*AssistScience†LecturUnivers

AddUWI SWest Inyahoo.8755-7

Journal© 2014

USING CARL ROGERS'PERSON-CENTERED MODEL TO EXPLAIN

INTERPERSONAL RELATIONSHIPS AT A

SCHOOL OF NURSING

VENISE D. BRYAN, MSN, RN*, JASCINTH LINDO, PHD, RN†,PAULINE ANDERSON-JOHNSON, MSC., RN†, AND STEVE WEAVER, PHD, RN†

ant Lecs, Univeer, Theity of thress corchool odies, Mcom223

of ProElsevie

Faculty members are viewed as nurturers within the academic setting and may be able toinfluence students' behaviors through the formation of positive interpersonal relationships.Faculty members' attributes that best facilitated positive interpersonal relationships according toCarl Rogers' Person-Centered Model was studied.Students (n = 192) enrolled in a 3-year undergraduate nursing program in urban Jamaica wererandomly selected to participate in this descriptive cross-sectional study. A 38-itemquestionnaire on interpersonal relationships with nursing faculty and students' perceptions oftheir teachers was utilized to collect data. Factor analysis was used to create factors of realness,prizing, and empathetic understanding. Multiple linear regression analysis on the interaction ofthe 3 factors and interpersonal relationship scores was performed while controlling for nursingstudents' study year and age.One hundred sixty-five students (mean age: 23.18 ± 4.51 years; 99% female) responded. Theregression model explained over 46% of the variance. Realness (β = 0.50, P b .001) was the onlysignificant predictor of the interpersonal relationship scores assigned by the nursing students. Ofthe total number of respondents, 99 students (60%) reported satisfaction with the interpersonalrelationships shared with faculty.Nursing students' perception of faculty members' realness appeared to be the mostsignificant attribute in fostering positive interpersonal relationships. (Index words: Interpersonalrelationships; Person-centered learning; Realness; Prizing; Empathetic understanding) J ProfNurs 0:1–8, 2014. © 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

ACULTY PLAYS AN integral role in determining the defined by nursing students as clear communication between

F classroom climate and the interpersonal relationships(IPRs) that may be formed between students and the faculty(Martin & Dowson, 2009; Sidelinger & Booth-Butterfield,2010). Furthermore, within the academic setting, facultymay influence students' behaviors as the faculty are viewedas nurturers; this is best achieved through the developmentof positive IPRs (Bromberger, 2010). Positive IPRs have been

turer, The UWI School of Nursing, Faculty of Medicalrsity of theWest Indies, Mona Campus, Kingston 7, Jamaica.UWI School of Nursing, Faculty of Medical Sciences,e West Indies, Mona Campus, Kingston 7, Jamaica.respondence to Venise D. Bryan: Assistant Lecturer, Thef Nursing, Faculty of Medical Sciences, University of theona Campus, Kingston 7, Jamaica. E-mail: bryanvenise@

fessional Nursing, Vol 0, No. 0 (August), 2014: pp 1–8r Inc. All rights reserved.

individuals that brings about trust, mutual understanding,support, and respect (Bryan, Weaver, Anderson-Johnson, &Lindo, 2013). West and Turner (2011) described commu-nication as an interpersonal activity in which messages aretransmitted by a sender to a receiver with the aim ofinfluencing the behavior of the receiver. Therefore, the roleof effective communication in college classrooms cannotbe overemphasized because it forms the framework for IPRs(Melvin, Ephraim, & Sussie, 2013).

Globally, the ultimate goal of faculty is to help theirstudents develop or mature academically (Penn StateWorthington Scranton, 2014). It is desired that nurseswill be safe and compassionate practitioners aftercompleting the nursing program of study, and thisoutcome is best achieved through a holistic curriculumthat is geared toward meeting all the needs of the student

1http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.profnurs.2014.07.003

ARTICLE IN PRESS

PositiveStudent-

Teacher IPRRating

Realness(Compassionate, Fair, and Reliable)

Prizing(Trust and Respect)

Empathetic Understanding(Considerate and Non-judgemental)

Figure. Attributes of faculty members that contribute to positivestudent–teacher relationships developed by the researchers fromRoger's (1979) Person-Centered Approach.

2 BRYAN ET AL

(Sedgwick & Harris, 2012). Positive IPRs between facultyand students may aid in meeting the objectives of aholistic curriculum because it has been reported thatstudents thrive in an academic setting where therelationship shared with faculty are characterized byteachers being flexible, available, friendly, and helpful(Bryan, Weaver, Anderson-Johnson, & Lindo, 2012;Goodboy & Bolkan, 2009; Meyers, 2009). IPR furthercreates a sense of belonging and reduces the perception ofdistance between both parties (Gidman, McIntosh,Melling, & Smith, 2011).

