Formative Evaluation for In-Hospital Nursing Curriculum
This paper argues that formative evaluation is the most appropriate method for assessing and improving in-hospital nursing curricula. Drawing on Keating's curriculum development framework, the paper outlines a three-part evaluation plan built around benchmarks, regular research audits, and alignment with the hospital's master plan. It also addresses accreditation sources — including technology companies and the National League for Nursing — and explains how ongoing data collection can be used to correct curriculum weaknesses and keep content current with evolving medical technology. The discussion emphasizes that continuous, targeted evaluation protects both nurse competency and patient care quality.
- Introduction to Curriculum Evaluation in Nursing: Why evaluation matters in evolving nursing education
- Why Formative Evaluation Is the Optimal Method: Formative evaluation enables targeted, cost-effective curriculum updates
- Key Elements of the Evaluation Plan: Benchmarks, research audits, and hospital master plan alignment
- Accreditation Sources and Verification: Technology companies and NLN ensure curriculum credibility
- Using Data Collection to Improve the Curriculum: Data drives ongoing curriculum corrections and currency
✍️ How to write this paper — guide, tools & examples ▾
What makes this paper effective
- The paper immediately connects evaluation theory to a real-world nursing context, grounding abstract concepts in a practical hospital setting.
- It uses a concrete example — updating an Ultrasound Peripheral IV protocol — to illustrate why formative evaluation saves time and resources compared to wholesale curriculum replacement.
- The three-part evaluation plan (benchmarks, research audits, alignment with the hospital master plan) is logically sequenced and easy to follow, giving the argument a clear internal structure.
Key academic technique demonstrated
The paper demonstrates applied citation reasoning: rather than simply quoting sources, it integrates them to justify specific design choices. For example, Keating's definition of formative evaluation is cited not just as background but as the direct rationale for choosing that method over alternatives. This technique strengthens credibility by showing that each recommendation is evidence-based.
Structure breakdown
The paper opens with a brief justification for why evaluation matters in nursing specifically. It then selects and defends formative evaluation as the best method, outlines three concrete evaluation plan components, addresses accreditation, and closes by explaining how collected data feeds back into curriculum improvement. The argument moves from rationale → method → plan → oversight → application, forming a clean problem-to-solution arc.
Introduction to Curriculum Evaluation in Nursing
Evaluation is at the core of designing an appropriate, useful, and up-to-date curriculum. This is especially important in the area of nursing, where medical knowledge and technology are constantly changing. Without an appropriate evaluation method, a curriculum can become outdated — or worse, inapplicable — resulting in poor quality of medical care from its participants. For this reason, the following evaluation framework should be utilized.
Why Formative Evaluation Is the Optimal Method
The best method of evaluation for an in-hospital nursing curriculum is formative evaluation. This method is optimal because it provides information not only about the curriculum's success, but also forecasts any weaknesses within it. As stated in Keating's text, formative evaluation is intended as a basis for improvement (p. 314). In other words, using this method allows updates to individual parts of the curriculum when necessary, saving the hospital time and money that would otherwise be spent recreating the entire curriculum once it becomes outdated.
For instance, should a new needle or protocol be released in the area of Ultrasound Peripheral IV procedures, a hospital using formative evaluation after each training session would identify the areas where the curriculum is lacking and make the targeted adjustments necessary to keep it current and useful.
Key Elements of the Evaluation Plan
The primary key element of this evaluation plan would be benchmarks. Benchmarking is critical because it ensures that the evaluation is specific to the various components of the curriculum. Data would be collected through a qualifying exam administered at the end of the course as well as a three-month follow-up exam completed by the nurses (Davis & Harden, 2003).
The second key element would be regular research evaluation, ideally conducted annually. The purpose is to update any outdated components of the curriculum and keep its content cutting edge. This process would involve two components: a survey completed by nurses during the course, which solicits input as to whether anything in the curriculum seems outdated, and an annual audit and fact-check of all curriculum content.
The third key element would be verifying how the curriculum aligns with the hospital's master plan. Should the hospital change its overall strategies, those changes should be reflected in the curriculum. Otherwise, the curriculum risks becoming irrelevant and falling out of use. The National League for Nursing provides accreditation standards that can help guide this alignment process.
References
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 Educational Research Journal, 21(2), 449–460.
Keating, S. (2011). Curriculum development and evaluation in nursing. Springer Publishing Company.
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.