From "Be a Good Role Model" to "Ask Four Clinical Judgment Questions Each Shift": Writing Measurable Objectives for a Preceptor Development Program
[Student Name]
University of Phoenix
NSG/531: Program and Course Development
Week 4 Assignment
[Instructor Name]
[Date]
The hospital, its staff and the program are a composite written for a model paper.
The needs assessment in Week 1 found that preceptors showed orientees how to do things far more often than they drew out their reasoning, rarely gave feedback that named a specific behavior and kept no written record of progress, and that first-year turnover among new graduates was 32%. Week 2 chose adult learning, social learning and clinical judgment theory, and Week 3 aligned the program with professional, regulatory and accreditation standards. This paper writes the objectives.
The Role of Objectives
Objectives turn the gap into statements of what learners will be able to do, determine the methods and define what the evaluation will measure. The revised taxonomy of the cognitive domain by Anderson and Krathwohl (2001) arranges thinking from remembering and understanding through applying and analyzing to evaluating and creating, and it recommends stating objectives as observable verbs. For a program meant to change how preceptors behave at the bedside, objectives written at the level of "understand" would measure the wrong thing.
From Weak to Strong: Three Revisions
Draft: "Preceptors will be good role models." Problem: "good role model" cannot be observed or measured. Revision: "During an observed precepted shift, the preceptor will think aloud while performing at least two assessments or decisions, explaining what she noticed and why she acted."
Draft: "Preceptors will understand how to give feedback." Problem: "understand" is not observable, and no standard is set. Revision: "During a role-play and on at least three shifts each week of orientation, the preceptor will give feedback that names a specific observed behavior, its effect and one next step."
Draft: "Preceptors will know the orientation process." Problem: knowing a process does not show it is followed. Revision: "Each week of orientation, the preceptor will complete the orientee's progress record, rating each competency and writing one goal for the following week, with the orientee's input."
Program Outcomes
Program outcome 1: every nurse who precepts a new graduate on the medical-surgical units will complete the preceptor workshop before precepting, within one year.
Program outcome 2: first-year turnover among new graduates on the medical-surgical units will fall from 32% toward the hospital's target of 15% within two years.
Program outcome 3: new graduates' ratings of explanation and feedback on the adapted survey will rise from a median of 2 to at least 3 on a four-point scale.
Preceptor Objectives
At the end of the program, the preceptor will be able to:
1. Explain the stages of transition a new graduate experiences in the first year and identify signs that an orientee is struggling (cognitive, understand).
2. Plan an individualized weekly orientation plan with the orientee, based on the unit's competency checklist and the orientee's progress (cognitive, create).
3. Use the four phases of clinical judgment, noticing, interpreting, responding and reflecting, to ask at least four reasoning questions per shift before offering answers (cognitive, apply).
4. Think aloud during assessments and decisions so that the orientee can observe expert reasoning (psychomotor and cognitive, apply).
5. Give feedback that names a specific behavior, its effect and a next step, in private and at least three times per week (cognitive, apply; affective).
6. Evaluate the orientee's readiness for independent practice using the competency checklist and weekly progress records, and document competency validation according to hospital policy (cognitive, evaluate).
7. Recognize when an orientee's performance is unsafe or not progressing and escalate to the educator and manager with documented examples (cognitive, analyze).
8. Value the orientee's growth over task completion, shown by allowing the orientee to perform procedures and make decisions within her competence rather than doing them for her (affective).
Objectives for the Organization's Part
Some changes identified in the needs assessment belong to managers, not preceptors, and the program cannot hold preceptors responsible for them. Two organizational targets will be tracked alongside the objectives: no more than two preceptors per orientee during the first six weeks, and a reduced patient assignment for preceptors during the same period. These are not learning objectives, but naming them keeps the program honest about what training can and cannot achieve, and it gives the educator a way to report to leadership when the organizational conditions for good precepting are missing.