An effective teacher is able to facilitate positive IPRsthat will enhance students' success because they recog-nize that partnering with students, rather than dictatingto them, will facilitate a nurturing classroom climate,encourage learning, and enhance students' integrity(Evertson, 2014; Saavedra & Saavedra, 2007). A nurtur-ing classroom climate can contribute to a higher sense ofwell-being and enable students to take risks, build trust,and develop a strong sense of community when strongcaring IPRs between teachers and students are formed(Freiberg & Lamb, 2009; Van Petegem, Aelterman, VanKeer, & Rosseel, 2008). Such a climate is person-centeredand is regarded as being warm and respectful. It providesa place where students feel safe to express themselves andmake mistakes, allowing them to develop in a holisticmanner—socially, emotionally, and academically(Freiberg & Lamb, 2009; Saavedra & Saavedra, 2007).

Prior to 2002, nursing education in Jamaica wasconducted mainly through 3-year hospital-based trainingprograms with a single university offering a 4-yearundergraduate nursing degree (Hill, 2006; The UWISchool of Nursing, 2004-13). Today, all nurses in Jamaicaare educated at the baccalaureate level in highereducation institutions for duration of nine semestersover 3 or 4 years; this education is typically inclusive of120 theory and clinical credit hours (The UWI School ofNursing, 2004-13). It is recommended that institutions ofhigher learning (university/colleges), particularly thoseinvolved in nursing education reflect a person-centeredapproach in order to meet desired school and curriculumobjectives geared at developing compassionate and safenursing practitioners (Colley, 2012). Furthermore, localevidence suggests that first year nursing studentsenrolled in an urban undergraduate nursing programattributed their success to the IPRs they shared withfaculty. They also reported that positive IPRs withteachers motivated them to work harder on assignments(Bryan et al., 2012).

In the face of limited evidence a plausible explanationof the factors that influence positive IPRs and the effecton the quality of nursing graduates remains unclear. Thisarticle examines faculty members' attributes that bestfacilitate positive IPRs with students at a Jamaican schoolof nursing from the students' perspective. The study wasconducted to inform faculty training and educationgeared toward improving IPRs between students andfaculty. It is guided by Carl Rogers' Person-CenteredModel (1951, cited in Rogers, 1995a,b, pp. 243–270,

1969). Evidence from this study may inform practice inthe teaching and learning process and form the basis forfurther work in the context of education in a developingcountry. This is the second article from a body of workcompleted for masters' theses. The first article reportedon the influence of IPRs between nursing students andlecturers on specific learning outcomes (Bryan et al.,2013). Here we report on faculty members' attributes ofrealness, prizing, and empathetic understanding and howthese attributes best facilitated positive IPRs withstudents at a Jamaican school of nursing based on CarlRogers' Person-Centered Model.

BackgroundConceptual

Framework—Rogers' Person-Centered ModelThe quality of the IPRs that faculty share with students isthe most significant element in determining the effec-tiveness of their academic experience (Martin & Dowson,2009; Rogers, 1969). Therefore, Carl Rogers' Person-Centered Model (1951, cited in Rogers, 1995a,b, pp. 243–270, 1969), in which positive IPRs with clients facilitatedtheir growth and development, provided the theoreticalbasis of this research. The concept started in the field ofpsychology and was transitioned into the wider academicsetting (Rogers, 1969). For effective teaching and learningto occur, faculty members must possess certain attributesthat will foster positive IPRs, thus facilitating a growth-promoting climate. These attributes are realness (authen-ticity, congruence, or compassion), prizing (trust oracceptance), and empathetic understanding (Motschnig-Pitrik, 2004; Smith, 2012).

The main tenets of Rogers (1979) Person-CenteredModel that contributes to the quality of the IPRs sharedbetween students and teachers are depicted in Figure.Realness, described as the teacher being compassionate,fair, and reliable, along with prizing and empatheticunderstanding, are important attributes described byRogers, which teachers must possess in order for theirshared IPRs to be considered positively by their students.Teachers who utilize these attributes treat people aspersons with valuable feelings, thus fostering positive IPRs(Rogers, 1995a,b). The attributes of realness, prizing, and

ARTICLE IN PRESS3CARL ROGERS' PERSON-CENTERED MODEL

empathetic understanding are considered integral tocreating a nurturing classroom environment and arebased heavily on the interpersonal skills and attitudes ofthe teacher (Motschnig-Pitrik, 2004; Rogers, 1995a,b).

RealnessRealness means to unveil the “real self” to the studentwithout a front, facade, or any form of pretense (Rogers,1969). In being real, one has to be compassionate bydisplaying warmth, caring, liking, and understandingrather than pretending to be all-knowing and perfect(Rogers, 1989). A study conducted in the United Statesamong African Americans and Latina/o preuniversitystudents showed that students were able to detect whenteachers were unreal and, as such, showed no interest indeveloping IPRs with them (Hidalgo, 2011). This findingwas further supported by the view that students prefer toknow how compassionate their teachers are beforelearning what the teacher knows (Zakrzewski, 2012).Compassion can be considered as a major descriptor ofrealness, where individuals are sensitive to their ownfeelings and the feelings of others and where people arenot viewed as objects to be used but rather as completebeings (Docan-Morgan & Docan-Morgan, 2009; Smith,2008). Therefore, teachers are called upon to be aware oftheir feelings and those of their students. This approachfacilitates communication between both parties becauseneeds and expectations are better understood and moreeasily fulfilled (Smith, 2012).

