstanding of curriculum development and the lack of safeguards to protect against curriculum blind spots allows important healthcare topics to slip through the cracks. The official curriculum appears to be at the discretion of individuals and groups who, rightly or wrongly, have their own opinions of what knowledge and skills are essential. We also found prevailing abortion stigma remains a barrier to education.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":46287,"journal":{"name":"Teaching and Learning in Nursing","volume":"19 4","pages":"Pages e654-e660"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1557308724001112/pdfft?md5=7f6dc10ecc30b4c1566c02eba1365219&pid=1-s2.0-S1557308724001112-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Teaching and Learning in Nursing","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1557308724001112","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"NURSING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

There is rising concern about the work readiness of nursing and midwifery graduates. Using the prism of unplanned pregnancy to understand Australian academics' perspectives of teaching this topic may highlight challenges associated with the current national education accreditation model and contribute to the dearth of international research on nursing and midwifery education accreditation.

Aim

This study aimed to explore Australian academics' perspectives on teaching unplanned pregnancy prevention and care to undergraduate nursing and midwifery students.

Methods

A constructivist qualitative study of undergraduate nursing and midwifery academics in Australia.

Findings

We constructed three major themes from the thematic analysis: accreditation barriers and conflicting agendas, important but not important enough and protecting against the "unmentionable".

Conclusions

These findings highlight participants' misunderstanding of curriculum development and the lack of safeguards to protect against curriculum blind spots allows important healthcare topics to slip through the cracks. The official curriculum appears to be at the discretion of individuals and groups who, rightly or wrongly, have their own opinions of what knowledge and skills are essential. We also found prevailing abortion stigma remains a barrier to education.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
澳大利亚护理和助产课程设计的盲点:通过意外怀孕棱镜进行的定性研究
背景人们越来越关注护理和助产专业毕业生的工作准备情况。本研究旨在探讨澳大利亚学者对护理和助产专业本科生意外怀孕预防和护理教学的看法。方法对澳大利亚本科护理和助产专业的学者进行建构主义定性研究。结果我们从主题分析中构建了三大主题:认证障碍和相互冲突的议程、重要但不够重要以及防止 "不可提及"。结论这些研究结果凸显了参与者对课程开发的误解,以及缺乏防止课程盲点的保障措施,使得重要的医疗保健主题被遗漏。官方课程似乎是由个人和团体自行决定的,他们对哪些知识和技能是必要的有自己的看法,无论对错。我们还发现,普遍存在的堕胎耻辱感仍然是教育的障碍。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
10.50%
发文量
119
审稿时长
37 days
期刊介绍: Teaching and Learning in Nursing is the Official Journal of the National Organization of Associate Degree Nursing. The journal is dedicated to the advancement of Associate Degree Nursing education and practice, and promotes collaboration in charting the future of health care education and delivery. Topics include: - Managing Different Learning Styles - New Faculty Mentoring - Legal Issues - Research - Legislative Issues - Instructional Design Strategies - Leadership, Management Roles - Unique Funding for Programs and Faculty
期刊最新文献
Perception of caring behaviors of faculty members from the perspective of nursing students The Urgency of Teaching Theory in the Current Nursing Education Landscape OADN's Milestone Anniversary: Celebrating 40 Years of Advocacy, Education, and Leadership Nurse Educators’ Perspectives in Facilitating Ethics Education: A Descriptive Qualitative Study Implementing Entrustable Professional Activities in a pre-licensure nursing program to facilitate competency-based education
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1