Masoumeh Mangeli; OmeSalimeh Roudi Rashtabadi; Sakineh Sabzevari; Esmat Nouhi
Volume 12, Supplement , July 2015, , Pages 249-265
Abstract
Background & Objective: In recent years, there has been an increase in the number of medical universities that have launched doctoral nursing education programs in their centers; thus, monitoring the quality of these programs to identify their strengths and weaknesses is very important. This study ...
Read More
Background & Objective: In recent years, there has been an increase in the number of medical universities that have launched doctoral nursing education programs in their centers; thus, monitoring the quality of these programs to identify their strengths and weaknesses is very important. This study was conducted to evaluate the quality of doctoral nursing education in a university center in Iran.
Methods: This descriptive and comparative study was performed on 33 lecturers and students/graduates using the census method in 2015. Data were collected using the quality of nursing doctoral education (QNDE) Questionnaire.
Results: There was no statistically significant difference between the mean scores of the two groups, but this difference was significant in the program domain (P = 0.036). The participants’ answers only showed significant differences in a few statements of the program, resources, and evaluation domains (P < 0.050). A significant difference was observed between the views of lecturers and students in terms of advanced computer facilities and internet access, and appropriate research infrastructure for facilitating research and education (P < 0.050).
Conclusion: Weaknesses such as lack of resources, infrastructure, library holdings, and regular and timely feedback to program evaluators require attention in order to be decreased or resolved. Great differences in the scores of overall course quality and curriculum evaluation between the two groups revealed the need for further research for the identification of factors effective on the quality of doctoral education programs from the view of both groups.
