DATA COLLECTED FOR STAGE ONE

Data were gathered from a number of sources in stage one, summarised below. (Note: pseudonyms were allocated to the lecturers and students to aid clarity in the write up of this thesis.)

a) Eight lecturers involved in the pre-admission selection of students - semi structured interviews were conducted.

Table 6.1 Pseudonyms and branches the lecturers taught on, interviewed in stage 1______________________ ____________________________

Name Branch of Nursing

Nicola Mental Health

Youseff Mental Health

Susan Child

Douglas Child

Gareth Learning Disability

Elizabeth Learning Disability

Angharad Adult

Sarah Adult

b) Three Special Needs Officers - semi structured interviews were conducted with each individually.

o University Dyslexia Tutor

o University Special Needs Officer

o School Specific Needs Officer

c) Seven dyslexic student nurses on years 2 or 3 of the pre-registration

programme. Three students who studied at the University of Glynrith were interviewed as a group. The four students who studied at the University of

Pimbury - one was interviewed face to face, the remainder had individual

telephone interviews (see section 6.2.2, page 105 for more details).

Table 6.2 Pseudonyms and university of the students interviewed in stage 1

Name University

Matthew University of Glynrith Lisa University of Glynrith Michelle University of Glynrith

Anne University of Pimbury

Beth University of Pimbury

Jane University of Pimbury

Vicky University of Pimbury

d) Policies and procedures documents

e) Ten areas used for student placements received a copy of the clinical

mentor postal questionnaire - nine responded.

6.2.1 Responses from the clinical mentor questionnaire

The following is a summary of the nine responses received from the ten postal

questionnaires sent to placement areas that had previously been allocated a

dyslexic student nurse.

• Five questionnaires were completed by the clinical mentor, who had worked

directly with a student who had disclosed they were dyslexic;

• One questionnaire was completed by the sister responsible for students during placement on the ward, who recalled a student who was dyslexic being placed

on the ward; and

• Three responses, one by a staff nurse who normally acted as a clinical mentor

and two from ward sisters responsible for arranging mentorship of students during the placement, stating that none of the students placed with them had disclosed during the placement and were therefore unknown to them. This

meant they were unable to comment on the specific questions within the questionnaire.

6.2.2 Commentary on interviews with the nursing students

The group of three students from the University of Glynrith consisted of one male student, Matthew, and two female students, Lisa and Michelle. Matthew and Michelle were diagnosed as dyslexic while on the nursing course. Lisa was

diagnosed as a child. The group interview was conducted in a quiet interview room within the School at the end of one of their theory days in School. The students asked for and received a copy of the interview after transcription, this was important for validation of the information gathered. None of the students subsequently added to the comments made in the interview.

The three students who took part in the group interview had had quite different experiences while studying on the course. These experiences to some extent affected their behaviour during the interview. Matthew who had been diagnosed as part of the admissions procedures and was now in his third year, stated that he had not been well supported during the course, had received negative comments from lecturers and clinical mentors and had experienced lecturers actively trying to dissuade him from pursuing nursing as a career choice. In contrast, Lisa and Michelle reported mainly positive and supportive experiences during the course.

During the interview Matthew was open about his experiences and wanted to tell his story. I noted that he arrived early and was the first to speak, giving what appeared to be a rehearsed story of his experiences. I had the impression that Matthew was a little suspicious of my motives for doing the study. To some extent this was understandable from his negative experiences on the course to date. On two occasions he challenged me during the interview. The first time he said that he felt I was focussing on the difficulties students with dyslexia had on the course rather than on what ‘good things’ they could bring to the profession, e.g. a

heightened ability to empathise. On the second occasion he asked me about my knowledge base and appeared to be testing out my assertion that I was interested in determining how to support nursing students who are dyslexic. The atmosphere

in the interview remained friendly throughout however and he did not dominate the discussion and willingly allowed the other students to speak.

In respect of Lisa and Michelle, during the interview there were noticeable

differences in their levels of confidence. They were roughly the same age, being in their early twenties, and were both in the second year of the course. However, Lisa had been diagnosed as dyslexic as a child, whereas Michelle had only found out a few months previously, when she had failed some of her course work. Lisa seemed relaxed and happy to talk about her problems and how she had

developed ways of coping. Her body language was open, gave eye contact when she spoke and was attentive to the discussion. This was in contrast to the

demeanour exhibited by Michelle. She wore a baseball cap pulled down over her eyes and she kept her head down and rarely made eye contact with me. She sat back a little from the rest of the group with folded arms and crossed legs

throughout the interview. She did express opinions and shared her experiences when asked but did not volunteer any information otherwise. As Michelle began the interview in this way I feel sure it was not because of the opinions put forward by Matthew. She told me at the end that she had only agreed to come when she knew that Lisa was going to be there. This implied her lack of confidence or

uncertainty about her dyslexia. I did notice that by the end of the interview Michelle had relaxed somewhat as the three students got to know one another and shared experiences.

It is important to note that as student confidentiality is strictly adhered to throughout the University of Glynrith, the students rarely knew of others with dyslexia studying at the School. The opportunities for peer support were therefore minimal. Most support is from the School or University staff in a formalised way and on a one to one basis.

Due to the small number of dyslexic students at Glynrith, a second group interview with five students from a nearby School of Nursing at the University of Pimbury that shared the clinical placements was planned. Unfortunately, this proved to be difficult to arrange. Although all five students agreed verbally to attend the meeting set up in their School, details of which were then confirmed in writing, on the day

of the interview only one student, Anne, attended. I was able to contact three of the four students who had not attended. Beth and Vicky said that they had not been able to get off duty on time to attend the interview, while Jane said she had a terrible memory and had forgotten (poor memory is a feature of dyslexia).

Therefore, four semi-structured interviews were conducted, of which one was face- to-face and three were conducted over the telephone. Sturges and Hanrahan (2004) compare face-to-face interviewing with telephone interviewing in a qualitative study. The interview transcripts revealed no significant differences in the interviews and they therefore conclude that telephone interviews could be as productive as face-to-face interviews. Information gained through the face-to-face interviews and telephone interviews are therefore seen as equally valid and therefore this data collection method was used in this study.

Anne and Vicky were diagnosed as dyslexic when they were children, and Beth and Jane were diagnosed while studying on the course. Notes from the three telephone interviews were transcribed immediately after the interviews and sent to the students for confirmation; no changes were made.