Developing mentors to support students in practice, Part 5: Facilitation of learning
Summary
The last article, ‘developing mentors to support students in practice part 4’ considered some
of the myriad of different learning theories and how they relate to clinical practice.
Developing a good understanding of these is essential for mentors and practice teachers as it
enables them to deliver quality evidence based learning support.
This is particularly
important given that good learning support is built upon educator who possess a good
knowledge of their specialist area as well as the tools and methods they can use to support
learning (Coe et al. 2014). As can be seen from box 1, the third Nursing and Midwifery
Council (2008) standard for the ‘support of learning and assessment in practice’ relates to the
facilitation of learning. In order to do this, mentors and practice teachers need to demonstrate
the ability to diagnose the needs of learners and deliver appropriate support to meet those
needs. This article will look into some of the more practical aspect of delivering that support
and the tools that can be used to do this.
Introduction
The last article looked at some of the key overarching theories of learning and the
epistemological assumptions upon which they are based. To some authors this is regarded as
a kind of linear progression from a time of teacher led instruction to the present day where
student led facilitation is more possible (Gopee 2011). Whilst this is arguably true in terms
of how people may conceive teaching and learning, the reality may be somewhat less defined.
Instead these different theories represent different theoretic standpoints with which to explore
the concept of teaching and learning. What is perhaps true however, is the way in which the
focus of the strategies has shifted from that of the teacher to that of the learning. The NMC
(2008) standards for the support of learning and assessment in practice use the word facilitate
when discussing the mentors role in the learning process. This is very much exemplary of the
current commonly held view of what effective learning entails. This is further supported by
the subheadings of the standard that highlight the need to understand the learners current
stage of learning and to enable the use of learning strategies are appropriate for that stage.
Student-centred Learning
The fact that a student-centred approach to learning is highlighted within the NMC standards
should not be the only reason why this kind of approach is adopted by mentors and practice
teachers. It is often highlighted how student centred approaches to learning promote a higher
level of engagement, commitment and motivation (Bailey-McHale & Hart 2013). Further to
this, engaging the existing knowledge base of the learner ensures that they understand the
relevance of what is being learnt with regard to their own practice and development (Cobb &
Bowers 1999). Malcolm Knowles took the notion of student-centred learning further and
conceptualized the idea that there are distinct differences in the way adults and children learn
(Knowles 1990). Up until this point the term pedagogy was used as a fairly blanket term to
describe any type of learning or teaching. Knowles (1990) however, regarded this as a label
used to describe the more teacher-centred style of instruction that he felt was for use in
educating children. He felt that these techniques did not work for adults and instead coined
the term andragogy to describe how adults undertake learning.
Within the concept of andragogy, adults are regarded as self-governing individuals with a vast
repertoire of existing skills and knowledge; furthermore, they need to regard a subject as
relevant in order to be motivated to learn it. This very much places an emphasis on the
learning process being more of a partnership between the teacher and learner in which they
mutually identify learning opportunities and objectives.
The concept of andragogy and
pedagogy as defined in this way does however receive a lot of criticism (Blondy 2007). The
majority of this is more directed at the bifurcation of the ideologies of how people learn into
different explanations for adults and children (Hartree 1984). Indeed this does go against
the general conception of student-centred education given that it is a universal theory for
learning, not one that is intended only to apply to adults. Following this criticism, Knowles
later revised his concept and suggest that instead the two idea where extremes on either end of
a continuum
(Blondy 2007; Knowles 1990). Thus, the use of either approach may be appropriate at any
given time.
Learning Activity 1
Consider Knowles’s concepts of pedagogy Vs andragogy and the
notion that they exist on a continuum of extremes. Thinking about
situations in the past when you have been a learner, where on the
continuum do you think you where as a learner? For each of the
instances you have thought of, consider why you was at that point on
the continuum. What it because of the way the learning was
structured? Perhaps you chose to learn in that particular way, if so,
why?
Aside from the wider debate regarding the suitability of ‘adult modes’ of learning for the
education of children, Knowles’s concepts do provide a very clear set of considerations.
