4 circle critical thinking model

What Are Critical Thinking Indicators (CTIs) In Nursing?

In this article, we will explore key critical thinking indicators in nursing and provide examples of how these indicators manifest in real-world situations.

What are Critical Thinking Indicators?

Critical Thinking Indicators (CTIs) are traits or skills that demonstrate a person’s ability to think critically and analytically.

They provide insights into how someone approaches complex problems, evaluates information, and makes well-reasoned decisions.

15 Attitudes of Critical Thinking in Nursing (Explained W/ Examples)

• What is Critical Thinking in Nursing? (Explained W/ Examples)

How to Improve Critical Thinking Skills in Nursing? (24 Strategies W/ Examples)

What are critical thinking indicators (ctis) in nursing, definition of critical thinking indicators (ctis) in nursing.

Critical thinking indicators in nursing can be defined as the skills, traits, and behaviors that demonstrate a nurse’s ability to analyze complex situations, make informed decisions, and provide high-quality patient care.

CTIs are critical in the healthcare field, where nurses frequently face diverse and often urgent challenges that necessitate thoughtful and well-reasoned responses.

CTIs help nurses navigate the complexities of healthcare, adapt to changing circumstances, and ensure the best possible outcomes for their patients.

Related: What is the 4-Circle CT Model?

Critical thinking indicators (ctis) in nursing.

Here are a few critical thinking indicators; take a moment to reflect on how many of these attributes manifest in your own behavior.

1. Self-Awareness:

Nurses who are self-aware acknowledge their biases and limitations, enabling them to provide objective care.

For example, a nurse might recognize their discomfort with a certain medical procedure and actively seek guidance from a colleague to ensure patient safety.

2. Genuine/Authentic:

Authentic nurses align their actions with their values, fostering trust and rapport with patients.

By demonstrating empathy and compassion, a nurse establishes a genuine connection with patients, which can significantly enhance the healing process.

3. Effective Communicator:

Effective communication is essential for nurses to understand patient needs and relay critical information.

A nurse who actively listens to a patient’s concerns and articulates medical instructions clearly ensures that patients are well-informed and empowered to manage their health.

4. Curious and Inquisitive:

Curiosity drives nurses to seek deeper understanding. When faced with a new treatment approach, a curious nurse might research alternative methods and consult with colleagues to explore innovative solutions for patient care.

5. Alert to Context:

Being attentive to changes in a patient’s condition is crucial. A nurse who notices a sudden change in a patient’s vital signs may investigate further to identify potential complications and take swift action.

6. Reflective and Self-Corrective:

Nurses who reflect on their actions and interactions can identify areas for improvement.

After a challenging shift, a nurse might review their decisions and consider seeking feedback from peers to enhance future performance.

7. Analytical and Insightful:

Analytical nurses identify patterns in patient data that might go unnoticed by others.

By recognizing a recurring symptom, a nurse can contribute to an accurate diagnosis and tailored treatment plan.

8. Logical and Intuitive:

Balancing logic and intuition is key. A nurse who uses both logical reasoning and intuition may suspect an adverse reaction to medication based on a patient’s sudden change in behavior, prompting timely intervention.

9. Confident and Resilient:

Confident nurses trust their abilities even in challenging situations. When a complex case arises, a nurse’s confidence can drive them to collaborate with the medical team to devise an effective care strategy.

10. Honest and Upright:

Honesty and integrity guide ethical decision-making. A nurse who acknowledges their own mistakes and takes responsibility fosters an environment of trust within the healthcare team.

• Nursing Concept Map (FREE Template)
• Clinical Reasoning In Nursing (Explained W/ Example)
• 8 Stages Of The Clinical Reasoning Cycle
• How To Improve Critical Thinking Skills In Nursing? 24 Strategies With Examples
• What is the “5 Whys” Technique?
• What Are Socratic Questions?

Adopting these critical thinking indicators (CTIs) in nursing practice is essential for improving patient care and fostering transformative changes in the healthcare setting.

Recommended Readings

Critical Thinking Indicators (CTIs)

Critical Thinking, Clinical Reasoning, and Clinical Judgment: A Practical Approach

Applying Nursing Process: The Foundation for Clinical Reasoning

Comments are closed.

Medical & Legal Disclaimer

All the contents on this site are for entertainment, informational, educational, and example purposes ONLY. These contents are not intended to be used as a substitute for professional medical advice or practice guidelines. However, we aim to publish precise and current information. By using any content on this website, you agree never to hold us legally liable for damages, harm, loss, or misinformation. Read the  privacy policy  and  terms and conditions.

Privacy Policy

Terms & Conditions

© 2024 nurseship.com. All rights reserved.

• Corpus ID: 23189874

Personal Critical Thinking Indicators : Behaviors , Attitudes , and Characteristics

• Education, Psychology

Figures and Tables from this paper

22 References

Critical thinking versus clinical reasoning versus clinical judgment: differential diagnosis, theoretical model of critical thinking in diagnostic processes in nursing, is high fidelity simulation the most effective method for the development of non-technical skills in nursing a review of the current evidence, differences in clinical reasoning among nurses working in highly specialised paediatric care., nurses’ clinical reasoning, a cost-utility analysis of medium vs. high-fidelity human patient simulation manikins in nursing education., using concept maps in perioperative education., relationships between critical thinking ability and nursing competence in clinical nurses., registered nurses' thinking strategies on malnutrition and pressure ulcers in nursing homes: a scenario-based think-aloud study., do educational interventions improve nurses' clinical decision making and judgement a systematic review., related papers.

Showing 1 through 3 of 0 Related Papers

Published in

Video Series

• Analyze the logic of a problem or issue
• Analyze the logic of an article, essay, or text
• Analyze the logic of any book of nonfiction
• Evaluate an Author’s Reasoning
• Analyze the logic of a character in a novel
• Analyze the logic of a profession, subject, or discipline
• Analyze the logic of a concept or idea
• Distinguishing Inferences and Assumptions
• Thinking Through Conflicting Ideas

• Could you elaborate further?
• Could you give me an example?
• Could you illustrate what you mean?
• How could we check on that?
• How could we find out if that is true?
• How could we verify or test that?
• Could you be more specific?
• Could you give me more details?
• Could you be more exact?
• How does that relate to the problem?
• How does that bear on the question?
• How does that help us with the issue?
• What factors make this a difficult problem?
• What are some of the complexities of this question?
• What are some of the difficulties we need to deal with?
• Do we need to look at this from another perspective?
• Do we need to consider another point of view?
• Do we need to look at this in other ways?
• Does all this make sense together?
• Does your first paragraph fit in with your last?
• Does what you say follow from the evidence?
• Is this the most important problem to consider?
• Is this the central idea to focus on?
• Which of these facts are most important?
• Do I have any vested interest in this issue?
• Am I sympathetically representing the viewpoints of others?

Everyone thinks; it is our nature to do so. But much of our thinking, left to itself, is biased, distorted, partial, uninformed, or downright prejudiced. If we want to think well, we must understand at least the udiments of thought, the most basic structures out of which all thinking is made. We must learn how to take thinking apart.

All Thinking Is Defined by the Eight Elements That Make It Up. Eight basic structures are present in all thinking: Whenever we think, we think for a purpose within a point of view based on assumptions leading to implications and consequences. We use concepts, ideas and theories to interpret data, facts, and experiences in order to answer questions, solve problems, and resolve issues.

