It is essential to evaluate teaching methods and include comprehensive teaching components for optimal educational outcomes. Accordingly, this study will evaluate the effect of teaching diabetes management to nursing students using two different methods.
Introduction and Aim: To provide effective diabetes education for nursing students, it is essential to evaluate teaching methods and include comprehensive teaching components for optimal educational outcomes. Accordingly, this study will evaluate the effect of teaching diabetes management to nursing students using two different methods. Methods: The research will be conducted using a quasi-experimental research design with a pre-test/post-test control group. The sample will consist of students enrolled in the Internal Medicine Nursing course at a university nursing department. Data will be collected in two time periods: after theoretical information on diabetes and treatment/care practices is provided, and after jigsaw and case-based learning applications are completed. Students will be divided into three groups: jigsaw learning group, case-based learning group, and control group. Data will be collected using a Personal Information Form, Diabetes Knowledge Test, Critical Thinking Tendency Scale, and Self-Efficacy Scale.
Study Type
INTERVENTIONAL
Allocation
NON_RANDOMIZED
Purpose
OTHER
Masking
NONE
Enrollment
88
Students in the jigsaw group will be divided into 5 groups of six. Then, the topic content will be divided into five outlines (diabetes classification/symptoms and signs, diabetes treatment (nutrition and exercise), diabetes treatment (insulin and oral antidiabetics), acute and chronic complications of diabetes, patient education in diabetes), and each member of each jigsaw group will be assigned to a specific outline. Students will be asked to study all the material by looking more closely at the given topic. Then, all students assigned to the same outline in the 5 jigsaw groups will be gathered in a group called the "expert group." In this expert group, each student will be asked to share and discuss the information they have gained regarding the specific outline with the other students.
The researcher will provide the students with 5 examples, and five case studies will be conducted with the students in the case-based learning group (cases will include information such as the patient's detailed history, medical diagnosis, a brief summary of the disease, and the medications the patient is using). The case studies used will contain the basic details of diabetes. Necessary background information will be provided, and discussion questions will be determined.
AmasyaU
Amasya, Turkey (Türkiye)
Diabetes Knowledge Test
The knowledge test will consist of 20 questions on the physiology, signs, and treatment of septic shock. The questions in the knowledge test will be sent to 5 experts for review, and content validity will be established.
Time frame: 4 week
Critical Thinking Tendency Scale
The "Critical Thinking Tendency Scale" was developed in 2012 by Karalı and Battal to measure critical thinking tendencies. The CTTS is a five-point Likert-type scale consisting of 21 items. The scale has two sub-dimensions: "Skills Dimension" and "Values Dimension". The Cronbach's alpha internal consistency reliability coefficient of the scale was found to be 0.91 (Karalı and Battal, 2012). The highest possible score on the "Skills" subscale of the "Critical Thinking Tendency Scale" is 60, and the lowest is 12. The highest possible score on the "Values" subscale is 45, and the lowest is 9. The Cronbach's alpha internal consistency reliability coefficient of the scale was found to be 0.91.
Time frame: 4 week
Self-Efficacy Scale
The scale is unidimensional and consists of 10 positive items, therefore it does not contain reverse-coded items. Each item is given a score between 1 and 4, in equal intervals. A higher score indicates higher self-efficacy. The Cronbach's alpha internal consistency reliability coefficient of the scale adapted into Turkish and whose validity and reliability analyses were performed by Yurtçiçek Eren and Başgöl was found to be 0.81.
Time frame: 4 week
This platform is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Always consult a qualified healthcare professional.