These fit well with the earlier concepts of learner-centred methods: first and foremost it
places an emphasis on the need for learners to be actively engaged with what they are
learning (Rogers 1983). Practice placements offer an ideal arena for this given the readily
available and rich array of learning opportunities present. As beneficial as it may be to be
presented with such a diverse and rich array of learning opportunities, it does require careful
negotiation between the learner and mentor/practice teacher. In this sense the mentor may
take on the role of experience broker, in which they discuss the level of knowledge the
student has and where they need to be. They can then help them to identify which learning
opportunities would fit their current stage of learning. From the mentors perspective this
requires a clear understanding of the students ability, the clinical environment in which they
work and the methods which they can use to support the student.
This negotiation of learning does demand a high level of skill on the part of the mentor.
Gopee (2011) highlights this by noting that mentors and practice teachers need to display
‘genuineness’, ‘trust and acceptance’ as well as ‘empathic understanding’. Arguably such
qualities are not too far removed from those required in any healthcare role, in particular
nursing. Furthermore, the notion could be simplified by postulating that trust is the centrally
important attribute of a learning relationship. Particularly given that a lack of acceptance,
genuineness or empathy would result in a lack of trust. It could also be conceived that the
relationship between nurse and patient has many similarities to that of mentor and student.
Although it would be unjustified to suggest that learning could not occur in situations where
there is little or no trust, it would be feasible to suggest that it would be poorer for it. This is
particularly relevant given the notion suggested by Knowles (1990) that learners need to see
the relevance of what is to be learnt.
Phil Race also highlights the importance of active participation on the process of learning
within his ‘ripples on a pond’ model of learning (Race 2010). This model places slightly less
emphasis on (but does not disregard) the relationship between the learner and facilitator, but
instead sets out a number of conditions required for effective learning.
These are
needing/wanting to learn, doing, feedback and digesting (Race 2010). First of all, learners
must have some kind of desire to learn, which can be driven by a combination of needing to,
and/or wanting to. Then their needs to be some kind of participation in what is being learnt
and this in turn must yield some form of feedback to the learner. This may be the actual
outcome of what they are doing, or it may also encompass some form of feedback from the
facilitator of the learning. Finally, the learner must be able to make sense of their experiences
based on their existing knowledge base and experience. The simplicity of this model makes
it a good mental checklist for mentors to utilise when planning and delivering learning
experiences. Particularly if they are taking advantage of opportunistic scenarios for which
they have not planned.
Learning Domains
A common way to plan learning is to break down what is being learnt into what are often
termed learning domains. The most prevalent way of categorising learning into domains are
the ones originally forwarded by Benjamin Bloom in which there are three categories;
cognitive, psychomotor and affective (Bloom et al. 2001). The cognitive domain relates to
knowledge and mental reasoning, psychomotor is the ability to undertake physical skills and
Learning Activity 2
Make a list of several things that you do that are central to your role,
such as clinical skills or key practices. Make sure you note the full
skills, not a broken down component of it.
For each of the items on your list, try to break down what is required
in order to undertake that skill in terms of the domains set out by
bloom et al (2001). What aspects are cognitive, which require
psychomotor skills and where do you need to display affective
attributes.
affective is about feelings, values and beliefs. Breaking down what needs to be learnt in this
way can be very helpful when planning learning or indeed assessments. Care however does
need to be taken so as not to overly fragment what is being learnt into the different domains,
particularly in the way it is taught (Bereiter & Scardamalia 2005). Over fragmenting in this
way can reduce the perceived relevance of the topic to the learner since learning cannot be
applied to practice in such way. Practice is a joined up and complex endeavour that can not
be easily broken down. It can however be helpful when articulating to students what needs to
be learnt for a particular topic.
This is particularly helpful in clinical practice because
intricacies and expertise utilised by a practitioner may not always be obvious to the observer.
Although it is not necessarily true that each domain is present in all things that a healthcare
student might be required to master, mentors and practice teachers should give each careful
consideration. The affective domain is perhaps the most likely of all to be missed given it can
be very subjective and perhaps less concrete in nature. Arguably this has greater significance
within healthcare because of the interpersonal nature of the role (Killgallon 2012). A student
can demonstrate both knowledge and skill in performing a clinical task but leave the patient
feeling that the episode of care has been suboptimal. This is obviously not an acceptable
level of performance and demonstrates a need to improve upon the application of affective
domain
skills.
The domains of nursing came about following a higher education working group led by
Bloom with the intent of investigating how higher forms of thinking could be conceptualised
within education.
