This section provides an overview of similarities and differences between participants’ views (Smith et al., 2009). As table 11 shows, there were many
similarities the participants shared, highlighting the commonality of the participants’ perceptions and indicating the strength of their feelings, particularly in relation to exclusion from their new environment, feeling fragmented and isolated, and loss of professional identity. In addition, the university induction was considered not fit for purpose.
However, there were nuances within their individual responses. Only one participant (Janet), who had no prior VL experience, showed a difference in relation to
expectations of the nurse educator role. Those with prior VL experience perceived that they were expected to be prepared for their new role. They also found staff expected more from them due to their prior experiences as a VL. Janet, who had recently worked for the local authority, appeared to cope with working across the various sites better than the other participants, as evidenced by the lack of reference to the theme in relation to location and culture of sites. Lorna, unlike the other
participants, felt well supported by her mentor who was from a different field of nursing; this provided a different perspective which was found beneficial.
Table 11: Agreement and exceptions between participants Super- ordinate themes Sub- ordinate themes
Lorna Janet Diane Jenny Brenda Linda Tracey Hannah Nuances
Partial Transition Expectations of nurse educator role
VL experience gave a false impression of the role.
Greater expectation from existing staff of new staff with VL experience.
Diane expected a buddy system. Career
change
Career change: ‘thought I would still be a nurse’
(Jenny).
Fear in leaving NHS.
Different mind-set: Tracey described staff “don’t have
that nurse attitude’. Dual CoPs University
contextual influence issues
Excluded from new environment, feeling there was ‘secret
manual people were hiding’.
Needed to have an ‘A-Z manual’. (Lorna).
Location and culture of
sites issues
No staff room on some sites. Admin staff busy, not approachable. Expected to absorb how to do things. Feeling fragmented, isolated. Introduction Tick box
exercise
Induction provided opportunity for Linda to continue to meet up with new colleagues as a CoP.
Department induction regarded as tick box exercise by Janet.
University induction described as not fit for purpose. Limited role
of mentor
Relationship between mentor and mentee. Focus of this relationship was about the role, not the field.
Time allocated to mentorship responsibility recognised as important by Diane.
4.7 Summary
This chapter has presented the findings constructed within the three super-ordinate themes of ‘partial transition’, ‘dual CoPs’ and ‘introduction’; and their associated sub- ordinate themes, ‘expectations of nurse educator role’ and ‘career change’,
‘university contextual influences’ and ‘location and culture of sites’, and ‘tick box exercise’ and ‘limited role of mentor.’
Within these themes are a range of participants’ key reflections on their lived experiences during their transition into HE, including what it felt like for them to essentially undertake a career change, and the challenges they faced during their induction and orientation.
At the end of each of the sub-ordinate themes, a summary of key findings and issues which impacted on and shaped the participants lived experiences has been provided. Under the super-ordinate theme of ‘transition’, the sub-ordinate theme of ‘expectations of the role’ highlighted that participants felt that, due to their VL experience, existing staff had unrealistic expectations of them. Many participants had not realised what the role involved. The second sub-ordinate theme was ‘identity’, which emphasised the importance of recognising the psychological
aspects of coping with change and the social aspects of establishing their new roles. Under the super-ordinate theme of ‘dual CoPs’, the sub-ordinate theme of ‘university contextual influences’ acknowledged that participants had felt neglected and
unsupported, and that there was an expectation that they had to learn these new systems for themselves. The sub-ordinate theme ‘location and culture of sites’found that amongstaff who frequently worked across sites this perpetuated transient working practices. It also limited development of personal and academic identity. Under the super-ordinate theme ‘introduction’, the sub-ordinate theme ‘tick box exercise’ highlighted that induction needed to be designed around the needs and requirements of the job, rather than organisational policies and systems. The sub- ordinate theme ‘limited role of mentor’ recognised that formal training for mentors was needed, along with allowances in their workload. It was perceived that they were overwhelmed with other workload commitments, and this affected the quality of regular communication. The new nurse educators had come from practice where the mentors’ role was recognised as a priority in supporting new nurses or staff moving to a new clinical area through preceptorship (Demsey, 2007).
Finally, table 11 identifies similarities and differences between participants’ stories. It shows that the majority agreed that they had expected their VL experience would have helped them; all discussed how they were not prepared for the role. However, it also shows that for one person having no VL experience prior to starting in post had its advantages: they had no expectations and the role was less stressful. The majority also agreed with the location and culture of the site being a theme, though again for one participant this was not an issue; however, this participant’s previous role involved delivering training at multiple locations. In the next chapter, these findings will be explored in more depth using the data and associated themes in relation to the literature and theory of CoPs.