Purpose: This study aimed to investigate the factors affecting nursing students' learning flow in COVID-19 pandemic situations through mixed-method research.Method: Of the 245 nursing students participating in the survey, 20 participated in a focus group interview. Quantitative data were analyzed using stepwise multiple regression analysis. Qualitative data were analyzed using content analysis. Results: The factors affecting the learning flow of nursing students during the COVID-19 pandemic were their self-regulated learning ability (β = .24, p = .001); learning motivation (β = .23, p = .001); self-efficacy in clinical practice (β = .14, p = .014); and lecture type, or a mixture of recorded and real-time video lectures (β = .13, p = .022). As a result of the qualitative study, eight categories and 22 subcategories were derived. The eight categories are: a lack of preparation in the starting of virtual classes, adapting and growing in a new learning environment, enhancing nursing knowledge and skills through virtual clinical training, self-regulation difficulties when studying alone due to social distancing, difficulty concentrating when learning online, disadvantages of virtual learning, concerns about academic performance, and missing opportunities to enjoy college life. Conclusion Students attempted to discover their own learning expertise through virtual learning while concerned that they would be unable to fully establish their competence to work as actual hospital nurses due to a lack of clinical practice. In such a learning environment, systematic support and strategies are needed to increase the learning flow of nursing students.

Purpose: Phenomenological methods are used to capture human experience, and nursing research has long attempted phenomenological approaches in many studies. This study explored the 22-year trends (2001– 2022) in phenomenological research within Korean nursing science and identified the types of journals where research is published, common phenomenological data analysis methods, phenomena of interest, and standards of rigor applied to phenomenological studies. Methods: This scoping review followed the six stages recommended by Arksey and O'Malley's (2005) and utilized the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR) for reporting guidance. A total of 4,354 articles acquired through systematic searches across seven search engines PubMed, CINAHL, Embase, Research Information Sharing Service (RISS), Korea Citation Index (KCI), Korea Institute of Science and Technology Information (KISTI), and Korean studies Information Service System (KISS) were reviewed. Key search terms and inclusion and exclusion criteria were used as strategies to identify relevant articles. Results: In the final review, 568 Korean phenomenological studies were included. Among the phenomenology research, 50.4% of the total work was performed between 2016 and 2020, and the Colaizzi method of study was the most common (62.9%). Most researchers were published in nursing journals (55.8%). Nurses constituted the majority of participants (24.5%), followed by people living with illnesses (23.1%) and people of all ages. The primary focus included participants' experiences: the disease experience of the sick, the job-related experience of the nurses, and the learning-related experience of the nursing students. The median sample size of reviewed papers (i.e., 9) is relevant to phenomenological research saturation. The most rigorous studies applied Lincoln and Guba's criteria (54.0%). Conclusions Advancing phenomenological research in nursing entails giving priority to diverse perspectives, rigor, and the foundational essence of phenomenology. Ensuring transparency and reliability requires reinforcing rigor through the integration of phenomenology, philosophy, and effective data analysis methods.