What was also devised at the same time was a system for ranking the
levels of performance within each domain, called a taxonomic scale (Bloom et al. 2001).
This scale starts at the bottom with what are termed lower order thinking skills and progress
up towards higher order thinking skills at the top. These can be used when planning learning
to articulate the level at which individuals should be performing within a given domain
(Kinnell & P. Hughes 2010). In general the lower order skills relate to the rote learning and
recall of discrete facts, or perhaps passive interpersonal engagement such as listening. Higher
order skills involve more analysis and evaluation, such as adapting practices or interpreting
data.
Taxonomic scales can often be found with different verbs listed under each category to help
guide the language used when articulating the performance required. This is particularly
helpful with working with students to plan episodes of learning. When selecting the level of
performance required, mentors and practice teachers need to consider the stage of the course
the student is on as well as topic or subject that is in focus. Thus whilst it may be a
reasonable expectation that a student in their third year should be working towards a higher
level, this level will not be universal to all the topics they cover. A third year nursing student
would be expected to be able to adapt their practice to accommodate unexpected
developments as they change a dressing. Conversely, they would only be expected to be able
to describe the procedure for administering IV medication.
Learning Activity 3
Return to the notes you made in the last learning activity regarding the
different aspects of your role. Where you have broken them down
between the domains, consider the level of performance required for
that aspect of the skill.
Attempt to write these out at statements using key verbs to articulate
this level.
Learning Styles
Another consideration that is often used to aid in the planning and development of learning,
particularly when the educator is attempting to personalise learning, are learning styles.
There are a variety of different tools available to analyse the learning style of a learner but
one of the most popular is based on the experiential learning cycle of Kolb that was discussed
in the last article. Honey & Mumford (1992) developed this questionnaire-based tool that
presents a series of statements for the responder to indicate if they agree with them or not.
Based on the questions which the responder indicated an affinity towards, the tool will
indicate their preference toward learning in a particular way (Mumford et al. 1992). So for
the Honey & Mumford questionnaire the possible outcomes are Activist, Reflector,
Pragmatist and Theorist.
The idea behind learning styles is to allow educators to be able to adapt the methods of
delivery in order to play to the strengths of the learner, or to present material in ways in which
they have an affinity for. So reflectors for example would be given more time to think about
issues or events whilst activists may need to be engaged in activities earlier. In addition to
this, it is also intended to help educators identify the styles of learning an individual is weaker
at so that they can concentrate on building up those areas (Mumford et al. 1992). There is
however an inherent danger in the use of learning styles. On the face of it they represent an
easy way to categorise and sort learners into different groups so that learning can be tailored
accordingly. This in turn provides a label that can be used to diagnose and describe issues a
student may be experiencing, or provide an explanation for failed learning when the teaching
style is at odds with the learning style (Killgallon 2012). But this strict and unmovable
adherence to the results is not really the intention of the many of the theorists the first
produced them (Coffield et al. 2004) and represents a misuse of the instrument.
There can be a number of criticisms levelled at the use of learning styles, such as the oftenminimal research that underpins some of them. The validity of the tool is often questioned
because it is argued that it is an attempt to assign a quantitative value to a qualitative response
(Coffield et al. 2004).
In addition to this there are ethical questions around the
commercialisation of many of the tools, which is slightly juxtapose to the traditional open and
sharing nature of academic enquiry. Despite this they do remain a very popular tool, and this
itself remains a point of contention. With some sceptics warning over the excessive amount
of time, effort and precedence devoted to what they regard as a single influencing factor on
learning (Coffield et al. 2004). The compromise to this debate could perhaps be found in the
way in which such tools are implemented and utilised.
As noted above, strict adherence to the outputs of measurement tools such as this is at risk of
narrowing the mentors focus when planning learning. A looser and more accommodating
approach enables mentors to utilise the results to inform and guide their practice, whilst also
leaving room for other influences (Bailey-McHale & Hart 2013). This however is still
selling them short of their potential. Opening up a dialogue with the learner over the results
of such a tool and encouraging their interpretation of them provides a good discussion point
about their learning. One of the most valuable roles of a mentor is to help learners understand
how they learn (Gopee 2011) since there is no way to prepare them for everything they need.
