| Course | NR 537 Assessment and Evaluation in Education |
|---|---|
| Week | 7 |
| Paper type | Course evaluation plan |
| Length | About 1,120 words, 2 pages |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | Chamberlain University |
| Program | MSN, Nurse Educator |
| Updated | September 2026 |
Free sample paper for NR 537 Week 7
Course Evaluation Plan: What the End-of-Course Survey Can and Cannot Tell Us About the Maternal-Newborn Course, and the Four Other Sources That Measure Whether Students Learned and Used What It Taught
Student Name
College of Nursing, Chamberlain University
NR 537: Assessment and Evaluation in Education
Instructor Name
Month Day, Year
Course Evaluation Plan: What the End-of-Course Survey Can and Cannot Tell Us About the Maternal-Newborn Course, and the Four Other Sources That Measure Whether Students Learned and Used What It Taught
What the Survey Measures
At the end of each semester, students in our third-year maternal-newborn course complete the program's standard course survey: twelve items on a five-point scale, from "the course was well organized" to "the instructor was available outside class," and two open questions. Last year, the course averaged 4.3. The survey is the only formal evaluation the course receives, and faculty and administrators treat it as the measure of whether the course is good.
A survey handed out in the last week records how the course felt to sit through. That is evidence of something real: whether students found the course organized, fair and respectful, which matters for their willingness to engage. It is not evidence of whether they learned, and when the course is praised or criticized on the basis of the survey alone, the praise and criticism are about the experience rather than the outcome. A meta-analysis of studies that related student evaluation of teaching ratings to measures of student learning, correcting for small-study effects, found that ratings and learning were essentially unrelated (Uttl et al., 2017). The survey should therefore be used for what it measures and not asked to answer questions it cannot.
A Framework for What Else to Measure
This plan uses Kirkpatrick's four levels of evaluation, developed for training programs, to organize evidence about the course: reaction, learning, behavior and results (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). The survey measures reaction, the first level. The plan adds sources at each of the other three, chosen because they already exist or can be collected with modest effort. For every source, the plan states which question it can settle and which it cannot.
The Plan
Table 1 lists the sources, what each measures and its limits.
Table 1
Course Evaluation Sources by Level
| Level | Source | Question it answers | What it cannot tell us |
|---|---|---|---|
| Reaction | End-of-course survey, 12 items and 2 open questions | Did students find the course organized, fair and supportive? | Whether they learned or can apply the content |
| Learning | Final examination by blueprint cell, with item analysis | Did students meet the objectives, and which areas were weakest? | Whether knowledge is used in practice |
| Learning | Discharge teaching demonstration scored with the analytic rubric | Can students teach a parent the key content, especially warning signs? | How they teach real parents under time pressure |
| Behavior | Clinical evaluation tool, revised, with observed maternity behaviors | Do students recognize and respond to maternal and newborn changes on the unit? | How consistently different instructors rate |
| Results | Licensing examination subscores for maternal-newborn content, and a six-month graduate survey | Did graduates perform in this content after the course? | Effects of the course separate from later courses |
Reaction: Using the Survey Well
The survey stays, but its use changes. Its twelve items will be reported item by item rather than as a single average, because an average of 4.3 hides the difference between a course that is well organized but unclear in its examinations and one that is the reverse. The two open questions will be read and coded into themes by two faculty members, since they often explain the ratings. A third open question will be added: "Name one thing from this course you expect to use in your first year of practice." The answers will be compared with what the course most wants students to take away.
Learning: Examinations and the Teaching Demonstration
The final examination is built from a blueprint that weights content areas by class hours and objectives, so its results can be reported by content area and cognitive level. The course will use those results, not the overall mean, to identify weak areas. For example, if students score well on antepartum and postpartum items but poorly on complications items at the analyzing level, the problem is not general preparation but a specific kind of reasoning, and the teaching response is different. Item analysis adds a further layer by showing which misconceptions attract students, as when a third of the class chose calcium gluconate before stopping a magnesium infusion. Those misconceptions become targets for the next year's teaching, and the items that exposed them are kept in the bank so that improvement can be measured. The discharge teaching demonstration, scored with an analytic rubric tested for agreement between instructors, provides evidence of a skill the examination cannot capture. Together they show what students can do at the end of the course, under assessment conditions.
Behavior: The Clinical Setting
Whether students use what they learned is measured in the clinical rotation. The program's clinical evaluation tool is being revised to include maternity-specific behaviors and descriptors. Once revised, its ratings for recognizing postpartum hemorrhage and newborn instability will be reported for each cohort, alongside the examination items on the same content. Agreement between examination performance and clinical ratings would suggest that the course's teaching transfers; disagreement would show where it does not.
Results: After the Course
The program receives licensing examination reports that include performance in content areas. The maternal-newborn subscore will be tracked each year. It is an imperfect measure of this course, since students also learn from other courses and from preparation programs, and it will be read as one indicator among several. A brief survey of graduates six months after licensure will ask which maternal-newborn situations they have faced and how prepared they felt, which gives a view the program does not currently have.
Using the Evidence
Each summer, the course faculty will meet to review all five sources together. The meeting will produce a one-page report stating what the evidence shows at each level, where the sources agree and disagree, and one or two changes for the next year. It will also state what the evidence could not show, so that the committee does not read more into it than it supports. The report will go to the curriculum committee alongside the survey average, so that decisions about the course rest on evidence of learning and practice, not on how the course felt. Evaluation texts for nurse educators recommend drawing on multiple sources of evidence when evaluating courses and programs, since no single measure captures their effectiveness (Oermann & Gaberson, 2019). This plan is an attempt to make that recommendation routine rather than occasional.