• generates purposes
• raises questions
• uses information
• utilizes concepts
• makes inferences
• makes assumptions
• generates implications
• embodies a point of view
• What is your, my, their purpose in doing________?
• What is the objective of this assignment (task, job, experiment, policy, strategy, etc.)?
• Should we question, refine, modify our purpose (goal, objective, etc.)?
• What is the purpose of this meeting (chapter, relationship, action)?
• What is your central aim in this line of thought?
• What is the purpose of education?
• Why did you say…?
• Take time to state your purpose clearly.
• Distinguish your purpose from related purposes.
• Check periodically to be sure you are still on target.
• Choose significant and realistic purposes.
• What is the question I am trying to answer?
• What important questions are embedded in the issue?
• Is there a better way to put the question?
• Is this question clear? Is it complex?
• I am not sure exactly what question you are asking. Could you explain it?
• The question in my mind is this: How do you see the question?
• What kind of question is this? Historical? Scientific? Ethical? Political? Economic? Or…?
• What would we have to do to settle this question?
• State the question at issue clearly and precisely.
• Express the question in several ways to clarify its meaning.
• Break the question into sub-questions.
• Distinguish questions that have definitive answers from those that are a matter of opinion or that require multiple viewpoints.
• What information do I need to answer this question?
• What data are relevant to this problem?
• Do we need to gather more information?
• Is this information relevant to our purpose or goal?
• On what information are you basing that comment?
• What experience convinced you of this? Could your experience be distorted?
• How do we know this information (data, testimony) is accurate?
• Have we left out any important information that we need to consider?
• Restrict your claims to those supported by the data you have.
• Search for information that opposes your position as well as information that supports it.
• Make sure that all information used is clear, accurate and relevant.
• Make sure you have gathered sufficient information.
• What conclusions am I coming to?
• Is my inference logical?
• Are there other conclusions I should consider?
• Does this interpretation make sense?
• Does our solution necessarily follow from our data?
• How did you reach that conclusion?
• What are you basing your reasoning on?
• Is there an alternative plausible conclusion?
• Given all the facts what is the best possible conclusion?
• How shall we interpret these data?
• Infer only what the evidence implies.
• Check inferences for their consistency with each other.
• Identify assumptions underlying your inferences.
• What idea am I using in my thinking? Is this idea causing problems for me or for others?
• I think this is a good theory, but could you explain it more fully?
• What is the main hypothesis you are using in your reasoning?
• Are you using this term in keeping with established usage?
• What main distinctions should we draw in reasoning through this problem?
• What idea is this author using in his or her thinking? Is there a problem with it?
• Identify key concepts and explain them clearly.
• Consider alternative concepts or alternative definitions of concepts.
• Make sure you are using concepts with precision.
• What am I assuming or taking for granted?
• Am I assuming something I shouldn’t?
• What assumption is leading me to this conclusion?
• What is… (this policy, strategy, explanation) assuming?
• What exactly do sociologists (historians, mathematicians, etc.) take for granted?
• What is being presupposed in this theory?
• What are some important assumptions I make about my roommate, my friends, my parents, my instructors, my country?
• Clearly identify your assumptions and determine whether they are justifiable.
• Consider how your assumptions are shaping your point of view.
• If I decide to do “X”, what things might happen?
• If I decide not to do “X”, what things might happen?
• What are you implying when you say that?
• What is likely to happen if we do this versus that?
• Are you implying that…?
• How significant are the implications of this decision?
• What, if anything, is implied by the fact that a much higher percentage of poor people are in jail than wealthy people?
• Trace the implications and consequences that follow from your reasoning.
• Search for negative as well as positive implications.
• Consider all possible consequences.
• How am I looking at this situation? Is there another way to look at it that I should consider?
• What exactly am I focused on? And how am I seeing it?
• Is my view the only reasonable view? What does my point of view ignore?
• Have you ever considered the way ____(Japanese, Muslims, South Americans, etc.) view this?
• Which of these possible viewpoints makes the most sense given the situation?
• Am I having difficulty looking at this situation from a viewpoint with which I disagree?
• What is the point of view of the author of this story?
• Do I study viewpoints that challenge my personal beliefs?
• Identify your point of view.
• Seek other points of view and identify their strengths as well as weaknesses.
• Strive to be fairminded in evaluating all points of view.

• Skip to main content

Update your browser for the best possible experience

As of January 1st, 2020, Internet Explorer (versions 11 and below) is no longer supported by Evolve. To get the best possible experience using Evolve, we recommend that you use another web browser. For HESI iNet users click here .

Critical Thinking Models: A Comprehensive Guide for Effective Decision Making

Critical thinking models are valuable frameworks that help individuals develop and enhance their critical thinking skills . These models provide a structured approach to problem-solving and decision-making by encouraging the evaluation of information and arguments in a logical, systematic manner. By understanding and applying these models, one can learn to make well-reasoned judgments and decisions.

Key Takeaways

Fundamentals of critical thinking.

Definition and Importance

Critical thinking is the intellectual process of logically, objectively, and systematically evaluating information to form reasoned judgments, utilizing reasoning , logic , and evidence . It involves:

Core Cognitive Skills

Influence of cognitive biases.

A key aspect of critical thinking is recognizing and mitigating the impact of cognitive biases on our thought processes. Cognitive biases are cognitive shortcuts or heuristics that can lead to flawed reasoning and distort our understanding of a situation. Examples of cognitive biases include confirmation bias, anchoring bias, and availability heuristic.

To counter the influence of cognitive biases, critical thinkers must be aware of their own assumptions and strive to apply consistent and objective evaluation criteria in their thinking process. The practice of actively recognizing and addressing cognitive biases promotes an unbiased and rational approach to problem-solving and decision-making.

The Critical Thinking Process

Stages of Critical Thinking

The critical thinking process starts with gathering and evaluating data . This stage involves identifying relevant information and ensuring it is credible and reliable. Next, an individual engages in analysis by examining the data closely to understand its context and interpret its meaning. This step can involve breaking down complex ideas into simpler components for better understanding.

Values play a significant role in the critical thinking process. Critical thinkers assess the significance of moral, ethical, or cultural values shaping the issue, argument, or decision at hand. They determine whether these values align with the evidence and logic they have analyzed.

Application in Decision Making

Critical thinking models, the red model.

The RED Model stands for Recognize Assumptions, Evaluate Arguments, and Draw Conclusions. It emphasizes the importance of questioning assumptions, weighing evidence, and reaching logical conclusions.

Bloom’s Taxonomy

Bloom’s Taxonomy is a hierarchical model that classifies cognitive skills into six levels of complexity. These levels are remembering, understanding, applying, analyzing, evaluating, and creating. By progressing through these levels, individuals can develop higher-order thinking skills.

Paul-Elder Model

The Paul-Elder Model introduces the concept of “elements of thought,” focusing on a structured approach to critical thinking. This model promotes intellectual standards, such as clarity, accuracy, and relevance. It consists of three stages:

The Halpern Critical Thinking Assessment

These four critical thinking models can be used as frameworks to improve and enhance cognitive abilities. By learning and practicing these models, individuals can become better equipped to analyze complex information, evaluate options, and make well-informed decisions.

Evaluating Information and Arguments

Evidence assessment, logic and fallacies.

Being aware of these fallacies enables a thinker to effectively evaluate the strength of an argument and make sound judgments accordingly.

Argument Analysis

Enhancing critical thinking, strategies for improvement, critical thinking in education.

In the field of education, critical thinking is an essential component of effective learning and pedagogy. Integrating critical thinking into the curriculum encourages student autonomy, fosters innovation, and improves student outcomes. Teachers can use various approaches to promote critical thinking, such as:

Developing a Critical Thinking Mindset

Critical thinking in various contexts, the workplace and beyond.

In the workplace context, critical thinkers are able to recognize assumptions, evaluate arguments, and draw conclusions, following models such as the RED model . They can also adapt their thinking to suit various scenarios, allowing them to tackle complex and diverse problems.

