两种组合教学方法在内科学见习教学中实施效果的比较  

To compare the implementary effects of two kinds of teaching methods on internal medicine clinical practice

作　　者：龚邦东[1] 汤建平[1] 房星星[1] 张晓宇[1] 程昉[1] 冯润[1] 

机构地区：[1]同济大学附属同济医院风湿免疫科,上海200025

出　　处：《中华医学教育杂志》2015年第1期84-86,114,共4页Chinese Journal of Medical Education

摘　　要：目的 比较以病例为基础教学（case-based instruction,CBI）与以授课为基础学习（lecture-based learning,LBL）教学相结合（以下简称CBI＋ LBL教学）、以问题为基础学习（problem-based learning,PBL）教学与以授课为基础学习（lecture-based learning,LBL）教学相结合（以下简称PBL＋ LBL教学）两种组合教学方法在临床医学专业学生内科学见习教学中的可行性和效果.方法 选择同济大学2009级八年制临床医学专业12名学生、2010级七年制临床医学专业32名学生为研究对象,将学生分为两组,分别采用CBI＋LBL和PBL＋LBL教学方法.通过比较学生的考试成绩、病例分析能力及对他们的问卷调查,评价两种组合教学方法的教学效果.结果 实施CBI＋ LBL教学方法的学生在内科学多数亚专科见习成绩、病例分析能力高于实施PBL＋ LBL教学方法的学生,差异具有统计学意义.问卷调查结果显示,学生更愿意接受CBI＋ LBL教学方法.结论 CBI＋ LBL教学方法有助于提高学生临床思维能力和自我学习能力.Objective To compare the feasibility and effects between case-based instruction with lecture-based learning and problem-based learning with lecture-based learning on internal medicine clinical practice.Methods By senior students of seven-year program or eight-year program,experimental group try out the teaching pattern of CBI/LBL,and control group keeps PBL/LBL,to compare the comprehensive abilities of exercising information with previous ones through exams,case analysis and questionnaire.Results Scores of written examinations and case analysis of CBI/LBL group of students are mostly higher than PBL/LBL group of students with statistically significant difference.Survey results show that CBI/LBL teaching methods are welcome by students.Conclusions CBI is benefit to improve students＇ clinical thinking skills and self-learning ability,perhaps more suitable for the current domestic clinical seven-year program,or eight-year program.

关 键 词：以病例为基础教学 以问题为基础学习 以授课为基础学习 内科学 见习 

分 类 号：R-4[医药卫生]