The Journal of Continuing Education in Nursing

Original Article 

Development of the Preceptor Self-Assessment Tool and Use of the Content Validity Index

Kristine M. L'Ecuyer, PhD, RN, CNL; Divya S. Subramaniam, PhD, MPH; Chuntana Reangsing, MSc, RN

Abstract

Background:

Competency of staff nurse preceptors is an essential factor that determines the success of preceptorship experiences. Competency assessment is complex, and no self-assessment tool exists.

Method:

This article describes phase two of the development of the Preceptor Self-Assessment Tool (PSAT). A content validity index (CVI) survey was completed by 11 subject matter experts to determine relevance of items on the PSAT.

Results:

The Scale-Level CVI (S-CVI) for the instrument was 0.91, and the items CVI ranged from 0.45 to 1.0; most were above 0.78. One item was dropped and three were collapsed, leaving the final number of items at 64.

Conclusion:

The items on the PSAT have undergone content validity and have been found to be highly relevant. Pilot testing in a large sample of preceptors is warranted to further refine the items on the tool. [J Contin Educ Nurs. 2020;51(10):469–476.]

Abstract

Background:

Competency of staff nurse preceptors is an essential factor that determines the success of preceptorship experiences. Competency assessment is complex, and no self-assessment tool exists.

Method:

This article describes phase two of the development of the Preceptor Self-Assessment Tool (PSAT). A content validity index (CVI) survey was completed by 11 subject matter experts to determine relevance of items on the PSAT.

Results:

The Scale-Level CVI (S-CVI) for the instrument was 0.91, and the items CVI ranged from 0.45 to 1.0; most were above 0.78. One item was dropped and three were collapsed, leaving the final number of items at 64.

Conclusion:

The items on the PSAT have undergone content validity and have been found to be highly relevant. Pilot testing in a large sample of preceptors is warranted to further refine the items on the tool. [J Contin Educ Nurs. 2020;51(10):469–476.]

Staff nurses work as preceptors to train nursing students, new graduate nurses, and experienced nurses in clinical settings. Nurse preceptors work as teachers, mentors, role models, or supervisors, following guidelines from the National Council of State Boards of Nursing (2012), the American Association of Colleges of Nursing (2008), and the Commission on Collegiate Nursing Education (2013). Researchers have found preceptorships to be an integral part of nursing education (Kalischuk et al., 2013; L'Ecuyer, von der Lancken, et al., 2018; Martínez-Linares et al., 2019; McClure & Black, 2013). Preceptors guide the learning and growth of a nurse, provide protection during difficult situations, and assist in development of critical thinking, decision making, and priority setting (Bowen et al., 2019; Chen et al., 2012; McClure & Black, 2013; Quek & Shorey, 2018). The relationship between preceptor and preceptee is significant (Edward et al., 2017; Martínez-Linares et al., 2019; Washington, 2013), as are preceptor training programs, which have been shown to improve organizational outcomes related to retention rates, critical thinking, and reduced stress levels in new graduate nurses (Brook et al., 2019; Pennington & Driscoll, 2019; Piccinini et al., 2018). Conversely, unsatisfactory preceptorships, in which preceptors are inconsistent or inexperienced, are less effective and result in lower confidence and delayed progression of a new graduate nurse (Bengtsson & Carlson, 2015; Irwin et al., 2018).

Competency of nurse preceptors is an essential factor for the success of a preceptorship experience. Mann-Salinas et al. (2014) found that the most critical component of a comprehensive preceptor program was a motivated, trained, and supported group of highly competent preceptors. Other researchers have addressed the components of preceptor performance including knowledge, skills, attitude, role, role preparation and support, and preceptor characteristics (Butler et al., 2011; Carter et al., 2016; Cotter & Dienemann, 2016; Cotter et al., 2018; Forneris & Peden-Mcalpine, 2009; L'Ecuyer, Hyde, et al., 2018). These researchers noted that competency assessment for nurse preceptors is complex, is multifaceted, and lacks a clear component for evaluation by preceptors themselves (Carter et al., 2016; Forneris & Peden-Mcalpine, 2009; Sedgwick et al., 2014). Importantly, no instrument for assessing preceptor competence exists. Therefore, the researchers have undertaken a three-phase approach to develop a Preceptor Self-Assessment Tool (PSAT). The goal of developing a self-assessment tool is to allow nurse preceptors to reflect and evaluate their role competency. This article summarizes phase one and reports on the methodology and results of phase two, the content validity index (CVI) of the PSAT.

