Contradicciones explícitas y deliberadas en la República

The nursing degree is a vocationally-based, applied degree that leads to registration with the Nursing Council of New Zealand. Normal established practice in the ITP sector (Institutes of Technology and Polytechnics) in New Zealand in regard to curriculum development and design is to consult with relevant stakeholders, draw up a graduate profile and then bundle content into packages (courses) which will be measured by assessment against learning

outcomes. Within this design process, the student nurse must also be assessed against the Nursing Council of New Zealand Competencies (NCNZ, 2007b) where students are judged against predetermined criteria. Nursing degrees are designed to have a significant amount of clinical placement in the final year so that the student can demonstrate performance against these NCNZ competencies before a nursing school recommends them to the Nursing Council for admission to the register (students will still have to sit the State Final examination to be fully registered). Whereas the theory parts of the nursing degree are based on locally written learning outcomes that essentially drive the rest of the curriculum content. In these theory courses, students are assessed via achievement-based methodologies (as opposed to standard based or competency methodologies for the clinically based assessments) and the student receives a grade.

If curriculum can be thought of as a body of knowledge that is to be transmitted, (sometimes called the syllabus) the learning outcomes are then the objectives or the products of that knowledge. The Nursing Council of New Zealand is the syllabus-setting body, but does not prescribe the curriculum or the content in any detail, except for in general terms which leaves nursing schools to produce a graduate profile that aligns with the regional workforce, or with any specialty provision that the school could provide. It could be argued that a nationally prescribed syllabus could be an advantage for nursing where the focus is on content and consistency to a particular national standard (Nursing Council Scopes of Practice and Competencies) (NCNZ, 2005a; NCNZ 2007a). However, education that measures against set objectives seems appropriate for technicians, but it could be argued that this might not produce a graduate who is an autonomous decision maker who meets the needs of the current and future workforce.

The dichotomy that exists in most nursing schools with having to meet Nursing Council requirements for registration (that is, be deemed competent and a pass the state final examination), and the academic recognition required of a degree course of learning (accreditation by external bodies such as NZQA and ITPQ) makes curriculum development a more complicated process than for degrees in other discipline areas. Clarke (2003) states that “curriculum development …. nowadays

is more an issue of constructing documentation – for presentation to a curriculum body – which will satisfy the minutiae of predetermined criteria” (p. 3).

The focus on objectives (competencies and learning outcomes) is based on a ‘product model’ of curriculum design, which has its roots based in the needs of business, (or industry) where curriculum is a way of standardising the end product – the graduate (Smith, 2000). This obviously has relevance to a vocational, applied programme; however, it potentially can neglect the importance of the journey of education – building confidence, learning how to learn etc. The process model of curriculum development is a design approach that develops through the “dynamic interaction of action and reflection” (Smith, 2000, p. 10) which appears on face value to be similar to that required for nursing practice (action and reflection). It has been suggested that the process model of curriculum cannot be subject to examination (assessment). Stenhouse (1975) suggests that examinations or assessment should not be the end result of learning (that is, passing the course), but are a by-product only. He suggests that assessment underestimates the students’ actual ability, and that a student who does not engage with the learning activities in a curriculum that is developed by a process model, would not progress through the programme (irrespective of assessment) because it requires a commitment to educational aims which includes constant planning, acting and evaluation which is integrated into the education process (Grundy, 1987). The process model of curriculum design is heavily dependent on the setting of behavioural objectives and the focus is on the interaction of teachers, learners and knowledge. The process curriculum model that focuses on the development of the individual is probably best suited to producing a graduate that is capable of independent critical thinking and decision making; but a product model provides an element of confidence to stakeholders, policy makers and ultimately employers and registration bodies.

Informal learning, such as that which takes place in the workplace, or the clinical setting, is often not articulated as either product or process. The clinical practice part of a nursing degree tends to align towards the competencies of Nursing Council, in small, achievable and appropriate ‘chunks’ of experience. As such, a lot of the learning that takes place in the workplace would be part of a ‘hidden

curriculum’ that is firmly rooted in the social context of the learning. Jeffs and Smith (1990, 1999) argue that curriculum is divided into formal and informal education. The product model of curriculum does not appear to be compatible with informal learning where the emphasis is on process and praxis.

Often, informal learning situations attempt to set out the essential features of the learning encounter in advance, but sometimes this is not possible as the activities and topics that may be involved will vary (Eraut, 2004). The setting of learning outcomes that are negotiated in the workplace may have limited value and may not be clearly related to desired outcomes such as competencies and often have the effect of keeping the student busy, without engaging in learning opportunities when they come along, simply because they came along.

In essence, the product model of curriculum is possibly not the ideal design model for nursing as the focus is more on the performance of activities. This possibly was appropriate for training nurses of the past where the focus was on the performance of tasks. Nursing of the future may need graduates who are able to make decisions, possibly in isolation, and as such, a process model of curriculum design where the focus is on the development of the individual is probably the most appropriate.