1. Preceptors’ Experience of Using a Competency Assessment Tool Toni Ui Chiardha, Miriam McNicholas, Evelyn Byrne, Eimear Burke, Adrienne Montgomery, Marcella Kelly

2. The Aim of the Study To measure the reliability and validity of the competency assessment booklet which was used to assess students’ competence in the undergraduate nursing programmes (general & psychiatric).

3. The Study Design Mixed method approach Ethical approval Four distinct phases: – Content analysis of existing tool – Focus group interviews – Questionnaire development & pilot test – The study

4. Content Analysis Aim: to establish content validity Domains of Competence: – Professional/Ethical practice – Holistic approaches to care and the integration of knowledge – Interpersonal relationships – Organisation and management of care – Personal and professional development Process: – Development of a tool – Performance criteria and Indicators reviewed against ABA ‘Requirements & Standards…’ – Learning Outcomes evaluated against the Indicators – Learning Outcomes deemed measurable or not

5. Content Analysis Findings The performance criteria & indicators: – Identical to ABA document – Identical for both programmes – Learning outcomes measurable – Some wording unclear – Some repetition

6. Focus Group Interviews 6 semi-structured interviews – Consent & ground rules set – Audio-taped & notes taken – Transcribed Analysis – Modified Colazzi’s framework Findings = 9 themes – ContentProcessKnowing v doing – RepetitionResponsibilityFamiliarity – TimeRecognising competence Layout

7. Questionnaire Development Quantitative descriptive survey Addressed to themes identified by focus groups Dichotomous & 5 point Likert Scale Content validity Pilot study (N=50) Internal reliability Cronbach’s alpha = 0.9 Ethical approval

8. The Findings Demographics – Sample = 22% response rate of Registered General and Psychiatric Nurses who have acted as preceptor, the majority identifying preparedness for role, competence in role, acceptance of responsibility – Limitation of study Validity of Tool – 63% identified the tool facilitated the assessment of students

9. The Findings Reliability of the Tool – Preceptors’ expertise and judgement – Assessment process – Language and learning outcomes – Layout and time issues Limitations – The questionnaire

10. Conclusions The assessment tool is valid and provides a structure for assessment The reliability of the tool requires to be addressed so that clear discrimination between achieved and not achieved learning outcomes are evidenced The tool be reviewed in relation to the findings and then researched again