Background and Conceptual Framework

Competency has been described as a synergistic combination of knowledge, skills, and attitudes to solve problems in complex situations (Fernandez et al., 2012). This description along with Bloom's taxonomy of the cognitive, affective, and psychomotor learning domains (Bloom et al., 1956) serve as a framework for describing the complex work of staff nurse preceptors. Nurse educators have viewed preceptor competence as the ability to engage in learning, critical thinking, and reflective practice, including critical analysis skills (Sedgwick et al., 2014). O'Malley et al. (2000) suggested that the preceptor's characteristics should include experience and expertise in their specialty, good communication, leadership skills, decision-making ability, professional growth, positive attitude toward coworkers, flexibility, and teaching ability. In addition, the preceptor should be sensitive to preceptee's needs and should possess teaching and evaluation capabilities (O'Malley et al., 2000). Rodrigues and Witt (2013) suggested that preceptor competency consisted of nine domains—education, professional values, basic public health sciences, management, health care, teamwork, communication, community orientation, and professional development (Rodrigues & Witt, 2013).

Nurse preceptor preparation programs have been found to be effective ways of introducing nurses to the role of preceptor. Often, training courses and support for preceptors stop after these initial courses. Follow up in terms of advanced training needs and further development have not been discussed in the literature. Because staff nurses are diverse in background, educational preparation, and work experience, it is likely that their needs for training regarding the preceptor role are unique. These conclusions, and the fact that there is no tool known for preceptors to self-assess their role competency, have led to the desire to develop and test the PSAT.

Phase One: Summary of Item Development

The intent of this project was to develop a tool to be used by preceptors to explore their own needs regarding development and training for the preceptor role. This tool can be used prior to training courses to assess perceptions of development needs, after courses to measure changes in perceptions of competency after training, or later to identify needs for advanced training beyond basic courses. This information will benefit both preceptors and educators, who can work together to find resources that bridge the development needs. The goal of phase one was to develop items for the PSAT. The concept of preceptor competency was explored through a comprehensive literature review and qualitative study with a statewide sample of nurse preceptors (L'Ecuyer, Hyde, et al., 2018) to generate an item pool. Competencies of nurse preceptors were described in 553 responses as a range of attributes distributed across a final list of 25 defined attributes (categories) in which preceptors described their competency in terms of what they know, what they do, and how they behave (L'Ecuyer, Hyde, et al., 2018). The attributes were sorted into domains of knowledge, skills, attitudes, and other. The first three domains aligned with Bloom's taxonomy of the cognitive, affective, and psychomotor learning domain (Bloom et al., 1956). In addition, preceptors described “feeling supported” and “having enough time” as attributes of their competency, which suggests that there are other conditions that must be present for preceptors to do their work. Within each of the four domains, descriptions of preceptor competency were further sorted into categories and defined. The domains, categories, definitions, and sample statements are outlined in a previous publication (L'Ecuyer, Hyde, et al., 2018).