The use of such tools may provide them with a level of metacognition that can be utilised to
reflect on their learning and identify ways to improve their learning strategies (Coffield et al.
2004). In such instances mentors have a responsibility to also ensure that students fully
understand the scope and limits of the tools they are using. It would be unfruitful to inform a
learner they are a reflector and that’s just how they learn. Informing someone that they have
a ‘preference’ for learning via reflection however yields more insight.
Furthermore,
exploring how this might impact on their learning when they have little time to reflect may
result in the development of better learning strategies in such scenarios.
Planning Vs Opportunistic Learning
Supporting learning in practice presents a myriad of challenges to all the practitioners within
a learning environment, but this is especially so for the mentors themselves. By the same
token, the planning of learning can be even more challenging and thus it necessitates the need
for mentors to be flexible in their approach (Bailey-McHale & Hart 2013; Omansky 2010).
The various learning theories and ideologies presented so far offer a broad and detailed basis
upon which to build. Furthermore they provide good theoretical structures and mechanisms
that can be utilised to diagnose individual learning needs and preferences. This however is
perhaps where their usefulness ends. That is not to disregard the need for mentors to have a
firm understanding of them, as with clinical practice, educational practice should be built
upon best evidence. In addition to this firm knowledge base, mentors also need a repertoire
of skills and tools to help them deliver effective and meaningful support of learning.
One of the big challenges that mentors face is choosing how much to plan in the way of
learning opportunities and how much can be taken advantage of as opportunities present
themselves. The amount that can be planned will vary significantly between placement areas.
One of the first considerations should be around what, if anything, should all students have
gained by the end of the placement (Gopee 2011). These may be skills that they should be
able to undertake, knowledge they should have or experiences that they should have had
exposure to. The answer to this question may be different for the different types of student
that visit, but it should be informed by their programme of study, their stage within that
programme and its perceived relevance to future practice. An important factor to remember
at this stage, is that the placement should support the learning of the professional skills
required for the individual’s future career. That career may or may not be in the current area
of practice, thus transferable skills and knowledge are key (Wilson 2014), as is the need to
build emotional intelligence and life long learning skills.
Planned learning opportunities add an element of structure to placements and give students a
clear understanding of what is required of them (Gopee 2011).
For some practice
placements that have a high through flow of learners, they may offer rolling programmes of
study. For other areas it might be more a matter of having some prepared materials ready to
be utilised as required. A key advantage of having planned learning sessions is their ability to
act as enhancers to the learners experiences of the placement. This is particularly relevant
when the learner is likely to encounter things they have little or no prior experience of; as it
can provide a sense-making framework with which they can interpret their experiences. This
fits in well with many of the learning theories discussed in the previous article, where it is
noted that learners need to be able to make sense of things as well as see its relevance
(Fosnot 2005).
Planned learning does not need to be a sit down session with a flipchart or presentation
(Bailey-McHale & Hart 2013). There are a range of different techniques that can be used
such as small group work, case studies, workbooks, e-learning materials, watching videos,
demonstrations and question/answer sessions (Gopee 2011). The important consideration is
how it fits with the content of what is being delivered. This should be selected to enable the
learner the opportunity to engage with what they are required to learn, thus learning by doing
(Race 2010). That does not mean that they have to be actively undertaking skills in order to
learn. What it means is that if a student needs to learn the difference between similarly
presenting conditions, the methods chosen should expose them to the need to have to use the
reasoning skills required, rather than providing a list of differences. When planning learning
opportunities in practice mentors and practice teachers should seek to take full advantage of
the intimacy of the mentor/mentee relationship. Unlike classroom learning, mentors will only
have small groups or single students to support at any given time (Butts & Rich 2014). This
means that they can explore individual learning needs and existing knowledge in more detail.
This can then be used to tailor the planned learning opportunities so they have maximum
relevancy to them.
Within a more traditional non-clinical setting learning is usually planned via the use of a
lesson plan or something similar. The purpose of these are to provide structure and flow to
the lesson as well as helping to identify what materials may be needed at various points
(Billings & Halstead 2012). In addition to this it also helps as an aid to ensure key bits are
not forgotten during the session. Lesson plans are not exclusive to classroom based learning
though and they should be utilised in the planning of dedicated learning sessions irrespective
of location. The exact nature or format of the plan is largely unimportant and more a matter
of personal preference or local standard. For some they will take the form of tables with rows
and columns to indicate how the session should progress through the different topics. Other
individuals may favour a more list or bullet point orientated model. What is important is the
content of these plans and how it details what will unfold during the planned activities.