PrizingPrizing is the unconditional acceptance and trust of eachstudent as an individual (Rogers, 1967). Teachers areusually warm, respectful, positive, and accepting of studentsas individuals with great potential, thereby facilitating thestudents' growth and development (Rogers, 1969). Studentsfrom several faculties in the United States said their teacherscreated a nurturing classroom climate through demonstrat-ing respect, care, a nonjudgmental attitude, and acceptanceof the diversity of each student (Saavedra&Saavedra, 2007).Previous research has shown that nursing students placedgreat importance on empowerment, sharing of power, anda sense of belonging while being educated intheir undergraduate program (Begum & Slavin, 2012;Bradbury-Jones, Sambrook,& Irvine, 2011;Murphy, Rosser,Bevan, Gwyneth, & Jordan, 2012).

Empathetic UnderstandingEmpathetic understanding is the ability of the teacher torecognize and comprehend the inner feelings of students,which further aid in the nonjudgmental interpretation ofthe students' actions and behaviors (Rogers, 1962). It isbeing able to view the world from the students'perspective, which facilitates understanding and workingwith students through their present emotional situationto maximize the academic experience, thus demonstrat-ing consideration (Rogers, 1967). Students are usuallygrateful for this deep level of sensitive empathy becausethey feel that their viewpoint is valid and completely

understood and that they will not be judged or evaluated byit (Rogers, 1967). Demonstrating acceptance and validationof students' thoughts and emotions through listeningattentively when students are expressing their feelings andthoughts may be integral in conveying empathetic under-standing (Sidelinger & Booth-Butterfield, 2010). This effectwas seen when perceived teacher understanding had adirect effect on the teacher's credibility in the classroom andIPRs formed with 651 undergraduate students at two largemidwestern universities in the United States (Schrodt,Turman, & Soliz, 2006).

Learning for some students depends on their attitudesand perception of the classroom and the teacher.Teachers who use realness, prizing, and empatheticunderstanding in creating positive social experiences inthe classroom will increase the likelihood that studentsmeet the objectives of the curriculum (Freiberg & Lamb,2009; Sidelinger & Booth-Butterfield, 2010). Conse-quently, this article explores Carl Rogers' Person-Centered model guided by realness, prizing, andempathetic understanding in explaining positive IPRswith nursing students within the Jamaican academiccontext. The study aimed to determine the contributionof specific attributes of faculty members in predictingthe quality of the IPRs that they shared with nursingstudents.

MethodsStudy Design and Participants

A cross-sectional survey of undergraduate nursingstudents enrolled in a 3-year full-time baccalaureateprogram was conducted at an urban school of nursing inJamaica. The total population of undergraduate nursingstudents was 382 with 83 (22%) students being enrolledin Year 1, 153 (40%) in Year 2, and 146 (38%) in Year 3.The sample size of 192 was determined using the Raosoft(2004) with a confidence level of 95%, responsedistribution of 50%, and a margin of error of 5%.Students were stratified by the year of enrollment, and asample proportionate to the size of the year of enrollmentfor the 3 years was selected using a table of randomnumbers. Thus, 42/83, 77/153, and 73/146 students fromYear 1, Year 2, and Year 3, respectively, were selectedfrom the student register.

Data CollectionData were collected using a 38-item self-administeredquestionnaire composed of demographic items, questionsrelated to attributes of faculty members, and the qualityof IPRs shared with faculty, as well as satisfaction withIPRs between students and faculty. Students were askedto rate the relationship shared with faculty and theattributes of faculty members on a 5-point Likert-typescale of 1 to 5, with 1 being very poor and 5 beingexcellent. A single dichotomous variable of satisfactionrequiring a yes/no answer was also included.

Following a review of the literature, 24 questions weredeveloped by the researchers, and 14 questions relating tostudents' relationship with faculty were selected with

ARTICLE IN PRESS4 BRYAN ET AL

permission from the Indiana University-based NationalSurvey of Student Engagement (NSSE) 2010 (IndianaUniversity, 2001-11). The NSSE College Student Reportcollects data that represent the desired behaviors bystudents and institutions associated with undergraduateeducation (Indiana University, 2012). This 29-iteminstrument consisted of a number of scales designed toevaluate the students' involvement with learning activities,the provision of a supportive environment for learning, therole of faculty members in the learning process, and therelationship students share with the faculty, administra-tion, and peers (Indiana University, 2012).

