Accreditation And Program Outcomes Essay

Accreditation And Program Outcomes Essay

CCNE PROGRAMME

Outline

• Definition of CCNE
• Roles of CCNE
• Understand the importance of program
• CCNE standards of program evaluation
• Three strategies of evaluating my

Program Accreditation

• The process of ensuring a school program meets all the professional
• Accreditation is carried out by outside organizations with CCNE and ACEN recognized in the US.
• Accreditation affects various aspects of learning:
  • Access to financial and grants
  • Ability to take licensing exams
  • Access to jobs
  • Ability to transfer credits to other schools

(Beasley et al., 2019)

What is CCNE

• It is a voluntary accrediting organization in the
• It accredits bachelor`s, master’s, and residency
• The organization relies on self-assessments, peer reviews, and visits to maintain accreditation.
• CCNE performs regular assessments of participating
• CCNE aims at improving the quality of nursing

(DelMonte et al., 2022)

Programs accredited by CCNE and Values

• The following are accredited:
  • Traditional LPN to BSN programs
  • LPN to BSN online programs
  • Traditional LPN to RN programs
  • LPN to RN online programs
• Values of CCNE
  • Foster innovation
  • Fosters quality improvement
  • Maintains integrity through consistency

Standard 1: Mission and Governance.

• The commission reviews the mission, goals, and expected program outcomes congruent with those of the sponsoring organization.
• The program’s mission and goals should be well written and accessible to
• The availability of qualified educators to enable the program to achieve its mission

and goals are also evaluated.

• Definition of eligibility criteria to align with the scope of
• The definition of roles of mentors towards achieving the mission and goals of the
• Accuracy of documents and publications is also

(DelMonte et al., 2022)

Standard 2: Institutional commitment and Resources

In terms of resources, CCNE evaluates the following

• • The adequacy of fiscal and physical resources of the program to fulfill the mission, goals, and expected outcomes.
  • The ability of the parent organization to provide a supportive environment that encourages services, faculty teaching, and practice.

 

Standard 3; Curriculum and Teaching-Learning Practices

• The following are assessed in the curriculum:
  • If the curriculum is developed, implemented, and revised in accordance with the program’s mission, goals, and expected outcomes.
  • If the expected individual learning outcomes are consistent with the roles a program

prepares its graduates.

• If the curriculum is logically structured to achieve expected learning outcomes
• If the environment and learning practices support the expected achievements and learning outcomes.
• If the curriculum considers the needs and expectations of the identified community of

interest.

• If the student performance reflects the achievements of the learning

(DelMonte et al., 2022)

Standard 4: Program effectiveness

• The effectiveness of the program is evaluated by:
  • Collection of data and surveys about students, alumni, and employer satisfaction to

demonstrate achievements.

• Analyzing and comparing the data of the expected student outcomes with aggregate student outcomes
• Analyzing the consistency of aggregate faculty outcomes contributes to the

achievement of the program`s mission, goals, and expected outcomes.

• Use of information from formal complaints to foster ongoing program

(Ghasemi et al., 2020)

Evaluation of my Program

• Course: Post-intervention radiology Procedure-patient
• Program: masters
• Standard: curriculum and teaching
• Course outcomes: learners are expected to accomplish the following
  • Monitor patient vitals and interpret findings
  • Maintain airway
  • Manage pain effectively
  • Educate family and patients

Strategies of Evaluation

• Evaluation of the program involves various groups
  • Learners- formative and summative assessment
    • Oral, written, and practical
  • Educators: formal or informal self-
  • Peer evaluation: evaluation of educators by peers through

(Sutor et al., 2020)

Conclusion

• Accreditation of nursing programs is vital to standardize the training of all
• CCNE and ACEN are two vital agencies responsible for accreditation in the US and its territories.
• CCNE accredits bachelor’s, residency, and master`s
• CCNE evaluates four standards: mission and governance, resources, curriculum and teaching practices, and effectiveness of the
• Strategies for program evaluation include formative and summative assessment, self-evaluation, questionnaires, and peer observation.

The End

• Questions ?
• Contributions?

