Chritical thinking Exercises

Case Study #1: Mountainview College Department of Nursing

Mountainview Community College , an associate degree-granting college, is located in a medium-sized metropolitan city of approximately 400,000 inhabitants. Health facilities include four hospitals, several-drop in clinics staffed by physicians and primary health care nurse practitioners; and a visiting nurse service in which all community-based health care except medical care is coordinated. The College provides business, technology, community service, and health science programs to approximately 6500 full and part-time students. Among the programs is a 2-year, associate-degree nursing (ADN) program. Springhaven University is also located in the city and offers a 4-year baccalaureate nursing (BSN) program. In addition to offering the 2-year ADN program, Mountainview College has entered into a collaborative partnership with Springhaven University, to offer the first two years of the BSN program. Springhaven will offer the third and fourth years. There is agreement to develop a new curriculum together. Participants from both institutions and the health community are working collaboratively to develop the new BSN curriculum.

1. Describe matters that the dean of nursing at Springhaven University and the Chair of the nursing department at Mountainview Community College should discuss about leadership of the collaborative curriculum development project.

2. What factors should be considered when deciding on leadership for the collaborative curriculum development process?

3. How might a curriculum leader be selected or appointed? Who should the leader be? Should there be two leaders, one for each institution? Why or why not? How could community nursing leaders contribute to the leadership of the curriculum development enterprise?

4. What should be included in a faculty development program to prepare potential curriculum leaders?

Case Study #2: Old Ivy University College of Nursing

Old Ivy University College of Nursing offers BSN, BSN completion, MS, and PhD programs. It is located in a large metropolitan city of approximately 2,500,000 inhabitants. Health facilities include twelve hospitals, nurse practitioner clinics, home health services, and drop-in clinics. The university provides graduate and undergraduate programs to 52,000 full-and part-time students in a full range of programs.

The College of Nursing has approximately 1300 students, of whom approximately sixty percent are full-time, and these mainly in the BSN program. The BSN program has been accredited. Although the curriculum content and teaching-learning approaches have been updated periodically, the overall structure of the curriculum and the location of clinical experiences have undergone little change. Most faculty members believe that the curriculum has lost its unity and that it is time to develop a new curriculum with more progressive philosophical approaches and learning experiences.

Most faculty teaching classroom courses in the BSN program have a PhD degree; some have a master's degree. Some clinical instructors have master's degrees, although the majority has a BSN. Doctorally-prepared faculty teach in the MS and PhD programs although most without an undergraduate teaching assignment do guest lectures in the BSN program.

Dr. Lumella, the Dean of the College of Nursing, is supportive of the undergraduate faculty's proposal to design a completely new curriculum. She has appointed Dr. Beverly Eme, an experienced and long-time faculty member, as the curriculum leader. Dr. Eme is a popular choice since she teaches in the BSN program and is highly supportive of faculty colleagues. Dr. Eme begins to plan how to proceed with her colleagues.

1. How can Dr. Eme help the faculty choose a change theory to guide their overall process?

2. What committees could be struck in order to facilitate curriculum development? What purposes would they serve? How should committee members be selected or appointed? Who should the members be?

3. If some of the faculty teaching in the MS and PhD programs are reluctant to participate in undergraduate curriculum development, how could Dr. Lumella and Dr. Eme encourage them to do so?

4. What decision-making approaches would be effective for the curriculum developers?

5. What could be a practical work plan for developing the curriculum? What are the logistical factors associated with joint curriculum planning by faculty members of various degree levels?

6. What potential is there for publication arising from curriculum development? How might faculty determine authorship?

7. What resources might be needed for the curriculum work to be achieved?

8. What faculty development activities would be helpful?