醫(yī)高專文理科學(xué)生學(xué)習(xí)能力差異性調(diào)查及對(duì)策研究
發(fā)布時(shí)間：2018-09-01 09:35
【摘要】：培養(yǎng)學(xué)生學(xué)習(xí)能力及樹(shù)立終身學(xué)習(xí)觀念已成為學(xué)校教育改革的一個(gè)重要目標(biāo)。本文以尋求本校部分專業(yè)文理兼招學(xué)生的學(xué)習(xí)能力的差異性，探討文理科學(xué)生的學(xué)習(xí)能力問(wèn)卷調(diào)查各項(xiàng)的差異性和文理科學(xué)生在基礎(chǔ)醫(yī)學(xué)主干課學(xué)習(xí)效果的差異性。結(jié)合文、理學(xué)生的特點(diǎn)，在教學(xué)方式、培養(yǎng)方式等方面提出研究對(duì)策。能夠給醫(yī)學(xué)院校促進(jìn)學(xué)生學(xué)習(xí)能力建設(shè)工作提供重要的參考，對(duì)提高醫(yī)學(xué)院校文理科學(xué)生終身學(xué)習(xí)的意識(shí)，提高學(xué)習(xí)質(zhì)量具有重要意義。實(shí)現(xiàn)醫(yī)護(hù)人員自身可持續(xù)發(fā)展，實(shí)現(xiàn)整個(gè)社會(huì)的可持續(xù)發(fā)展。 對(duì)象與方法： 對(duì)象：長(zhǎng)春醫(yī)學(xué)高等�？茖W(xué)校(以下簡(jiǎn)稱為醫(yī)高專)全日制文理兼招專業(yè)的學(xué)生。 方法： 1.本研究以問(wèn)卷的方式進(jìn)行現(xiàn)況調(diào)查，，采用林國(guó)耀編制的“大學(xué)生學(xué)習(xí)能力量表”，結(jié)合本校的實(shí)際情況及研究范疇對(duì)此問(wèn)卷第一部分基本情況進(jìn)行改編，第二部分的問(wèn)卷部分無(wú)變化。 2.文理科學(xué)生基礎(chǔ)醫(yī)學(xué)主干課學(xué)習(xí)效果分析。 結(jié)果： 1.文理科學(xué)生學(xué)習(xí)能力的性別、年級(jí)差異無(wú)統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義（P0.05）。文理科學(xué)生的知識(shí)獲得與應(yīng)用能力差異、學(xué)習(xí)過(guò)程自我監(jiān)控學(xué)習(xí)能力差異、學(xué)習(xí)資源管理與應(yīng)用能力差異、學(xué)習(xí)能力總分差異無(wú)統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義（P0.05）。 2.不同專業(yè)的文科生和理科生的學(xué)習(xí)能力差異顯著（P 0.05）。醫(yī)學(xué)專業(yè)的文科生和理科生的學(xué)習(xí)能力差異顯著（P 0.05）。護(hù)理專業(yè)的文科生和理科生的學(xué)習(xí)能力差異不顯著（P0.05）。 3.非學(xué)生干部及學(xué)生干部的文理科學(xué)生學(xué)習(xí)能力差異不顯著（P0.05）。不同地區(qū)來(lái)源的的文理科學(xué)生的學(xué)習(xí)能力差異不顯著（P0.05）。高出錄取分?jǐn)?shù)線的文理科學(xué)生的學(xué)習(xí)能力及剛過(guò)錄取分?jǐn)?shù)線的文理科學(xué)生的學(xué)習(xí)能力差異不顯著（P0.05）。補(bǔ)錄的文理科學(xué)生的學(xué)習(xí)能力差異顯著（P 0.05）。家長(zhǎng)不同的文化程度對(duì)文理科學(xué)生的學(xué)習(xí)能力影響差異不顯著（P0.05）。 4.文科生非學(xué)生干部與學(xué)生干部的學(xué)習(xí)能力無(wú)統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義（P0.05）。文科生的地區(qū)來(lái)源不同對(duì)學(xué)習(xí)能力無(wú)統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義（P0.05）。 5.理科生的非學(xué)生干部與學(xué)生干部的學(xué)習(xí)能力有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義（P 0.05）。地區(qū)來(lái)源不同的理科生學(xué)習(xí)能力有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義（P 0.05），來(lái)自市城區(qū)與郊區(qū)的城鎮(zhèn)及來(lái)自郊區(qū)的城鎮(zhèn)與郊區(qū)的農(nóng)村的理科生學(xué)習(xí)能力均差異顯著（P0.05），而來(lái)自市城區(qū)與郊區(qū)的農(nóng)村的理科生學(xué)習(xí)能力差異不顯著（P0.05）。對(duì)入學(xué)成績(jī)不同的理科生學(xué)習(xí)能力分析結(jié)果有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義（P 0.05），高出錄取分?jǐn)?shù)線很多與剛過(guò)錄取分?jǐn)?shù)線及剛過(guò)與補(bǔ)錄生均差異顯著（P 0.05），而高出錄取分?jǐn)?shù)線與補(bǔ)錄生中的理科生學(xué)習(xí)能力差異不顯著（P0.05） 6.不同專業(yè)文理科學(xué)生基礎(chǔ)醫(yī)學(xué)主干課成績(jī)分析。護(hù)理、護(hù)理（英語(yǔ)加強(qiáng)）專業(yè)，文理科學(xué)生之間各科基礎(chǔ)醫(yī)學(xué)主干課成績(jī)差異均沒(méi)有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義（P0.05）。醫(yī)學(xué)專業(yè)，文理科學(xué)生之間各科基礎(chǔ)醫(yī)學(xué)主干課成績(jī)中組織胚胎學(xué)成績(jī)、病原生物學(xué)與免疫學(xué)成績(jī)差異具有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義（P 0.05）。 7.不同年級(jí)文理科學(xué)生基礎(chǔ)醫(yī)學(xué)主干課成績(jī)分析。