How Objectives Guide the Orientee Plan
The objectives also shape what preceptors produce. Objective 2 requires a weekly plan built with the orientee, and objective 6 requires a documented judgment of readiness. Together they create a written record of each orientation, which did not exist before. That record lets a manager see early when an orientee is struggling, lets a second preceptor pick up where the first left off and gives the hospital the documentation of competence that regulation and accreditation require.
Domains and Levels
Most objectives sit at the apply level or above, because the needs assessment found gaps in performance. Objective 2 is set at create because building an individual plan requires synthesizing the checklist and the orientee's needs. Objective 6 is set at evaluate because judging readiness is the most consequential decision a preceptor makes and is required by the competency standards identified in Week 3. Objective 8 is affective and is tied to an observable behavior, since the needs assessment found preceptors doing tasks for orientees.
Alignment With Need, Standards and Evaluation
Objective 1 answers the new graduates' struggles after orientation, is grounded in the transition shock described by Duchscher (2009) and will be measured by a short knowledge check. Objective 2 answers the absence of written plans and will be measured by review of orientation plans. Objective 3 answers the low rating for explanation, draws on the model described by Tanner (2006) and will be measured by observation. Objective 4 answers observed teaching by doing and will be measured by observation. Objective 5 answers the low feedback rating and will be measured by role-play and orientee report. Objective 6 answers the regulatory and accreditation requirement for documented competency and will be measured by record review. Objective 7 answers the need to protect patients and orientees and will be measured by scenario. Objective 8 answers exit interview reports of preceptors doing hard tasks themselves and will be measured by orientee survey and observation.
Reviewing the Objectives With Stakeholders
Before the program begins, the draft objectives will be reviewed by two experienced preceptors, two recent orientees and the medical-surgical nurse managers. Preceptors can say whether the objectives are realistic on a busy shift, orientees whether they describe the help they needed and managers whether they fit the orientation policy. Their comments may change wording or targets, but not the principle that every objective names an observable behavior.
Conclusion
Eight measurable preceptor objectives and three program outcomes now describe what the program will change, at the level of performance the needs assessment found missing. Each is tied to a gap, a standard and a measure. Week 5 will choose the teaching methods to reach them.
References
Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (Eds.). (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom's taxonomy of educational objectives. Longman.
Duchscher, J. E. B. (2009). Transition shock: The initial stage of role adaptation for newly graduated registered nurses. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 65(5), 1103-1113. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2648.2008.04898.x
Tanner, C. A. (2006). Thinking like a nurse: A research-based model of clinical judgment in nursing. Journal of Nursing Education, 45(6), 204-211. https://doi.org/10.3928/01484834-20060601-04
How this NSG 531 Week 4 example is structured
The NSG/531 description stresses a systematic framework, and objectives are where the needs assessment becomes a plan. This paper revises vague drafts into measurable objectives, classifies each by domain and level of the revised taxonomy and ends with an alignment section that ties each objective to its evidence, its governing standard and its evaluation. Students search this week as NSG 531 Week 4, NSG531 Wk 4 or NSG/531 Wk 4; all three are the same assignment.
NSG/531 Week 4 questions, answered
What does NSG/531 Week 4 usually ask for?
Many sections ask students to write measurable learning objectives for their program, aligned with the needs assessment and with an appropriate level of a taxonomy such as Bloom's revised taxonomy.
How do I write objectives for attitudes?
Attitudes cannot be observed directly, so tie them to a behavior that shows the attitude in action, such as a preceptor consistently asking the orientee for her reasoning before giving an answer.
Should a preceptor program have outcomes beyond the preceptors?
Yes. Program outcomes can include orientee experience and retention, since those are the reasons the program exists, even though learner objectives describe the preceptors.
Write yours, or have the desk draft it
This paper is an original model document written by our desk, not a submitted student paper and not an official University of Phoenix document. Read it for the moves, then write your own to the instructions in your classroom. If you want one built to your exact prompt and rubric, the first custom sample is free and arrives in 24 to 48 hours.