Much has been written over the years about our need to build the science of nursing education and conduct studies that generate evidence for our practice as educators. To meet this goal, one recommendation includes more multisite studies done across schools of nursing. We need to use validated versus teacher-developed tools or to first conduct studies on tools we have adapted or developed to establish their validity and reliability. With the goal to build the science of nursing education, there also are recommendations for more meta-analyses and meta-syntheses, but we cannot do those without rigorous studies to synthesize. For much of this research, educators need adequate funding, which is limited in nursing education, and I do not see that changing anytime in the future.
The articles in this issue of Nurse Educator provide examples of studies that reflect many of these recommendations. A study that examined the outcomes of extern programs, compared to employment as a nursing assistant or in a non-health care job, was multisite and included students from 2 nursing programs, associate and baccalaureate, and from 2 extern programs. The investigators measured clinical decision making with a validated scale. In another study, a group of nurse educators compared faculty and student perceptions of incivility across disciplines at a large university to determine if incivility was more prevalent in one discipline than another. They had a large sample (n = 577) and used a valid and reliable tool, both of which add strength to their findings.
We need to invest in efforts to develop and test instruments for use in nursing education. Authors report on the development and validation of the Just Culture Assessment Tool for Nursing Education (JCAT-NE) for measuring just culture in nursing programs. They carefully describe the instrument's development, content validation, and their study with students. The JCAT-NE is a valid and reliable measure of just culture in academic settings, available for your use for research and for assessing just culture in your school.
Another recommendation is the need for systematic reviews in nursing education. In a review, the authors identify studies to answer a question or to learn more about a topic, critically appraise them, and synthesize findings. We have 3 reviews in this issue. In one study, the authors examined the research to learn more about acculturation into nursing among Hispanic/Latino prelicensure nursing students and new graduates. Another group of nurse educators conducted an integrative review on the use of simulation to develop teamwork skills in prelicensure nursing students. Scoping reviews are relatively new approaches to synthesizing evidence for teaching and evaluation in nursing. This issue includes a scoping review of objective structured clinical examinations (OSCE). Scoping reviews are valuable to describe the "scope" of an area of research and the types of studies being done-the authors reviewed 204 studies done across 33 countries and confirmed the value of OSCE in nursing.
Conducting multisite studies is important, but there is value to small studies done in a school of nursing. Not all studies can be multisite with large numbers of participants. We can learn about students, the feasibility of curriculum or course changes, issues with a new evaluation form, and processes that may need to be modified, among other areas, from studies in our own schools with our own students. Many of these are publishable and should be disseminated-they can be used to build evidence. Studies in clinical practice often begin with one group of patients in one setting. When published and replicated in other settings, we begin to learn more about the intervention or approach to care. This is also true in nursing education. Studies done in one school, when carefully designed and using validated tools, are important to build our knowledge about teaching in nursing.
As we begin this new academic year, I call on all nursing faculty to help others in their schools understand and value educational scholarship. Scholarship in nursing education includes research, but it is more than that. Educational innovations; new programs, curriculum models, and courses; creative teaching strategies; and new approaches developed by nurse educators to improve student learning outcomes are forms of scholarship when they are disseminated for use by others. These are important forms of scholarship that nurse educators do in all types of schools of nursing and at all program levels. We need to adopt broad definitions of scholarship in nursing education in our schools, and these definitions need to be integrated in your criteria for annual review, promotion, and tenure. Nurse Educator is committed to advancing the science of nursing education, but we are equally committed to disseminating your scholarship.
Marilyn H. Oermann, PhD, RN, ANEF, FAAN, Editor-in-Chief, Nurse Educator