- 1、原创力文档(book118)网站文档一经付费(服务费),不意味着购买了该文档的版权,仅供个人/单位学习、研究之用,不得用于商业用途,未经授权,严禁复制、发行、汇编、翻译或者网络传播等,侵权必究。。
- 2、本站所有内容均由合作方或网友上传,本站不对文档的完整性、权威性及其观点立场正确性做任何保证或承诺!文档内容仅供研究参考,付费前请自行鉴别。如您付费,意味着您自己接受本站规则且自行承担风险,本站不退款、不进行额外附加服务;查看《如何避免下载的几个坑》。如果您已付费下载过本站文档,您可以点击 这里二次下载。
- 3、如文档侵犯商业秘密、侵犯著作权、侵犯人身权等,请点击“版权申诉”(推荐),也可以打举报电话:400-050-0827(电话支持时间:9:00-18:30)。
- 4、该文档为VIP文档,如果想要下载,成为VIP会员后,下载免费。
- 5、成为VIP后,下载本文档将扣除1次下载权益。下载后,不支持退款、换文档。如有疑问请联系我们。
- 6、成为VIP后,您将拥有八大权益,权益包括:VIP文档下载权益、阅读免打扰、文档格式转换、高级专利检索、专属身份标志、高级客服、多端互通、版权登记。
- 7、VIP文档为合作方或网友上传,每下载1次, 网站将根据用户上传文档的质量评分、类型等,对文档贡献者给予高额补贴、流量扶持。如果你也想贡献VIP文档。上传文档
查看更多
CBL教学法在牙周病学本科临床见习中应用
CBL教学法在牙周病学本科临床见习中应用
摘 要 目的:探?基于实例的教学法(case-based learning,CBL)在牙周病学本科临床见习中的教学效果。方法:选取同济大学口腔医学院2013级本科生43名,根据随机数字表法分为试验组22名和对照组21名。试验组由指导教师提供病例,要求学生查找相关文献并进行讨论;对照组由指导教师以传统教学模式结合病例进行讲解。在临床见习前、后分别进行考试,并请学生完成教学满意度调查问卷。结果:试验组的平均成绩从见习前的(77.86±7.69)分升至见习后的(86.29±6.31)分,差异有统计学意义(P=0.006);对照组则从(78.95±8.01)分升到(82.27±7.58)分,差异无统计学意义(P=0.167),但两组见习后成绩差异有统计学意义(P=0.040)。多数学生支持CBL教学法,认为该方法更有利于提高其学习效率和自主学习能力。结论:CBL教学法能够显著提升学生的沟通能力、自学能力及病例分析能力,在理论与实践教学之间起到了良好的衔接作用。
关键词 CBL教学法;牙周病学;临床见习
中图分类号:G642.44 文献标志码:A 文章编号:1006-1533(2018)10-0003-03
Application of case-based learning method in undergraduates’ clinical probation in periodontology
HU Congjiao1, 2, FENG Yanhuizhi1, 3, SHI Mingyan1, 2, LUO Lijun1, 2, AN Kangkang1, 3
(1. Department of Periodontology of School of Stomatology, Tongji University, Shanghai 200072, China; 2. First Department of Periodontology of Stomatological Hospital affiliated to Tongji University, Shanghai 200072, China; 3. Second Department of Periodontology of Stomatological Hospital affiliated to Tongji University, Shanghai 200072, China)
ABSTRACT Objective: To explore the teaching effect of case-based learning(CBL) teaching method in undergraduates’clinical probation in periodontology. Methods: Forty-three students from the 2013 grade undergraduate of Stomatology School of Tongji University were selected, and according to the random number table method divided into an experimental group with 22 students and a control group with 21 ones. The experimental group was provided with a case by the instructor and asked to find the relevant literatures and discuss it. The control group was explained by the instructor in combination with the traditional teaching mode. The examination was carried out before and after the clinical probation, and the students were asked to complete the questionnaire of teaching satisfaction. Results: The average score of the experimental group rose from (77.86±7.69) before clinical probation to (86.29±6.31) after clinic
文档评论(0)