Creative and Lateral Thinking

In conclusion, critical thinking is a multifaceted skill that comprises various thought processes, including creative and lateral thinking. By embracing these skills, individuals can excel in the workplace and in their personal lives, making better decisions and solving problems effectively.

Overcoming Challenges

Recognizing and addressing bias.

By adopting these practices, individuals can minimize the impact of biases and enhance the overall quality of their critical thinking skills.

Dealing with Information Overload

By implementing these techniques, individuals can effectively manage information overload, enabling them to process and analyze data more effectively, leading to better decision-making.

Measuring Critical Thinking

Assessment tools and criteria.

Furthermore, criteria for assessing critical thinking often include precision, relevance, and the ability to gather and analyze relevant information. Some assessors utilize the Halpern Critical Thinking Assessment , which measures the application of cognitive skills such as deduction, observation, and induction in real-world scenarios.

The Role of IQ and Tests

Frequently asked questions, what are the main steps involved in the paul-elder critical thinking model.

The Paul-Elder Critical Thinking Model is a comprehensive framework for developing critical thinking skills. The main steps include: identifying the purpose, formulating questions, gathering information, identifying assumptions, interpreting information, and evaluating arguments. The model emphasizes clarity, accuracy, precision, relevance, depth, breadth, logic, and fairness throughout the critical thinking process. By following these steps, individuals can efficiently analyze and evaluate complex ideas and issues.

Can you list five techniques to enhance critical thinking skills?

What is the red model of critical thinking and how is it applied, how do the ‘3 c’s’ of critical thinking contribute to effective problem-solving.

The ‘3 C’s’ of critical thinking – Curiosity, Creativity, and Criticism – collectively contribute to effective problem-solving. Curiosity allows individuals to explore various perspectives and ask thought-provoking questions, while Creativity helps develop innovative solutions and unique approaches to challenges. Criticism, or the ability to evaluate and analyze ideas objectively, ensures that the problem-solving process remains grounded in logic and relevance.

What characteristics distinguish critical thinking from creative thinking?

What are some recommended books to help improve problem-solving and critical thinking skills, you may also like, the 7 best critical thinking books for beginners, critical thinking for strategic intelligence: a comprehensive guide, critical thinking skills in the workplace, why critical thinking is important for success, download this free ebook.

• Productivity
• Thoughtful learning

Critical thinking models: definition, benefits, and skills

In the age of memes and misinformation, critical thinking is a must. It's a crucial skill to differentiate between what may be true or false and develop (and explain) reasons for your beliefs.

The hardest part of critical thinking is knowing when to do it. Most of the time, it's easier to accept things as fact rather than to dig deeper to reach a conscious conclusion. This happens for various reasons. The most common being the ease of following the crowd and the fact it would be rather cumbersome to think critically about every single thing in the world!

How then do we know what to think critically about? How do we get the right answers, and how do we know they're correct? This is where a critical thinking model comes in. In this article, we’ll share three critical thinking models, essential critical reasoning skills, and why improving your critical thinking process is a good idea.

What Is Critical Thinking?

"Critical thinking is reasonable and reflective thinking focused on deciding what to believe or do.” This is how renowned professor and author Robert Hugh Ennis defines it. Put another way, the definition of critical thinking is careful consideration and analysis of information to reach a rational conclusion or decision. We practice critical thinking to inform—and own—our beliefs and actions and ensure they truly align with our values and intentions.

That said, critical thinking is not our natural way of thinking . Most of us are never aware of our brain's metacognitive actions, conceptualizations, or synthesis. Instead, we rely on habits, patterns, and competencies from past experiences to understand and interact with the world. While this may save us time and effort, it doesn’t always provide the best results—and often results in fallacies.

What Are Critical Thinking Models?

A critical thinking model provides the structure for practicing this type of thinking. It helps us notice our own thinking biases and allows us to try viewing the world objectively all while providing guidelines for asking the right questions, reaching logical conclusions, and explaining how we did it.

3 Critical Thinking Models That Are Useful in Everyday Life

There are thousands of critical thinking models for almost any subject or discipline. Let’s take a look at three models of critical thinking we find useful in everyday life.

Proximate vs. Root Cause

The proximate vs. root cause critical thinking model encourages people to discover the primary cause of an event. A proximate cause is closest to the observed result or immediately responsible for it. In contrast, the root cause is the actual cause of the result. Both are causes of the event, but the root cause is the main cause, while the proximate cause is the immediate next cause.

This mental model forces you to look beyond obvious reasons to determine the core reason for impact. It helps with innovative problem-solving, so instead of relying on “Band-Aid solutions” or improving currently-existing solutions, you uncover the root of the matter and create something altogether new.

Example: You've gained a lot of weight since March 2021. Upon investigation, you may draw the following inferences:

• Proximate cause: You burn fewer calories than you consume (moving less and eating more due to boredom or food accessibility), thus the weight gain.
• Root cause: Your habits changed because of the lifestyle change from working at the office to working from home.

When you know the root cause of an issue, you can begin to deal with it to reduce the odds of recurrence. In this case, change your habits to fit the work-from-home lifestyle better. The proximate vs. root cause model improves your critical thinking ability and helps formulate a proper understanding of issues before working on them.

Cognitive Bias

Cognitive bias is a tendency to think in ways that can lead to deviations from rationality and objectivity. We all have cognitive biases. This error in thinking happens because of our tendency to process and interpret information swiftly, which can affect our decision-making and the eventual outcome of a situation.

Example: A soccer player scores a goal. In his mind, that means he's a great player. But if he had missed, he would reason that it was because the grass was wet. In self-serving bias, the tendency is to claim more responsibility for successes than failures. In other words: if there's a success, it's because I did something right. If there's a failure, it's something else's fault, not mine.

When you only pay attention or engage with news sources, stories, and conversations that confirm your worldview, you limit yourself from other perspectives and opinions that may be good for you without realizing it. Being aware of your own cognitive bias allows you to create some distance between how you expect the world to be and become more open to how it actually is on any given day.

The human brain is a powerful machine, but it has its limitations. One of them is neglecting facts and evidence to make sense of the world quickly and easily. This habit of mind may allow us to make faster decisions, but it doesn't serve us optimally. When unchecked, cognitive biases hinder fair-mindedness, inclusion, and impartiality.

Hanlon's Razor

"Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by incompetence."

Hanlon's Razor promotes good thinking and teaches us not to assume the worst intentions about people's actions without investigation. It helps regulate our emotions and improve relationships and decision-making. It also helps us develop empathy by giving others the benefit of the doubt and not assuming negative intent with evidence.

Example: You get to work earlier than usual on a Monday morning and notice your things scattered around. This must mean someone used your office! You immediately think a certain coworker did this to annoy you. But when you pause and consider, you realize that a coworker may have used your office during the weekend because it was vacant and they forgot their keys at home.

The stories we tell ourselves about why things happen the way they do are rarely true. It's worth spending some time to objectively view situations and choose a positive narrative that leads to better outcomes in our mental and emotional health and relationships.

Be the first to try it out!

We're developing ABLE, a powerful tool for building your personal knowledge, capturing information from the web, conducting research, taking notes, and writing content.

Critical Thinking Skills and Their Benefits

Critical thinking skills are useful for everyone. They help us think coherently and make advancements with our personal and professional goals. Some of the benefits you can gain from critical thinking are:

• Greater reflective thinking and self-awareness
• Ability to audit new information
• Better interpersonal relationships
• More creative thinking and problem-solving skills
• Expanded open-mindedness
• Improved communication and presentation skills
• Freedom from past experiences and attachments

To gain these types of benefits, it’s important to practice the critical thinking skills listed below.

