Regulatory Influences on Curriculum

Regulatory Influences on Curriculum

Curriculum development and learning drivies learning in the nursing discipline. In this vein, the NLNAC and the National League of Nursing (NLN) do this in the various states. By using case studies, their impact upon curriculum development/revision within the nursing discipline will be analyzed by the author in this short essay. These regulatory agencies will be analyzed and the author will explore which of their subcomponents set policy and standards related to required curriculum content and development.

Unfortunately, the impact is not always positive. Indeed, there have been many bureaucratic barriers that have been erected in the way of effective curriculum development. In this essay's literature review, the importance of graduate education will noted and seconded. However, what disturbs this author is the lack of emphasis upon basic nursing education, especially in the LPN and four-year nursing ranks. This issue will also be addressed.

The mission of most any state Board of Nursing is to advance the safe quality care in that state via nursing licensing, certification, education and accountability for public protection. This is a similar story for the NLN. Both bodies are primarily concerned with the training and licensure of high quality, qualified nurses who will serve patients well.

Cathleen Shultz, the NLN's president puts it very well when she advocates "not throwing out the baby with the bath water" and to embrace diverse pathways to advanced practices in nursing education. With all of the development in nursing curriculum in the last 60 years, Ms Shultz remarks that "I believe one of the biggest mistakes of recent years has been the de-emphasis in graduate programs on preparation for nurse educators (Shultz, 2011).

" In this vein, the NLN led a round table discussion on April 21 on post-baccalaureate education. This discussion was attended by representatives from several universities and concluded with their affirmation of the NLN

's principles about diverse pathways in nursing education as they voiced their support for graduate level preparation for nursing education roles. In response to the health crises of this time, master's-level education must continue and must be further funded (ibid).

To bring this about Dr. Cheryl Holly has advocated the increasing use of distant education programs to help bring about the NLN's goals of implementing diverse methods of nursing education and informatics in the nation's nursing education programs. This is especially pertinent in our age when so many busy working adults are pursuing part-time education programs to further pursue training and retraining in the nursing discipline. In her estimation, distance education is more than capable of providing this increased flexibility and access in a cost efficient fashion in nursing education simultaneously. Because of this, e- learning is increasingly being seen as an economical way of continuing to expand educational activities in a recession while widening opportunities for students across the board in this country. All of this is done by making effective use of new, cutting edge instructional technologies while simultaneously providing busy students with an educational program that is functional and valid in the real-world (Holly, 2009, 508).

While graduate level education is sorely needed, will we neglect the needs of basic nursing education? Luckily, the NLNAC

seems to be providing direction on this issue. By studying the implementation of NLNAC Standard 2, we can see very graphically how a national nursing licensing organization and its subcomponents can handle a major issue. NLNAC Executive Director Sharon J. Tanner has recently fielded questions about compliance with NLNAC

Standard 2 which deals with the competency of instructors. Unfortunately, due to education cutbacks, nursing has like so many other fields of study made an increasing use of adjunct instructors. Many people have raised the issue that the adjuncts should be evaluated according to the same standards as full time faculty under Standard 2. The NLNAC addresses this issue by assigning a full-time faculty member to mentor the part-timer and help them deal with student issues. This mentoring faculty will file "documentation of the evaluation process...part-time faculty will be able to speak to the process and expectations associated with their role in the supervision of student clinical experiences (Tanner, 2011, 206) .

" This is dictated via detailed plans that the NLNAC has with universities.