Phase Two: CVI Methods

To further validate the findings, phase two consisted of development and distribution of a content validity survey to a panel of subject matter experts. The goal of phase two was to determine content validity of the PSAT. Literature and data from phase one were again reviewed. Although it was important to collapse the original 69 items to four domains and 25 attributes (categories) in phase one of the study, it was also important to expand them for subject matter expert (SME) review in phase two to ensure the meaning of the original data was conveyed. For example, within the knowledge domain, the expertise and knowledge category was expanded to five items (1 = has clinical experience, 2 = has clinical nursing knowledge, 3 = is knowledgeable about resources, 4 = is knowledgeable about the institution, and 5 = is knowledgeable about policies and procedures). Further, the 69 items represent original data from preceptors, and it was important that SMEs examine the complete list to help determine validity of each item. Again, this important step informs the final items of the PSAT tool, ensures that each category sufficiently describes a concept and validates earlier decisions by the researcher to collapse versus expand the categories (Table 1).

Preceptor Self-Assessment Domains, Definitions, and Preceptor Self-Assessment Tool (PSAT) Items (1–69)Preceptor Self-Assessment Domains, Definitions, and Preceptor Self-Assessment Tool (PSAT) Items (1–69)

Table 1:

Preceptor Self-Assessment Domains, Definitions, and Preceptor Self-Assessment Tool (PSAT) Items (1–69)

A survey of the items was created in Qualtrics® using a 4-point Likert scale of 1 = not relevant, 2 = somewhat relevant, 3 = quite relevant, and 4 = highly relevant (Polit & Beck, 2017; Polit et al., 2007). Fourteen SMEs were recruited and asked to review the content validity index of the PSAT. The SME inclusion criteria were as follows: nurses who have worked as preceptors for a minimum of 5 years, nurse faculty who have worked with preceptor and student pairs, nurses who work in staff development as preceptor trainers, or nurses who work in staff development with preceptor and new graduate or new employee nurse pairs. The SMEs were recruited from across the state of Missouri and represent a variety of backgrounds and nursing expertise. The purposive sample of SMEs received an email invitation to complete the CVI survey. All SMEs fit the inclusion criteria; therefore, demographic data were not collected.

The CVI was calculated for the relevancy of the 69 items. The Item-Level CVI (I-CVI) was calculated for each survey item, and the Scale-Level CVI (S-CVI) was calculated for the overall survey tool. In addition to rating the items, SMEs were also asked to provide feedback and comments for each item. The following formulas were used to calculate the I-CVI and S-CVI (Polit et al., 2007):

  • I-CVIs = N of experts agreeing on items rated a 3 or 4/Total N of experts
  • S-CVI = Final average of I-CVI scores

Results

A pool of 69 items generated from the literature and a previous study (L'Ecuyer, Hyde, et al., 2018) were evaluated for content validity by SMEs. Eleven of 14 SMEs who were invited completed the CVI assessment (79% response rate). The sample SMEs were expert nurse preceptors, nurse educators who train preceptors, or nurse faculty who work with students and preceptor pairs, and they worked in a variety of setting across the state of Missouri. The S-CVI for the entire survey instrument was 0.91 (Table 2). The I-CVI scores ranged from 0.45 to 1.0. Polit et al. (2017) suggested using a cut-off score of 0.80 to determine item validity. Most items had a CVI score above 0.80 and were deemed excellent. Item 64 (has a good sense of humor) had the lowest score (0.45) and was removed. Item 69 (flexible schedule) had a CVI score of 0.73 and was removed. Items 54 (is kind), 55 (is friendly), and 57 (is personable) had a score of 0.73. These three items were within the category of kindness, along with item 56 (is respectful, which had a score of 1.00). After review of their CVI scores, the four items in the kindness category were collapsed to one item, and this category was renamed to respect. Item 67 (established team to enable preceptor function) also had a CVI score 0.73. After review, it was kept because the researchers felt that teamwork among preceptors is an important component of feeling supported. Only one qualitative comment was provided, and no revisions to the item were made. After CVI by SMEs and review by the researchers, the PSAT tool includes a total of 64 items.