Items were also included based on the attributesidentified by Carl Rogers as facilitative to positive IPRs;construct validity was measured and the instrumentfurther modified. Face and expert validity were soughtfrom experienced faculty members at The UWI School ofNursing and some items were reconstructed to be moreculturally relevant. Pretesting of the modified instrumentwas conducted among 25 postgraduate nursing studentsat the school of nursing who shared IPRs with several ofthe same faculty members as the undergraduate students.The final instrument recorded high internal consistency(Cronbach's α = .9).

E-mails were sent to the course leaders of each yeargroup to request the facilitation of the survey adminis-tration during the final 35 minutes of one of their classes(Semester 1; September to December 2010). The surveywas administered by the researcher who remained for theduration of data collection. Completed questionnaireswere placed in an envelope, sealed, and deposited in acontainer located at the back of the classroom.

Data AnalysisCompleted questionnaires were entered, cleaned, andanalyzed using the Statistical Package for the SocialSciences® Version 17. Students rated the quality of theIPRs shared with faculty using attributes of availability,helpfulness, flexibility, friendliness, supportiveness, andsense of belonging. This allowed a maximum IPR ratingof 30. Faculty members were rated according to attributesof compassion, trust, reliability, respect, consideration,fairness, and being nonjudgmental.

Based on Rogers' Person-Centered Model, the sevenattributes used to describe faculty were subjected toconfirmatory factor analysis to create categories ofrealness, prizing, and empathetic understanding factors.The realness factor was measured based on items relatedto students' perception of faculty's compassion, fairness,and reliability, and the prizing factor included attributesof trust and respect. Finally, the empathetic understand-ing component was based on items related to whetherfaculty members were perceived as considerate andnonjudgmental (Motschnig-Pitrik, 2004; Rogers, 1967,1969, 1989, 1995a,b). Factors of realness, prizing, andempathetic understanding were saved as variables andsubjected to multiple linear regression analyses. Themodel included possible confounders (nursing students'study year and age), IPRs scores (dependent variable),

and factors of realness, prizing, and empathetic under-standing (independent variables). The independentvariables had intercorrelations lower than 0.80, suggest-ing no multicollinearity between the variables (Rubin,2010). Hierarchal regression analysis was conducted, andcollinearity statistics satisfied a tolerance higher than 0.2and a variance inflation factor lower than 5. A P value≤ .05 was taken as a criterion for the results identified inthis study.

Ethical ConsiderationsEthical approval to conduct the study was granted by theinstitution's internal review board, and permission toconduct the study was obtained from the head of theschool of nursing. The study was explained to theselected participants by the researcher who was notinvolved in teaching the students. This included thepurpose of the study and the right to refuse participationwithout any negative consequences. Written informedconsent was obtained, and students were given a copy.No names or other identifiers were collected, and allinformation was treated confidentially. Completed datacollection tools were stored as per the World MedicalAssociation Council Guidelines (World Medical Associ-ation, 2011). No favors, grants, or sponsorship wereaccepted in conducting this study.

ResultsWe retrieved 165/192 completed questionnaires (re-sponse rate of 86%), which included 41 (98%) Year 1students, 56 (73%) Year 2 students, and 68 (93%) Year 3students. Respondents' ages ranged from 18 to 41 years,with a mean age of 23.18 ± 4.51 years. The majority ofrespondents were 163 (99%) females and 2 (1%) males.

Almost three fifths (n = 99 or 60%) of the studentsreported satisfaction with the IPRs shared with faculty inresponse to a yes/no dichotomous question on satisfac-tion with IPR shared with faculty. Created factors ofrealness, prizing, and empathetic understanding weresubjected to multiple linear regression analyses deter-mined by their ability to explain the IPRs scores assignedto faculty by the study participants. These scores rangedfrom 6 to 30 with a mean rating of 20.8 ± 4.3 (Table 1).

According to the model generated, 7% of the IPRs scoreswere explained using the two control variables, age andstudy year group, F(2, 162) = 7.48; P = .001. However,students' age was not a significant predictor of the IPRsscores (β = 0.05, P N .05), whereas the study year was (β =0.30, P b .001). The addition of realness as an independentvariable explained 45.6% of the variance in the IPRs scores,F(3, 161) = 46.79; P b .001, and nursing students' studyyear and age became nonsignificant predictors of the IPRsscores (β = 0.03, P N .05 and β = 0.11, P N .05,respectively). When prizing was added, over 45% of thevariance in the IPRs scores were accounted for with anadjusted R2 of 0.458, F(4, 160) = 35.63; P b .001.However, prizing was not a significant predictor of theIPRs scores (β = 0.11, P N .05), and realness remained asignificant predictor (β = 0.57, P b .001).

