NR 536 Week 7 Designing an Experiential Learning Activity

Student Name
Chamberlain University
NR-536: Advanced Health Assessment, Pathophysiology & Pharmacology for Advanced Nursing Practice
Prof. Name
Date
Experiential Learning Activity
Part 1: Foundation for the Learning Activity
Experiential learning is a vital educational approach in nursing that integrates theoretical knowledge, practical application, and professional behavior into one unified process. It combines cognitive skills, psychomotor learning, ethical reasoning, communication, and collaboration, allowing learners to practice in a safe and structured environment (Jones & Guthrie, 2012). Unlike traditional lectures, experiential learning emphasizes active engagement, such as role-playing, clinical simulations, and interactive reflection (Nunes et al., 2015).
The purpose of this paper is to design a structured experiential learning activity aimed at nurses with less than two years of clinical experience. The activity intends to strengthen their clinical competence, professional communication, and ethical decision-making abilities. By using realistic simulation, these novice nurses will gain practical exposure that prepares them for complex healthcare settings.
Description of the Experiential Learning Activity
The proposed activity will take place in a skills laboratory designed to replicate an Intensive Care Unit (ICU). A full-sized human patient simulator (HPS) mannequin will be used to mimic a patient with chronic health complications. The activity will be embedded into a mentorship program for newly graduated nurses.
Each group of five participants will have assigned roles that mirror real-world responsibilities in an ICU. A senior mentor will oversee their performance, documenting critical elements such as communication strategies, decision-making processes, patient safety interventions, ethical behaviors, and overall civility within the team.
To ensure structured learning, every group will receive a detailed case scenario describing patient history, role expectations, and character attributes. The mentor will only intervene if the group deviates from the learning objectives. After the activity, participants will engage in a guided reflection session, where peers evaluate one another’s performance and discuss potential improvements. This reflective process aligns with Kolb’s experiential learning cycle, which includes concrete experiences, reflective observation, abstract conceptualization, and active experimentation.
Learning Objectives
This activity is designed to accomplish three major goals:
- Improve interprofessional communication and collaboration.
- Foster ethical and evidence-based decision-making.
- Promote civility and respect in workplace interactions.
These objectives are incorporated into the simulation scenarios to replicate authentic clinical environments, helping novice nurses develop confidence and professional competence.
Part 2: Presentation of the Learning Activity
Description of the Setting
The simulation lab is arranged to replicate a hospital ICU with two adjacent patient rooms connected by a central hallway. The main ICU will contain a patient on a ventilator with congestive heart failure at risk for ventilator-associated pneumonia.
The lab is divided into four main areas:
| Area | Description |
|---|---|
| ICU | Includes a ventilator, monitoring system, and HPS mannequin with chronic illness |
| Adjacent Room 1 | Patient with moderate respiratory distress |
| Adjacent Room 2 | Patient recovering from surgery |
| Observation Hallway | Seating for observers in a circular arrangement |
Participants will rotate through specific roles, including bedside nurse, support nurse, nurse leader, and observers.
Identification of the Characters and Roles
The activity assigns each nurse a role with distinct strengths and challenges:
| Character | Role & Attributes |
|---|---|
| Nurse Educator | Acts as instructor, facilitator, and observer; provides guidance and resources |
| Nurse Leader | Demonstrates strong decision-making and communication but struggles with patience |
| Nurse 1 | Bedside ICU nurse; calm and cooperative but lacks confidence |
| Nurse 2 | Responsible for hygiene and triage; outgoing, empathetic, and proactive |
| Nurse 3 | Assertive and experienced but tends to dominate and display incivility |
| Nurse 4 | Skilled and reliable but introverted and hesitant to speak up |
Outline of the Scenario
The central scenario involves three patients:
- ICU patient (65 years old, congestive heart failure).
- Patient in Room 1 (moderate respiratory distress).
- Patient in Room 2 (post-surgical recovery).
A conflict arises when a family member complains about a missed physiotherapy session. Upon investigation, Nurse 1 identifies that a ventilator angle is incorrectly set, leading to disagreement with Nurse 3. This dispute escalates into incivility and ethical concerns. Nurse 2 notifies the nurse leader, while Nurse 4 remains passive. The nurse leader mediates the issue, guiding the team toward resolution.
Interactions between the Characters
Sample Dialogue
- Nurse 3: “Why are you interfering in my patient’s care?”
- Nurse 1: “The family expressed concerns about missed physiotherapy, and I noticed the ventilator setting wasn’t at the required 30 degrees. I only want to ensure patient safety.” (demonstrates professional communication)
- Nurse 3 (angrily): “You’re inexperienced and shouldn’t challenge me. I am the assigned nurse here.” (shows incivility and resistance to collaboration)
- Nurse 1: “I respect your experience, but we need to prioritize patient well-being. I apologize if I seemed intrusive.” (reflects ethical reasoning and professionalism)
This interaction highlights the significance of communication, civility, and conflict management in clinical practice.
Debriefing
Debriefing is a crucial part of this learning design, ensuring participants internalize lessons from the simulation (Victor et al., 2015).
- Initial Briefing: Explains the purpose, objectives, and roles in the simulation (Romaniuk et al., 2020).
- Scenario Walkthrough: Provides a rehearsal for participants to clarify expectations.
- Post-Simulation Reflection: Participants analyze their communication, teamwork, and ethical decision-making, guided by the mentor (Young & Dufrene, 2020).
Socratic Questions
- How does open-ended communication differ from scripted dialogue in experiential learning?
- Is it sufficient to conduct a single simulation with one group, or should repetition be applied?
- What potential barriers (such as lack of resources or resistance from learners) could hinder the success of this activity?
Conclusion
Experiential learning activities provide a powerful approach to enhance nursing practice, especially for novice nurses. This ICU-based simulation strengthens communication, ethical reasoning, and workplace civility while aligning with Kolb’s learning cycle. By integrating realistic clinical scenarios, the activity equips new nurses with the skills needed for safe, ethical, and collaborative patient care.
References
Jones, B., & Guthrie, K. (2012). Teaching and learning: Using experiential learning and reflection for leadership education. New Directions for Student Services. https://doi.org/10.1002/ss.20031
Nunes, S., Prado, M., Kempfer, S., & Martini, J. (2015). Experiential learning in nursing consultation education via clinical simulation with actors: Action research. Nurse Education Today, 35(2). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2014.12.016
NR 536 Week 7 Designing an Experiential Learning Activity
Romaniuk, D., Paula, M., & Liu, L. (2020). Comparison of debriefing methods after a virtual simulation: An experiment. Clinical Simulation in Nursing, 19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecns.2018.03.002
Victor, C., Turk, M., & Adamson, K. (2015). Effects of an experiential learning simulation design on clinical nursing judgment development. Nurse Educator, 40(5). https://doi.org/10.1097/NNE.0000000000000159
Young, A., & Dufrene, C. (2020). Successful debriefing—Best methods to achieve positive learning outcomes: A literature review. Nurse Education Today, 34(3). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2013.06.026