There are many different ways of organising how a session will be delivered. Gopee (2011)
advocates the use of the Herbartian rule which provides a clear sequence of how a topic
should be broken down and presented within a session. The use of such a tool is very helpful
as it prompts the mentor to think about exactly how the concepts and ideas will be presented
to the learner (Quinn & S. Hughes 2007). This is an often overlooked aspect of delivery,
practitioners may be able to identify what needs to be learnt very easily, understanding how to
translate these to someone else may not be that straightforward. This can be an oftenneglected aspect of delivery and it is further compounded if there is not a shared lexicon
between mentor and student. Using something such as the Herbartian rule ensures that
mentors think carefully about how to relate the new concepts to those the student already has
a firm grasp of (Fosnot 2005).
Opportunistic learning takes places when mentors take advantage of events or opportunities
that spontaneously present themselves. This is not to be confused with what is often referred
to as ‘sitting with Nellie’. This colloquial term describes the act of a learner just being
present within a clinical environment and expected to ‘pick it up’. Undoubtedly an individual
would learn something by being present and observing the work of others, a degree of
participation would also enhance this, but it would not be optimal learning. As demonstrated
by the various learning theories already discussed, there needs to be some input and feedback
in order to stimulate a deeper level of learning. This is what sets opportunistic learning apart
from the notion of sitting with Nellie. It is a matter of taking advantage of those events and
occurrences that present themselves in order to provide meaningful and developmental
opportunities (Bailey-McHale & Hart 2013).
In many respects the principles that apply to planned learning also apply to opportunistic
learning. Mentors need to be on hand to help the student make sense of what they are being
exposed to (Cobb & Bowers 1999). Therefore the use of something like the aforementioned
Herbartian rule is equally as relevant here. So to is the need to have some kind of plan of
what will be covered and discussed, in this instance however it is more likely to be a mental
plan than a written one. Often opportunistic learning opportunities can be events that rapidly
and unexpectedly unfold during a shift. This leaves little time for the mentor or practice
teacher to plan what will be covered or in some instances, how it will be covered. In high
pressure events, it may therefore be better to provide the student with some indication of what
points to look out for, so that it can be discussed in more detail later. So for example in the
event of a patient who has become unwell the student could be encourage to participate but at
the same time the mentor could tell them to pay attention to how the team communicated.
This could then be discussed in more detail following the event in order to gain more from the
learning.
Irrespective of how planned or not an episode of learning may be, it is important to negotiate
clear learning objectives with the student. As with lesson plans, sometimes these will be
written down, and at others they may be only be verbalised. The importance is that they are
discussed and preferably agreed by both parties (Billings & Halstead 2012). It is often said
that students will focus their attention on the aspects of learning they think they will be
assessed on (Biggs 2003) and the same notion applies here. Learning objectives are often
serve as the first indication to a student of what will be assessed, thus this will influence what
they focus on, or rather choose to learn. These objectives, particularly if planned, should be
made very clear in terms of what needs to be learnt and to what level. Taxonomic scales as
highlighted above can be helpful here as there are verbs associated with the different levels
that give very clear indication of what is required.
Learning Clinical Skills
The learning of clinical skills is often given a lot of focus during practice placements, as this
is something that can only be undertaken either in practice or in a skills suite (Myall et al.
2007). Additionally they are also the highly visible parts of a healthcare practitioner’s role
and as such are prone to becoming regarded as the activities that define a particular profession
(Burford 2012). Much of what has been discussed so far can be applied to the support of
skill development within the practice setting but there are also further considerations that
need to be accounted for. From a patient safety perspective clinical skills have a significant
potential to cause the patient immediate harm. Unfortunately this does at times leave mentors
reluctant to permit the practice of particular skills for fear of mistakes being made. There is
potentially a risk in such situations of the student developing a degree of learnt helplessness
because they are always used to having another more senior practitioner observing them.
