22^nd International Conference on Global Nursing Education & Research November 12-13, 2018 Melbourne, Australia

Dale M. Hilty, Associate Professor at the Mt. Carmel College of Nursing. He received his PhD in counseling psychology from the Department of Psychology at The Ohio State University. He has published studies in the areas of psychology, sociology, and religion. Between April 2017 and June 2018, his ten research teams published approximately 100 posters at local, state, regional, national, and international nursing conferences.

In an academic undergraduate setting, competitive greatness (i.e., continuous self-improvement, being the best you can be when your best is needed, accepting difficult challenges) is associated with students experiencing a meaningful interaction with course material. In Bloom\'s taxonomy, knowledge and comprehension are associated with completing textbook reading assignments and lecture presentations. Continuous self-improvement in this context suggests student personal study habits extend their fundamental understanding of the information by analyzing, applying, evaluating, and synthesizing the information.\r\n\r\nThe purpose of this educational intervention was to explore the relationship among competitive greatness/continuous self-improvement, engagement, and disengagement. Instrumentation used to measure disengagement were Greenglass\' avoidance coping scale and Carver\'s mental disengagement and behavioral disengagement scales. Engagement skills, physical, cognitive, and deep learning engagement common factors/scales were used to measure engagement. \r\n\r\nMETHOD\r\nHypothesis 1: Determine if there is a relationship among the competitive greatness, avoidance learning, mental disengagement, and physical disengagement scales. Hypothesis 2: Determine if there is a relationship among the competitive greatness, physical, cognitive, deep learning, and engagement skills scales. Hypothesis 3. Determine if correlation coefficients are significantly different from zero.\r\n\r\nRESULTS\r\nHypothesis 1: Using SPSS 25, the correlational analyses found a significant negative relationship between competitive greatness and avoidance learning (r = -.251, p=.031). The correlational coefficients among competitive greatness, mental disengagement (r= -.187, p>.05), and physical engagement (r = .007, p>.05) were in coefficient general interpretation (Salkind, 2017) of no relationship. Hypothesis 2: The \r\n\r\n \r\ncorrelational analyses found significant positive relationship among competitive greatness, deep learning (r = .373, p=.001) engagement, and engagement skills (r = .24, p=.04). The correlational coefficients among competitive greatness, physical engagement (r = .16, p>.05), cognitive engagement (r = .10, p>.05) were in coefficient general interpretation (Salkind, 2017) of no relationship. Hypothesis 3. Using SPSS 25 regression analysis, the ANOVA table reported a significant effect (F =2.707, p=.016). The overall regression was significant (r = .472, r-squared = .223).\r\n

Dale M. Hilty, Associate Professor, received his PhD in counseling psychology from Department of Psychology at the Ohio State University. He has published studies in the areas of psychology, sociology, and religion. Between April 2017 and April 2018, his ten research teams published 55 posters at local, state, regional, national, and international nursing conferences

Using an educational intervention, the purpose of this study was to explore the relationship between CG/Continuous Self-Improvement and Optimism. Bachelor of Science in Nursing (BSN) students (N=53) were participants in this study. \r\n\r\nMethod\r\nInstrumentation: In the summer of 2016, the first author read most of Wooden\'s books, and transferred his ideas into Likert-type questions. The name of this quantitative instrument is the Wooden Pyramid of Success Questionnaire (WPSQ; Hilty, 2017) which consists of 229 items. In order for the WPSQ to have content validity, it was a goal for the 229 questions to mirror Wooden\'s own words. The process of developing the WPSQ was assisted by his decision to major in English at both the undergraduate and graduate degree levels. CG is one of the scales on the WPSQ. \r\n\r\nThe measurement of optimism was based on Seligman’s 2006 publication. In his book (Seligman, 2006, pp. 33-51) a copy of his optimism test and the scoring procedures are available. There are 10 scales: Personalization Good (PsG), Personalization Bad (PsG), Permanent Good (PmG), Permanent Bad (PmB), Pervasiveness Good (PvG), Pervasiveness Bad (PvB), Hope (HoB=PvB+PmB), Total Bad, Total good, and Good-Bad. The optimism test can also be completed at the https://www.authentichappiness.sas.upenn.edu/ website under the heading of questionnaires.\r\n\r\nHypothesis 1: Using a SPSS correlational analysis, it was hypothesized that a significant positive correlation coefficient would be found between the CQ and Good-Bad scale.\r\n Hypothesis 2: Linear regression analysis would result in a significant finding using the Good-Bad scale as the predictor variable and CG as the outcome variable.\r\n\r\nFindings\r\nHypothesis 1: A positive correlation was found between the CG and G-B scales (r = .372, p=.006). It is important to remember that a correlation does not imply causation, it appears there is an association between the two variables.\r\n\r\n \r\n\r\nHypothesis 2: The linear regression analysis confirmed the hypothesis 3 prediction and produced a correlation between CG and Good-Bad scales of .372 (r square = .138) which is significant (F (1, 52)=8.192, p=.006). A higher score on the Competitive Greatness scale is associated with higher scores on G-B scale. \r\n

