The assessment and development of drug calculation skills in nurse education: a critical debate

The drug calculation skill of nurses continues to be a national concern. The continued concern has led to the introduction of mandatory drug calculation skills tests which students must pass in order to go on to the nursing register. However, there is little evidence to demonstrate that nurses are poor at solving drug calculation in practice. This paper argues that nurse educationalists have inadvertently created a problem that arguably does not exist in practice through use of invalid written drug assessment tests and have introduced their own pedagogical practice of solving written drug calculations. This paper will draw on literature across mathematics, philosophy, psychology and nurse education to demonstrate why written drug assessments are invalid, why learning must take place predominantly in the clinical area and why the key focus on numeracy and formal mathematical skills as essential knowledge for nurses is potentially unnecessary.

Critical care in childbearing for midwives

Many women who have higher–risk pregnancies, complications or medical conditions require specialist obstetric or multidisciplinary care. Increasingly women, whose condition deteriorates and becomes critical during childbirth, are being cared for by midwives in obstetric high dependency units within the labour ward, rather than being cared for by nurses in ITU. Critical Care in Childbearing for Midwives explores all aspects of management, support and care of childbearing women who become critically ill due to pre–existing conditions or who develop critical illness as a result of complications of childbearing. It examines predisposing factors which result in the need for critical care, addresses specialist monitoring technology and skills, and explores autonomous practice and team approaches to providing care for critically ill women in childbearing.

When the shift hits the critical fan: a Foucauldian analysis

In the past 15 years in the UK, the state has acquired powers, which mark a qualitative shift in its relationship to higher education. Since the introduction and implementation of the Further and Higher Education Act 1992, the Teaching and Higher Education Act 1998 and the Higher Education Act 2004, a whole raft of changes have occurred which include the following: Widening participation; the development of interdisciplinary, experiential and workplace-based learning focused on a theory-practice dialogue; quality assurance; and new funding models which encompass public and private partnerships. The transformation of higher education can be placed in the context of New Labour’s overall strategies for overarching reform of public services, as set out in the Prime Minister’s Strategy Unit’s discussion paper The UK Government’s Approach to Public Service Reform (2006). An optimistic view of changes to higher education is that they simultaneously obey democratic and economic imperatives. There is an avowed commitment through the widening participation agenda to social inclusion and citizenship, and to providing the changing skills base necessary for the global economy. A more cynical view is that, when put under critical scrutiny, as well as being emancipatory, in some senses these changes can be seen to mobilise regulatory and disciplinary practices. This paper reflects on what kinds of teaching and learning are promoted by the new relationship between the state and the university. It argues that, whilst governmental directives for innovations and transformations in teaching and learning allegedly empower students and put their interests at the centre, reforms can also be seen to consist of supervisory and controlling mechanisms with regard both to our own practices as teachers and the knowledge/ learning we provide for the students.