Study Guide

Objective

The student:
- has knowledge of their own professional field, the history and development of caring science
- has knowledge of and can reflect on basic concepts in caring science
- knows the basic competence requirements for their own profession
- understand the importance of evidence-based care
- can describe the organization of social and health care in Finland and the legislation that governs the activities
- has knowledge of service systems and the patient's / client's social benefits
- has basic skills in interprofessional work
- understands and can reflect on ethical guidelines and profession-specific ethical codes and can in his future profession work on the basis of these
- understands the importance of culture in healthcare and can respond to clients / patients from different cultures
- has knowledge about The Agenda for Sustainable Development 2030 and its implementation at Novia
- is aware of the importance of internal sustainability based on the demands placed on the profession and can maintain good health

Content

Caring science knowledge and evidence as a basis for care
The importance of the nursing profession
Work areas of a nurse
Health care in Finland
Management structures, different sustainable service environments and service systems
General laws in social and health care
Interprofessional work
The client's / patient's position and rights
Ethical guidelines and codes
Professional encounters
Person centered care
Intercultural care
Internal sustainability in the profession

Location and time

On campus Alere
Autumn 2025

Materials

NURSING SCIENCE (Choose at least one book)
Alligood, M. R. (2014). Nursing theorists and their work (Eighth edition.). Elsevier.
Arman, M., Dahlberg, K. & Ekebergh, M., red. 2015. Teoretiska grunder för vårdande. Stockholm: Liber.
kapitel 1-3, 5
Erikssson, K. m.fl. 2012. Hoitotiede, Helsinki: Sanoma pro OY.
Eriksson, K. 2018. Vårdvetenskap. Vetenskapen om vårdandet - om dettidlösa i tiden. (Samlingsverk.) Stockhom: Liber AB.
Learner, H. 2025. Att defininiera hälsa. Lund: Studentlitteratur.
Rehnsfeldt, A. & Arman, M. (red.). 2020. Klinisk vårdvetenskap. Vårdande på teoretisk grund. Stockholm: Liber Ab.
Wiklund, L. 2003. Vårdvetenskap i klinisk praxis. Stockholm: Natur och kultur.

NURSING ETHICS
Sandman.L. & Kjellström.S. 2013. Etikboken. Etik för vårdande yrken. Lund: Studentlitteratur.
Arman, M., Dahlberg, K. & Ekebergh, M., red. 2015. Teoretiska grunder för vårdande. Stockholm: Liber.
kapitel 4.

INTERKULTURELL VÅRD (Choose at least one book)
Abdelhamid, P., Juntunen, A. & Koskinen, L. 2009. Monikulttuurinen hoitotyö. Helsinki: WSOYpro.
Ahmadi, F. 2008. Kultur och hälsa. Lund: Studentlitteratur.
Ekblad, S, (red.).Hälsa och mångfald: ett kliniskt perspektiv. Stockholm: Liber.
Hanssen, I. 2007. Omvårdnad i ett mångkulturellt samhälle. Lund: Studentlitteratur.
Herlitz, G. 2006. Kulturgrammatik - hur du ökar din förmåga att umgås över kulturgränserna. Malmö: Liber.
Hofstede, G., Hofstede, G.J. & Minkov, M. 2011. Organisationer och kulturer. Lund: Studentlitteratur.
Holland, K. & Hogg, C. 2010. Cultural awareness in nursing and health care: an introductory text. London: Hodder Arnold.
Kersey-Matusiak,G. 2015. Kulturkompetent omvårdnad. Lund: Studentlitteratur.
Ritter, L.A. & Graham, D.H. 2017. Multicultural Health. Burlington, MA, USA: Jones & Bartlett Learning.
Sorajjakool, S., Carr, M.F. & Bursey, E. (Eds.) 2017. World religions for healthcare professionals. 2nd ed. Routledge: Oxon.
Wellman
+ links on Moodle

Social and Healt care organisation and the Sote reform
acts on www.finlex.fi
links on Moodle

