The overall aim was to investigate bachelor nursing students’ experiences with simulation as a learning approach conducted under various conditions. Additionally, the aim was to translate and validate questionnaires for the evaluation of simulation in a Norwegian context. Methods: Quantitative and qualitative methods were used. Nursing students responded to three questionnaires after attending either low- or high-fidelity simulation. Data were analyzed with statistics (I). Two evaluation questionnaires were subjected to a principal components analysis (II, III). Data were obtained from nursing students through focus group interviews, and analyzed with a qualitative content analysis (IV). Main findings: Independent of the fidelity level in the simulation and educational level, the students reported satisfaction and that the emphasized features in learning were present. Those who had used a paper/pencil case study were the most satisfied (I). Debriefing was reported to be crucial for learning, but in particular by attending the large groups, also as a stressful and intrusive situation (IV).The Norwegian version of the questionnaire, the Student Satisfaction and Self-Confidence Scale, revealed no stable factor solution (II). The translated version of the Debriefing Experience Scale was shown to hold a good potential for evaluating debriefing, but benefited from reducing the subscales (III). To ensure safety and security were reported to be a prerequisite for learning, with the students requesting a more frequent use of simulation and a higher degree of familiarity with active learning in their program in general (IV). Conclusions: Simulation at all fidelity levels should be used in nursing education. To exploit the potential, the learning approaches should be integrated into the program in general through a systematic and structured building of a learning community. A further validation and testing of the questionnaires in different programs and contexts is needed.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Alabama at Birmingham, 2006. / Title from first page of PDF file (viewed Feb. 14, 2008). Includes bibliographical references (p. 97-100).

Für die Konstruktion gebrauchstauglicher Anwendungssysteme ist eine exakte Evaluierung der Usability eine wertvolle Unterstützung. Zu diesem Zweck werden in der Praxis häufig Usability-Fragebögen herangezogen. Im deutschen Sprachraum sind die beiden Fragebögen Isonorm 9241/10 und Isometrics, die beide Software gemäß der EN ISO 9241-110 evaluieren, weit verbreitet. Die vorliegende Studie widmete sich einem Vergleich dieser beiden Fragebögen hinsichtlich testtheoretischer Gütekriterien. Im Rahmen eines experimentellen Designs wurden die beiden Fragebögen eingesetzt um die Usability von zwei Standard-Softwarepaketen zu bewerten. Hinsichtlich der inhaltlichen Validität der Fragebögen zeigten die Ergebnisse eine hohe Übereinstimmung der Usability-Messung der beiden Fragebögen. Auch weitere testtheoretische Analysen lieferten eine ähnliche Qualitätsbeurteilung beider Fragebögen, weshalb sie aus diesem Blickwinkel gleichermaßen für Forschung und Praxis empfohlen werden können.