Publication: Debriefing and learning strategies: a comparison between two reflective analysis styles with/without a graphical record of strengths/weaknesses.
| dc.contributor.author | Escribano Sánchez, Guillermo | |
| dc.contributor.author | Ruzafa Martínez, María | |
| dc.contributor.author | Ramos Morcillo, Antonio Jesús | |
| dc.contributor.author | Leal Costa, César | |
| dc.contributor.author | García Sánchez, Alfonso | |
| dc.contributor.author | Díaz Agea, José Luis | |
| dc.contributor.department | Enfermería | |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2024-03-01T12:40:20Z | |
| dc.date.available | 2024-03-01T12:40:20Z | |
| dc.date.issued | 2021-01-28 | |
| dc.description | ©2021. This manuscript version is made available under the CC-BY 4.0 license http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ This document is the Published, version of a Published Work that appeared in final form in Healthcare. To access the final edited and published work see https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare9020130 | es |
| dc.description.abstract | Background: Clinical simulation efficiently complements the training of Nursing Degree students. The debriefing phase is the most important feature of simulation-based learning, where the students are able to acquire the necessary competences. It is at this stage where learning strategies and motivation play a crucial role. The objective of the study was to analyze the relationship between the style of debriefing utilized in the simulation sessions, and the learning strategies of Nursing Degree students who participated in a high-fidelity clinical simulation. Method: This was a quasiexperimental study conducted with a sample of 200 students in their third and fourth years at university. To obtain the data, an evaluation Questionnaire for the Evaluation of Learning Strategies of University Students (CEVEAPEU) was utilized, as well as two different types of structured debriefing styles, namely, with or without a graphical representation of the strengths/weaknesses during the analytical phase. The data analysis was performed with the SPSS® v25 program. Results: Statistically significant differences were found, with higher scores obtained when utilizing debriefing with a graphical representation, on both scales of the questionnaire (affective and cognitive), on the motivational, metacognitive and processing, and use of information subscales, and twelve learning strategies mostly belonging to the subscales of motivation; searching, collecting, and selecting information; and processing and using information. Conclusion: Debriefing with a graphical representation is deemed, a priori, as the most adequate approach for our context, based on the greater number of learning strategies utilized by our students. The use of a written graphical record of the strengths and weaknesses in the analytical phase is recommended. | es |
| dc.format | application/pdf | es |
| dc.format.extent | 13 | es |
| dc.identifier.citation | Healthcare 2021, 9, 130 | |
| dc.identifier.doi | https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare9020130 | |
| dc.identifier.issn | Electronic: 2227-9032 | |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/10201/139798 | |
| dc.language | eng | es |
| dc.publisher | MDPI | es |
| dc.relation | Sin financiación externa a la Universidad | es |
| dc.relation.publisherversion | https://www.mdpi.com/2227-9032/9/2/130 | es |
| dc.rights | info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess | es |
| dc.rights | Atribución-NoComercial 4.0 Internacional | * |
| dc.rights.uri | http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ | * |
| dc.subject | Debriefing | es |
| dc.subject | Clinical simulation | es |
| dc.subject | Learning strategies | es |
| dc.subject | Motivation | es |
| dc.subject | Nursing | es |
| dc.subject.other | CDU::6 - Ciencias aplicadas::61 - Medicina | es |
| dc.title | Debriefing and learning strategies: a comparison between two reflective analysis styles with/without a graphical record of strengths/weaknesses. | es |
| dc.type | info:eu-repo/semantics/article | es |
| dspace.entity.type | Publication | es |
Collections
Este ítem está sujeto a una licencia Creative Commons. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/