Mind mapping: A tool to facilitate learning; why not give it a try?

Schools of nursing continuously strive to facilitate learning through student engagement and teaching strategies that encourage active learning. This paper reports on the successful use of mind mapping, an underutilised and underdeveloped strategy, to enhance teaching and learning in undergraduate nurse education (Spencer et al., 2013). Mind mapping or concept mapping has been defined in the literature as a visual representation of one’s thoughts and ideas (Abel and Freeze, 2006). It is characterised by colour, images and text in a graphical, nonlinear style. Mind maps promote the linking of concepts and capitalise on the brain’s natural aptitude for visual recognition to enhance learning and memory recall (Buzan, 2006). Traditional teaching strategies depend on linear processes, which in comparison lack engagement, associations and creativity (Spencer et al., 2013). Mind mapping was introduced to nursing students undertaking modules in ‘Dimensions of Care’ and ‘Care Delivery’ on year two of the nursing degree programme in Queen’s University Belfast. The aim of introducing mind mapping was to help students make the critical link between the pathophysiology of conditions studied and the provision of informed, safe and effective patient care, which had challenged previous student cohorts. Initially maps were instructor-made as described by Boley (2008), as a template for note taking during class and as a study aid. However, students rapidly embraced the strategy and started creating their own mind maps. Meaningful learning occurs when students engage with concepts and organise them independently in a way significant to them (Buzan, 2006). Students reported high levels of satisfaction to this teaching approach. This paper will present examples of the mind maps produced and explore how mind mapping can be further utilised within the undergraduate nursing curriculum.

A note on the prediction of liquid hold-up with the stratified roll wave regime for gas/liquidco-current flow in horizontal pipes.

This note presents a simple model for prediction of liquid hold-up in two-phase horizontal pipe flow for the stratified roll wave (St+RW) flow regime. Liquid hold-up data for horizontal two-phase pipe flow [1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6] exhibit a steady increase with liquid velocity and a more dramatic fall with increasing gas rate as shown by Hand et al. [7 and 8] for example. In addition the liquid hold-up is reported to show an additional variation with pipe diameter. Generally, if the initial liquid rate for the no-gas flow condition gives a liquid height below the pipe centre line, the flow patterns pass successively through the stratified (St), stratified ripple (St+R), stratified roll wave, film plus droplet (F+D) and finally the annular (A+D, A+RW, A+BTS) regimes as the gas rate is increased. Hand et al. [7 and 8] have given a detailed description of this progression in flow regime development and definitions of the patterns involved. Despite the fact that there are over one hundred models which have been developed to predict liquid hold-up, none have been shown to be universally useful, while only a handful have proven to be applicable to specific flow regimes [9, 10, 11 and 12]. One of the most intractable regimes to predict has been the stratified roll wave pattern where the liquid hold-up shows the most dramatic change with gas flow rate. It has been suggested that the momentum balance-type models, which give both hold-up and pressure drop prediction, can predict universally for all flow regimes but particularly in the case of the difficult stratified roll wave pattern. Donnelly [1] recently demonstrated that the momentum balance models experienced some difficulties in the prediction of this regime. Without going into lengthy details, these models differ in the assumed friction factor or shear stress on the surfaces within the pipe particularly at the liquid–gas interface. The Baker–Jardine model [13] when tested against the 0.0454 m i.d. data of Nguyen [2] exhibited a wide scatter for both liquid hold-up and pressure drop as shown in Fig. 1. The Andritsos–Hanratty model [14] gave better prediction of pressure drop but a wide scatter for liquid hold-up estimation (cf. Fig. 2) when tested against the 0.0935 m i.d. data of Hand [5]. The Spedding–Hand model [15], shown in Fig. 3 against the data of Hand [5], gave improved performance but was still unsatisfactory with the prediction of hold-up for stratified-type flows. The MARS model of Grolman [6] gave better prediction of hold-up (cf. Fig. 4) but deterioration in the estimation of pressure drop when tested against the data of Nguyen [2]. Thus no method is available that will accurately predict liquid hold-up across the whole range of flow patterns but particularly for the stratified plus roll wavy regime. The position is particularly unfortunate since the stratified-type regimes are perhaps the most predominant pattern found in multiphase lines.

Outcome measurement and service evaluation - a note on research design.

The purpose of this research note is to demonstrate how an individualised quality of life instrument could be adapted to provide a more accurate estimate of the impact of a social service on a person’s quality of life. An increase in quality of life between the start and end of a service is often taken as an indication that the service impacted positively on quality of life. The modifications to the quality of life instrument suggested in this paper show that this assumption is not always accurate and should be questioned directly.