The strengths of this design are related to the ease of application and usage. The design of the survey was easy to administer and self explanatory. While the weakness was related to the willingness of the participant to Chapter Three 5
participate complete the survey and provide truthful responses. An additional weakness is relative to the age group that was present for the survey and their relationship to the use of computers.
After approval of the study from the Institutional Review Board at Indiana
Wesleyan University and Methodist Hospitals, Inc. Nursing staff were recruited to participate in for the study. Participants were eligible for the study if they were currently an employee of the employed by Methodist Hospitals, Inc., It was also necessary that they hold a current nursing license, participated in online learning, and were able to read and write English. A registered nurse who has participated in any online learning events, and are able to read and write English. Risk to participants was minimal, however, all participants were given information regarding the nature of the study and properly debriefed. They were provided with the name and contact information of counseling services should they require consultation following completion of the survey. Further, participants were made aware that their information would be kept in the strictest confidence and that there would be no individually identifying information on the survey. Should they choose to have their survey not included in the data analysis they were free to withdraw at any time. There was minimal risk in participation.
To recruit Registered Nurses participants the surveys were administered during staff meetings held on in various nursing units throughout the hospitals.
Data collection began in January 2010 and ended in February, 2010.
Participants were Registered Nurses who have accessed and taken online continuing education courses. The participants were employees of the Methodist
Hospitals, Inc. The researcher is an employee of the Methodist Hospitals, Inc. And therefore will have access to the hospitals two campuses. The main campus is located at 600 Grant Street Gary, IN and the second campus is located at 8701 Broadway
Merrillville, IN. (unless specifically requested this information is not necessary this information may be included in an appendix where you include the letter of permission or the meeting dates for each institution) From the nursing employees A sample size of 200 was acquired. The participants included were roughly equal in number from each location. used dividing the participants evenly between the two campuses. This allows for 100 Registered Nurses from each campus to participate. Sample subjects Participants were randomly selected to generalize the population from which the sample data was drawn (discuss how you selected randomly). The Black or African-American
and Hispanic or Latino communities are well established in Lake County, Indiana thus the data collected accurately represented the population of the area.
Therefore cultural and ethnic diversity was seen within the survey results. Since Because the survey was administered during a monthly staff meeting, the sampleing consisted of those in attendance at the meetings.
Chapter Three 6
A total of 200 Two hundred questionnaires surveys were passed out for review with a total of 172
questionnaires returned for analysis distributed. At the end of data collection One hundred seventy two completed surveys were returned. The process of distributing and collecting surveys took approximately two months, the researcher (myself) and an assistant were the only individuals involved in data collection. Data was collected by the researcher and Data
Assistant over a two-month period of time. This allowed for adequate distribution and return of the questionnaires. A cover letter outlining the purpose of the study and how anonymity and confidentiality procedures would be maintained will be was attached to each questionnaire survey. Responses were voluntary and consent was implied by questionnaire completion. Haigh and Jones (2005) note that this form of implied consent is appropriate in sample groups who are over 18 and when potential harm to respondents is low. The surveys were distributed by the researcher, the assistant researcher then remained to collect completed surveys in a lidded box. Incentive for participation was microwavable popcorn which was distributed to participants upon completion of the survey. The Researcher passed out the Questionnaires with the Data Assistant left behind to collect the completed questionnaires. Once the participant completed the questionnaire, the participant was directed by the Data Assistant to place the questionnaire in a lidded box and a complementary thank you gift of microwavable popcorn was obtained by the subject. To ensure subject participant anonymity the survey was completed at the conclusion of the meeting, with the Data Assistant remaining behind to assist subjects in placing questionnaires into a lidded box, no traceable personally identifying information was placed or recorded included on the surveys. The absence of the researcher during the completion of the surveys not only ensured anonymity, it also removed the potential confound of demand characteristics whereby the participant may be inclined to answer in a manner he or she believes the researcher desires as opposed to reporting honestly. The Researcher chose to leave the room as this would assist in elevating bias for the subjects. There was minimal risk. Due to the manner of collection of data, the subject was protected by the anonymity of the Data
Assistant and no recording marks on the collected questionnaires. Therefore, personal contact between the subject and researcher did not take place in reference to completion of the questionnaire.
Chapter Three 7
Data was maintained held in a locked cabinet in the Nursing Education Department
office at the Gary Methodist campus. The survey contained general information however no identifying personal information was recorded on the surveys. The measure used to obtain relevant data consisted of 32 self report multi-step questions. The measure assessed general knowledge regarding computer use and HIS applications as well as the individual's personal reliance on computers. The data collection tool focused on 32-item five point multiple-step self-report instrument measures nurse's knowledge regarding general computer use and HIS applications and the nurse's role and participation with computers. This instrument also allowed the nurse to rate themselves on a novice-to-expert scale (Hobbs, 2002).
The data collection tool will focus on multiple-choice questions for ease of measure utilized multiple choice questions to facilitate efficient data analysis and questions will be pertinent to the understanding regarding the implementation of online education/competencies and the barriers that some nurses view or experience regarding this type of education. The data will be analyzed using descriptive statistics, percentage of agreement, and t test.
Chapter Three 8
Overall the tone of this section was pretty good. I know writing a method section can be particularly difficult. Where you ran into trouble was largely with phrasing. When writing a thesis of any description, you need to assume that your reader is at least tangentially familiar with your topic as well as the general data collection and analysis techniques. Don't explain a concept that would be common knowledge to your professor for example. Also, strive to find the most succinct and direct way of stating things. 13 pages seems quite long for a methods section if your study only included a single assessment tool. Where you need to expand is in the actual break down of your sample information. You also need to spend more time talking about the measure you used. Necessary information in a methods section is the reliability and validity of the tool if it is one which is standardized, if it is one you made up, include sample questions and explain your reasoning for creating your own etc. You also make reference to randomizing your sample, its things like that that need to be clearly and succinctly elucidated. I was always told that a methods section should read like a how to, any other scientist should be able to turn to your methods section and recreate your experiment exactly. Resist the desire to try and make it sound nice" that's what your discussion and lit review are for. This section is just straight information. Your ref. section came out formatted very strangely and I was unable to separate which documents went with what pieces. I'm also unsure what the yellow highlighted section was for. In formal writing though stating "what a paper will find or what a paper is for" is improper. Present questions or research objectives in prose using numbering and list making only when absolutely necessary. In terms of strengths and weaknesses, from what I know of your paper things you should include are:
Negatives of a convenience sample
Inherent limitations of a self report multiple choice survey
Highlight the extremely high number of participants who actually completed and returned the survey
That your survey was anonymous and legitimately assessed the specific questions you were studying
GOOD LUCK!! I really hope I was able to help.. please though email me with any questions or if you need anything
The following information was presented in the original paper Data Collection…