To further compound the risk adverse nature of some mentors and practice teachers, clinical
practice can be pervaded by a lot of false information regarding what a student is permitted to
do. From a legal perspective a student, just like any other healthcare professional is permitted
to perform any task for which they have been appropriately trained and assessed to do
(Scrivener et al. 2011; Mulryan 2009). There are a few distinct exceptions to this, but these
are the exception not the rule. The exact nature of what constitutes trained and assessed is not
clearly specified and is left to be decided upon on a more individual basis. For many skills it
will be up to the mentor to decide if the learner has the appropriate knowledge and skill in
order to undertake a task. As with all aspects of clinical practice however, they should adhere
to local policies that are likely to be far more stringent and offer greater guidance.
There are a number of models that can be utilised for the structuring of clinical skills but the
Peyton model is one of the most widely adopted (Krauttera et al. 2011). This model is
simple and straightforward and fits well with a very wide range of skills and complexities.
The Peyton Model is a four stage approach where the skill is initially demonstrated in its
entirety without explanation and at full stage. For more complex skills it may be appropriate
to undertaken this stage several times or if possible, only focus on a particular aspect of the
skill. In the second stage the skills is demonstrated again but with detailed explanation and
the encouragement of questions. Once again repetition or fragmentation may be needed. In
the third stage the mentor will undertake the skill but they will follow the prompt and
explanations of the observing student/s. Finally, the student undertakes the skill under the
supervision of the mentor and the mentor will ask questions and seek explanations.
It is worth noting that the Peyton model was initially designed to support the development of
skills in a simulated environment. This does not negate its use in practice, but mentor and
student alike do need to be mindful of the fact that it is time consuming. The advantage of
such an approach however, is that the student has had ample exposure to the skill before
practicing it (Krauttera et al. 2011). In addition to this the mentor has also had ample
opportunity to ensure the student understands the various stages and their rational. This is
particularly key in this model since the student needs to demonstrate a suitable level of
understanding before they get the opportunity to develop any physical skills.
Learning Activity 4
Think about some of the skills or activities you either commonly
teach learners or that you would be likely to in the future. How
would you go about delivering teaching around these skills with
regard to Peyton’s Model? Consider and make notes on the following
points; - What steps would you break it down into?
- What explanations would you give for these steps?
- What questions might you ask the students when they are
undertaking the skill to ensure they have good knowledge of the
practice?
Portfolio Development
Completion of the learning activities within this article will enable mentors and practice
teacher to develop a greater understanding of some commonly used tools and methods to
support learning. Furthermore they could be used to create a bank of learning resources that
could be utilised in the support of students within your practice area. Collaborating with
other mentors and practice teachers within your practice area to create shared resources would
further enhance the usefulness of these resources.
As with all aspect of learning and
assessment care should be taken to evaluate the impact and effectiveness of these recourses
and improve them for the future. The processes for doing this will be discussed in a future
article. Undertaking this, along with the portfolio development tasks for the previous article
will provide good evidence in support of the third NMC standard for the support of learning
and assessment in practice; Facilitation of Learning.
Summery
The process of supporting learning in practice is complex and challenging which means
mentors have to be both vigilant and fast thinking (Killgallon 2012). A sound knowledge of
learning theories and their application is fundamental to the effective support of learning but
this alone is not enough. Such knowledge should form the theoretical foundation upon which
a mentor builds a wide range of practical and emotional skill to support students in a range of
different scenarios. Chief among the key skills of a mentor is the ability to communicate
clearly, with both compassion and empathy for the learner’s needs and apprehensions.
Further to this, mentors need to remain ever mindful that they are preparing people for a
professional role and as part of that role they will need to engage in lifelong learning.
Understanding how one learns and how that can be maximised is immensely emancipatory
and equips the practitioners of the future with the flexibility to meet the needs of their future
patients. Most of all, mentors and practice teachers need to be mindful that good teachers
who know their specialist area and have a firm grasp of educational theory are firmly at the
heart of quality learning (Coe et al. 2014).
References
Bailey-McHale, J. & Hart, D., 2013. Mastering Mentorship: A Practical Guide for Mentors of
Nursing, Health and Social Care Students, London: Sage Publications Ltd.
Bereiter, C. & Scardamalia, M., 2005. Beyond Bloom’s Taxonomy: Rethinking Knowledge
for the Knowledge Age. In M. Fullan, ed. Fundamental Change: International Handbook of
Educational Change. London: Springer Link.