1. Observation

Observation is the foundation for critical thinking. It’s the ability to notice and predict opportunities, problems, and solutions. Taking the time to observe helps you process information better. Positive habits like meditating, journaling, and active listening will help you improve your observation skills.

2. Analysis

After observing, it's time to analyze the information. Analyzing helps you gain a clearer grasp of the situation at hand. Ask questions that help you get a clearer picture of the subject and get to the root cause or reason. For example, if you’re analyzing a controversial tweet you read, you may ask questions such as:

• Who wrote this?
• What is it about?
• When was it written?
• Why did they write it? Do they have a hidden agenda?
• How sound is the premise?
• What if this tweet was altered to send a misleading message?

These questions help you break your subject into rational bits and consider the relationship between each one and the whole.

3. Inference

Inference is the ability to draw conclusions from the information you've analyzed and other relevant data. It's a higher-level critical thinking skill that helps you reach careful decisions rather than hastily drawn (and likely biased) conclusions.

4. Communication

Once you have a solid foundation for your beliefs, communicating your theory is the next essential part of critical thinking. Share your point of view and get feedback from others to know if it holds up. You can improve your communication skills by participating in thematic forum discussions and sharing your research and insights with others in your community, both online and offline.

5. Problem-solving

Problem-solving is one of the main reasons for critical thinking. The end goal of critical thinking is using your new conclusion to close gaps and solve problems. You start by identifying your viewpoint, analyzing relevant information, and deciding on the right solution for a particular scenario. You can improve your problem-solving skills by self-learning the subject at hand and considering hidden, alternative outcomes.

Tap Into the Power of Critical Thinking

Becoming a critical thinker is challenging but oh-so worth it. It leads to continuous growth in all areas of your life: better relationships, confidence, and problem-solving skills. Critical thinking helps us overcome familiar patterns and ways of thinking, opening us to new perspectives.

To improve your critical thinking, spend time honing the five crucial critical thinking skills: observation, analysis, inference, communication, and problem-solving. Have fun with the process as you pay more attention to your beliefs and experiences and other people's perspectives and experiences as well.

You can use critical thinking models to guide your critical thinking journey, prompting you to realize when to pause and ask questions and when to accept the answers you have and move on. For example, in today’s age of misinformation, you may learn that it’s almost always counterproductive to engage with news and information from unknown sources.

Critical thinking is needed to remove scales from our eyes and improve our knowledge and experience of the world, but it’s also important to know when to turn our attention to focus on a new subject and move on.

Improve your critical thinking with ABLE

Ask better questions and get better answers with ABLEs integrated web search, annotation and note-taking features. Check how ABLE helps you to improve your critical thinking.

We hope you have enjoyed reading this article. Feel free to share, recommend and connect on Twitter: https://twitter.com/meet_able 🙏

Straight from the ABLE team: how we work and what we build. Thoughts, learnings, notes, experiences and what really matters.

Read more posts by this author

follow me :

Simplifying complexity: How to conquer clarity and brevity

How to organize information: the best methods for lifelong learning.

What is abstract thinking? 10 activities to improve your abstract thinking skills

5 examples of cognitive learning theory (and how you can use them)

0 results found.

• Aegis Alpha SA
• We build in public

Building with passion in

• Programs & Services
• Delphi Center

Ideas to Action (i2a)

• Paul-Elder Critical Thinking Framework

Critical thinking is that mode of thinking – about any subject, content, or problem — in which the thinker improves the quality of his or her thinking by skillfully taking charge of the structures inherent in thinking and imposing intellectual standards upon them. (Paul and Elder, 2001). The Paul-Elder framework has three components:

• The elements of thought (reasoning)
• The  intellectual standards that should be applied to the elements of reasoning
• The intellectual traits associated with a cultivated critical thinker that result from the consistent and disciplined application of the intellectual standards to the elements of thought

According to Paul and Elder (1997), there are two essential dimensions of thinking that students need to master in order to learn how to upgrade their thinking. They need to be able to identify the "parts" of their thinking, and they need to be able to assess their use of these parts of thinking.

Elements of Thought (reasoning)

The "parts" or elements of thinking are as follows:

• All reasoning has a purpose
• All reasoning is an attempt to figure something out, to settle some question, to solve some problem
• All reasoning is based on assumptions
• All reasoning is done from some point of view
• All reasoning is based on data, information and evidence
• All reasoning is expressed through, and shaped by, concepts and ideas
• All reasoning contains inferences or interpretations by which we draw conclusions and give meaning to data
• All reasoning leads somewhere or has implications and consequences

Universal Intellectual Standards

The intellectual standards that are to these elements are used to determine the quality of reasoning. Good critical thinking requires having a command of these standards. According to Paul and Elder (1997 ,2006), the ultimate goal is for the standards of reasoning to become infused in all thinking so as to become the guide to better and better reasoning. The intellectual standards include:

Intellectual Traits

Consistent application of the standards of thinking to the elements of thinking result in the development of intellectual traits of:

• Intellectual Humility
• Intellectual Courage
• Intellectual Empathy
• Intellectual Autonomy
• Intellectual Integrity
• Intellectual Perseverance
• Confidence in Reason
• Fair-mindedness

Characteristics of a Well-Cultivated Critical Thinker

Habitual utilization of the intellectual traits produce a well-cultivated critical thinker who is able to:

• Raise vital questions and problems, formulating them clearly and precisely
• Gather and assess relevant information, using abstract ideas to interpret it effectively
• Come to well-reasoned conclusions and solutions, testing them against relevant criteria and standards;
• Think open-mindedly within alternative systems of thought, recognizing and assessing, as need be, their assumptions, implications, and practical consequences; and
• Communicate effectively with others in figuring out solutions to complex problems

Paul, R. and Elder, L. (2010). The Miniature Guide to Critical Thinking Concepts and Tools. Dillon Beach: Foundation for Critical Thinking Press.

• SACS & QEP
• Planning and Implementation
• What is Critical Thinking?
• Why Focus on Critical Thinking?
• Culminating Undergraduate Experience
• Community Engagement
• Frequently Asked Questions
• What is i2a?

Copyright © 2012 - University of Louisville , Delphi Center

Information

• Author Services

Initiatives

You are accessing a machine-readable page. In order to be human-readable, please install an RSS reader.

All articles published by MDPI are made immediately available worldwide under an open access license. No special permission is required to reuse all or part of the article published by MDPI, including figures and tables. For articles published under an open access Creative Common CC BY license, any part of the article may be reused without permission provided that the original article is clearly cited. For more information, please refer to https://www.mdpi.com/openaccess .

Feature papers represent the most advanced research with significant potential for high impact in the field. A Feature Paper should be a substantial original Article that involves several techniques or approaches, provides an outlook for future research directions and describes possible research applications.

Feature papers are submitted upon individual invitation or recommendation by the scientific editors and must receive positive feedback from the reviewers.

Editor’s Choice articles are based on recommendations by the scientific editors of MDPI journals from around the world. Editors select a small number of articles recently published in the journal that they believe will be particularly interesting to readers, or important in the respective research area. The aim is to provide a snapshot of some of the most exciting work published in the various research areas of the journal.

Original Submission Date Received: .

• Active Journals
• Find a Journal
• Proceedings Series
• For Authors
• For Reviewers
• For Editors
• For Librarians
• For Publishers
• For Societies
• For Conference Organizers
• Open Access Policy
• Institutional Open Access Program
• Special Issues Guidelines
• Editorial Process
• Research and Publication Ethics
• Article Processing Charges
• Testimonials
• Preprints.org
• SciProfiles
• Encyclopedia

Article Menu

• Subscribe SciFeed
• Recommended Articles
• PubMed/Medline
• Google Scholar
• on Google Scholar
• Table of Contents

Find support for a specific problem in the support section of our website.