Content Validity Index for Items of Preceptor Self-Assessment ToolContent Validity Index for Items of Preceptor Self-Assessment Tool

Table 2:

Content Validity Index for Items of Preceptor Self-Assessment Tool

Discussion

The nurse PSAT was developed to help preceptors identify their role competencies and identify areas for further education or development. Preceptor competence is an important concept because they are consistently described as key components of clinical education for nurses, and their competence is critical to the success of preceptor programs (Mann-Salinas et al., 2014; McClure & Black, 2013; Schumacher & Risco, 2017). Preceptors have repeatedly reported the need for adequate preparation, clear role expectations, and support for their role (Omansky, 2010; Tracey & McGowan, 2015; Valizadeh et al., 2016; Walker & Norris, 2020). The sustainment of adequately trained and competent preceptors is the responsibility of nurse leaders and those who oversee new nurse on-boarding (Mann-Salinas et al., 2014). Tools to help nurses better understand their own talents and needs for further development are needed. The PSAT will give preceptors an opportunity to reflect on their individual skill set of the preceptor role. It may identify needs previously undiscovered. Findings may encourage preceptors to discuss needs with mentors, nurse educators, or nursing administrators to help nurses find effective ways of developing their preceptor skills. The preceptor skill set is complex, and it is unlikely that it can be fully developed in one introductory training session. Advanced courses need to be developed and offered to support the complex work preceptors do as clinical educators. The PSAT tool can help identify gaps in training and inform the curriculum and development of advanced training.

The items in the PSAT CVI survey were developed based on literature reviews and findings from a previous qualitative study of preceptors' perceptions of preceptor competency. In the content validity process, most items were scored as highly relevant and therefore retained. Of the 69 items in the survey pool, six had CVI scores of less than the suggested cut-off score of 0.78. Five were removed. Because those items were not found in the literature related to preceptor competency, and their relevancy was rated low by SMEs, the researchers were comfortable removing them from the competency tool. One low scoring item (established team to enable preceptor function, 0.73) was retained. This item has also not been found in the literature; however, the researchers decided the concept was important enough to retain it for further testing in the next phase tool development. After CVI testing and further researcher discussion, the number of PSAT items is 64. Because the SMEs rated most of the items as relevant, the original set of domain categories is largely unchanged after the phase two CVI study. Overall, the S-CVI for the survey tool was 0.90, which is the recommended criterion for the S-CVI (Polit & Beck, 2006; Polit & Beck, 2017).

Generalization of these results is limited in that the SMEs used for this study are from only one state. Demographic data were not collected from SMEs, which means we do not know that the pool of SMEs represents the pool of nurse preceptors in terms of demographics. The items generated are from preceptors also from one state. Future research with a diverse, representative national sample of nurse preceptors will be necessary.

It will be an important next step to further reduce items in this 64-item tool. A tool has greater likelihood of being adapted and useful for nurses if its length is reasonable. More input from preceptors is needed to identify which items might overlap and which items can be collapsed. For that reason, the next phase of this research will include pilot testing of the PSAT tool using a large sample study population of nurse preceptors.

Conclusion

This study contributes to the identification of key components of preceptor competency and will allow preceptors to assess their individual strengths and identify areas that would benefit from further development. Findings will also benefit organizations and nurse leaders who are responsible for robust preceptor programs that support the recruitment, education, and retention of new nurse employees. Nursing education relies on skilled preceptors, who are a critical hidden workforce. Efforts should continue to identify the needs of preceptors and support their development. The psychometric properties of the PSAT were described in this study. To fully describe the concept of preceptor competency, further testing is indicated.