References
Kirkpatrick, J. D., & Kirkpatrick, W. K. (2016). Kirkpatrick's four levels of training evaluation. ATD Press.
Oermann, M. H., & Gaberson, K. B. (2019). Evaluation and testing in nursing education (6th ed.). Springer Publishing.
Uttl, B., White, C. A., & Gonzalez, D. W. (2017). Meta-analysis of faculty's teaching effectiveness: Student evaluation of teaching ratings and student learning are not related. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 54, 22-42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2016.08.007
What the NR 537 Week 7 assignment asks for
Planning how to evaluate a course is this week's work. Prompts generally ask for an evaluation plan identifying the questions to be answered, data sources, methods, timing and how results will be used. Be exact about what each source measures. A satisfaction survey measures reaction, not learning. Organize sources with a framework, such as levels of reaction, learning, behavior and results. For each source, state the question it answers and what it cannot tell you. Prefer sources that already exist or are easy to collect. Plan how the evidence will be reviewed together and reported. Say how results will lead to changes. Cite evaluation research and frameworks in APA 7, and summarize sources in a table.
How this NR 537 Week 7 example is built
The plan opens by describing the current survey and its role as the only evaluation, then cites a meta-analysis finding that ratings and learning are unrelated. A framework section introduces Kirkpatrick's four levels. Table 1 lists six sources across the levels with their questions and limits. Following sections explain each level: reporting the survey item by item and adding a question about expected use, reporting the examination by blueprint cell with item analysis, pairing the demonstration rubric with examination results, using the revised clinical tool for behavior, and tracking licensing subscores and a graduate survey for results. An annual review and one-page report close the plan.
Where the points sit in the NR 537 Week 7 rubric
Evaluation plan rubrics usually reward clear evaluation questions, appropriate and varied data sources, a sound framework, feasible methods, attention to limitations and a plan for acting on the evidence. Stronger plans that match each source to what it can actually measure and state its limits. Using a recognized framework to organize levels of evidence shows theoretical grounding. Relying on sources that already exist demonstrates feasibility. A structured review and report that leads to specific changes shows how evaluation improves the course. Evidence on the limits of student ratings supports a balanced approach. A summary table and correct citations support the evaluation. A named owner and date for the annual review usually complete the highest band.
Common NR 537 Week 7 mistakes, and how to avoid them
Many plans rely on the end-of-course survey as its main or only measure. Add sources that measure learning and behavior. Another is listing many sources without saying what each answers. Pair each with its question. Students also propose data that would be expensive or impossible to collect; use what exists. Avoid treating licensing results as a direct measure of one course, since many courses contribute. Do not forget how the evidence will be reviewed and by whom. Plan to report what the evidence could not show. Finally, connect the review to decisions, since evaluation that changes nothing is only data collection. Share the one-page report with students too, since it shows them how their feedback was used.
Get a NR 537 Week 7 example written to your instructions
Send the assignment instructions, the course your plan has to evaluate and its published objectives, and a custom NR 537 Week 7 example is written to them and returned inside 24-48h, first one free. If your section supplies a survey instrument or a template with required headings, include it so the plan arrives in the shape it will be read in.
More NR 537 papers and MSN samples
- NR 537 Week 1: Discussion on Two Flawed Test Items
- NR 537 Week 2: Test Item Set With Rationales
- NR 537 Week 3: Test Blueprint
- NR 537 Week 4: Analytic Rubric
- NR 537 Week 5: Item Analysis Write-Up
- NR 537 Week 6: Clinical Evaluation Tool Critique
- NR 537 Week 8: Assessment Plan Synthesis
- NR 536 Week 7: Transfer Assessment Design
- NR 535 Week 7: Clinical Teaching Plan
- NR 524 Week 7: Curriculum Revision Proposal
NR 537 Week 7 questions, answered
Should the plan evaluate teaching as well as the course?
Sections normally keep them apart, and the distinction is worth defending in the document itself. A course evaluation asks whether the design delivered its objectives; an instructor evaluation asks about a person and is governed by employment rules this assignment does not touch. Blurring them tends to cost marks twice, once for scope and once because the recommendations then point at somebody rather than at a design.
How does this differ from a program evaluation plan?
Scope, and it is worth naming. A program plan gathers evidence across a sequence of courses and answers to accreditation, while this one stays inside a single course and works from the instruments that course already runs. The exam blueprint, the rubrics and the item statistics are available to you and are not available at program level, which is why they carry so much of the argument.
Does the plan need survey questions written out?
Often yes, at least a sample, and writing them is where the earlier weeks pay off. A survey question has a stem and options and can be led just as easily as a test question, so the plan should show items asking about specific experiences rather than about overall satisfaction, and should say which objective or design decision each one informs.
Where can I find a free NR 537 Week 7 sample paper?
The five-source course evaluation plan shown above is the full NR 537 Week 7 sample, available to read on this page. If you are planning an evaluation for another course, tell us what data you have and a plan organized by level can be drafted.
Can an NR 537 course evaluation rely on student surveys?
Surveys show how students experienced the course, which matters, but research finds ratings unrelated to learning. The sample keeps the survey for reaction and adds examinations, a rubric, clinical ratings and outcome data.