• The Journal of Korean Academic Society of Nursing Education
• /
• v.21 no.2
• /
• pp.155-167
• /
• 2015

Purpose: The aim of this study was to develop course outcomes for nursing students by applying Hauenstein's theory. Methods: The research was conducted in three steps as follows: identifying exit outcomes related to the Adult Nursing course, developing Adult Nursing course outcomes based on the theory of Hauenstein, and finalizing Adult Nursing course outcomes. Results: Exit outcomes achievable in Adult Nursing were generated after a needs analysis survey among students, nurses and professors was conducted and subsequently reviewed by professors specializing in the subject. For theoretical courses, the level of the course outcomes was derived from the cognitive domain, whereas, for practical courses, it was derived, in stages, from the cognitive, affective and psychomotor domains. Next, using taxonomical terms that can properly address the level of each domain, course outcomes for theoretical and practical courses were determined. After expert opinion was sought, the final course outcome for the Adult Nursing course was produced. Conclusion: The results are meaningful in that valid course outcomes were developed through the process described above and are expected to greatly contribute to reaching exit outcomes and strengthen the professional capacity of nursing students.

• Korean Journal of Community Nutrition
• /
• v.26 no.6
• /
• pp.455-466
• /
• 2021

Objectives: The purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of internal and external capacity on the practical capacity for food waste disposal in adults. Methods: The study subjects were 410 adults who answered a structured questionnaire. The survey was conducted in January 2021. Data were analyzed through descriprive analysis, t-test, ANOVA, and multiple regression analysis using the SPSS Win 24.0. Results: First, in the analysis of internal capacity, attitude (3.95 out of 5 points) scored higher than knowledge (3.59 points). Attitudes showed significant differences according to gender (P < 0.001), age (P < 0.001), and income (P < 0.001). Knowledge showed significant differences according to gender (P < 0.01) and age (P < 0.05). Second, in the analysis of capacity, market constraints (3.73 points) scored the highest, followed by institutional conditions (3.48 points) and reference group (3.36 points). Market constraints differed according to gender (P < 0.001), and institutional conditions differed according to income (P < 0.001). There was a significant difference in the reference group according to the level of education (P < 0.05) and income (P < 0.05). Third, the practical capacity scores appeared in the order of separating discharge behavior, using behavior, purchasing behavior, and leadership behavior. Separating discharge behavior showed significant differences according to gender (P < 0.001), education level (P < 0.05), and income (P < 0.01). Using behavior showed a difference according to gender (P < 0.01), and purchasing behavior showed a significant difference according to income (P < 0.05). Leadership behavior showed no difference according to demographic factors. Fourth, internal capacity and external capacity showed a significant positive relationship with practical capacity. Factors affecting purchasing behavior were knowledge, attitude, institutional conditions, and reference group, and their explanatory power was 53%. Factors influencing using behavior were knowledge, attitude, institutional conditions, and reference group, and had an explanatory power of 37%. Leadership behavior was influenced by institutional conditions and the reference group, with an explanatory power of 31%. Conclusions: Internal capacity, external capacity, and practical capacity show differences according to demographic factors. Factors influencing the practical capacity of adults were knowledge, attitude, institutional conditions, and reference group.