Dale M. Hilty, Associate Professor at the Mt. Carmel College of Nursing. He received his PhD in counseling psychology from the Department of Psychology at The Ohio State University. He has published studies in the areas of psychology, sociology, and religion. Between April 2017 and June 2018, his ten research teams published 100+ posters at local, state, regional, national, and international nursing conferences.

In the academic environment, Wooden’s competitive greatness can be linked to Continuous Self-Improvement (CSI). By focusing on individual growth and development, there are endless opportunities to expand our skills and abilities. Meyer’s 10-80-10 principle estimates that 10 percent are in “… relentless pursuit of improvement” or CSI. In Figure 1*, we have an example of a CSI nursing student functioning at an exceptional level of engagement, deeper learning processing of material from textbook readings and lecture presentations. Using an intrinsic reward system, they internalize content and concepts and continuously apply them in new, unique ways. These students appear to feel the satisfaction and receive the validation they are going to be excellent nurses. Not only do they understand the scientific and theoretical aspects of nursing, but they also demonstrate the art and caring nature of an excellent and compassionate nurse.\r\n\r\nViewing performance on a continuum (4=Exceptional, 3=Exceeds Expectations, 2=Meets Expectations, 1=Improvement Needed/Unsatisfactory), Figure 2* reflects level two (i.e., meeting expectations) and Figure 3* reflects level one. A majority of nursing students (i.e., non-CSI) appear grouped in Meyer\'s 80 percent category who meet the requirements of their nursing program requirements. They obtain their BSN degree, state licensure, and are successfully employed RNs. The CSI students appear to regularly offer higher levels of patient care, demonstrate higher level of performance on their clinical paperwork (e.g., care plan, concept map, lab analysis, medical information). They more frequently demonstrate a \"big picture\" understanding by being able to reliably answer five questions: (1) What did I learn about the patient? (2) What concepts can I apply from my course’s theoretical component? (3) What connections can I find between a variety of variables? (4) What directed my care? (5) How and why did I perform the tasks? \r\n\r\nThe second author evaluated nursing students on a weekly basis regarding their clinical performance in providing patient care. Evaluations were based on seven operational behaviors. Since the medical-surgical course is a 16-week course, he was able to collect weekly intervals of how the CSI (Meyer\'s 10% estimate) and non-CSI (Meyer\'s 80% estimate) students spent their time on clinical setting objectives and behaviors. The evaluation used three criteria: on intermittent direct observation, the clinical evaluation tool, and the electronic health record. Student performance on the seven behaviors provided a weekly behavioral measurement. \r\n\r\nUsing SPSS 25 (independent t-test), a significant difference was found between the CSI and the non-CSI students (p=.001). \r\n \r\nExamples of one operational performance behavior: Non-CSI: Regarding the electronic health record (EHR), student uses the rubric to determine the type of clinical paperwork to complete as well as to guide their practice. CSI: Regarding the electronic health record (EHR), student completes clinical paperwork, consults with interdisciplinary healthcare professionals and their peers to deliver patient care.\r\n