Reference

• Beasley, F., Farmer, S., Nunn-Ellison, K., & Ard, N. (2019). International nursing program

accreditation. International Journal of Nursing Education Scholarship, 16(1). https://doi.org/10.1515/ijnes- 2019-0075

• commission on collegiate nursing education (Ed.). (2020). STANDARDS FOR ACCREDITATION OF NURSE

PRACTITIONER FELLOWSHIP/RESIDENCY PROGRAMS.

https://www.aacnnursing.org/Portals/42/CCNE/PDF/CCNE-NP-Fellowship-Residency-Standards-2020.pdf

• DelMonte, J., Murray, B., & Burke, K. (2022). Overview of the revised commission on collegiate nursing education entry-to-practice nurse residency program accreditation Journal for Nurses in Professional Development, 38(3), 159–162. https://doi.org/10.1097/nnd.0000000000000893
• Ghasemi, R., Moonaghi, H. K., & Heydari, A. (2020). Strategies for sustaining and enhancing nursing students’ engagement in academic and clinical settings: a narrative review. Korean Journal of Medical Education, 32(2), 103–117. https://doi.org/10.3946/kjme.2020.159
• Sutor, , CCRN-K, NPD-BC, Painter, J., DNP, APRN, NEA-BC, NPD-BC, AOCNS, & LSSBB. (2020). Nurse

residency programs:: Providing organizational value. Delaware Journal of Public Health, 6(1), 58–61. https://doi.org/10.32481/djph.2020.04.013

BUY A PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER HERE

 

NUR 648 Topic 8 PowerPoint Instructions
A program evaluation is a formal plan to organize and document evaluation activities. The purpose of this assignment is to become familiar with the Commission on Collegiate Nursing Education (CCNE) standards used in program evaluations, and to evaluate the outcomes your proposed program using a CCNE standard.
Create a 10-12-slide PowerPoint summarizing the four CCNE standards for program evaluation. Select one standard and develop three strategies to evaluate the outcomes in the program you developed in this course. Create substantive speaker notes for each slide. Include additional slides for the title and references.
Refer to the resource, “Creating Effective PowerPoint Presentations,” located in the Student Success Center, for additional guidance on completing this assignment in the appropriate style.
You are required to cite two or three sources to complete this assignment. Sources must be published within the last 5 years and appropriate for the assignment criteria and nursing content.
While APA style is not required for the body of this assignment, solid academic writing is expected, and documentation of sources should be presented using APA formatting guidelines, which can be found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center.
This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.
You are not required to submit this assignment to LopesWrite.

Benchmark – Program Evaluation Presentation – Rubric

ListGrid

Print To PDF

Rubric Criteria

collapse all Rubric CriteriaCollapse All

Summary of Four CCNE Standards for Program Evaluation

27.5 points

Criteria Description

Summary of Four CCNE Standards for Program Evaluation

5. Target

27.5 points

The four CCNE standards for program evaluation are clearly and accurately outlined.

4. Acceptable

25.3 points

The four CCNE standards for program evaluation are accurately outlined. Some detail is needed for clarity.

3. Approaching

24.2 points

The four CCNE standards for program evaluation are outlined. There are minor omissions or inaccuracies.

2. Insufficient

22 points

The four CCNE standards for program evaluation are presented, but there are major omissions and inaccuracies.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

The four CCNE standards for program evaluation are omitted.

CCNE Standard and Strategies to Evaluate Program Outcome for Proposed Course (B)

27.5 points

Criteria Description

Develop three strategies, based on selected CCNE standard, to evaluate the outcomes in the program developed in this course (C6.3)

5. Target

27.5 points

Three detailed strategies to evaluate the outcomes of the program developed in this course are presented. The strategies are clearly based on one selected CCNE standard. An ability to participate in curriculum design and evaluate program outcomes is demonstrated.

4. Acceptable

25.3 points

Three strategies to evaluate the outcomes of the program developed in this course are presented. The strategies are based on one selected CCNE standard. Some detail is needed for clarity. An ability to participate in curriculum design and evaluate program outcomes is demonstrated.

3. Approaching

24.2 points

Three general strategies to evaluate the outcomes of the program developed in this course are presented. Overall, the strategies are based on one selected CCNE standard. Some aspects are unclear or there are minor inaccuracies. An ability to participate in curriculum design and evaluate program outcomes is generally demonstrated.

2. Insufficient

22 points

Three general strategies to evaluate the outcomes of the program developed in this course are presented but are incomplete or inaccurate. It is unclear which CCNE standard is used for the strategies. An ability to participate in curriculum design and evaluate program outcomes is not demonstrated.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

Three strategies based on a selected CCNE standard to evaluate the outcomes of the program developed in this course are omitted.