References

  • American Association of Colleges of Nursing. (2008). The essentials of baccalaureate education for professional nursing practice.
  • Bengtsson, M. & Carlson, E. (2015). Knowledge and skills needed to improve as preceptor: Development of a continuous professional development course - a qualitative study part I. BMC Nursing, 14, 51 doi:10.1186/s12912-015-0103-9 [CrossRef] PMID:26478717
  • Bloom, B., Englehart, M., Furst, E., Hill, W. & Krathwohl, D. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals. Langman, Green.
  • Bowen, L., Kable, A. & Keatinge, D. (2019). Registered nurses' experience of mentoring undergraduate nursing students in a rural context: A qualitative descriptive study. Contemporary Nurse, 55(1), 1–14 doi:10.1080/10376178.2018.1513808 [CrossRef] PMID:30146947
  • Brook, J., Aitken, L., Webb, R., MacLaren, J. & Salmon, D. (2019). Characteristics of successful interventions to reduce turnover and increase retention of early career nurses: A systematic review. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 91, 47–59 doi:10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2018.11.003 [CrossRef] PMID:30669077
  • Butler, M. P., Cassidy, I., Quillinan, B., Fahy, A., Bradshaw, C., Tuohy, D., O'Connor, M., Mc Namara, M. C., Egan, G. & Tierney, C. (2011). Competency assessment methods—Tool and processes: A survey of nurse preceptors in Ireland. Nurse Education in Practice, 11(5), 298–303 doi:10.1016/j.nepr.2011.01.006 [CrossRef] PMID:21324419
  • Carter, A. G., Creedy, D. K. & Sidebotham, M. (2016). Development and psychometric testing of the Carter Assessment of Critical Thinking in Midwifery (Preceptor/Mentor version). Midwifery, 34, 141–149 doi:10.1016/j.midw.2015.12.002 [CrossRef] PMID:26719194
  • Chen, Y. L., Hsu, L. L. & Hsieh, S. I. (2012). Clinical nurse preceptor teaching competencies: Relationship to locus of control and self-directed learning. The Journal of Nursing Research, 20(2), 142–151 doi:10.1097/jnr.0b013e318254ea72 [CrossRef] PMID:22592109
  • Commission on Collegiate Nursing Education. (2013). Standards for accreditation of baccalaureate and graduate nursing programs. http://www.aacnnursing.org/Portals/42/CCNE/PDF/StandardsAmended-2013.pdf?ver=2017-06-28-141019-360
  • Cotter, E. & Dienemann, J. (2016). Professional development of preceptors improves nurse outcomes. Journal for Nurses in Professional Development, 32(4), 192–197 doi:10.1097/NND.0000000000000266 [CrossRef] PMID:27434318
  • Cotter, E., Eckardt, P. & Moylan, L. (2018). Instrument development and testing for selection of nursing preceptors. Journal for Nurses in Professional Development, 34(4), 185–193 doi:10.1097/NND.0000000000000464 [CrossRef] PMID:29975311
  • Edward, K. L., Ousey, K., Playle, J. & Giandinoto, J. A. (2017). Are new nurses work ready? The impact of preceptorship. An integrative systematic review. Journal of Professional Nursing, 33(5), 326–333 doi:10.1016/j.profnurs.2017.03.003 [CrossRef] PMID:28931479
  • Fernandez, N., Dory, V., Ste-Marie, L. G., Chaput, M., Charlin, B. & Boucher, A. (2012). Varying conceptions of competence: An analysis of how health sciences educators define competence. Medical Education, 46(4), 357–365 doi:10.1111/j.1365-2923.2011.04183.x [CrossRef] PMID:22429171
  • Forneris, S. G. & Peden-McAlpine, C. (2009). Creating context for critical thinking in practice: The role of the preceptor. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 65(8), 1715–1724 doi:10.1111/j.1365-2648.2009.05031.x [CrossRef] PMID:19602012
  • Irwin, C., Bliss, J. & Poole, K. (2018). Does preceptorship improve confidence and competence in newly qualified nurses: A systematic literature review. Nurse Education Today, 60, 35–46 doi:10.1016/j.nedt.2017.09.011 [CrossRef] PMID:28987897
  • Kalischuk, R. G., Vandenberg, H. & Awosoga, O. (2013). Nursing preceptors speak out: An empirical study. Journal of Professional Nursing, 29(1), 30–38 doi:10.1016/j.profnurs.2012.04.008 [CrossRef]
  • L'Ecuyer, K. M., Hyde, M. J. & Shatto, B. J. (2018). Preceptors' perception of role competency. The Journal of Continuing Education in Nursing, 49(5), 233–240 doi:10.3928/00220124-20180417-09 [CrossRef] PMID:29701866
  • L'Ecuyer, K. M., von der Lancken, S. V., Malloy, D., Meyer, G. & Hyde, M. J. (2018). Review of state boards of nursing rules and regulations for nurse preceptors. Journal of Nursing Education, 57(3), 134–141 doi:10.3928/01484834-20180221-02 [CrossRef] PMID:29505070
