Student Name
Capella University
NURS-FPX 6111 Assessment and Evaluation in Nursing Education
Prof. Name
Date
Course Evaluation Template
The following course evaluation template has been designed for the BSN program at Mountainside Teaching Hospital to assess the course titled “Improving Palliative Care for Geriatric Patients in Long-Term Care Settings.” The template is structured to evaluate student learning across the cognitive, psychomotor, and affective domains, ensuring a comprehensive assessment of knowledge, clinical skills, and professional attitudes developed during the course.
This evaluation tool enables students to reflect on their learning outcomes while providing faculty with meaningful feedback regarding instructional strategies, course structure, and overall program effectiveness. By integrating both quantitative and qualitative feedback, the evaluation process supports continuous improvement in nursing education and contributes to enhanced patient care outcomes in long-term care environments.
Part One: Standardized Course Evaluation Template
Student Course Evaluation Survey
Students are requested to review each statement carefully and indicate their level of agreement based on their experience in the course. The responses help determine whether course objectives were achieved and whether teaching strategies supported effective learning.
Rating Scale
| Rating | Meaning |
|---|---|
| 🟢 Strongly Agree | The statement fully reflects my experience |
| 🔵 Agree | The statement generally reflects my experience |
| ⚪ Neutral | I am uncertain or have no strong opinion |
| 🟠 Disagree | The statement does not reflect my experience |
| 🔴 Strongly Disagree | The statement strongly contradicts my experience |
Learning Objectives
The following questions assess whether students believe they achieved the intended learning objectives after completing the course.
| Learning Objective | Strongly Agree | Agree | Neutral | Disagree | Strongly Disagree |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Demonstrate a clear understanding of the fundamental concepts of palliative care in long-term care environments (Cognitive). | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ |
| Evaluate, assess, and manage pain along with other distressing symptoms experienced by older adults receiving palliative care (Cognitive + Psychomotor). | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ |
| Communicate effectively with patients, family members, and interdisciplinary healthcare teams regarding goals of end-of-life care (Affective). | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ |
| Apply evidence-based nursing interventions aimed at improving comfort, dignity, and quality of life for elderly patients (Cognitive + Psychomotor). | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ |
| Recognize and appropriately address ethical challenges and cultural considerations associated with palliative care decision-making (Cognitive + Affective). | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ |
These learning objectives measure whether the course strengthened students’ knowledge of palliative care concepts, their clinical abilities in symptom management, and their interpersonal competencies when working with vulnerable geriatric populations.
Program Outcomes
The following section evaluates how the course contributed to broader BSN program outcomes related to professional nursing practice.
| Program Outcome | Strongly Agree | Agree | Neutral | Disagree | Strongly Disagree |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| The course strengthened my ability to apply specialized nursing knowledge to deliver safe and high-quality care across the lifespan (Cognitive). | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ |
| It improved my clinical reasoning and analytical abilities when developing comprehensive care plans for patients (Cognitive). | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ |
| It enhanced my ability to collaborate and communicate effectively with interdisciplinary healthcare teams (Affective). | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ |
| It helped me deliver culturally sensitive and patient-centered palliative care to diverse populations (Cognitive + Affective). | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ |
| It strengthened my understanding of ethical and legal responsibilities while advocating for patient dignity and autonomy (Cognitive + Affective). | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ |
| It developed my leadership skills in coordinating care among healthcare professionals in palliative care settings (Cognitive + Affective). | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ |
These outcomes evaluate whether students can integrate course learning into broader nursing competencies such as clinical judgment, ethical practice, teamwork, and leadership in patient care.
Instructor Approaches
This section asks students to evaluate the effectiveness of the instructor’s teaching strategies and learning environment.
| Instructor Practice | Strongly Agree | Agree | Neutral | Disagree | Strongly Disagree |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| The instructor clearly explained course goals, expectations, and evaluation criteria. | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ |
| The course materials and lectures were relevant to real-world clinical practice in palliative care. | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ |
| Multiple teaching strategies were used to promote learning (e.g., lectures, case studies, simulations, and group discussions). | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ |
| The instructor provided timely and constructive feedback on assignments and assessments. | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ |
| The classroom environment encouraged participation, inquiry, and critical thinking. | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ |
Instructor evaluation allows the program to determine whether teaching strategies effectively support student engagement and comprehension.
