CAJ | 학술논문

目的探索在《口腔修复学》课程中网络互动结合分组病例讨论的教学效果。方法采取分层随机化分组方式，将40名2009级口腔医学专业学生分为实验组和对照组，每组20人）。其中对照组实施传统教学；实验组实施网络互动结合分组病例讨论教学，在课堂上按3∶1的学时比例分配理论知识讲授与病例讨论时间，课后进行网络互动式授课。理论课程结束后，两组学生接受统一考试，题型包括单项选择题（80题）、判断题（20题）、病例分析题（5题），满分150。并进行问卷调查，内容包括学生的学习兴趣以及对学习难度的认知。对两组考试成绩行两样本t检验（α=0.05），问卷调查结果行Mann-Whitney U检验（α=0.05）。结果对照组考核平均成绩为（109.22±8.22）分，实验组平均成绩为（126.28±8.72）分，两组成绩差异有统计学意义（F=1.1254，P=0.000）。问卷调查显示，实验组与对照组学习兴趣（Z=-2.869，P=0.004）及对学习难度认知（Z=-2.711，P=0.007）存在差异。结论网络互动结合分组病例讨论教学有利于提高学生的学习积极性、学习成绩及独立思考能力，其效果优于传统教学。
목적탐색재《구강수복학》과정중망락호동결합분조병례토론적교학효과。방법채취분층수궤화분조방식，장40명2009급구강의학전업학생분위실험조화대조조，매조20인）。기중대조조실시전통교학；실험조실시망락호동결합분조병례토론교학，재과당상안3∶1적학시비례분배이론지식강수여병례토론시간，과후진행망락호동식수과。이론과정결속후，량조학생접수통일고시，제형포괄단항선택제（80제）、판단제（20제）、병례분석제（5제），만분150。병진행문권조사，내용포괄학생적학습흥취이급대학습난도적인지。대량조고시성적행량양본t검험（α=0.05），문권조사결과행Mann-Whitney U검험（α=0.05）。결과대조조고핵평균성적위（109.22±8.22）분，실험조평균성적위（126.28±8.72）분，량조성적차이유통계학의의（F=1.1254，P=0.000）。문권조사현시，실험조여대조조학습흥취（Z=-2.869，P=0.004）급대학습난도인지（Z=-2.711，P=0.007）존재차이。결론망락호동결합분조병례토론교학유리우제고학생적학습적겁성、학습성적급독립사고능력，기효과우우전통교학。
Objective To research the efficiency of interactive teaching combined with group discussion in prosthodontics course. Methods Totally 40 stomatology students of 2009 grade were divid-ed into 2 groups by stratified random sampling , 6 males and 14 females in each group. Students in con-trol group were taught by traditional teaching method while those in the test group were taught by interac-tive teaching method during prosthodontics course. Knowledge lectures and cases discussion in interactive teaching method were distributed as ratio of 3∶1 in class time , and network interactive teaching was car-ried out after class. Exam was taken after the course, which included single choices(80 questions, 80 points), true or false questions(20 questions, 20 points) and case analysis(5 questions, 50 points). Full marks of the exam was 150 points and exam time was 150min. Then questionnaire survey was carried out, which included the students' interest in learning and cognition of learning difficulty. Exam scores were statistically analyzed by two sample t-test(α=0.05) and the questionnaire survey results were statistically analyzed by Mann-Whitney U test(α=0.05). Results Average scores were(109.22±8.22) in control group and(126.28±8.72) in test group, with statistical differences(F=1.1254, P=0.000). There were statistical differences between control group and test group in studying interest(Z=-2.869, P=0.004) and difficulty(Z=-2.711, P=0.007). Conclusions Initiative, thinking capacity and scores can be enhance by interactive teaching method which is more efficiently than traditional teaching method.