TOPP-N

 

TOPP-N is a digital tool for administration, documentation, mentoring and evaluation developed to support students, supervisors, teachers and educational institutions in all clinical practice studies in nursing education. TOPP-N has modules for guidance and evaluation. The process in TOPP-N guidance module is based on constructive alignment and metacogtion theory. In the evaluation module TOPP-N have digitalized the research-based and validated assessment form AssCE (Assessment of Clinical Education).

TOPP-N is available in web and mobile version (application).

TOPP-N is a digital tool for mentoring and evaluation. It can be used in clinical practicals during nursing education and is based on the research that has been validated form AssCE (Assessment of Clinical Education). Additional, TOPP-N has modules for guidance and evaluation as well. TOPP-N is available in web and mobile version.

Guidance module

In the guidance module, the student can fill in reports during the internship period and can be customized to each individual internship period. The main areas in the reports are the same as in the evaluation form AssCE, and a link to the relevant learning outcomes for each individual internship period is available.

The process of the reports can be divided into 4 phases:

  1. In the planning phase, the student can identify points for the desired focus during a specific time period of practice. It is not the intention to select all available points every time. The points are alternatives to help cover the learning outcomes for the internship period. You can also select ‘Other’, and enter the desired focus yourself. By filling out the planning report, the student’s awareness of learning objectives increases. You also get help to focus on which learning activities contribute to achieving learning outcomes.
  2. When the planning report is completed, the implementation report becomes available. It is not certain that it went as planned, and the student marks what has been done. If you do not think that any of the points fit, you can select ‘Other’ and enter text yourself. The student then rates his need for guidance further in several main areas on a scale with five answer options (from ‘to a very small degree’ to ‘to a very large extent’). You can also write a supplementary comment. By filling in the implementation report, the student is stimulated to reflect on what they have learned and the need for further guidance.
  3. When the implementation report is completed, it will be available to the practice supervisor who can provide feedback. The supervisor sees what the student has done, and rates the student’s need for supervision further in the same main areas as for the student. The supervisor can also write comments or by using speech stored in an audio file.
  4. When the supervisor has given feedback, an overview report will appear which is visible to the student, supervisor and teacher. It shows a summary comment from the supervisor, and any differences in the graded need for further guidance. When the difference is 2 or more, the student and the supervisor are encouraged to have a conversation about the topic.

Mentoring module

In the mentoring module, the student can fill in reports during the internship period and can be customized to each individual internship period. The main areas in the reports are the same as in the evaluation form AssCE, and a link to the relevant learning outcomes for each individual internship period is available.

The process of the reports can be divided into 4 phases:

  1. In the planning phase, the student can identify points for the desired focus during a specific time period of practice. It is not the intention to select all available points every time. The points are alternatives to help cover the learning outcomes for the internship period. You can also select ‘Other’, and enter the desired focus yourself. By filling out the planning report, the student’s awareness of learning objectives increases. You also get help to focus on which learning activities contribute to achieving learning outcomes.
  2. When the planning report is completed, the implementation report becomes available. It is not certain that it went as planned, and the student marks what has been done. If you do not think that any of the points fit, you can select ‘Other’ and enter text yourself. The student then rates his need for guidance further in several main areas on a scale with five answer options (from ‘to a very small degree’ to ‘to a very large extent’). You can also write a supplementary comment. By filling in the implementation report, the student is stimulated to reflect on what they have learned and the need for further guidance.
  3. When the implementation report is completed, it will be available to the practice supervisor who can provide feedback. The supervisor sees what the student has done, and rates the student’s need for supervision further in the same main areas as for the student. The  supervisor can also write comments or by using speech stored in an audio file.
  4. When the supervisor has given feedback, an overview report will appear which is visible to the student, supervisor and teacher. It shows a summary comment from the supervisor, and any differences in the graded need for further guidance. When the difference is 2 or more, the student and the supervisor are encouraged to have a conversation about the topic.

Evaluation module

The evaluations are based on criteria based on criteria from AssCE which has 21 evaluation points divided into five main areas:

  1. Communication and teaching
  2. The nursing process
  3. Examinations and treatments
  4. Work management and collaboration
  5. Professional attitude

Each evaluation point includes a graded scale with three levels of goal achievement: ‘Insufficient – Good – Very good. ‘

There is also explanatory text for what corresponds to ‘Good’ and ‘Very good’ goal achievement.