大一文理科學(xué)生之間的基礎(chǔ)醫(yī)學(xué)主干課中的組織胚胎學(xué)成績(jī)差異具有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義（P 0.05）其他五科文理科學(xué)生之間各科成績(jī)差異均沒(méi)有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義（P0.05）。大二文理科學(xué)生之間的基礎(chǔ)醫(yī)學(xué)主干課各科成績(jī)差異均沒(méi)有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義（P0.05）。 8.不同課程文理科學(xué)生成績(jī)分析。文理科學(xué)生之間各科基礎(chǔ)醫(yī)學(xué)主干課成績(jī)差異均沒(méi)有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義（P0.05）。 結(jié)論： 1.醫(yī)高專文理科學(xué)生的學(xué)習(xí)能力在性別、學(xué)生干部與否、不同地區(qū)來(lái)源、父母文化程度、年級(jí)、入學(xué)成績(jī)高出錄取分?jǐn)?shù)線很多、入學(xué)成績(jī)剛過(guò)錄取分?jǐn)?shù)線、知識(shí)獲得與應(yīng)用能力、學(xué)習(xí)過(guò)程自我監(jiān)控學(xué)習(xí)能力、學(xué)習(xí)資源管理與應(yīng)用能力、學(xué)習(xí)能力的總分上均無(wú)差異。 2.醫(yī)高專文科生與理科生的學(xué)習(xí)能力普遍不高，處于中等偏下水平。 3.醫(yī)高專醫(yī)學(xué)專業(yè)理科生的學(xué)習(xí)能力比文科生高；醫(yī)學(xué)專業(yè)理科生的學(xué)習(xí)成績(jī)一定程度上比文科生高。 4.醫(yī)高專補(bǔ)錄生中，理科生的學(xué)習(xí)能力比文科生的學(xué)習(xí)能力高。 5.醫(yī)高專理科生的學(xué)習(xí)能力與擔(dān)任學(xué)生干部呈正相關(guān)；理科生的學(xué)習(xí)能力與其來(lái)源地呈正相關(guān)；理科生的學(xué)習(xí)能力與高考成績(jī)呈正相關(guān)。
[Abstract]:To cultivate students'learning ability and establish the concept of lifelong learning has become an important goal of school education reform. This paper aims to explore the differences in the learning ability of some students majoring in Arts and science and to explore the differences in the questionnaire survey of students' learning ability and the learning effect of students majoring in Arts and Science in the main courses of basic medicine. Combining with the characteristics of students of Arts and sciences, this paper puts forward some research countermeasures in the aspects of teaching methods and training methods. It can provide important reference for promoting students'learning ability construction in medical colleges and universities. It is of great significance to enhance the awareness of life-long learning of students of Arts and Sciences in medical colleges and improve the quality of learning. Sustained development to achieve sustainable development of the whole society.
Objects and methods:
PARTICIPANTS: Full-time students majoring in both arts and Science in Changchun Medical College (hereinafter referred to as Medical College).
Method:
1. The present study conducted a questionnaire survey, using the "College Students'Learning Ability Scale" compiled by Lin Guoyao, combined with the actual situation of the University and the scope of the study, the first part of the questionnaire was adapted, the second part of the questionnaire was unchanged.
2. analysis of the learning effect of basic medicine major courses for arts students.
Result:
1. There was no significant difference between genders and grades in the learning ability of liberal arts and sciences students (P 0.05). There was no significant difference in the total score of learning ability between liberal arts and sciences students (P 0.05).