Please let us know what you think of our products and services.

Visit our dedicated information section to learn more about MDPI.

JSmol Viewer

Does self-directed learning with simulation improve critical thinking and motivation of nursing students a pre-post intervention study with the maes© methodology.

1. Introduction

• To evaluate the learning motivation strategies of nursing students before and after the self-directed simulation training program (MAES©).
• To analyze the critical thinking of nursing students before and after the self-directed simulation training program (MAES©).

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. design, 2.2. participants, 2.3. study variables, 2.4. instruments, 2.5. procedure, 2.6. data analysis, 2.7. ethical considerations, 4. discussion, 5. conclusions, author contributions, institutional review board statement, informed consent statement, data availability statement, conflicts of interest.

• Díaz, J.L.; Leal, C.; García, J.A.; Hernández, E.; Adánez, M.G.; Sáez, A. Self-Learning Methodology in Simulated Environments (MAES©): Elements and Characteristics. Clin. Simul. Nurs. 2016 , 12 , 268–274. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Agea, J.L.D.; Costa, C.L.; Méndez, J.A.G. Metodología de autoaprendizaje en entornos simulados (MAES©). Evidentia Rev. Enfermería Basada Evid. 2014 , 11 , 8. [ Google Scholar ]
• Rudolph, J.W.; Raemer, D.B.; Simon, R. Establishing a Safe Container for Learning in Simulation: The Role of the Presimulation Briefing. Simul. Healthc. 2014 , 9 , 339–349. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Díaz-Agea, J.L.; Pujalte-Jesús, M.J.; Leal-Costa, C.; García-Méndez, J.A.; Adánez-Martínez, M.G.; Jiménez-Rodríguez, D. Motivation: Bringing up the rear in nursing education. Motivational elements in simulation. The participants’ perspective. Nurse Educ. Today 2021 , 103 , 104925. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Díaz Agea, J.L.; Ramos-Morcillo, A.J.; Amo Setien, F.J.; Ruzafa-Martínez, M.; Hueso-Montoro, C.; Leal-Costa, C. Perceptions about the Self-Learning Methodology in Simulated Environments in Nursing Students: A Mixed Study. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2019 , 16 , 4646. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ] [ Green Version ]
• Chickering, A.W.; Gamson, Z.F. Seven Principles for Good Practice in Undergraduate Education. AAHE Bull. 1987 , 3 , 7. Available online: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ed282491 (accessed on 14 February 2022).
• Garre-Baños, N.; Díaz-Agea, J.L. Two-way learning and pedagogical profile of the facilitator in self-learning methodology in simulated environments (MAES©). A qualitative exploratory study. Rev. Latinoam. Simul. Clín. 2021 , 2 , 106–132. [ Google Scholar ]
• Leal Costa, C.; Megías Nicolás, A.; García Méndez, J.A.; de Garcia Adánez Martínez, M.; Díaz Agea, J.L. Enseñando con metodología de autoaprendizaje en entornos simulados (MAES©). Un estudio cualitativo entre profesores y alumnos de grado en enfermería. Educ. Méd. 2019 , 20 , 52–58. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Kaufman, D.M. Teaching and Learning in Medical Education. In Understanding Medical Education ; John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2018; pp. 37–69. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Crosby, R.M.H.J. AMEE Guide No 20: The good teacher is more than a lecturer—The twelve roles of the teacher. Med. Teach. 2000 , 22 , 334–347. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Dieckmann, P.; Molin Friis, S.; Lippert, A.; Østergaard, D. The art and science of debriefing in simulation: Ideal and practice. Med. Teach. 2009 , 31 , e287–e294. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Kolb, D.A. Experiential Learning: Experience as the Source of Learning and Development ; FT Press: Upper Saddle River, NJ, USA, 2014; 417p. [ Google Scholar ]
• Díaz Agea, J.L.; Megías Nicolás, A.; García Méndez, J.A.; de Garcia Adánez Martínez, M.; Leal Costa, C. Improving simulation performance through Self-Learning Methodology in Simulated Environments (MAES©). Nurse Educ. Today 2019 , 76 , 62–67. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Peñataro-Pintado, E.; Díaz-Agea, J.L.; Castillo, I.; Leal-Costa, C.; Ramos-Morcillo, A.J.; Ruzafa-Martínez, M.; Encarna, R.-H. Self-Learning Methodology in Simulated Environments (MAES©) as a Learning Tool in Perioperative Nursing. An Evidence-Based Practice Model for Acquiring Clinical Safety Competencies. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021 , 18 , 7893. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Fenzi, G.; Reuben, A.D.; Agea, J.L.D.; Ruipérez, T.H.; Costa, C.L. Self-learning methodology in simulated environments (MAES©) utilized in hospital settings. Action-research in an Emergency Department in the United Kingdom. Int. Emerg. Nurs. 2022 , 61 , 101128. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Fragoso-Luzuriaga, R. Emotional intelligence and emotional competencies in higher education, the same concept? Rev. Iberoam. Educ. Super. 2015 , 6 , 110–125. [ Google Scholar ]
• Lopez, E. McKeachie’s Teaching Tips: Strategies, Research, and Theory for College and University Teachers. Rev. High. Educ. 2004 , 27 , 283–284. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Gutiérrez-Ríos, M. Repensar el papel del diálogo para la inclusión social, la responsabilidad política y la educación dialógica. Actual. Pedag. 2017 , 1 , 15–47. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ Green Version ]
• Roces, C.; Tourón, J.; González-Torres, M.C. Validación Preliminar del CEAM II (Cuestionario de Estrategias de Aprendizaje y Motivación II). 1995. Available online: https://dadun.unav.edu/handle/10171/19176 (accessed on 14 February 2022).
• Pintrich, P.R. A Manual for the Use of the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ). 1991. Available online: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED338122 (accessed on 14 February 2022).
• Zuriguel-Pérez, E.; Falcó-Pegueroles, A.; Roldán-Merino, J.; Agustino-Rodriguez, S.; del Carmen Gómez-Martín, M.; Lluch-Canut, M.T. Development and Psychometric Properties of the Nursing Critical Thinking in Clinical Practice Questionnaire. Worldviews Evid. Based Nurs. 2017 , 14 , 257–264. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ Green Version ]
• Martínez, J.R.; Galán, F. Estrategias de aprendizaje, motivación y rendimiento académico en alumnos universitarios. «Undergraduate students» learning strategies, motivation, and academic performance’. Rev. Esp. Orientación Psicopedag. 2000 , 11 , 35–50. Available online: https://redined.educacion.gob.es/xmlui/handle/11162/70239 (accessed on 14 February 2022). [ CrossRef ]
• Cavero, M.Á.B. Voluntad para estudiar, regulación del esfuerzo, gestión eficaz del tiempo y rendimiento académico en alumnos universitarios. Rev. Investig. Educ. 2011 , 29 , 171–185. [ Google Scholar ]
• Pintrich, P.R.; de Groot, E.V. Motivational and self-regulated learning components of classroom academic performance. J. Educ. Psychol. 1990 , 82 , 33–40. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Rutherford-Hemming, T.; Lioce, L.; Breymier, T. Guidelines and Essential Elements for Prebriefing. Simul. Healthc. 2019 , 14 , 409–414. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Alfaro-LeFevre, R. Critical Thinking, Clinical Reasoning and Clinical Judgment: A Practical Approach ; Pageburst E-book on Kno; Elsevier: Philadelphia, PA, USA, 2016; 288p. [ Google Scholar ]
• Saeedi, M.; Ghafouri, R.; Tehrani, F.J.; Abedini, Z. The effects of teaching methods on academic motivation in nursing students: A systematic review. J. Educ. Health Promot. 2021 , 10 , 271. [ Google Scholar ] [ PubMed ]
• Zhang, Z.-J.; Zhang, C.-L.; Zhang, X.-G.; Liu, X.-M.; Zhang, H.; Wang, J.; Liu, S. Relationship between self-efficacy beliefs and achievement motivation in student nurses. Chin. Nurs. Res. 2015 , 2 , 67–70. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ Green Version ]
• Yousefy, A.; Ghassemi, G.; Firouznia, S. Motivation and academic achievement in medical students. J. Educ. Health Promot. 2012 , 1 , 4. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Park, H.-R.; Park, J.-W.; Kim, C.-J.; Song, J.-E. Development and validation of simulation teaching strategies in an integrated nursing practicum. Collegian 2017 , 24 , 479–486. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Fawaz, M.A.; Hamdan-Mansour, A.M. Impact of high-fidelity simulation on the development of clinical judgment and motivation among Lebanese nursing students. Nurse Educ. Today 2016 , 46 , 36–42. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Navidad, F.C. Students’ Devised Classroom Games-Simulations: An Innovative Tool on Mathematics Achievement and Motivation in Nursing Students. Available online: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Students%E2%80%99-Devised-Classroom-Games-Simulations%3A-An-Navidad/1e3fe16f7789025efa625c7563497d0c46482cb6 (accessed on 15 February 2022).