  • Mann-Salinas, E., Hayes, E., Robbins, J., Sabido, J., Feider, L., Allen, D. & Yoder, L. (2014). A systematic review of the literature to support an evidence-based precepting program. Burns, 40(3), 374–387 doi:10.1016/j.burns.2013.11.008 [CrossRef] PMID:24331408
  • Martínez-Linares, J. M., Parra-Sáez, C., Tello-Liébana, C. & López-Entrambasaguas, O. M. (2019). Should we be trained to train? Nursing students' and newly qualified nurses' perception on good lecturers and good clinical preceptors. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 16(24), 1–10 doi:10.3390/ijerph16244885 [CrossRef] PMID:31817138
  • McClure, E. & Black, L. (2013). The role of the clinical preceptor: An integrative literature review. Journal of Nursing Education, 52(6), 335–341 doi:10.3928/01484834-20130430-02 [CrossRef] PMID:23621122
  • National Council of State Boards of Nursing. (2012). NCSBN model rules. https://www.ncsbn.org/14_Model_Rules_0914.pdf
  • O'Malley, C., Cunliffe, E., Hunter, S. & Breeze, J. (2000). Preceptorship in practice. Nursing Standard, 14(28), 45–49 doi:10.7748/ns2000.03.14.28.45.c2801 [CrossRef] PMID:11310070
  • Omansky, G. L. (2010). Staff nurses' experiences as preceptors and mentors: An integrative review. Journal of Nursing Management, 18(6), 697–703 doi:10.1111/j.1365-2834.2010.01145.x [CrossRef] PMID:20840364
  • Pennington, G. & Driscoll, A. (2019). Improving retention of home health nurses: Fostering outcome sustainability through an innovative orientation and mentorship program. Home Healthcare Now, 37(5), 256–264 doi:10.1097/NHH.0000000000000782 [CrossRef] PMID:31483357
  • Piccinini, C. J., Hudlun, N., Branam, K. & Moore, J. M. (2018). The effects of preceptor training on new graduate registered nurse transition experiences and organizational outcomes. The Journal of Continuing Education in Nursing, 49(5), 216–220 doi:10.3928/00220124-20180417-06 [CrossRef] PMID:29701863
  • Polit, D. E. & Beck, C. T. (2006). Essentials of nursing research: Appraising evidence for nursing practice (6th ed.). Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.
  • Polit, D. F. & Beck, C. T. (2017). Nursing research: Generating and assessing evidence for nursing practice (10th ed.).Wolters Kluwer Health.
  • Polit, D. F., Beck, C. T. & Owen, S. V. (2007). Is the CVI an acceptable indicator of content validity? Appraisal and recommendations. Research in Nursing & Health, 30(4), 459–467 doi:10.1002/nur.20199 [CrossRef] PMID:17654487
  • Quek, G. J. H. & Shorey, S. (2018). Perceptions, experiences, and needs of nursing preceptors and their preceptees on preceptorship: An integrative review. Journal of Professional Nursing, 34, 417–428 Advance online publication. doi:10.1016/j.profnurs.2018.05.003 [CrossRef] PMID:30243699
  • Rodrigues, C. D. S. & Witt, R. R. (2013). Competencies for preceptorship in the Brazilian health care system. The Journal of Continuing Education in Nursing, 44(11), 507–515 doi:10.3928/00220124-20130903-63 [CrossRef] PMID:24024502
  • Schumacher, G. & Risco, K. (2017). Competency-based nurse practitioner education: An overview for the preceptor. The Journal for Nurse Practitioners, 13(9), 596–602 doi:10.1016/j.nurpra.2017.07.020 [CrossRef]
  • Sedgwick, M., Kellett, P. & Kalischuck, R. G. (2014). Exploring the acquisition of entry-to-practice competencies by second-degree nursing students during a preceptorship experience. Nurse Education Today, 34(3), 421–427 doi:10.1016/j.nedt.2013.04.012 [CrossRef] PMID:23642340
  • Tracey, J. M. & McGowan, I. W. (2015). Preceptors' views on their role in supporting newly qualified nurses. British Journal of Nursing, 24(20), 998–1001 doi:10.12968/bjon.2015.24.20.998 [CrossRef] PMID:26559102
  • Valizadeh, S., Borimnejad, L., Rahmani, A., Gholizadeh, L. & Shahbazi, S. (2016). Challenges of the preceptors working with new nurses: A phenomenological research study. Nurse Education in Practice, 44, 92–97 doi:10.1016/j.nedt.2016.05.021 [CrossRef] PMID:27429335
  • Walker, S. H. & Norris, K. (2020). What is the evidence that can inform the implementation of a preceptorship scheme for general practice nurses, and what is the evidence for the benefits of such a scheme? A literature review and synthesis. Nurse Education Today, 86, 104327 Advance online publication. doi:10.1016/j.nedt.2019.104327 [CrossRef] PMID:31931464
  • Washington, G. T. (2013). The theory of interpersonal relations applied to the preceptor-new graduate relationship. Journal for Nurses in Professional Development, 29(1), 24–29 doi:10.1097/NND.0b013e31827d0a8a [CrossRef] PMID:23486153