ARTICLE IN PRESS

Table 1. Nursing Students' Assigned Scores of IPRs Rating byStudy Year

Year group

IPR score

(Mean ± SD) Range

Year 1 (n = 41) 22.7 ± 4.1 12–30Year 2 (n = 56) 20.8 ± 4.3 12–30Year 3 (n = 68) 19.6 ± 4.1 6–29All (n = 165) 20.8 ± 4.3 6–30

P = .001.

5CARL ROGERS' PERSON-CENTERED MODEL

The addition of empathetic understanding explained46% of the variance, F(5, 159) = 28.88; P b .001; realness(β = 0.50, P b .001) remained a significant predictor, butprizing (β = 0.09, P N .05) and empathetic understanding(β = 0.11, P N .05) were nonsignificant predictors of theIPRs scores (Table 2). It must be noted that in addingprizing and empathetic understanding to the model, thebeta value for realness decreased from 0.65 to 0.50, whichsuggests that the impact of realness on the IPRs scores ispartially mediated through prizing and empatheticunderstanding. The models were similar when the resultswere disaggregated by year groups, with realness beingthe sole significant predictor of the IPRs scores. Anincrease in the predictor variables of age, realness,prizing, and empathetic understanding resulted in anincrease in the IPRs scores. However, the IPRs scoresdeclined as students progressed from Year 1 to Year 3.The effect of each independent variable on the IPRsscores can be seen in more detail in Table 2.

DiscussionAccording to Carl Rogers' Person-Centered Model,realness, prizing, and empathetic understanding are keyelements for establishing positive IPRs with students. Theimpact of these three attributes on the IPRs scoresassigned to faculty by students enrolled in a 3-yearbaccalaureate nursing program at a school of nursing inJamaica was examined, while controlling for students'study year and age. Realness was the most significantpredictor of the IPRs scores assigned to faculty bystudents. This finding suggests that faculty members whoallowed students to know them personally and knowwhat to expect of them as teachers through thedemonstration of compassion, fairness, and reliabilitywere more likely to be assigned higher IPRs scores andexperience positive relationships with students. It wasobserved that each unit increase in perceived realnessresulted in an increase of 2.22 in IPRs scores (Table 2).

These findings support Roger's (1962) theory, whichpurports that realness was the most important of all threeattributes. Realness requires a deep level of transparencyfuelled by compassion and reliability (Burgan & Congos,2008; Rogers, 1962). A previous study conducted at alarge midwestern, U.S. University among students fromseveral faculties found that high teacher self-disclosureled to higher levels of student motivation, affectivelearning, and nurturing classroom climates (Mazer,

Murphy, & Simonds, 2007). Therefore, teachers whoare perceived to be genuine are better able to motivatestudents, cultivate positive student–teacher relationshipsand foster positive attitudes about the course andclassroom climate, thus enhancing learning (Hughes &Pickeral, 2013).

Based on the results in this study, realness wasidentified as the greatest predictor of positive IPRs.However, the relationships were further enhanced in thepresence of prizing and empathetic understanding as theeffect of realness reduced when these two additionalattributes were added. This finding suggests that,although prizing and empathetic understanding resultedin minimal changes in the IPRs scores, they wereimportant in their own right. Building trust, demonstrat-ing respect and creating a learning environment thatresonates with unconditional acceptance is integral to thevision of the person-centered model (Ferch, St. John,Reyes, & Ramsey, 2006; Rogers, 1969). Within thisenvironment, students are able to express themselvesfreely and learn from each other; as such, Rogers (1969)believed that a classroom climate of trust was importantin unearthing intellectual and emotional discovery thatallowed students to become life-long learners.

Rogers (1962) explained that all three attributes areessential in facilitating positive IPRs and learning. Colley(2012) found that nursing faculty members at a westernuniversity in the United States received positive studentfeedback after employing the person-centered approacharmed with the three attributes as evidenced by activestudent engagement with the curriculum even outside ofthe classroom. Another study conducted among 18 thirdyear nursing students at one United Kingdom and twoAustralian universities revealed that positive student–teacher relationships were integral in promoting thestudents' sense of belonging and learning (Levett- Jones,Lathlean, Higgins, & McMillan, 2009). These findingsfurther supported the view that a trusting and respectfulenvironment provides students with greater opportuni-ties to become engaged, which increases the likelihoodof positive IPRs and may lead to greater academic success(Barile et al., 2012).

Age and nursing students' study year had a weak effecton the IPRs scores. However, contrary to this finding, aprevious study conducted at a university in the UnitedStates among 215 Caucasian students from severalfaculties showed that students' age was a statisticallysignificant predictor of students' satisfaction with facultyinteraction; older students interacted more with facultyand were more satisfied with the IPRs they shared withfaculty (Strayhorn, 2010). However, in comparingStrayhorn's study to the one described in this article, itis important to note that there are significant culturaldifferences between the student respondents and thefaculty in each of the studies.

