Objectives, Sequence and a Plan to Measure Them: The Design Phase of a Supported Conversation Module for Junior Nursing Students
[Student Name]
University of Phoenix
NSG/534: Facilitating Engaged Learning
Week 2 Assignment
[Instructor Name]
[Date]
The school, the students and the design are a composite written for a model paper.
In Week 1, the analysis phase of this project established that many junior nursing students avoid direct communication with patients who have aphasia after stroke, that the cause is mainly missing knowledge and skill in supported conversation and that instruction must fit into an existing course before students' rehabilitation rotation. The goal set at the end of that phase was specific: students will use supported conversation to speak with, not around, a patient with aphasia during everyday care. This paper designs the instruction.
From Goal to Objectives
Objectives break the goal into observable behaviors, stated with a condition and a standard. The five objectives are:
1. Describe the main types of aphasia and how each affects a patient's understanding and expression, with at least 80% accuracy on a scenario-based quiz (cognitive, understand).
2. Identify barriers and facilitators to communication in a video of a nurse caring for a patient with aphasia, naming at least four of six planted examples (cognitive, analyze).
3. Demonstrate at least five supported conversation techniques, including short sentences, written key words, gesture, checking understanding and allowing time, during a ten-minute simulated care encounter with a standardized patient (psychomotor and communication, apply).
4. Assess a patient's pain and a simple preference using a method the patient can answer, such as a pictorial scale or written choices, in the same simulated encounter (cognitive and communication, apply).
5. Reflect on their own communication after the encounter, identifying one effective technique and one to improve (cognitive, evaluate; affective).
Each objective traces to the analysis: objective 1 to the missing knowledge, objective 2 to students' inability to recognize what went wrong, objectives 3 and 4 to observed behavior and objective 5 to students' anxiety, which reflection can address. The techniques in objective 3 come from the supported conversation methods described by Kagan (1998).
Sequence and Structure
The design is blended, with three parts totaling about three hours.
Part 1, an online module of about 60 minutes, completed in the week before simulation. It covers types of aphasia, what it is like to live with aphasia, the supported conversation techniques and the location and use of communication tools on the unit. It ends with a scenario-based quiz for objective 1.
Part 2, a video analysis activity of about 30 minutes, within the online module. Students watch a short video of a nurse caring for a patient with aphasia, identify barriers and facilitators and compare their answers with an expert commentary, which addresses objective 2.
Part 3, a simulation of about 60 minutes in the simulation center, scheduled during the course's existing lab time. Each student completes a ten-minute encounter with a standardized patient portraying aphasia, followed by a debriefing and a written reflection, which addresses objectives 3, 4 and 5.
The sequence moves from knowing about aphasia, to recognizing good and poor communication, to doing it, which is the order in which confidence is built.
Assessment Strategy
Each objective has a planned assessment. Objective 1 is measured by a ten-item quiz with scenario-based questions, such as choosing the best way to explain a procedure to a patient with fluent aphasia and poor comprehension; students may retake it once after reviewing feedback. Objective 2 is measured by the video analysis form, scored against the six planted examples. Objectives 3 and 4 are measured by a checklist completed by a trained rater during the simulation, listing each technique and the pain assessment, with space for comments. Objective 5 is measured by the written reflection, scored with a brief rubric. The module is required but graded pass or fail, since its purpose is preparation for clinical practice rather than ranking.
Design Principles
Several principles will guide development.
Keep cognitive load manageable. Mayer and Moreno (2003) described ways to reduce cognitive load in multimedia learning, such as segmenting content into short learner-paced parts, using narration with visuals rather than on-screen text read aloud and removing interesting but irrelevant material. The online module will use short segments of three to five minutes, narrated animations and minimal on-screen text.
Use authentic voices. The module will include a short interview, used with permission, with a stroke survivor who has aphasia and a family member, so that students hear what good and poor communication felt like to them.
Practice before assessment. Students will see each technique demonstrated and try it in the video analysis before the simulation.
Make it safe to make mistakes. The simulation will begin with a prebriefing and focus on learning; the checklist is used for feedback, and students who miss techniques will have a second short practice with a peer.
Accessibility. Videos will be captioned, the module will work on phones and quiz time limits will not be used.
Why a Blended Design
Three alternatives were considered. A single classroom lecture would fit the schedule poorly and offer no practice. A fully online module would be convenient but could not provide practice with a real person reacting in real time, which the analysis showed students need most. A clinical-only approach, teaching techniques on the unit, would depend on which patients happened to be available and would expose real patients to students' first attempts. The blended design uses online time for knowledge and decision practice and in-person time for skill practice, which Branch (2009) describes as matching delivery to the type of learning each objective requires.
Alignment Check
A design matrix lists each objective, its content, its practice activity and its assessment. For objective 3, for example, content is the technique segments, practice is the video analysis and a peer practice script, and assessment is the simulation checklist. Every objective has all three, and no content appears without an objective, which keeps the module focused.
Accommodating Different Learners
Learners differ, and the design allows for it. Students who already know about aphasia, such as those who have worked as nursing assistants in rehabilitation, can move quickly through the online segments and use the quiz to confirm their knowledge. Students who are anxious about speaking with standardized patients get extra practice through the peer script. Second-career students, who often bring life experience with stroke in their own families, will be invited to share it in the debriefing if they wish. The design does not require all students to spend the same time in each part, only to meet the same objectives.
Stakeholder Review
Before development, the design will be reviewed by the speech-language pathologist on the unit, who can confirm that the techniques are correct and realistic, by two clinical instructors and by two students who completed the rotation last semester. Their comments will be recorded and addressed.
Conclusion
The design phase produced five measurable objectives from the instructional goal, a blended sequence from online learning to video analysis to simulation, an assessment for every objective and principles to keep the module focused, manageable and accessible. Week 3 will design the engaging activities within this structure.
References
Branch, R. M. (2009). Instructional design: The ADDIE approach. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-09506-6
Kagan, A. (1998). Supported conversation for adults with aphasia: Methods and resources for training conversation partners. Aphasiology, 12(9), 816-830. https://doi.org/10.1080/02687039808249575
Mayer, R. E., & Moreno, R. (2003). Nine ways to reduce cognitive load in multimedia learning. Educational Psychologist, 38(1), 43-52. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15326985EP3801_6
How this NSG 534 Week 2 example is structured
The NSG/534 description asks learners to use the ADDIE model to create instructional products. This paper completes the design phase: objectives written from the analysis, a sequence that builds from understanding to practice, an assessment strategy decided before any content is built and principles that the development phase must follow. Students search this week as NSG 534 Week 2, NSG534 Wk 2 or NSG/534 Wk 2; all three are the same assignment.
NSG/534 Week 2 questions, answered
What does NSG/534 Week 2 usually ask for?
Many sections ask students to complete the design phase of the ADDIE model: writing measurable objectives, choosing a sequence and structure and planning assessment for the instructional product.
Why plan assessment before developing content?
Deciding how each objective will be measured first keeps the content focused on what learners must do and ensures that practice activities match the final assessment.
What is blended learning?
Instruction that combines online and in-person components, often with online preparation followed by in-person practice, so that face-to-face time is used for activities that need it.
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.