Preceptor Self-Assessment Domains, Definitions, and Preceptor Self-Assessment Tool (PSAT) Items (1–69)

Domain/CategoryDefinitionPSAT Items on Content Validity Index
Knowledge
  Expertise and knowledgeCurrent on evidence-based practice, nursing essentials, nursing resourcesHas clinical experience
Has clinical nursing knowledge
Is knowledgeable about resources
Is knowledgeable about the institution
Is knowledgeable about policies and procedures
  Learning stylesLearning is unique, teaching should be individualsUnderstands the influence of learning styles
Can adapt to preceptees' various learning styles
  Personality issues and typesPersonality types and implicationsUnderstands the influence of personality types
Can adapt to preceptees' various personality types
  Role preparationPrecepting methodologyIs prepared for the preceptor role
Has completed a preceptor training course
Understands the role of the preceptor
  Emotional intelligenceManagement or expression of emotionsUnderstands the influence of emotional intelligence
Skills
  Clinical competenceCurrent and capable clinical skillsHas strong clinical skills
Has current clinical skills
  Teacher competenceAbility to teachIs a good teacher
Understands teaching role
  Clinical thinkingAnalyze and evaluate objectively to form a judgmentHelps preceptee develop critical thinking skills
  CommunicationExchange informationIs a good communicator
Explains things clearly
Is a good listener
  Interpersonal skillsNetwork; handle interpersonal issues including conflictDemonstrates interpersonal skills
Works well with others
Works collaboratively
  Feedback/evaluation skillsReport on performance to assist, improve, validateIs able to give feedback
Gives constructive feedback
Is able to evaluate performance
Is able to evaluate competency
  Protector/safetyIntervene to prevent errors or aggressions of othersActs to protect preceptee
Creates a nonthreatening environment
  FlexibilityAdjust to change, tailor education to preceptee's needsIs flexible
Is adaptable
  OrganizationUse time effectively, be efficient, be productiveIs organized
Can manage time
Has prioritization skills
Has delegation skills
Has problem solving skills
Is consistent
  Setting goalsEstablish objectives to work towardCan create a plan
Works with preceptee to set goals
Knows expectations of preceptor and preceptee
  Role modelAct as an example to be imitatedIs a role model
Has leadership qualities
Is professional
  Open to improvementDemonstrate willingness to be a better preceptorIs open to improving preceptor skills
  Learning opportunitiesAbility to identify learning momentsCan provide learning opportunities for preceptee
Attitude
  PatienceAccepting and tolerant, calm and composedIs patient with preceptee
  Desire to be preceptorWilling to assume preceptor roleHas desire to be a preceptor
Is willing to be a preceptor
  UnderstandingEmpathetic, compassionate, awareIs understanding
Is empathetic
  ApproachableOpen, considerate of new ideasIs approachable
Is open minded
  KindnessbFriendly, generous, and considerateIs kinda
Is friendlya
Is respectful
Is personablea
  ConfidenceSelf-assured and conscious of strengths and weaknessesIs confident
Is comfortable in preceptor role
  TrustworthyHonest, truthful, reliableIs trustworthy
Is honest
Positive attitudeOptimistic in thinking, feeling, behaving; sense of humorHas a positive attitude
Has a caring attitude
Has a good sense of humora
Other
  Feeling supportedHaving adequate material and human resourcesAdministrative and managerial support
Institutional resources to do the job of preceptor
Established team to enable preceptor function
  Having enough timeHaving time to spend on precepting dutiesAdequate time
Flexible schedulea

