This data would entail two components, a survey completed by the nurses during the course, which asks for input as to whether anything in the curriculum seems outdated. The second component would be an annual audit and fact-check. Finally, the third component would be verifying how the curriculum falls in line with the hospital's master plan. Should the hospital change its overall strategies, those changes should be reflected in the curriculum. Otherwise the curriculum becomes outdated and collects dust on a shelf. Given that the curriculum is hospital and technology based, the primary accreditation source would be the technology companies. Accreditation verification would also be sought by the National League for Nursing to ensure that the curriculum is inline with other current curriculum.

Consistent monitoring of the curriculum is essential to ensure optimal nurse achievement and patient satisfaction (Fuchs, 1984). Keeping this in mind, the first way that the data collection would be...

If the curriculum continues reflecting a weakness in a certain portion, then that portion can be updated, improving the overall curriculum. The second way would be to ensure that all information contained within the curriculum is current with medical technology. As updates are made and mentioned by either the students or found in the annual audit, the information can be changed and the curriculum upheld as credible.
Works Cited

Davis M & Harden R (2003). Planning and implementing an undergraduate medical curriculum: the lessons learned. Medical Teacher, 25(6), 596-608.

Fuchs L, Deno S, Mirkin P (1984). The Effects of Frequent Curriculum-Based Measurement and Evaluation on Pedagogy, Student Achievement, and Student Awareness of Learning. American Education Research Journal, 21(2), 449-60.

Keating, Sarah (2011). Curriculum Development and Evaluation in Nursing. Danvers, MA, Springer Publishing Company.