Overall Feedback and Recommendations
Students are encouraged to provide additional comments regarding their experience in the course.
Possible guiding questions include:
- What aspects of the course most effectively supported your learning?
- What improvements would enhance the course for future students?
- Were the course materials, assignments, and clinical simulations relevant to real-world palliative care practice?
These open-ended responses allow students to elaborate on their experiences and suggest constructive improvements to the curriculum.
Part Two: Executive Summary
The course evaluation template developed for “Improving Palliative Care for Geriatric Patients in Long-Term Care Settings” is designed to assess the extent to which course objectives align with overall BSN program outcomes. The evaluation focuses on three primary learning domains—cognitive, psychomotor, and affective—to ensure that students develop not only theoretical knowledge but also practical clinical skills and professional attitudes required in palliative care practice.
Through this structured evaluation system, the program measures students’ ability to apply palliative care principles in clinical contexts such as pain management, ethical decision-making, interdisciplinary collaboration, and culturally sensitive care delivery. These competencies are essential for ensuring high-quality patient care, especially among older adults receiving long-term care services. Evidence suggests that nursing education programs emphasizing collaborative decision-making and patient-centered care significantly improve both educational outcomes and clinical practice (Sultan et al., 2022).
In addition, the evaluation framework helps determine whether students have developed the critical thinking, leadership, and communication skills necessary to function effectively in interdisciplinary healthcare teams. By examining both quantitative ratings and qualitative comments, educators can identify strengths and areas requiring improvement within the course structure. Ultimately, this approach ensures that nursing students are adequately prepared to deliver compassionate and evidence-based palliative care in diverse healthcare settings.
Assumptions
The development of this course evaluation tool is based on several key assumptions regarding the learning process and student feedback. First, it assumes that meaningful learning occurs across the cognitive, psychomotor, and affective domains, requiring a multidimensional evaluation strategy to capture students’ knowledge, clinical competence, and professional attitudes.
Second, the template assumes that students are capable of providing honest and reflective feedback regarding their educational experiences. Their responses are expected to offer valuable insights into how effectively the course supported the development of their competencies in palliative care. It is also assumed that students’ self-reported perceptions generally correspond with their actual performance and learning outcomes.
Another underlying assumption is that evaluating these domains will provide useful information about instructional effectiveness and curriculum quality. Finally, the evaluation assumes that the collected feedback will be actively utilized by educators and program administrators to improve the course design and maintain alignment with program learning outcomes.
Assessment Strategies and Supporting Evidence
The course evaluation template integrates multiple assessment strategies to produce a comprehensive understanding of student learning. These strategies include the Likert scale, open-ended feedback questions, and Bloom’s taxonomy as an educational framework.
The Likert scale is widely used in educational research because it allows for systematic measurement of attitudes, perceptions, and learning outcomes. By providing structured response options, it enables quantitative analysis and comparison across student cohorts (Kusmaryono et al., 2022). This data helps educators identify patterns in student experiences and evaluate the overall effectiveness of the course.
In addition to quantitative measures, open-ended questions allow students to express their perspectives in greater depth. These responses provide qualitative insights into specific strengths or limitations of the course, offering suggestions that may not be captured through numerical ratings alone (Aznar-Mas et al., 2023).
The evaluation is further guided by Bloom’s Taxonomy, which organizes learning into hierarchical domains such as knowledge acquisition, skill development, and attitude formation. By aligning evaluation questions with these domains, the assessment ensures that students develop foundational knowledge, clinical competencies, and ethical awareness required for professional nursing practice (Momen et al., 2022).
Together, these strategies create a balanced evaluation process that combines statistical data with descriptive feedback, thereby supporting evidence-based improvements in curriculum design.