Content Validity Index for Items of Preceptor Self-Assessment Tool

Item No.No. of SMEs in Agreement of Item Rated 3 or 4I-CVIInterpretation
1111.00Excellent
2111.00Excellent
3100.91Excellent
490.82Excellent
5111.00Excellent
690.82Excellent
790.82Excellent
8100.91Excellent
9100.91Excellent
10100.91Excellent
1190.82Excellent
12111.00Excellent
1390.82Excellent
14111.00Excellent
15111.00Excellent
16111.00Excellent
17100.91Excellent
1890.82Excellent
19111.00Excellent
20111.00Excellent
21111.00Excellent
22111.00Excellent
23111.00Excellent
24111.00Excellent
25111.00Excellent
26111.00Excellent
27111.00Excellent
28111.00Excellent
29111.00Excellent
30100.91Excellent
31100.91Excellent
32111.00Excellent
3390.82Excellent
34111.00Excellent
35111.00Excellent
36100.91Excellent
37111.00Excellent
38111.00Excellent
3990.82Excellent
4090.82Excellent
41111.00Excellent
42111.00Excellent
4390.82Excellent
44111.00Excellent
45100.91Excellent
46100.91Excellent
47100.91Excellent
48100.91Excellent
49100.91Excellent
50100.91Excellent
51100.91Excellent
52111.00Excellent
53100.91Excellent
5480.73Removed
5580.73Removed
56111.00Excellent
5780.73Removed
58111.00Excellent
59100.91Excellent
60111.00Excellent
61111.00Excellent
6290.82Excellent
63100.91Excellent
6450.45Removed
6590.82Excellent
6690.82Excellent
6780.73Retained
68111.00Excellent
6980.73Removed
Authors

Dr. L'Ecuyer is Associate Professor, Ms. Reangsing is PhD student, Saint Louis University Trudy Busch Valentine School of Nursing, and Dr. Subramaniam is Assistant Professor, Saint Louis University School of Medicine Department of Health and Clinical Outcomes Research, St. Louis, Missouri.

The authors have disclosed no potential conflicts of interest, financial or otherwise.

Address correspondence to Kristine M. L'Ecuyer, PhD, RN, CNL, Associate Professor, Saint Louis University Trudy Busch Valentine School of Nursing, 3525 Caroline Street, St. Louis, MO 63104; email: Kris.lecuyer@slu.edu.

Received: January 13, 2020
Accepted: May 04, 2020

10.3928/00220124-20200914-09

Sign up to receive

Journal E-contents