Presentation of Content

22 points

Criteria Description

Quality of presentation of content. Organization of presentation includes substantive speaker notes for each slide. Additional slides for the title and references are included.

5. Target

22 points

Content is written clearly and concisely. Ideas universally progress and relate to each other. The project includes motivating questions and advanced organizers. The project gives the audience a clear sense of the main idea. Substantive speaker notes for each slide and additional slides for the title and references are included.

BUY A PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER HERE

4. Acceptable

20.24 points

Content is written with a logical progression of ideas and supporting information, exhibiting a unity, coherence, and cohesiveness. Persuasive information from reliable sources is included. Substantive speaker notes for each slide and additional slides for the title and references are included.

3. Approaching

19.36 points

Presentation slides are generally competent, but ideas may show some inconsistency in organization or in their relationships to each other. Speaker notes are included for each slide, but some speaker notes lack relevant content, detail, or are unclear. Additional slides for the title and references are included.

2. Insufficient

17.6 points

Content is vague in conveying a point of view or does not create a strong sense of purpose. Some persuasive information is included. Speaker notes do not provide relevant information, are not detailed, or are not included for each slide. Additional slides for the title and references are not included.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

Content lacks a clear point of view or logical sequence of information. Little persuasive information is included. Sequencing of ideas is unclear.

Layout

11 points

Criteria Description

Layout of presentation

5. Target

11 points

Layout is visually pleasing and contributes to the overall message with appropriate use of headings, subheadings, and white space. Text is appropriate in length for the target audience and to the point. The background and colors enhance the readability of the text.

4. Acceptable

10.12 points

Layout background and text complement each other and enable the content to be easily read. The fonts are easy to read and point size varies appropriately for headings and text.

3. Approaching

9.68 points

Layout uses horizontal and vertical white space appropriately. Sometimes the fonts are easy to read, but in a few places the use of fonts, italics, bold, long paragraphs, color, or busy background detracts from or does not enhance readability.

2. Insufficient

8.8 points

Layout shows some structure, but appears cluttered and busy or distracting, with large gaps of white space or a distracting background. Overall readability is difficult due to lengthy paragraphs, too many different fonts, dark or busy background, overuse of bold, or lack of appropriate indentations of text.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

Layout is cluttered, confusing, and does not use spacing, headings, and subheadings to enhance the readability. The text is extremely difficult to read, with long blocks of text, small point size for fonts, and inappropriate contrasting colors. Poor use of headings, subheadings, indentations, or bold formatting is evident.

Language Use and Audience Awareness

11 points

Criteria Description

Includes sentence construction, word choice, etc.

5. Target

11 points

The writer uses a variety of sentence constructions, figures of speech, and word choice in distinctive and creative ways that are appropriate to purpose, discipline, and scope.

4. Acceptable

10.12 points

The writer is clearly aware of audience, uses a variety of appropriate vocabulary for the targeted audience, and uses figures of speech to communicate clearly.

3. Approaching

9.68 points

Language is appropriate to the targeted audience for the most part.

2. Insufficient

8.8 points

Some distracting inconsistencies in language or word choice are present. The writer exhibits some lack of control in using figures of speech appropriately.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

Inappropriate word choice and lack of variety in language use are evident. Writer appears to be unaware of audience. Use of primer prose indicates writer either does not apply figures of speech or uses them inappropriately.

Mechanics of Writing

5.5 points

Criteria Description

Includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, and language use.

5. Target

5.5 points

Writer is clearly in control of standard, written, academic English.

4. Acceptable

5.06 points

Slides are largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present.

3. Approaching

4.84 points

Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but they are not overly distracting to the reader.

2. Insufficient

4.4 points

Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

Slide errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning.

Documentation of Sources

5.5 points

Criteria Description

Includes citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style.

5. Target

5.5 points

Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of errors.

4. Acceptable

5.06 points

Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct.

3. Approaching

4.84 points

Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors may be present.

2. Insufficient

4.4 points

Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

Sources are not documented.

Total110 points

[1]HTML: <noscript data-n-css=””>

[2]HTML: </noscript>

[3]HTML: <meta name=”viewport” content=”minimum-scale=1, initial-scale=1, width=device-width”>

[4]HTML: <noscript>

[5]HTML: </noscript>