Biggs, J., 2003. Teaching for Quality Learning at University, Buckingham: Open University
Press.
Billings, D. & Halstead, J., 2012. Teaching in Nursing: A Guide for Faculty 4 ed., Missouri:
Elsevier Saunders.
Blondy, L., 2007. Evaluation and Application of Andragogical Assumptions to the
Adult Online Learning Environment. Journal of Interactive Online Learning, 6(2).
Bloom, B. et al., 2001. A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: a revision of
Bloom's taxonomy of educational objectives, New York: Longman.
Burford, B., 2012. Group Processes in Medical Education: Learning from social identity
theory. Medical Education, pp.143–152.
Butts, J. & Rich, K., 2014. Philosophies and Theories for Advanced Nursing Practice 2nd ed.,
Burlington: Jones and Bartlett Publishers LLC.
Cobb, P. & Bowers, J., 1999. Cognitive and Situated Learning Perspectives in Theory and
Practice. Educational Researcher, 28(2), pp.4–15.
Coe, R. et al., 2014. What makes great teaching? The Sutton Trust.
Coffield, F. et al., 2004. Learning styles and pedagogy in post-16 learning: a systematic and
critical review, London: Learning and Skills Research Centre.
Fosnot, C., 2005. Constructivism: Theory, Perspectives and Practice 2nd ed., New York:
Teachers College Press.
Gopee, N., 2011. Mentoring and Supervision in Healthcare, London: Sage Publications Ltd.
Hartree, A., 1984. Malcolm knowles‟ theory of andragogy. A critique. International Journal
of Lifelong Education, 3(3), pp.203–210.
Killgallon, K., 2012. Mentoring in Nursing and Healthcare: A Practical Approach K.
Killgallon, J. Thompson, & Janet, eds., Chichester: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Kinnell, D. & Hughes, P., 2010. Mentoring nursing and healthcare students, London: Sage.
Knowles, M., 1990. The adult learner: a neglected species 2nd ed., London: Gulf.
Krauttera, M. et al., 2011. Effects of Peyton's Four-Step Approach on Objective Performance
Measures in Technical Skills Training: A Controlled Trial. Teaching and Learning in
Medicine: An International Journal, 23(3).
Mulryan, C., 2009. Accountability for HCAs and assistant practitioners. British Journal of
Healthcare Assistants., 3(4), pp.182–184.
Mumford, P., Mumford, A. & Alan, 1992. The manual of learning styles 3rd ed.,
Maidenhead: Honey.
Myall, M., Levett-Jones, T. & Lathlean, J., 2007. Mentorship in contemporary practice: the
experiences of nursing students and practice mentors. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 17,
pp.1834–1842.
Nursing and Midwifery Council (2008) Standards to Support Learning and Assessment in
Practice. Second edition, NMC, London.
Omansky, G., 2010. Staff nurses' experiences as preceptors and mentors: an integrative
review.: EBSCOhost. Journal of Nursing Management, 18, pp.697–703.
Quinn, F. & Hughes, S., 2007. Quinn's Principles and Practice of Nurse Education 5 ed.,
Cheltenham: Nelson Thornes.
Race, P., 2010. Making learning happen: a guide for post-compulsory education 2nd ed.,
London: Sage.
Rogers, C., 1983. Freedom to learn for the 80's, London: Merrill.
Scrivener, R., Hand, T. & Hooper, R., 2011. Accountability and responsibility: Principle of
Nursing Practice B. Nursing Standard., 25(29), pp.35–36.
Wilson, A.M.E., 2014. Mentoring Student Nurses and the Educational Use of Self: A
Hermeneutic Phenomenological Study. Nurse Education Today, 34, pp.313–318.
Box 1
Facilitation of Learning
Stage 2 - mentor

Use knowledge of the student’s stage of learning to select appropriate learning
opportunities to meet individual needs.

Facilitate the selection of appropriate learning strategies to integrate learning
from practice and academic experiences.

Support students in critically reflecting upon their learning experiences in order
to enhance future learning.
Stage 3 – practice teacher

Use knowledge of the student’s stage of learning to select appropriate learning
opportunities to meet individual needs.

Facilitate the selection of appropriate learning strategies to integrate learning
from practice and academic experiences.

Support students in critically reflecting upon their learning experiences in order
to enhance future learning.
NMC (2008)