Teaching methods

Lectures, group work, individual work, study visit at Vaasa Central Hospital to meet nurses
Workshop/seminars (compulsory attendance)

Employer connections

Nurses association,
Wefare county

Exam schedules

Nursing Ethics: 7 Online Tests. Examiner: Anita Wikberg
Nursing Sciences + Intercultural Care: Examiner: Anita Wikberg
Social and health care organisation, Sote, legistlation: assignment. Examiner Carina Gädda
Own profession individual work. Examiner Yvonne Sjöberg-Ehn
Compulsory attendance during Hub 11th of September

International connections

Interview with someone with a different cultural background
Hub with Swedish universities

Completion alternatives

Validation according to Novia's instructions

Student workload

Nursing science and intercultural care: lectures, discussions, interview, group work, assignment = 54h.
Nursing ethics 2h introduction, 25h own reading and implementation of tests
Sote and legislation: lectures + group work and discussions = 54h
Own profession and sustainable development: lectures and material other own reading and implementation + individual task = 27h
Participation in Hub on sustainable development

Content scheduling

-

Further information

Introductions, workshops and seminar are mandatory and mandatory attendance.
other lectures are recommended, submission of assignments before deadlines.
Content and materials can be found in Moodle.

Evaluation scale

H-5

Assessment criteria, satisfactory (1)

Criteria for evaluation of the exam
The student has a superficial knowledge of the subject (by heart reading)

Assessment criteria for written work
The student has followed the instructions and their knowledge of the other students' work is inadequate. The student shows limited substance knowledge, it can be essential.

The student shows insufficient knowledge about the other students' written work. The student has followed the instructions for the written work. They have a deficient knowledge of the substance also touching the essential.

Assessment criteria, good (3)

Criteria for evaluation of the exam
The student can account for the literature, reflect and motivate his / her views

Assessment criteria for written work
The student has followed the instructions for the written work and shows insufficient knowledge about the other students' written work. The student master the substance of his work, but the application is limited

Assessment criteria, excellent (5)

Criteria for evaluation of the exam
The student shows in his answer an in-depth knowledge and maturity beyond the traditional

Criteria for evaluation of written work individually or in groups
The student has followed the instructions for the written work and shows that she has mastered the substance. They have read the other participants' written work and can ask relevant questions and lead a discussion at the seminar. The written work and the possible opponentship show something out of the ordinary (technical execution, oral presentation, mature reflections, and independent working methods)

The student has followed the instructions for the written work and shows that she has mastered the substance. They have read the other participants' work and can ask relevant questions and lead a discussion at the seminar.

Assessment methods and criteria

Nursing ethics assessed Pass/ Fail 4/5 = 80% pass.

The assignment (caring science + intercultural care) is assessed with grades 0-5
21-24pints = grade 1
25-28=2
29-32=3
33-36=4
37-40=5

Criteria for evaluation Max score 40
Criteria for evaluation Max score 40:
- Have chosen a relevant term and described it 10
- Referenced to one of the recommended books on each subject of health sciences and
intercultural care 2
- Described the culture, ethnic group 10
- Referenced a scientific article/study (peer reviewed) on the chosen culture and concept e.g. health of Vietnamese. Told about the result 3
- Interviewed a person from a culture other than their own. Told about the result. The questions in Annex. 2
- Reflection 3
- Followed Novia's instructions before degree project especially references 2
- 9 pages of text on 3 stud., 5-6 on 2 stud. 1
- Extra Literature 1
- Something else extra in addition to what was required, e.g. PP, film, theory 2
- Comments on other people's work on Moodle 3
- Submitted on agreed date 1

The health care organization is assessed 0-5

Own work on the profession is assessed gk/uk

Assessment criteria, fail (0)

Criterias for grade 1 is not reached

Assessment criteria, satisfactory (1-2)

See above

Assessment criteria, good (3-4)

See above

Assessment criteria, excellent (5)

See above

Qualifications

No prior knowledge required