2. There was significant difference in learning ability between liberal arts students and science students of different majors (P 0.05). There was significant difference in learning ability between medical liberal arts students and science students (P 0.05). There was no significant difference in learning ability between nursing liberal arts students and science students (P 0.05).
3. There was no significant difference in learning ability between non-student cadres and student cadres (P 0.05). There was no significant difference in learning ability between liberal arts and sciences students from different regions (P 0.05). There was no significant difference in learning ability between liberal arts and sciences students who were higher than the admission score line and those who had just passed the admission score line (P 0.05). There was a significant difference in the learning ability of the recorded liberal arts students (P 0.05). There was no significant difference in the influence of parents'different educational levels on the learning ability of liberal arts students (P 0.05).
4. There was no significant difference in learning ability between non-student cadres and student cadres of liberal arts students (P 0.05).
5. The learning ability of non-student cadres and student cadres of science students was statistically significant (P 0.05). The learning ability of science students from different regions was statistically significant (P 0.05). The learning ability of science students from urban and suburban towns and from suburban towns and rural areas was significantly different (P 0.05). There was no significant difference in learning ability between rural science students in suburban areas (P 0.05). There was statistical significance in the analysis of learning ability of science students with different entrance grades (P 0.05). There was no significant difference in ability (P0.05).
6. Analysis of the scores of the main courses of basic medicine for students majoring in Arts and sciences. There was no significant difference in the scores of the main courses of basic medicine among students majoring in nursing, nursing and arts and Sciences (P 0.05). The difference in immunology scores was statistically significant (P 0.05).
7. Analysis of the results of the main courses of basic medicine for liberal arts and sciences students of different grades. The difference of histology and Embryology scores between liberal arts and Sciences freshmen was statistically significant (P 0.05). There was no significant difference among the other five arts and sciences students (P 0.05). There was no significant difference in the scores of major subjects in all subjects (P0.05).
8. Analysis of the scores of liberal arts and sciences students in different courses. There was no significant difference between liberal arts and sciences students in the main courses of basic medicine (P 0.05).
Conclusion:
1. The study ability of medical college students in Arts and Sciences is in gender, student cadres or not, different regional sources, parents'educational level, grade, entrance scores are much higher than the admission score line, entrance scores have just passed the admission score line, knowledge acquisition and application ability, learning process self-monitoring learning ability, learning resource management and application ability, learning ability. There is no difference in the total score of force.
2. the learning ability of liberal arts students and science students is generally not high, and it is below the middle level.
3. The study ability of medical science students is higher than that of liberal arts students, and the academic achievement of medical science students is higher than that of liberal arts students to some extent.
4. in medical college students, the learning ability of science students is higher than that of liberal arts students.
5. The learning ability of science students in medical colleges is positively correlated with their cadres; the learning ability of science students is positively correlated with their places of origin; and the learning ability of science students is positively correlated with the scores of college entrance examination.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：吉林大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2013
【分類號(hào)】：G642.4;R-4
本文編號(hào)：2216789
[Abstract]:To cultivate students'learning ability and establish the concept of lifelong learning has become an important goal of school education reform. This paper aims to explore the differences in the learning ability of some students majoring in Arts and science and to explore the differences in the questionnaire survey of students' learning ability and the learning effect of students majoring in Arts and Science in the main courses of basic medicine. Combining with the characteristics of students of Arts and sciences, this paper puts forward some research countermeasures in the aspects of teaching methods and training methods. It can provide important reference for promoting students'learning ability construction in medical colleges and universities. It is of great significance to enhance the awareness of life-long learning of students of Arts and Sciences in medical colleges and improve the quality of learning. Sustained development to achieve sustainable development of the whole society.
Objects and methods:
PARTICIPANTS: Full-time students majoring in both arts and Science in Changchun Medical College (hereinafter referred to as Medical College).
Method:
1. The present study conducted a questionnaire survey, using the "College Students'Learning Ability Scale" compiled by Lin Guoyao, combined with the actual situation of the University and the scope of the study, the first part of the questionnaire was adapted, the second part of the questionnaire was unchanged.
2. analysis of the learning effect of basic medicine major courses for arts students.
Result:
1. There was no significant difference between genders and grades in the learning ability of liberal arts and sciences students (P 0.05). There was no significant difference in the total score of learning ability between liberal arts and sciences students (P 0.05).
2. There was significant difference in learning ability between liberal arts students and science students of different majors (P 0.05). There was significant difference in learning ability between medical liberal arts students and science students (P 0.05). There was no significant difference in learning ability between nursing liberal arts students and science students (P 0.05).
