营养学课程PBL教学改革的探索  

EXPLORATION OF PBL EDUCATIONAL REFORM IN NUTRITIONAL SUBJECT

作　　者：俞捷[1,2] 李岩[1] 范瑞明[3] 胡斌丽[1] 张镖[4] 许洁[1,5] 

机构地区：[1]遵义医学院预防医学教研室,遵义563003 [2]马来西亚国立大学公共卫生学院 [3]遵义医学院附属医院神经内科 [4]遵义医学院预防医学系本科生 [5]重庆医科大学公共卫生学院

出　　处：《现代预防医学》2011年第24期5091-5092,共2页Modern Preventive Medicine

基　　金：遵义医学院教学改革基金(XG200903);遵义医学院大学生创新基金(20101716)

摘　　要：[目的]探讨对医学生施行营养学课程PBL教学改革的必要性。[方法]将87名医学生分为实验组45名与对照组42名,实验组采用PBL教学法,对照组采用传统教学法。[结果]多数实验组医学生对PBL教学评价较高,PBL教学组国家公共营养师资格考试总分为(72.60±7.35)分,及格率是95.55%;传统教学组为(64.38±5.27)分,及格率是73.80,两组比较有统计学差异(P﹤0.05)。PBL教学组学生认为教学效果、查阅文献的能力、激发学习兴趣、分析解决问题能力明显增强,对营养学课程的学习有帮助,而传统教学组学生认为这4种教学效果变化不大(P﹤0.05)。[结论]PBL教学法优于传统教学法,有利于培养医学生分析问题、解决问题的能力,将其应用于营养学课程是可行的。[Objective]To compare the effectiveness of PBL approach with traditional educational method.[Methods]87 medical college students were randomly divided into experimental group including 45 medical students（PBL approach）and control group including 42 medical students（traditional educationl method）.[Results]The National Public Dietitian Examination scores and passing rates among PBL-educated students were higher than those of the control group（P﹤0.05）. The total score of PBL experimental group was 72.60±7.35,and the pass rate was 95.55%. The score of control group was 64.38±5.27,and the pass rate was 73.80%. There was significant different between the two groups. The experimental group had high capacity of teaching,literature review,and cultivate the students’ learning interest and ability of analyzing and solving problem,which could be helpful for nutrition courses. There was no significantly difference in the control group.[Conclusion]PBL is better than the traditional educational method.PBL might help students to analyze problems and improve problem-solving skills.

关 键 词：基于问题的学习 营养学课程 大学生 改革 

分 类 号：R151[医药卫生—营养与食品卫生学]