{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.014731369150779897, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.6, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
The development of an evaluation tool for grading clinical competence.

A perceived difficulty in grading clinical practice has meant that over the past two decades, educators in nursing have focused on non-graded results for clinical practicum. However, students expect rewards for achievement. Hospitals and universities require a means of differentiating levels of performance for employment and further study. This exploratory study uses quantitative and qualitative methods to evaluate a tool for grading clinical competence. The aims of the study were to determine the distribution of clinical grades, compare the clinical grades with the cumulative theoretical grades and compare the clinicians' and students' perceptions of competence. Study findings show that students and clinicians rated clinical performance well above the expected level. These grades for clinical performance exceeded comparative results in theoretical work for the practicum topic. In addition, content analysis of the qualitative data indicates that clinicians may have difficulty in using the ANCI Competencies to rate a student's performance for registration as a nurse.