Undergraduate nursing students’ and faculty’s perceptions of remediation resource co-design

A qualitative exploration

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.15173/ijsap.v10i1.6829

Keywords:

co-design, nursing, remediation, undergraduate, clinical placement

Abstract

The development of student-focused remediation resources aligns well with students-as-partners approaches, particularly co-design. However, there is limited research exploring co-design in nursing education, and few studies, if any, have examined its use in the development of remediation resources to support clinical placements. This study aimed to explore nursing students' and faculty's perceptions of co-designed remediation resources to support clinical placements. Co-design involved framing the problem through a literature review, student surveys and a focus group; planning and designing the co-designed remediation resources and strategies; and trialling the co-designed remediation outputs. A qualitative, exploratory design was used, involving thematic analysis of students' and faculty's written reflections on the co-design of remediation resources. Participants perceived co-design positively. Four overarching themes were identified, including confidence as co-design evolves; enhanced collaboration and awareness; feeling cared for and connected; and ongoing benefits for oneself and others. Co-design with nursing students and faculty is a feasible, student-focused approach to developing remediation resources that support clinical placements. When designing curricula, faculty should consider co-design and other partnership-based approaches that can have immediate and longer-term benefits for students and faculty.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biographies

Beth Pierce, Griffith University

Dr Beth Pierce (PhD) is a registered nurse, lecturer, and curriculum lead. She is a Senior Fellow of the Higher Education Academy and Secretary of the Australian Nurse Teachers' Society. Beth's expertise spans education and health-related areas, including near-peer models of clinical education, health students' self-efficacy beliefs, active learning in digital environments and programmatic curriculum co-design. She has managed many education and health projects, including implementation of two five-year Bachelor of Nursing curricula and a professional external accreditation. She has led consumer-partnered health programs and clinical research studies

Julia Alcock, Griffith University

Julia Alcock (MANP) is a registered nurse, lecturer and bachelor of nursing program advisor. As an emerging researcher, Julia is recognised for her warm, collaborative nature and her deep commitment to student success. Her Masters dissertation focused on improving care for vulnerable Emergency Department patients, specifically those brought in by police, highlighting her passion for driving system-level improvements in healthcare delivery. This same commitment is reflected in her role as a nurse educator, where she fosters inclusive, participatory, and student-centred learning environments grounded in constructivist and collaborative pedagogical approaches

Lynda Hughes, Griffith University

Dr Lynda Hughes (PhD)  is a registered nurse, senior lecturer, Senior Fellow of the Higher Education Academy and Program Director of the Bachelor of Nursing, recognised for her sustained leadership in student success and academic development. A committed nurse academic, Lynda’s work is driven by a passion for enabling students and staff to realise their full potential. Building on her doctoral research into the phenomenon of “failing to fail” in clinical education, she has continued to lead strategically focused, evidence-based initiatives to address complex learning and teaching challenges. Her work centres on developing inclusive, scalable strategies to enhance retention, student progression, and academic performance, particularly in high-stakes clinical contexts

References

Ambrosetti, É., Gaudin, C., Flandin, S., & Poizat, G. (2025). Students as co-designers in health professional education: A scoping review. BMC Medical Education, 25(1), 645. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-025-07110-0

Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. Freeman.

Bell, K. (2022). Increasing undergraduate student satisfaction in higher education: The importance of relational pedagogy. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 46(4), 490–503. https://doi.org/10.1080/0309877X.2021.1985980

Benner, P., Hughes, R. G., & Sutphen, M. (2008). Clinical reasoning, decisionmaking, and action: Thinking critically and clinically. In R. G. Hughes (Ed.), Patient safety and quality: An evidence-based handbook for nurses. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK2643/

Bradwell, P., & Marr, S. (2017). Making the most of collaboration: An international survey of public service co-design. Annual Review of Policy Design, 5(1), 1–27. https://ojs.unbc.ca/index.php/design/article/view/1661

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa

Camp, S., & Legge, T. (2018). Simulation as a tool for clinical remediation: An integrative review. Clinical Simulation in Nursing, 16, 48–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecns.2017.11.003

Cant, R., Ryan, C., Hughes, L., Luders, E., & Cooper, S. (2021). What helps, what hinders? Undergraduate nursing students' perceptions of clinical placements based on a thematic synthesis of literature. SAGE Open Nursing, 7, 23779608211035845. https://doi.org/10.1177/23779608211035845

Cook-Sather, A., Bovill, C., & Felten, P. (2014). Engaging students as partners in learning and teaching: A guide for faculty. Jossey-Bass.

Custer, N. (2018). Remediation in nursing education: A concept analysis. Teaching and Learning in Nursing, 13(3), 147–152. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.teln.2018.02.002

Dollinger, M., & D'Angelo, B. (2020). Co-design for student success. National Centre for Student Equity in Higher Education. https://www.ncsehe.edu.au/app/uploads/2020/03/CoDesignHandbook_FINAL.pdf

Dollinger, M., Lodge, J., & Coates, H. (2018). Co-creation in higher education: Towards a conceptual model. Journal of Marketing for Higher Education, 28(2), 210–231. https://doi.org/10.1080/08841241.2018.1466756

Facione, N. C., & Facione, P. A. (1996). Externalizing the critical thinking in knowledge development and clinical judgment. Nursing Outlook, 44(3), 129–136. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0029-6554(06)80005-9

Ghahramanian, A., Ghasempour, M., Zamanzadeh, V., Valizadeh, L., Killam, L. A., Purabdollah, M., & Asghari-Jafarabadi, M. (2025). Hallmarks of nursing students exhibiting unsafe clinical practices: A qualitative study. BMC Nursing, 24(1), 439. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12912-025-03093-x

Gravett, K., Kinchin, I. M., & Winstone, N. E. (2020). 'More than customers': Conceptions of students as partners held by students, staff, and institutional leaders. Studies in Higher Education, 45(12), 2574–2587. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2019.1623769

Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1994). Competing paradigms in qualitative research. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 105–117). Sage Publications.

