EXAMINING THE LITERATURE ON THE EVALUATION SCALE OF PRACTICAL TRAINING IN NURSING

This study clarifies the trend of evaluation scales for clinical practice by nursing students. This study will be used as material to evaluate both, the educational abilities of professors and the practical nursing abilities of students, in clinical practice. The search method was based on the Medical Journal （ICHUSHI） Web Ver. 5, with the search period from January 2005 to September 2015. The search was limited to original articles with the terms "clinical practice," "nursing students, " and "evaluation." Among the articles, those that used scales to evaluate nursing practice were included in the analysis. Those that used only original questionnaires were excluded. As a result, 1,132 articles were extracted. Of these, 73 were applicable to the conditions of this study. There were 55 types of evaluation scales used, and a wide variety of scales from 1 to 11 per article. The evaluators were classified into three categories: teachers, instructors, and students. The evaluation targets were classified into five categories: teachers, instructors, students, practice processes （general practice）, and practice environment. Among the literature that assessed people, the four references that assessed teachers were the fewest, and all of them were identified after 2011. There were 20 references that evaluated instructors and 45 references that evaluated students, which were confirmed in 2005. Of the documents that evaluated instructors, three used the Japanese version of the Effective Clinical Teaching Behaviors （ECTB） for students and one used the Scale of Clinical Teaching Behaviors （SCTB） for nursing practice for instructors （self-evaluation）. As for the raters and rating scales in the literature that assessed instructors, 11 of the 14 student evaluations were ECTB, three were SCTB, and six instructors （self-assessment） were ECTB. In recent studies on educational evaluation in nursing practice, the commonality of the SCTB and ECTB was confirmed as a scale for evaluating the educational practice ability of professors. However, only a few studies have evaluated teachers. In addition, those evaluations were conducted at two or three points in time; for instance, after basic practice and before and after domain practice. There were no studies on student evaluations throughout the entire process, which could have been conducted from basic nursing practice to after the completion of all practices. Finally, it was found that the students evaluated their practical training by combining the evaluation scales for each component of their practical nursing skills.