With regard to students' study year, prior research hasshown that as students progressed in their academicprogram, they sought after teachers less and placed lessimportance on IPRs with faculty (Seyedfatemi, Tafreshi,

ARTICLE IN PRESS

Table 2. Results of IPRs Scores Regression Analysis

Predictors Change in IPR score (B value) t P

Age 0.04 0.61 .54Nursing students' study year −0.52 −1.50 .14Realness 2.22 4.86 b .001Prizing 0.38 1.01 .31Empathetic understanding 0.50 1.21 .23

P = .05.

6 BRYAN ET AL

& Hagani, 2007; Shabana, Khater, & Akhu-Zaheya,2012). It is, therefore, not surprising that with every yearincrease in the students' study year, the IPRs scoresdeclined by 0.52 (Table 2). This is an interesting findingfor nursing schools that are trying to improve student–teacher relationships and improve the success of theirstudents because this empirical evidence suggests thatrealness, prizing, and empathetic understanding have amuch stronger impact on student–faculty IPRs thanstudents' age or year of study. In addition, the threeconcepts of the person-centered model contributed muchmore to the total variance explained in the IPRs scoresthan did students' study year and age. Recall that the totaladjusted R2 was 0.46, whereas that of the controlledvariables was 0.07. This result suggests that realness,prizing, and empathetic understanding combined con-tributed 39% in explaining the IPRs scores.

More than half of the respondents reported satisfactionwith the IPRs that they shared with faculty members. Thisfinding suggests that teachers at the institution studiedwere utilizing the three attributes to develop and maintainpositive IPRs with the nursing students. Furthermore, itindicates that the students were satisfied with the IPRs.Positive IPRs may assist students in personal developmentas they learn to form inner relationships within themselvesandwith the curriculum,which is integral in the successfulachievement of academic goals (Hughes & Pickeral, 2013;Vassilopoulos & Kosmopoulos, 2009). A previous meta-analysis identified a study carried out by Poplin andWeeres(1994) Cornelius-White (2007) showed that studentswanted to develop genuine relationships with their teachersthat were built on trust, honesty, caring, and sharedresponsibility (Poplin & Weeres, 1994, cited in Cornelius-White, 2007, p. 116). Based on these significant findings, itis believed that Rogers (1951 cited in Rogers, 1995a,b,pp. 243–270) Person-CenteredApproach assists the studentin achieving superior results along with holistic growth asan individual if learning takes place in an environmentwhere teachers possess or are perceived to possess somemeasure of the three core attributes of realness, prizing, andempathetic understanding.

LimitationsAlthough the findings are congruent with that of Rogerswith realness being the most important attribute indeveloping positive IPRs with students, there are somelimitations to the study. The study was carried out at asingle university in Jamaica in a particular social andcultural context, thus limiting the generalizability of the

findings. It also focused on the perception of the studentsand not that of the faculty members, which could haveoffered a broader viewpoint. Majority of the respondentswere female with only 1% being male; hence, the findingsof the study may be limited to female students. However,this is not rare for nursing because most of the studentpopulation in nursing programs is female; for example,men only make up 5% to 10% of the nursing populationin some countries (Brown, 2009). In spite of theselimitations, it is important to highlight the response rateof 86% that reduces the possibility of nonresponse bias onthe findings presented. The findings still hold importantknowledge about utilizing the person-centered model todevelop positive IPRs with undergraduate students.Nursing students from all three year groups wereinvolved in the study, and students in the differentyears did not show any significant differences intheir opinions.

ConclusionsMore than half of the nursing students studied weresatisfied with the IPRs shared with faculty. Realness wasidentified as the most significant predictor of the IPRsscores assigned by the nursing students in a school ofnursing in urban Jamaica. This implies that nursingeducators should endeavor to create a teaching–learningenvironment that will build genuine IPRs starting in Year1. Positive IPRs have been known to assist students insuccessfully achieving their academic goals (Barile et al.,2012; Sidelinger & Booth-Butterfield, 2010). Therefore,tertiary institutions should educate and encourage facultymembers to utilize Rogers' Person-Centered Modelguided by the three attributes, particularly realness,because this may improve academic success and retentionof their students.

References

Barile, J. P., Donohue, D. K., Anthony, E. R., Baker, A. M.,Weaver, S. R., & Henrich, C. C. (2012). Teacher–studentrelationship climate and school outcomes: Implications foreducational policy initiatives. Journal of Youth and Adolescence,41, 256-267.

Begum, S., & Slavin, H. (2012). Perceptions of “caring” innursing education by Pakistani nursing students: An exploratorystudy. Nurse Education Today, 32, 332-336, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2011.10.011.

Bradbury-Jones, C., Sambrook, S., & Irvine, F. (2011).Empowerment and being valued: A phenomenological study of

ARTICLE IN PRESS7CARL ROGERS' PERSON-CENTERED MODEL

nursing students'’experiences of clinical practice.Nurse EducationToday, 31, 368-372.