• Roh, Y.S.; Kim, S.S. Integrating Problem-Based Learning and Simulation: Effects on Student Motivation and Life Skills. Comput. Inform. Nurs. 2015 , 33 , 278–284. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Sarikoc, G.; Ozcan, C.T.; Elcin, M. The impact of using standardized patients in psychiatric cases on the levels of motivation and perceived learning of the nursing students. Nurse Educ. Today 2017 , 51 , 15–22. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• INACSL Standards of Best Practice: Simulation SM Simulation Glossary. Clin. Simul. Nurs. 2016 , 12 , S39–S47. [ CrossRef ]
• Bandura, A.; Freeman, W.H.; Lightsey, R. Self-Efficacy: The Exercise of Control. J. Cogn. Psychother. 1999 , 13 , 158–166. [ Google Scholar ]
• Orgambídez, A.; Borrego, Y.; Vázquez-Aguado, O. Self-efficacy and organizational commitment among Spanish nurses: The role of work engagement. Int. Nurs. Rev. 2019 , 66 , 381–388. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Cant, R.P.; Cooper, S.J. Use of simulation-based learning in undergraduate nurse education: An umbrella systematic review. Nurse Educ. Today 2017 , 49 , 63–71. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Foronda, C.; Liu, S.; Bauman, E.B. Evaluation of Simulation in Undergraduate Nurse Education: An Integrative Review. Clin. Simul. Nurs. 2013 , 9 , e409–e416. [ Google Scholar ]
• Franklin, A.E.; Lee, C.S. Effectiveness of Simulation for Improvement in Self-Efficacy Among Novice Nurses: A Meta-Analysis. J. Nurs. Educ. 2014 , 53 , 607–614. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Oh, P.-J.; Jeon, K.D.; Koh, M.S. The effects of simulation-based learning using standardized patients in nursing students: A meta-analysis. Nurse Educ. Today 2015 , 35 , e6–e15. [ Google Scholar ]
• Nascimento, J.D.S.G.; Siqueira, T.V.; Oliveira, J.L.G.D.; Alves, M.G.; Regino, D.D.S.G.; Dalri, M.C.B. Development of clinical competence in nursing in simulation: The perspective of Bloom’s taxonomy. Rev. Bras. Enferm. 2021 , 74 . Available online: http://www.scielo.br/j/reben/a/zgmY8gmZF3Q98JrxzLdCLrC/?lang=en (accessed on 15 February 2022). [ CrossRef ]
• Adams, N.E. Bloom’s taxonomy of cognitive learning objectives. J. Med. Libr. Assoc. 2015 , 103 , 152–153. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Stephens, M.; Ormandy, P. An Evidence-based Approach to Measuring Affective Domain Development. J. Prof. Nurs. 2019 , 35 , 216–223. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Lee, J.; Lee, H.; Kim, S.; Choi, M.; Ko, I.S.; Bae, J.; Kim, S.H. Debriefing methods and learning outcomes in simulation nursing education: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Nurse Educ. Today 2020 , 87 , 104345. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Melnyk, B.M.; Gallagher-Ford, L.; Long, L.E.; Fineout-Overholt, E. The Establishment of Evidence-Based Practice Competencies for Practicing Registered Nurses and Advanced Practice Nurses in Real-World Clinical Settings: Proficiencies to Improve Healthcare Quality, Reliability, Patient Outcomes, and Costs. Worldviews Evid. Based Nurs. 2014 , 11 , 5–15. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Edwards, D.; Hawker, C.; Carrier, J.; Rees, C. A systematic review of the effectiveness of strategies and interventions to improve the transition from student to newly qualified nurse. Int. J. Nurs. Stud. 2015 , 52 , 1254–1268. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Banning, M. Clinical reasoning and its application to nursing: Concepts and research studies. Nurse Educ. Pract. 2008 , 8 , 177–183. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Levett-Jones, T.; Hoffman, K.; Dempsey, J.; Jeong, S.Y.-S.; Noble, D.; Norton, C.A.; Roche, J.; Hickey, N. The ‘five rights’ of clinical reasoning: An educational model to enhance nursing students’ ability to identify and manage clinically ‘at risk’ patients. Nurse Educ. Today 2010 , 30 , 515–520. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Simmons, B. Clinical reasoning: Concept analysis. J. Adv. Nurs. 2010 , 66 , 1151–1158. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Brown Tyo, M.; McCurry, M.K. An Integrative Review of Clinical Reasoning Teaching Strategies and Outcome Evaluation in Nursing Education. Nurs. Educ. Perspect. 2019 , 40 , 11–17. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Lapkin, S.; Levett-Jones, T.; Bellchambers, H.; Fernandez, R. Effectiveness of Patient Simulation Manikins in Teaching Clinical Reasoning Skills to Undergraduate Nursing Students: A Systematic Review. Clin. Simul. Nurs. 2010 , 6 , e207–e222. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Kriewaldt, J.; Turnidge, D. Conceptualizing an Approach to Clinical Reasoning in The Education Profession. Aust. J. Teach. Educ. 2013 , 38 , 103–115. Available online: https://ro.ecu.edu.au/ajte/vol38/iss6/7 (accessed on 1 January 2022).
• Brentnall, J.; Thackray, D.; Judd, B. Evaluating the Clinical Reasoning of Student Health Professionals in Placement and Simulation Settings: A Systematic Review. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022 , 19 , 936. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Dreifuerst, K.T. Using Debriefing for Meaningful Learning to Foster Development of Clinical Reasoning in Simulation. J. Nurs. Educ. 2012 , 51 , 326–333. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Forneris, S.G.; Neal, D.O.; Tiffany, J.; Kuehn, M.B.; Meyer, H.M.; Blazovich, L.M.; Holland, A.E.; Smerillo, M. Enhancing Clinical Reasoning Through Simulation Debriefing: A Multisite Study. Nurs. Educ. Perspect. 2015 , 36 , 304–310. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Kautz, D.D.; Kuiper, R.; Pesut, D.J.; Knight-Brown, P.; Daneker, D. Promoting Clinical Reasoning in Undergraduate Nursing Students: Application and Evaluation of the Outcome Present State Test (OPT) Model of Clinical Reasoning. Int. J. Nurs. Educ. Scholarsh. 2005 , 2 , 1–19. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ] [ Green Version ]
• Kuiper, R.; Heinrich, C.; Matthias, A.; Graham, M.J.; Bell-Kotwall, L. Debriefing with the OPT Model of Clinical Reasoning during High Fidelity Patient Simulation. Int. J. Nurs. Educ. Scholarsh. 2008 , 5 . [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Burt, L.; Corbridge, S. Teaching Diagnostic Reasoning: A Review of Evidence-Based Interventions. Int. J. Nurs. Educ. Scholarsh. 2018 , 15 . [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Tanner, C.A. Thinking Like a Nurse: A Research-Based Model of Clinical Judgment in Nursing. J. Nurs. Educ. 2006 , 45 , 204–211. [ Google Scholar ] [ PubMed ]
• Clinical Judgment Development: Using Simulation to Create an Assessment Rubric. J. Nurs. Educ. 2007 , 46 . [ CrossRef ]
• Shin, H.; Ma, H.; Park, J.; Ji, E.S.; Kim, D.H. The effect of simulation courseware on critical thinking in undergraduate nursing students: Multi-site pre-post study. Nurse Educ. Today 2015 , 35 , 537–542. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Weiler, D.T.; Gibson, A.L.; Saleem, J.J. The effect of role assignment in high fidelity patient simulation on nursing students: An experimental research study. Nurse Educ. Today 2018 , 63 , 29–34. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Shinnick, M.A.; Woo, M.A. The effect of human patient simulation on critical thinking and its predictors in prelicensure nursing students. Nurse Educ. Today 2013 , 33 , 1062–1067. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ Green Version ]
• Bogossian, F.; Cooper, S.; Cant, R.; Beauchamp, A.; Porter, J.; Kain, V.; Bucknall, T.; Phillips, N.M.; FIRST2ACT™ Research Team. Undergraduate nursing students’ performance in recognising and responding to sudden patient deterioration in high psychological fidelity simulated environments: An Australian multi-centre study. Nurse Educ. Today 2014 , 34 , 691–696. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Cooper, S.; Kinsman, L.; Buykx, P.; McConnell-Henry, T.; Endacott, R.; Scholes, J. Managing the deteriorating patient in a simulated environment: Nursing students’ knowledge, skill and situation awareness. J. Clin. Nurs. 2010 , 19 , 2309–2318. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Yuan, H.B.; Williams, B.A.; Man, C.Y. Nursing students’ clinical judgment in high-fidelity simulation based learning: A quasi-experimental study. J. Nurs. Educ. Pract. 2014 , 4 , 7. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Alinier, G.; Hunt, W.B.; Gordon, R. Determining the value of simulation in nurse education: Study design and initial results. Nurse Educ. Pract. 2004 , 4 , 200–207. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ Green Version ]
• Radhakrishnan, K.; Roche, J.P.; Cunningham, H. Measuring Clinical Practice Parameters with Human Patient Simulation: A Pilot Study. Int. J. Nurs. Educ. Scholarsh. 2007 , 4 . [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Theobald, K.A.; Tutticci, N.; Ramsbotham, J.; Johnston, S. Effectiveness of using simulation in the development of clinical reasoning in undergraduate nursing students: A systematic review. Nurse Educ. Pract. 2021 , 57 , 103220. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Clemett, V.J.; Raleigh, M. The validity and reliability of clinical judgement and decision-making skills assessment in nursing: A systematic literature review. Nurse Educ. Today 2021 , 102 , 104885. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]

