Babol University of Medical Sciences , sepidmohamadi@yahoo.com
Abstract: (3244 Views)
Introduction: The dominant discourse of nursing education is vague and critical assessment can pave the way for such discourse and provide a solution to discover represented patterns of the dominant culture. The aim of this study was to explore the dominant discourse of BSc nursing theory courses.
Methods: The study was a qualitative research conducted through Fairclough’s discourse analysis approach. Participants included faculty members and students from five faculties of nursing and midwifery in Tehran, Isfahan, Mazandaran (Amol), Babol and Yasouj Universities of Medical Sciences. Data were collected from 25 individual interviews, 12 focus groups, 22 direct class observations and review of 32 booklets, 48 PowerPoint files and 25 exam questions from those faculties.
Results: Findings showed that key signifiers of nursing theory education included elements such as patient-centeredness, pathophysiology, diagnosis and treatment while nursing care and nursing process were floating signifiers. Accordingly, although authorities of nursing education discourse realized the power of nursing jargon words such as care-centeredness and nursing process in the field of nursing theory education, and tried to define and establish the floating signifiers in nursing discourse, this did not happen and the dominance of biomedical discourse was obvious in every part of nursing discourse.
Conclusion: Given the dominance of biomedical discourse, re-articulation based on signifiers resulted from nursing profession is essential and reformulation of dominant paradigmatic components requires a new discourse; a discourse that along with the elements extracted from the truth and nature of the field and the floating signifiers accepted in the discourse order of nursing theory education such as care-centeredness, could move away from the periphery and enter the center of academic education discourse.
Type of Study:
Original research article |
Subject:
Program Evaluation Received: 2017/06/15 | Accepted: 2017/08/1 | Published: 2018/01/31 | ePublished: 2018/01/31
Send email to the article author