ATTENTION: The software behind KU ScholarWorks is being upgraded to a new version. Starting July 15th, users will not be able to log in to the system, add items, nor make any changes until the new version is in place at the end of July. Searching for articles and opening files will continue to work while the system is being updated. If you have any questions, please contact Marianne Reed at mreed@ku.edu .

Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorClifford, Rita Harris
dc.date.accessioned2021-12-06T13:22:11Z
dc.date.available2021-12-06T13:22:11Z
dc.date.issued1981-05-31
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/1808/32254
dc.descriptionPh. D. University of Kansas, Educational Policy and Administration 1981en_US
dc.description.abstractA survey of educators and employers of clinical nurse specialists in eleven Midwestern states was undertaken to determine if these two groups held similar perceptions of the importance of functions of the clinical nurse specialist. An instrument, the Clinical Nurse Specialist Functions Inventory (CNSFI) was developed which consisted of 37 items, each representing one function of the clinical nurse specialist. Each function fit into one of four components of the role of the CNS, i.e., clinical, education, administration, and research. From a population of graduate nursing faculty and nursing administrators, a randomly selected sample was drawn. Seven hundred seventy seven individuals were contacted and 676 individuals (88%) responded. From this number, 152 educators and 190 employers completed biographical and institutional data and the function statement portions of the CNSFI. The remainder were employers who completed the first portion of the CNSFI, indicating they did not employ clinical nurse specialists.

Two hypotheses were tested using the t-test for independent means. Although there were significant differences between the independent means found on 30 of 37 individual functions and on all components of the role of the clinical nurse specialist, the two groups tended to view the functions in the same general direction of importance. Using the mean score for each item it was possible to identify the 10 most highly valued functions for each group and the 10 least valued functions for each group. The employer and educator rank order lists included many common items (7 of 10 for the most highly valued functions and 9 of 10 for the least valued functions). The clinical functions were most frequently represented in the most highly valued list and administrative functions were most frequently represented on the least highly valued list. Related findings dealt with biographical and institutional information and selected characteristics of the clinical nurse specialist as reported by the employers.
en_US
dc.publisherUniversity of Kansasen_US
dc.rightsThis item is protected by copyright and unless otherwise specified the copyright of this thesis/dissertation is held by the author.en_US
dc.titlePerceptions of employers and educators toward the importance of functions of the clinical nurse specialisten_US
dc.typeDissertationen_US
dc.thesis.degreeDisciplineEducational Policy and Administration
dc.thesis.degreeLevelPh.D.
kusw.bibid733391
dc.rights.accessrightsopenAccessen_US


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record