Share and Cite

Arizo-Luque, V.; Ramirez-Baena, L.; Pujalte-Jesús, M.J.; Rodríguez-Herrera, M.Á.; Lozano-Molina, A.; Arrogante, O.; Díaz-Agea, J.L. Does Self-Directed Learning with Simulation Improve Critical Thinking and Motivation of Nursing Students? A Pre-Post Intervention Study with the MAES© Methodology. Healthcare 2022 , 10 , 927. https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare10050927

Arizo-Luque V, Ramirez-Baena L, Pujalte-Jesús MJ, Rodríguez-Herrera MÁ, Lozano-Molina A, Arrogante O, Díaz-Agea JL. Does Self-Directed Learning with Simulation Improve Critical Thinking and Motivation of Nursing Students? A Pre-Post Intervention Study with the MAES© Methodology. Healthcare . 2022; 10(5):927. https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare10050927

Arizo-Luque, Vanessa, Lucía Ramirez-Baena, María José Pujalte-Jesús, María Ángeles Rodríguez-Herrera, Ainhoa Lozano-Molina, Oscar Arrogante, and José Luis Díaz-Agea. 2022. "Does Self-Directed Learning with Simulation Improve Critical Thinking and Motivation of Nursing Students? A Pre-Post Intervention Study with the MAES© Methodology" Healthcare 10, no. 5: 927. https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare10050927

Article Metrics

Article access statistics, further information, mdpi initiatives, follow mdpi.

Subscribe to receive issue release notifications and newsletters from MDPI journals

Alfaro-LeFevre Circular Model for Competence Assessment

Description.

• Implementation
• 11085    
• 5    

In 2015, an instrument was designed based on the Alfaro-LeFevre model in order to evaluate the critical thinking of care nurses at the Hospital Universitari Vall d’Hebron.

Person responsible for the Good Practice

HOSPITAL UNIVERSITARI VALL D'HEBRON

Corporate website

Good practice source

Catalanurses, good practice publisher.

BACKGROUND The need for more user-centred care and of evidence-based practices are aspects which highlight critical thinking as a professional competence. At a theoretical level, Alfaro-LeFevre put forth a thinking model based on four elements: personal characteristics, intellectual abilities, interpersonal and self-management abilities and technical abilities. However, no instrument has been found for its empirical evaluation.   METHODS Psychometric and correlation descriptive study. A set of elements was generated and a panel of experts evaluated the validity of the content of the new instrument based on the Alfaro-LeFevre circular model. Afterwards, the validation was performed on a sample of 339 nursing professionals at the Hospital Vall d’Hebron (Barcelona), who were selected by stratified sampling with proportional allocation of their units, between March and April 2015.   RESULTS The validity index of the Nursing Practice Critical Thinking Evaluation Questionnaire content (in Spanish, CuPCPE) was 0.85. The alpha Cronbach overall value was 0.96. The coefficient of intra-class correlation was 0.77. The factorial confirmatory analysis showed that the resulting model adapted to the theoretical four-dimensional theoretical model proposed. Care nurses were observed to present moderate levels of critical thinking. Among other noteworthy results, statistically significant differences were found (p   CONCLUSIONS Critical thinking is related to specific sociodemographic and professional variables. The CuPCPE psychometric properties reinforce its use in the clinical environment and in future studies.   Source of information: Catalanurses.cat: Avaluació del pensament crític en infermeres d’hospitalització segons el model circular d’Alfaro-LeFevre [Internet]. Catalonia [query performed on September 8, 2018]. Available at https://www.catalanurses.cat/projectes/avaluacio-del-pensament-critic-en-infermeres-dhospitalitzacio-segons-el-model-circular-dalfaro-lefevre/    

-       To know the level of critical thinking of the nursing collective at the hospital. -       To study the Alfaro-LeFevre circular model.

Management scopes

Achieve success through people’s talent . 

Unspecified

•   Notify me when similar ones are published
•   Favourites
•   Download
•   Report

Published on*** 9 Sep 2018

Log in to leave a comment.