Bromberger, N. (2010). Enhancing law student learning-thenurturing teacher. Legal Education Review, 20, 45-57.

Brown, B. (2009). Men in nursing: Re-evaluating masculi-nities, re-evaluating gender. Contemporary Nurse, 33, 120-129.

Bryan, V. D.,Weaver, S., Anderson-Johnson, P.,&Lindo, J. L.M.(2012). Student and faculty interpersonal relationships and learningoutcomes [Abstract]. West Indian Medical Journal, 61, 61.

Bryan, V.,Weaver, S., Anderson-Johnson, P., & Lindo, J. (2013).The effect of interpersonal relationships between nursing studentsand lecturers on learning outcomes at a Jamaican nursing school.Caribbean Journal of Nursing, 1, 41-48.

Burgan, W. M., & Congos, D. H. (2008). The student-centredSI leader and Carl Rogers. Research & Teaching in DevelopmentalEducation, 25, 3-9.

Colley, S. L. (2012). Implementing a change to a learner-centered philosophy in a school of nursing: Faculty perceptions.Nursing Education Perspectives, 33, 229-233.

Cornelius-White, J. (2007). Learner-centred teacher-studentrelationships are effective: A metaanalysis. Review of EducationalResearch, 77, 113-143.

Docan-Morgan, S., & Docan-Morgan, T. (2009). Compassion,moderation, and humility in interpersonal relationships. La Crosse,Wisconsin: University of Wisconsin- La Crosse (Retrieved from,http://www.relationalturningpoints.org/uploads/2009_-_Dao.pdf).

Evertson, C. (2014). Classroom management - creating alearning environment, setting expectations, motivational cli-mate, maintaining a learning environment, when problemsoccur. Retrieved from, http://education.stateuniversity.com/pages/1834/Classroom-Management.html 2014.

Ferch, S. R., St. John, I., Reyes, R., & Ramsey, M. (2006).Person-to-person learning: A form of creativity in education.Journal of Humanistic Counseling Education and Development, 45,148-164.

Freiberg, H., & Lamb, S. M. (2009). Dimensions of person-centred classroom management. Theory Into Practice, 48, 99-105.

Gidman, J., McIntosh, A., Melling, K., & Smith, D. (2011).Student perceptions of support in practice. Nurse Education inPractice, 11, 351-355, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.nepr.2011.03.005.

Goodboy, A., & Bolkan, S. (2009). College teacher misbe-haviors: Direct and indirect effects on student communicationbehavior and traditional learning outcomes. Western Journal ofCommunication, 73, 204-219.

Hidalgo, N. (2011). Uneven youth resistance across unevenschool contexts. International Journal of Qualitative Studies inEducation, 24, 601-606.

Hill, K. (2006). Shot in arm for nursing - Lee Chin donates$155 m to Northern Caribbean University (NCU). Retrievedfrom, http://jamaica-gleaner.com/gleaner/20060908/lead/lead1.html 2006.

Hughes, W. H., & Pickeral, T. (2013). School climate andshared leadership. In T. DaryT. Pickeral (Eds.). School ClimatePractices for Implementation and Sustainability. A SchoolClimate Practice Brief, Number 1New York NY: National SchoolClimate Center.

Indiana University. (2001-11). National survey of studentengagement 2010 the college student report. Retrieved from,http://nsse.iub.edu/pdf/US_paper_10.pdf 2001-11.

Indiana University. (2012). NSSE national survey of studentengagement. Retrieved from, http://nsse.iub.edu/html/about.cfm 2012.

Levett- Jones, T., Lathlean, J., Higgins, I., & McMillan, M.(2009). Staff –student relationships and their impact on nursing

“students” belongingness and learning. Journal of AdvancedNursing, 65, 316-324.

Martin, A. J., & Dowson, M. (2009). Interpersonal relation-ships, motivation, engagement, and achievement: Yields fortheory, current issues, and educational practice. Review ofEducational Research, 79, 327-365.

Mazer, J. P., Murphy, R. E., & Simonds, C. J. (2007). I'l seeyou on “Facebook”: The effects of computer-mediated teacherself-disclosure on student motivation, affective learning, andclassroom climate This project was funded in part by aTeaching-Learning Development Grant from the Center.Communication Education, 56, 1–17.

Melvin, C., Ephraim, A., & Sussie, U. (2013). Emotionalintelligence and cross-cultural. Education Research, 9, 241-246.

Meyers, S. (2009). Do your students care whether you careabout them? College Teaching, 57, 205-210.

Motschnig-Pitrik, R. (2004). Person centred e-learning in amajoracademic course: What are the results and what can we learn fromthem? Retrieved from, http://www.networkedlearningconference.org.uk/past/nlc2004/proceedings/symposia/symposium12/motschnig_pitrik.htm 2004.