3. There was no significant difference in learning ability between non-student cadres and student cadres (P 0.05). There was no significant difference in learning ability between liberal arts and sciences students from different regions (P 0.05). There was no significant difference in learning ability between liberal arts and sciences students who were higher than the admission score line and those who had just passed the admission score line (P 0.05). There was a significant difference in the learning ability of the recorded liberal arts students (P 0.05). There was no significant difference in the influence of parents'different educational levels on the learning ability of liberal arts students (P 0.05).
4. There was no significant difference in learning ability between non-student cadres and student cadres of liberal arts students (P 0.05).
5. The learning ability of non-student cadres and student cadres of science students was statistically significant (P 0.05). The learning ability of science students from different regions was statistically significant (P 0.05). The learning ability of science students from urban and suburban towns and from suburban towns and rural areas was significantly different (P 0.05). There was no significant difference in learning ability between rural science students in suburban areas (P 0.05). There was statistical significance in the analysis of learning ability of science students with different entrance grades (P 0.05). There was no significant difference in ability (P0.05).
6. Analysis of the scores of the main courses of basic medicine for students majoring in Arts and sciences. There was no significant difference in the scores of the main courses of basic medicine among students majoring in nursing, nursing and arts and Sciences (P 0.05). The difference in immunology scores was statistically significant (P 0.05).
7. Analysis of the results of the main courses of basic medicine for liberal arts and sciences students of different grades. The difference of histology and Embryology scores between liberal arts and Sciences freshmen was statistically significant (P 0.05). There was no significant difference among the other five arts and sciences students (P 0.05). There was no significant difference in the scores of major subjects in all subjects (P0.05).
8. Analysis of the scores of liberal arts and sciences students in different courses. There was no significant difference between liberal arts and sciences students in the main courses of basic medicine (P 0.05).
Conclusion:
1. The study ability of medical college students in Arts and Sciences is in gender, student cadres or not, different regional sources, parents'educational level, grade, entrance scores are much higher than the admission score line, entrance scores have just passed the admission score line, knowledge acquisition and application ability, learning process self-monitoring learning ability, learning resource management and application ability, learning ability. There is no difference in the total score of force.
2. the learning ability of liberal arts students and science students is generally not high, and it is below the middle level.
3. The study ability of medical science students is higher than that of liberal arts students, and the academic achievement of medical science students is higher than that of liberal arts students to some extent.
4. in medical college students, the learning ability of science students is higher than that of liberal arts students.
5. The learning ability of science students in medical colleges is positively correlated with their cadres; the learning ability of science students is positively correlated with their places of origin; and the learning ability of science students is positively correlated with the scores of college entrance examination.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：吉林大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2013
【分類號(hào)】：G642.4;R-4
【參考文獻(xiàn)】
相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條
1 鄭超美;;本科教育按大類招生及培養(yǎng)模式探析[J];重慶科技學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2006年05期
2 桑新民;李淑霞;孟紅娟;;遠(yuǎn)程學(xué)習(xí)者學(xué)習(xí)能力培養(yǎng)的整體思考[J];中國(guó)遠(yuǎn)程教育;2007年05期
3 李清平;;試論信息時(shí)代大學(xué)生學(xué)習(xí)能力的構(gòu)成及其影響因素[J];法制與社會(huì);2008年33期
4 香紅麗;羅淑云;;探討高考成績(jī)和大學(xué)階段學(xué)習(xí)能力的關(guān)系[J];中國(guó)科教創(chuàng)新導(dǎo)刊;2010年28期
5 朱小根;論高校學(xué)生干部隊(duì)伍建設(shè)[J];廣西政法管理干部學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2005年01期
6 廖春;熊坤林;朱永山;張偉國(guó);;醫(yī)學(xué)影像專業(yè)實(shí)習(xí)學(xué)員自主學(xué)習(xí)能力培養(yǎng)模式的構(gòu)建[J];重慶醫(yī)學(xué);2012年36期
7 賈金才;王蔚宇;;加強(qiáng)和改進(jìn)高校學(xué)生干部選拔培養(yǎng)工作的對(duì)策[J];河北農(nóng)業(yè)大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(農(nóng)林教育版);2008年01期
8 王若梅;中美兩國(guó)大學(xué)生學(xué)習(xí)能力之比較[J];理工高教研究;2002年06期
9 彭希林;周軍鐵;;論大學(xué)生的學(xué)習(xí)與學(xué)習(xí)能力[J];繼續(xù)教育研究;2007年03期
10 劉海華;辛偉;李建英;;職業(yè)院校大學(xué)生學(xué)習(xí)能力培養(yǎng)策略[J];教育與職業(yè);2008年23期
本文編號(hào)：2216789
本文鏈接：http://www.sikaile.net/jiaoyulunwen/shifanjiaoyulunwen/2216789.html
最近更新
教材專著