Criteria to Evaluate Selected Format
Several criteria were considered when selecting the format for the course evaluation template. One important factor is clarity and comprehensiveness, ensuring that each question clearly addresses a specific learning outcome and captures relevant aspects of student learning.
Another key criterion is validity and reliability, meaning that the evaluation tool accurately measures intended learning outcomes and produces consistent results across different groups of students (Erlinawati & Muslimah, 2021). The use of standardized questions contributes to reliability by reducing variations in interpretation.
The evaluation format also emphasizes accessibility and usability, ensuring that students can easily complete the survey without confusion or technical challenges. An intuitive design encourages higher response rates and more accurate feedback.
Finally, actionable feedback is a critical criterion. The evaluation must generate information that faculty can use to improve teaching methods, revise course materials, and strengthen alignment with program objectives. By focusing on practical outcomes such as teamwork, leadership, and ethical nursing practice, the template ensures that the evaluation directly supports the program’s educational goals.
Validity and Reliability of Evaluation Methods
Ensuring the validity and reliability of evaluation methods is essential for producing accurate and meaningful results. In this template, validity is achieved by aligning evaluation questions with clearly defined course objectives and program outcomes. Each question corresponds to competencies that nursing students must develop to provide effective palliative care in long-term care settings.
Reliability is strengthened through the use of standardized Likert-scale questions, which allow consistent measurement across multiple student groups. These quantitative responses provide measurable indicators of learning outcomes, while open-ended questions offer complementary qualitative insights into student experiences (Aznar-Mas et al., 2023; Kusmaryono et al., 2022).
Another strength of the evaluation is its integration of Bloom’s Taxonomy, which ensures that learning assessment addresses knowledge acquisition, skill development, and professional attitudes. This structured framework helps educators evaluate whether students have achieved comprehensive competency in palliative care practice.
However, one limitation of the evaluation is its reliance on self-reported student feedback. Some students may overestimate or underestimate their competencies, which can introduce bias into the results. To strengthen reliability, institutions may supplement course evaluations with additional data sources such as faculty observations, clinical performance assessments, and simulation evaluations.
Conclusion
The course evaluation template provides a systematic approach for assessing the effectiveness of the course “Improving Palliative Care for Geriatric Patients in Long-Term Care Settings.” By incorporating assessments across cognitive, psychomotor, and affective domains, the evaluation ensures that students develop the knowledge, clinical abilities, and professional values required for high-quality palliative care.
The structured combination of quantitative and qualitative assessment methods allows educators to identify both strengths and opportunities for improvement within the course. Although self-reported responses may introduce some bias, the integration of multiple evaluation strategies enhances the overall reliability and usefulness of the findings. Ultimately, the evaluation process supports continuous improvement in nursing education and the delivery of compassionate, patient-centered care in long-term care settings.
References
Aznar-Mas, L. E., Huerta, L. A., & Marin-Garcia, J. A. (2023). Effectiveness of the use of open-ended questions in student evaluation of teaching in an engineering degree. Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management, 16(3), 521–534. https://doi.org/10.3926/jiem.5620
Erlinawati, E., & Muslimah, M. (2021). Test validity and reliability in learning evaluation. Bulletin of Community Engagement, 1(1), 26. https://doi.org/10.51278/bce.v1i1.96
Kusmaryono, I., Wijayanti, D., & Maharani, H. R. (2022). Number of response options, reliability, validity, and potential bias in the use of the Likert scale in education and social science research: A literature review. International Journal of Educational Methodology, 8(4), 625–637. https://doi.org/10.12973/ijem.8.4.625
NURS FPX 6111 Assessment 3 Course Evaluation Template.
Momen, A., Ebrahimi, M., & Hassan, A. M. (2022). Importance and implications of theory of Bloom’s taxonomy in different fields of education. Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Emerging Technologies and Intelligent Systems, 573, 515–525. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-20429-6_47
Sultan, L., Alsaywid, B., De Jong, N. D., & De Nooijer, J. D. (2022). Current trends in interprofessional shared decision-making programmes in health professions education: A scoping review. Sustainability, 14(20), 13157. https://doi.org/10.3390/su142013157