Ha, L., & Pepin, J. (2017). Experiences of nursing students and educators during the co-construction of clinical nursing leadership learning activities: A qualitative research and development study. Nurse Education Today, 55, 90–95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2017.05.006

Hughes, L. J., Alcock, J., Wardrop, R., Stone, R., & Pierce, B. (2024). Remediation in clinical practice for student nurses: A scoping review. Nurse Education Today, 137, 106180. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2024.106180

Hughes, L. J., Mitchell, M. L., & Johnston, A. N. (2021). Moving forward: Barriers and enablers to failure to fail – a mixed methods meta-integration. Nurse Education Today, 98, 104666. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2020.104666

Iniesto, F., Charitonos, K., & Littlejohn, A. (2022). A review of research with co-design methods in health education. Open Education Studies, 4(1), 273–295. https://doi.org/10.1515/edu-2022-0017

Jeffreys, M. R. (2015). Jeffreys's nursing universal retention and success model: Overview and action ideas for optimizing outcomes A–Z. Nurse Education Today, 35(3), 425–431. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2014.11.004

Könings, K. D., Mordang, S., Smeenk, F., Stassen, L., & Ramani, S. (2020). Learner involvement in the co-creation of teaching and learning: AMEE Guide No. 138. Medical Teacher, 43(8), 924–936. https://doi.org/10.1080/0142159X.2020.1838464

Laugaland, K. A., Klippen, M. I. F., Ravik, M., Gonzalez, M. T., & Akerjordet, K. (2025). Exploring co-creation with student nurses in contemporary nursing education: A systematic scoping review. Nurse Education Today, 146, 106515. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2024.106515

Laugaland, K., Aase, I., Ravik, M., Gonzalez, M. T., & Akerjordet, K. (2023). Exploring stakeholders' experiences in co-creation initiatives for clinical nursing education: A qualitative study. BMC Nursing, 22(1), 416. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12912-023-01582-5

Lumivero. (2024). NVivo [Computer software]. https://lumivero.com/products/nvivo/

McLaughlin-Borlace, N., Creighton, L., & Mitchell, G. (2024). Championing student participation in co-designing digital education resources: A student experience. Nurse Education Today, 143, 106392. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2024.106392

Mee, C. L., & Schreiner, B. (2016). Remediation in nursing education today: Review of the literature and considerations for future research. Journal of Nursing Regulation, 7(1), 37–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/s2155-8256(16)31040-7

Naidoo-Chetty, M., & du Plessis, M. (2021). Systematic review of the job demands and resources of academic staff within higher education institutions. International Journal of Higher Education, 10(3), 268–284. https://doi.org/10.5430/ijhe.v10n3p268

Omland, M., Hontvedt, M., Siddiq, F., Amundrud, A., Hermansen, H., Mathisen, M. A., Rudningen, G., & Reiersen, F. (2025). Co-creation in higher education: A conceptual systematic review. Higher Education, 90, 1017–1047. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-024-01364-1

Rendle, K. A., Abramson, C. M., Garrett, S. B., Halley, M. C., & Dohan, D. (2019). Beyond exploratory: A tailored framework for designing and assessing qualitative health research. BMJ Open, 9(8), e030123. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2019-030123

Rojo, J., George, A., Salamonson, Y., Hunt, L., & Ramjan, L. M. (2023). Using codesign to develop a novel oral healthcare educational intervention for undergraduate nursing students. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 20(6), 4919. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20064919

van de Mortel, T. F. (2008). Faking it: Social desirability response bias in self-report research. Australian Journal of Advanced Nursing, 25(4), 40–48. https://www.ajan.com.au/index.php/AJAN/article/view/1817

Vargas, C., Whelan, J., Brimblecombe, J., & Allender, S. (2022). Co-creation, co-design, co-production for public health: A perspective on definitions and distinctions. Public Health Research & Practice, 32(2), e3222211. https://doi.org/10.17061/phrp3222211

World Health Organization. (2025). State of the world's nursing 2025: Investing in education, jobs, leadership and service delivery. World Health Organization. https://iris.who.int/server/api/core/bitstreams/a4173924-a18f-49b6-8bd1-9c2a4a098980/content

Downloads

Published

2026-05-21

How to Cite

Pierce, B., Alcock, J., & Hughes, L. (2026). Undergraduate nursing students’ and faculty’s perceptions of remediation resource co-design: A qualitative exploration. International Journal for Students as Partners, 10(1), 184–200. https://doi.org/10.15173/ijsap.v10i1.6829

Issue

Vol. 10 No. 1 (2026)

Section

Research Articles

License

Copyright (c) 2026 Beth Pierce, Julia Alcock, Lynda Hughes

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.

Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.

Authors are permitted to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process - this applies to the submitted, accepted, and published versions of the manuscript. This can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (see The Effect of Open Access).