Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Abstract Background: Clinical teaching and educational activities are of the utmost importance in nursing education for overcoming the theory–practice gap. There is a significant paucity of knowledge on nursing students’ experiences in the clinical learning setting and how supervision is carried out. Aim: The intent of this research is to determine the perception of undergraduate nursing student towards clinical learning environment and supervision. Methods: An institution-based, cross-sectional, descriptive-exploratory study comprising 476 nursing students selected through stratified sampling, conducted in the selected Institutes of National Importance (INI) using Google Form. The study instrument used includes self-structured demographic section and rating scale to assess the students’ perception towards the clinical learning environment and supervision. Descriptive and inferential statistics were used for data analysis using IBM SPSS (version 23). Results: A study of 476 nursing students from across INI, majority were aged 21–24 years (74.8%), found significant differences in their perceptions of the clinical learning environment and supervision. In terms of the clinical learning environment, almost all of first-year students (94.1%) considered nursing officers in the unit were learning sources, and 92.4% said that they learned something new every day in clinical settings. The majority of third-year students (89.1%) stated that increasing exposure to patients was the primary source of their clinical learning. First-year students had positive perceptions of supervision, although their expectations differed from those of higher-year students. Conclusion: According to the study, the majority of students feel that effective clinical learning environment necessitates excellent communication skills, a positive attitude, motivation and effective problem-solving strategies. Regarding supervision, students respect good communication skills, confidence in the supervisory relationship, constructive criticism and trust.
Patidar et al. (Mon,) studied this question.