(Co)Construção de artefato para avaliação da aprendizagem de graduandos em Enfermagem

Abstract

The research aimed to design an artifact aimed at evaluating the learning of undergraduate nursing students in the supervised curricular internship in hospital care. This is exploratory research, with a qualitative approach and applied nature, conducted by the seven stages of Soft Design Science Research (SDSR), which has Design Science as its epistemological basis, which has at its core rigorous studies, aimed at problem solving and projection of artifacts, with a view to improving the work, educational and other environments. The stakeholders, a total of 19, were nurses and preceptors with experience in care and/or teaching. The research took place in two public universities in the state of Mato Grosso, specifically, in undergraduate nursing courses. Data production was carried out between October and December 2021 with the implementation of synchronous online focus groups in which stakeholders were divided into three groups. Thematic content analysis guided the data analysis. The theoretical references of clinical competence in Benner and Science of the Mind, Brain and Education guided the research. Results: First stage of SDSR: document synthesis of two dissertations (2018 and 2019) and two theses (2019 and 2021) of the research group Training, education and management in health and nursing (GEFOR) raising the specific problem to be addressed solved: problems in the evaluation of learning oriented to the development of clinical competences of students in the supervised curricular internship of hospital care, mediated by instrument. Second stage of the SDSR: through a focus group with the stakeholders, the requirements of the problem were raised: 1. Evaluation instrument with unfeasible competence performances; 2. Uncertainty of how to evaluate taking into account the subjectivity that permeates the process; 3. Construction of evaluative instruments without reference base; 4. Assessment carried out only in the summative modality, at the end of the internship period; 5. Failure to recognize the role of the preceptor in the assessment; 6. Failure in the evaluation feedback between the actors involved (teacher, preceptor and academic). Third stage of the SDSR: scope review that helped to verify if there were artifact(s) in the literature that could solve the problem and problem generalization. Fourth stage of the SDSR: data triangulation defining a class of solutions for the problem, described in requirements: promoting the participation of the actors involved in the evaluation; enable the continuous evaluation of the student; promote formative assessment; favor feedback; have a list of skills and performance; provide a reliable record of the evaluation process, considering subjectivity. Fifth stage of the SDSR: General problem requirements can solve specific problem requirements when compared. Sixth stage of the SDSR: When comparing the five previous stages, there is congruence and they indicated the artifact to be (co)constructed: student evaluation instrument of the supervised curricular internship. Seventh stage of the SDSR: (co)construction of the artifact with implementation of focus groups. It is believed that the designed artifact can boost learning and the development of clinical competence, as it aims to promote social interaction and feedback between professors, preceptors and students; and student self-assessment, but needs to be analyzed in practice. It appears that training is needed for the actors involved in the process, especially for professors and preceptors, on how to implement the fundamentals of science in practice for the benefit of learning and continuing education for undergraduate students.