检索规则说明:AND代表“并且”;OR代表“或者”;NOT代表“不包含”;(注意必须大写,运算符两边需空一格)
检 索 范 例 :范例一: (K=图书馆学 OR K=情报学) AND A=范并思 范例二:J=计算机应用与软件 AND (U=C++ OR U=Basic) NOT M=Visual
作 者:唐勋 张宁[1] 周香艳[1] 吴兵[1] 王旺田[1] 王翠玲[1] 杨德龙[1] TANG Xun;ZHANG Ning;ZHOU Xiangyan;WU Bing;WANG Wangtian;WANG Cuiling;YANG Delong(College of Life Science and Technology,Gansu Agricultural University,Lanzhou 730070,China)
机构地区:[1]甘肃农业大学生命科学技术学院,兰州730070
出 处:《生命的化学》2021年第7期1608-1612,共5页Chemistry of Life
基 金:甘肃农业大学生物技术一流本科专业建设项目(201901);甘肃农业大学生物技术专业综合改革项目(201601);甘肃省教学成果培育项目(202016);甘肃农业大学2019年慕课建设项目(201901);甘肃省生物技术特色专业建设项目(201603)。
摘 要:采用对比实验将混合学习和单纯线下学习在基础生物化学中的效果进行了量化分析。结果显示,所有班级的混合学习组相比线下学习组的测试成绩均有所提高;其中,混合学习组B1a-B4a平均成绩在63.7~74.6之间,线下学习组C1a-C4a平均成绩在55.9~58.3之间,组间差异显著(P<0.05)。混合学习组对理解型和应用型试题的得分明显高于线下学习组;混合学习组对自身学习效果的主观评价也更高。这些研究结果为基础生物化学教学方式方法改革提供了理论参考。This study compared the effects of blended learning and classroom learning in fundamental Biochemistry. The results showed that the test scores of the blended learning group of all classes have improved compared with the classroom learning group. The mean score of blended learning group ranged between 63.7 to 74.6 whereas the mean score of classroom learning group ranged from 55.9 to 58.3, and a significant difference between the groups(P<0.05) was observed. The scores on the comprehension-type and application-type test questions in the blended learning group were significantly higher than that of the classroom learning group. The subjective evaluation of the blended learning groups’ self learning effect was also higher. This work provide a theoretical reference for the reform of Biochemistry teaching methods.
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在链接到云南高校图书馆文献保障联盟下载...
云南高校图书馆联盟文献共享服务平台 版权所有©
您的IP:52.14.115.102