Implementation of the mid- and final evaluation can be divided into two phases:

  1. Preparation
    Before completing the mid- and final evaluation, the student must rate their experience of their own goal achievement, and comment on each of the evaluation points. The supervisor must grade their experience of the student their achievement at each of the evaluation points. They can also write additional comments. A link to the relevant learning outcomes for each individual internship period is available in the evaluation form. When both the student and the supervisor have filled in the evaluation form and archived the content, the content becomes visible to the student, supervisor and teacher. Only the practice teacher can write further in the evaluation form after this point.
  2. Evaluation interview
    Completion of the evaluation form from the student and the supervisor form the basis for the evaluation interviews. The evaluation interviews are conducted as a physical or digital meeting between student, supervisor, and the teacher. Here they agree on final grades and the teacher may also write additional comments in the evaluation form.
    If there is a risk of not passing on the evaluation interview, a separate form is created in TOPP-N and must be filled in by the teacher with reasons and further planning for the prractical period.
    This form, and the form for mid- and final evaluation, is signed by the student, supervisor and teacher via code sent by email or text message.
    To receive a code via SMS, the telephone number must be registered in the user profile in TOPP-N.Key Contributors to TOPP-N

    Concept Development (TOPP-N ©): Andréa Aparecida Gonçalves Nes

    Name Development (TOPP-N ©): Andréa Aparecida Gonçalves Nes

    Concept Refinement (TOPP-N ©): Andréa Aparecida Gonçalves Nes and Jaroslav Zlamal

    Theoretical Approach (TOPP-N ©): Andréa Aparecida Gonçalves Nes, Jaroslav Zlamal, and Ørjan Flygt Landfald

    Logo Creation (TOPP-N ©): Andréa Aparecida Gonçalves Nes and Jaroslav Zlamal

    Logo Design (TOPP-N ©): Christian Adna

    Acknowledgments

    We extend our heartfelt gratitude to the following individuals and the entire educational community:

    – Simen Alexander Steindal

    – Marianne Trygg Solberg

    – Edith Rodt Gjevjon

    – Silje Christin Wang Linnerud

    – Sigrid Elise Naustdal Ilje

    – Mariann Fossum

    – Kristine Hadelland

    Special thanks to the dedicated educators, preceptors, and students whose contributions have been invaluable in the development of the TOPP-N © Application.

Evaluation module

The evaluations are based on criteria based on criteria from AssCE which has 21 evaluation points divided into five main areas:

  1. Communication and teaching
  2. The nursing process
  3. Examinations and treatments
  4. Work management and collaboration
  5. Professional attitude

Each evaluation point includes a graded scale with three levels of goal achievement: ‘Insufficient – Good – Very good. ‘

There is also explanatory text for what corresponds to ‘Good’ and ‘Very good’ goal achievement.

Implementation of the mid- and final evaluation can be divided into two phases:

  1. Preparation
    Before completing the mid- and final evaluation, the student must rate their experience of their own goal achievement, and comment on each of the evaluation points. The supervisor must grade their experience of the student their achievement at each of the evaluation points. They can also write additional comments. A link to the relevant learning outcomes for each individual internship period is available in the evaluation form. When both the student and the supervisor have filled in the evaluation form and archived the content, the content becomes visible to the student, supervisor and teacher. Only the practice teacher can write further in the evaluation form after this point.
  2. Evaluation interview
    Completion of the evaluation form from the student and the supervisor form the basis for the evaluation interviews. The evaluation interviews are conducted as a physical or digital meeting between student, supervisor, and the teacher. Here they agree on final grades and the teacher may also write additional comments in the evaluation form.
    If there is a risk of not passing on the evaluation interview, a separate form is created in TOPP-N and must be filled in by the teacher with reasons and further planning for the prractical period.
    This form, and the form for mid- and final evaluation, is signed by the student, supervisor and teacher via code sent by email or text message.
    To receive a code via SMS, the telephone number must be registered in the user profile in TOPP-N.

Key Contributors to TOPP-N ©

Special thanks to the dedicated educators, preceptors, and students whose contributions have been invaluable in the development of the TOPP-N © Application.

Concept Development (TOPP-N ©): Andréa Aparecida Gonçalves Nes

Name Development (TOPP-N ©): Andréa Aparecida Gonçalves Nes

Concept Refinement (TOPP-N ©): Andréa Aparecida Gonçalves Nes and Jaroslav Zlamal

Theoretical Approach (TOPP-N ©): Andréa Aparecida Gonçalves Nes, Jaroslav Zlamal, and Ørjan Flygt Landfald

Logo Creation (TOPP-N ©): Andréa Aparecida Gonçalves Nes and Jaroslav Zlamal

Logo Design (TOPP-N ©): Christian Adna

Acknowledgments

We extend our heartfelt gratitude to the following individuals and the entire educational community:

– Simen Alexander Steindal

– Marianne Trygg Solberg

– Edith Rodt Gjevjon

– Silje Christin Wang Linnerud

– Sigrid Elise Naustdal Ilje

– Mariann Fossum

– Kristine Hadelland