GETTING STARTED IN TEACHING FOR
NURSING AND THE HEALTH
PROFESSIONS
1ST EDITION
• AUTHOR(S)JUDITH A. HALSTEAD;
DIANE M. BILLINGS
TEST BANK
1
Reference: Ch. 1 — Introduction to curriculum development
Stem: As a new faculty member on a graduate nursing program
curriculum committee, you notice program learning outcomes
are listed separately from course objectives and clinical
competencies. The committee asks you to recommend changes
to improve coherence across levels. Which action most
appropriately addresses alignment during curriculum revision?
A. Propose rewriting course objectives so each directly maps to
one program outcome and one clinical competency.
Page | 1
,B. Recommend leaving course objectives intact but add an
appendix that lists which program outcomes each supports.
C. Suggest mapping program outcomes to assessment methods
first, then retrofitting course objectives where gaps appear.
D. Advocate for a top-down review: examine program
outcomes, then revise course objectives and clinical
competencies together to ensure constructive alignment.
Correct answer: D
Rationale (correct): Option D applies constructive alignment—
starting with clear program outcomes and revising course
objectives and competencies together—ensuring coherence
among outcomes, learning activities, and assessments as
emphasized by Halstead & Billings. It supports intentional
curriculum design rather than piecemeal fixes. This approach
fosters vertical and horizontal integration across the program.
Rationale (A): Mapping each course objective to a single
program outcome is overly restrictive and may fragment
integrated competencies; Halstead & Billings recommend
mapping relationships rather than one-to-one pairing.
Rationale (B): An appendix is passive and unlikely to change
teaching or assessment practices; alignment requires active
curriculum revision, not only documentation.
Rationale (C): Mapping to assessments first risks misaligning
instruction; assessments should follow clear outcomes and
aligned instruction per curriculum design principles.
Page | 2
,Teaching point: Begin curriculum revision at the program
outcome level and revise objectives and competencies together.
Citation: Halstead, J. A., & Billings, D. M. (2025). Getting Started
in Teaching for Nursing and the Health Professions (1st Ed.). Ch.
1.
2
Reference: Ch. 1 — Faculty role and responsibilities in
curriculum development
Stem: You are chairing a faculty meeting where several
experienced clinicians resist changing long-standing clinical
practica hours despite evidence linking competency acquisition
to competency-based assessments. As chair, which response
best balances faculty autonomy with the program’s
responsibility to ensure competence?
A. Insist on immediate reduction of contact hours to align with
national benchmarks.
B. Propose a pilot competency-based clinical model with
defined entrustable professional activities (EPAs) and evaluation
metrics, and involve resisting faculty in pilot design.
C. Defer changes and form a task force to gather more literature
before any action.
D. Replace resistant faculty on the committee with faculty who
support rapid change.
Correct answer: B
Page | 3
, Rationale (correct): Option B balances respect for faculty
experience and shared governance while introducing evidence-
based change through participatory pilot testing and clear EPAs
and metrics. Halstead & Billings highlight faculty responsibility
to lead curriculum innovation through collaborative processes
that support faculty development and accountability.
Rationale (A): Forcing immediate change disregards faculty
engagement and shared governance, risking implementation
failure and morale problems.
Rationale (C): Perpetual delay (analysis paralysis) undermines
responsibility to learners; while evidence gathering is
important, it should be paired with action when reasonable
evidence exists.
Rationale (D): Removing faculty undermines collegiality and
shared governance; engaging resistant faculty is a preferable
strategy.
Teaching point: Use participatory pilots with clear
competencies and metrics to implement curriculum change.
Citation: Halstead, J. A., & Billings, D. M. (2025). Getting Started
in Teaching for Nursing and the Health Professions (1st Ed.). Ch.
1.
3
Page | 4
NURSING AND THE HEALTH
PROFESSIONS
1ST EDITION
• AUTHOR(S)JUDITH A. HALSTEAD;
DIANE M. BILLINGS
TEST BANK
1
Reference: Ch. 1 — Introduction to curriculum development
Stem: As a new faculty member on a graduate nursing program
curriculum committee, you notice program learning outcomes
are listed separately from course objectives and clinical
competencies. The committee asks you to recommend changes
to improve coherence across levels. Which action most
appropriately addresses alignment during curriculum revision?
A. Propose rewriting course objectives so each directly maps to
one program outcome and one clinical competency.
Page | 1
,B. Recommend leaving course objectives intact but add an
appendix that lists which program outcomes each supports.
C. Suggest mapping program outcomes to assessment methods
first, then retrofitting course objectives where gaps appear.
D. Advocate for a top-down review: examine program
outcomes, then revise course objectives and clinical
competencies together to ensure constructive alignment.
Correct answer: D
Rationale (correct): Option D applies constructive alignment—
starting with clear program outcomes and revising course
objectives and competencies together—ensuring coherence
among outcomes, learning activities, and assessments as
emphasized by Halstead & Billings. It supports intentional
curriculum design rather than piecemeal fixes. This approach
fosters vertical and horizontal integration across the program.
Rationale (A): Mapping each course objective to a single
program outcome is overly restrictive and may fragment
integrated competencies; Halstead & Billings recommend
mapping relationships rather than one-to-one pairing.
Rationale (B): An appendix is passive and unlikely to change
teaching or assessment practices; alignment requires active
curriculum revision, not only documentation.
Rationale (C): Mapping to assessments first risks misaligning
instruction; assessments should follow clear outcomes and
aligned instruction per curriculum design principles.
Page | 2
,Teaching point: Begin curriculum revision at the program
outcome level and revise objectives and competencies together.
Citation: Halstead, J. A., & Billings, D. M. (2025). Getting Started
in Teaching for Nursing and the Health Professions (1st Ed.). Ch.
1.
2
Reference: Ch. 1 — Faculty role and responsibilities in
curriculum development
Stem: You are chairing a faculty meeting where several
experienced clinicians resist changing long-standing clinical
practica hours despite evidence linking competency acquisition
to competency-based assessments. As chair, which response
best balances faculty autonomy with the program’s
responsibility to ensure competence?
A. Insist on immediate reduction of contact hours to align with
national benchmarks.
B. Propose a pilot competency-based clinical model with
defined entrustable professional activities (EPAs) and evaluation
metrics, and involve resisting faculty in pilot design.
C. Defer changes and form a task force to gather more literature
before any action.
D. Replace resistant faculty on the committee with faculty who
support rapid change.
Correct answer: B
Page | 3
, Rationale (correct): Option B balances respect for faculty
experience and shared governance while introducing evidence-
based change through participatory pilot testing and clear EPAs
and metrics. Halstead & Billings highlight faculty responsibility
to lead curriculum innovation through collaborative processes
that support faculty development and accountability.
Rationale (A): Forcing immediate change disregards faculty
engagement and shared governance, risking implementation
failure and morale problems.
Rationale (C): Perpetual delay (analysis paralysis) undermines
responsibility to learners; while evidence gathering is
important, it should be paired with action when reasonable
evidence exists.
Rationale (D): Removing faculty undermines collegiality and
shared governance; engaging resistant faculty is a preferable
strategy.
Teaching point: Use participatory pilots with clear
competencies and metrics to implement curriculum change.
Citation: Halstead, J. A., & Billings, D. M. (2025). Getting Started
in Teaching for Nursing and the Health Professions (1st Ed.). Ch.
1.
3
Page | 4