Explotació dades de la formació prevista i realitzada en un simple Excel

18 Sep 2018

HOSPITAL DE CAMPDEVÀNOL

Disminució de cues a la cafeteria de l'hospital

25 Sep 2018

Xavier Garcia HOSPITAL DE PALAMÓS

Reducció de costos en el Servei de neteja mitjançant l’anàlisi dels recursos i responsabilitats

Ramón Roca HOSPITAL DE CAMPDEVÀNOL

Target group

• Infermeria/Auxiliars Infermeria
• Estratègia/Gestió
• Recursos Humans

We’re preparing the Good Management Practice file. You’ll be able to download it in a few seconds

Would you like to receive information on Good Practices by email?

Want to share your own experiences.

Sign up and publish them yourself

You have not registered

You must be registered to suggest a Good Practice. You can register if you still don’t have a user name. here . If you have a user name and password you can log in clicking on the following link.

• Publish in FFI Practitioner

The Four-Circle Model

View this edition in our enhanced digital edition format with supporting visual insight and information.

Thanks to this week’s contributor and FFI Fellow, Dean Fowler, for providing an overview of his Four-Circle Model. In the article, Dean explains how his model builds upon the Three-Circle Model and can be utilized by advisors to help understand and map the role of individuals in the system and their relationship to their family.

Over the past forty years, two themes have been critical for shaping consulting with family businesses: first, a systemic approach, and second – in more recent years – the inclusion of the next generation in transition planning. In this article, I discuss my Four-Circle Model for consulting with family enterprises that is both systemic and honors the next generation as individuated adults. My purpose is not to critique the more well-known Three-Circle Model, but rather to offer a proposed enhancement to the systemic approach for understanding families in business and families of wealth.

Prof. John Davis is a pioneer in the field of family business. The main purpose for developing his original Three-Circle Model was to identify the distinct roles held in the family business and how those roles shape individual perspectives . For more than 40 years, numerous consultants and researchers have used the systemic approach described by the Davis-Taguri model to explore a broad range of other topics as well.

The celebration of the 40 th anniversary of the Three-Circle Model was explored in depth in two issues of the FFI Practitioner (see the sidebar for the two interviews with John Davis).

On the one hand, models, theories, and paradigms are powerful tools to focus our attention when studying a given discipline. On the other hand, models may also limit the questions we ask, the topics we explore, and our understanding of critical issues. 1 My Four-Circle Model focuses attention on the role of individual adults in relationship to their own family of origin and broadens the systemic approach to working with and studying business families.

In the 1980s, when FFI was first holding national conferences, I presented my Four-Circle Model for studying families in business at several workshops. After discussing my model and research ideas with the Psycho-Dynamic Family Business group (PDFB) in 1993, I was encouraged to complete research to determine how the Four-Circle Model could be used to identify the most critical competencies that business families had to master for success. That research was published in the proceedings at the 1999 FFI conference.

The Four-Circle Model is different from the Three-Circle Model in four significant ways:

• The addition of the “individual circle” is critical, because in a family-owned business, advisors are often dealing with a family of adults, and healthy adults have typically individuated themselves from their family of origin. Healthy adult families are intentional. In my judgment, intergenerational family therapies, such as those developed by Murray Bowen 2 and James Framo, 3 are well suited to examine the systemic relationships between adults and their families of origin.
• The model focuses attention on competencies, particularly the competencies that must be mastered at each of the four intersection areas illustrated in the diagram.
• Individuals and/or individual beneficiaries, not families, own family businesses.
• Individuals such as board members and advisors who are not family members fit into the model in Sector 8.

Based on my research, twelve statistically reliable “factors” were identified that represent the competencies that must be mastered by individuals and their families for success:

Competencies of Intersection 1: Between adult individuals and their family of origin

• Maturity – Individuals must separate both emotionally and financially from their family of origin and develop a strong sense of their own self-esteem.
• Purpose – Adults must determine their own purpose by developing and pursuing passions either inside or outside the family business.
• Communication – Families must listen for understanding as well as to be understood and develop strong communication skills.

Competencies of Intersection 2: Between the family and the business

• Roles – Clear guidelines should be established concerning appropriate boundaries between the business and the family, so that roles can be differentiated.
• Business Competency – Business competency deals with developing a broad-based knowledge of the business.
• Compensation – Families must determine how to balance family fairness with the best business practices, based on national and regional compensation plans.

Competencies of Intersection 3: Between the business and ownership

• Strategy – For long-term success across generations, the owners and the business must develop a clear and comprehensive strategy with a mission, vision, and goals for growth.
• Structure – The organizational structure of the business must support the strategy. This requires having the right people in the right roles.
• Leadership – Professionalization of the business may be necessary, perhaps by having qualified family members coupled with a capable non-family executive leadership team.

Competencies of Intersection 4: Between ownership and adult individuals

• Succession – Based on the strategy and structure of the business, the transition of management from one generation to the next is critical. This succession may include next-gen family leaders, or a non-family president/CEO.
• Governance – Either an advisory board or a fiduciary board of directors should be in place for the long-term success of the business.
• Estate Planning – Estate, financial, and tax planning should support rather than drive the other competencies. The ownership transition plan should capture the voice, vision, and values of both the current and next generation shareholders.

The Four-Circle Model and the related twelve competencies from my research have shaped my consulting practice for decades. With an emphasis on adult individuals, and the individuation process, my primary client is the next generation–individuals, siblings, and/or cousins.

The senior generation gives legal permission to their advisors including the attorneys, accountants, insurance, and financial planning professionals to work directly with the successor generation. The next generation of adults then would design the optimal structure for the transition of the business and ownership, so that the business and the family will be setup to thrive in the future. In addition to planning with a team of advisors, the next generation also works on mastering the twelve competencies for future success and the implementation of the recommended structures and policies for the intergenerational transition. The process often takes several years, working interactively through a family or owners council, through which the next generation makes their recommendations to the senior generation, who controls the voting shares for their approval.

Based on my research using the Four-Circle Model, I developed an online assessment process with a questionnaire and report that benchmark how family members, non-family executives, and advisors–from the perspective of different sub-groups (roles ala Davis) –assess how the family is mastering these twelve competencies. 4

1 In his seminal work The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (1970) , Thomas Kuhn demonstrated that scientific theories are in fact “paradigms.” From the perspective of the sociology of knowledge, Kuhn argued that scientific communities share a common set of theories and ideas that are excellent tools to explore problems. However, in the history of science, there is a paradigm shift through which new theories emerge – for example from Newtonian physics to Einstein’s theory of relativity. Kuhn’s position contrasts with classical rationalism put forth by Karl Popper.

2 For key principles regarding Bowen read The Eight Concepts of Bowen Theory First Edition by  Dr. Roberta M Gilbert  or see the website https://www.thebowencenter.org/

3 Family-Of-Origin Therapy: An Intergenerational Approach by  James L. Framo

4 This online assessment and questionnaire can be found at ( https://www.deanfowler.com )

About the Contributor

Dean R. Fowler, PhD, FFI Fellow has advised business families for 38 years as well as facilitating Forums for Family Business TM – peer advisory boards – that specialize in personal and professional development through diversified experiences and accountability, while focusing on successful intergenerational transitions. He is the author of several books, including Love, Power and Money: Family Business between Generations . He can be reached at [email protected] .

Related posts you may also like

Iceberg Analysis of Family Systems

In this week’s FFI Practitioner, FFI Fellow and 2022 FFI International Award recipient Rodolfo Paiz, introduces the

Change, DNA, and Family Legacy

Thank you to this week’s contributors, Doug Gray and Natalie McVeigh, for their article that challenges practitioners’

An Interview with Dr. Salvatore Tomaselli: The Family-in-Business Model Canvas

This week, FFI Practitioner is pleased to share an interview with Dr. Salvatore Tomaselli, where he explains