Murphy, F., Rosser, M., Bevan, R., Gwyneth, W., & Jordan, S.(2012). Nursing students’ experiences and preferences regard-ing hospital and community placements. Nurse Education inPractice, 12, 170-175.

Penn State Worthington Scranton (2014). Understandingstudent success in a student-centered university. Dunmore: PennState Worthington Scranton (Retrieved from, www.sn.psu.edu/Documents/./Understanding_Student_Success.docx).

Raosoft (2004). Sample size calculator. Retrieved from,http://www.raosoft.com/samplesize.html 2004.

Rogers, C. R. (1962). The interpersonal relationship. HarvardEducational Review, 32 (Retrieved from http://www.centerfortheperson.org/pdf/1962__the_interpersonal_relationship.pdf).

Rogers, C. R. (1967). Autobiography. In E. W. Boring, G. Lindzey(Eds.). A History of Psychology in Autobiography, Vol. V. New York:Appleton-Century-Crofts.

Rogers, C. (1969). Freedom to learn: A view of what educationmight become. Columbus, OH: Merrill.

Rogers, C. R. (1979). The foundations of the person-centredapproach. Retrieved from http://www.centerfortheperson.org/pdf/1979__Foundations_of_a_Person_Centered_Approach.pdf 1979.

Rogers, C. (1989). The interpersonal relationship in thefacilitation of learning. In H. KirschenbaumV. Land Henderson(Eds.). The Carl Rogers Reader. (pp. 304–322). Boston:Houghton Mifflin.

Rogers, C. R. (1995). In I. Yalom (Ed.). A way of being. NewYork: Houghton Mifflin Company.

Rogers, C. R. (1995). Client-centered therapy in its context ofresearch. In P. D. Kramer (Ed.). On becoming a person.(pp. 243–270). Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

Rubin, A. (2010). Statistics for evidence-based practiceand evaluation. (2nd ed.). Belmont: Brooks/Cole CengageLearning 230.

Saavedra, D. E., & Saavedra, M. L. (2007). Women of colorteaching students of color: Creating an effective classroomclimate through caring, challenging, and consulting. NewDirections for Teaching & Learning, 110, 75-83.

Schrodt, P., Turman, P., & Soliz, J. (2006). Perceivedunderstanding as a mediator of perceived teacher confirmationand students’ rating of instruction. Communication Education,55, 370-388.

Sedgwick, M., & Harris, S. (2012). A critique of theundergraduate nursing preceptorship model. 2012Nursing

ARTICLE IN PRESS8 BRYAN ET AL

Research and Practice, http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2012/248356(Retrieved from).

Seyedfatemi, N., Tafreshi, M., & Hagani, H. (2007).Experienced stressors and coping strategies among Iraniannursing students. BMC Nursing, 6, 11-20.

Shabana, I. A., Khater, W. A., & Akhu-Zaheya, L. M. (2012).Undergraduate nursing students’ stress sources and copingbehaviours during their initial period of clinical training: AJordanian perspective. Nurse Education in Practice, 12, 204-209,http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.nepr.2012.01.005.

Sidelinger, R. J., & Booth-Butterfield, M. (2010). Co-constructing student involvement: An examination of teacherconfirmation and student-to-student connectedness in thecollege classroom. Communication Education, 59, 165-184.

Smith, M. K. (2008). Helping relationships-principles, theoryand practice. Retrieved from, http://www.infed.org/helping/helping_relationships.htm 2008.

Smith, M. K. (2012). Carl Rogers, core conditions and education.Retrieved from, http://infed.org/mobi/carl-rogers-core-conditions-and-education 2012.

Strayhorn, T. L. (2010). Majority as temporary minority:Examining the influence of faculty-student relationships onsatisfaction among white undergraduates at historically black

colleges and universities. Journal of College Student Development,51, 509-524.

The UWI School of Nursing. (2004–2013). The UWI Schoolof Nursing (UWISON) History. Retrieved from, http://myspot.mona.uwi.edu/nursing/about/history 2004–2013.

Van Petegem, K., Aelterman, A., Van Keer, H., & Rosseel, Y.(2008). The influence of student characteristics and interper-sonal teacher behaviour in the classroom on student'’ wellbeing.Social Indicators Research, 85, 279-291.

Vassilopoulos, S. P., & Kosmopoulos, A. V. (2009).Education as relationship between persons. The Person-Centered Journal, 16 (Retrieved from, http://www.academia.edu/1909705).

West, R., & Turner, L. (2011). Understanding interpersonalcommunication: Making choices in changing times. (2nd ed.).Boston: Wadsworth Cengage Learning 32.

World Medical Association. (2011). WMA declaration ofHelsinki - ethical principles for medical research involvinghuman subjects. Retrieved from, http://www.wma.net/en/30publications/10policies/b3/index.html 2011.

Zakrzewski, V. (2012). Four ways teachers can show theycare. Retrieved from, http://greatergood.berkeley.edu/article/item/caring_teacher_student_relationship 2012.