| 马桂芬,曾昭冲,杜世锁,赵小梅,白赟,高献书,陈宇翰,吴德华,陈一兴,潘向欧,孙菁.BOPPPS模式在放射生物学线上教学活动中的效果分析[J].中华放射医学与防护杂志,2022,42(8):561-566 |
| BOPPPS模式在放射生物学线上教学活动中的效果分析 |
| Effect analysis of BOPPPS model in online teaching activities of radiobiology |
| 投稿时间：2022-05-25 |
| DOI：10.3760/cma.j.cn112271-20220525-00224 |
| 中文关键词: 放射生物学 BOPPPS教学模式 网上教学 传统教学 |
| 英文关键词:Radiobiology BOPPPS teaching mode Online teaching Traditional teaching |
| 基金项目:国家自然科学基金（81773230）；河南省科技攻关计划项目（212102310619） |
|
| 摘要点击次数: 2445 |
| 全文下载次数: 567 |
| 中文摘要: |
| 目的 利用BOPPPS模式，包括导入（bridge-in）、学习目标（outcome）、前测（pre-test）、参与式学习（participation）、后测（post-test）、总结（summary），探讨肿瘤放疗从业人员线上学习放射生物学相关知识的效果。方法 选取细胞存活曲线、细胞周期和放射敏感性为例，以多个大学附属医院放疗从业人员为研究对象，开展了一项多中心前瞻随机对照研究。所有学员采用分类随机分组的方式，分为BOPPPS组和对照组。BOPPPS组是将课程设计为网上课堂，分为课前准备、网络授课以及课后阶段3个环节。网络授课阶段包含视频观看、基础知识学习、文献探讨及分组讨论等多种形式。对照组即为传统的教学模式。采用χ2检验比较两组一般情况的一致性，采用非参检验比较两组或者多组间成绩的差异。结果 课前摸底测试为（58.56±0.99）分。课后BOPPPS组平均分为（85.48±0.85）分，对照组为（77.79±1.10）分，与对照组相比，BOPPPS组平均分升高7.69分（Z=5.31，P < 0.001）。BOPPPS组和对照组的平均答题时间分别为（296.62±15.40）和（386.41±21.27） s，BOPPPS组缩短了89.79 s （Z=3.34，P=0.001）。亚组分析发现，学员不论是否学过放射生物学课程，BOPPPS组的成绩均有显著性提高，且在未学过的学员中，成绩提升幅度更大。从不同岗位情况分析，发现BOPPPS组和对照组相比均有提高，特别是对于医师、副主任医师和技师成绩的提高差异有统计学意义（Z=3.98、3.53、2.32，P<0.05）；不同学位之间成绩也有差异，本科和博士学员的成绩有显著提高（Z=3.64、4.18，P< 0.001）。结论 将BOPPPS教学模式灵活应用于放射生物学等枯燥的学科的线上教育中，对于提高放疗科医技人员的理论基础具有重要意义。 |
| 英文摘要: |
| Objective To explore the effect of a new teaching mode, which includes bridge-in, outcome, pre-test, participation, post-test and summary (BOPPPS), on the online teaching of radiobiology related knowledge for cancer radiotherapy practitioners.Methods Taking the cell survival curve, cell cycle and radiosensitivity as examples, the radiotherapy practitioners in multiple university-affiliated hospitals were organized to carry out a multicenter prospective randomized control study. All practitioners were randomly divided into BOPPPS group and control group. The courses for BOPPPS group were designed as an online classroom, consisting of pre-class preparation, online teaching and post-class stages. The online teaching stage included video viewing, basic knowledge learning, literature discussion, group discussion and others. The control group employed the traditional teaching mode. The χ2 test was used to compare the consistency of general conditions between the two groups, and nonparametric test was used to compare the differences in scores between two or more groups.Results The score of the pre-class test was 58.56 ±0.99. Post-class average score for BOPPPS group was 85.48±0.85 and for control group 77.79±1.10, with the former being higher 7.69 (Z=5.31, P<0.001) than the latter. The average answer time was (296.62±15.40) s for BOPPPS group and (386.41±21.27) s for control group, with the former being shorter 89.79 s (Z=3.34, P=0.001) than latter. Subgroup analysis shown that the scores of BOPPPS group were significantly rising, regardless of whether or not the students had studied radiobiology courses. Among the students who have not studied these courses, the scores were rising greatly. Moreover, From the analysis of different positions, it was found that both the scores of BOPPPS group and control group have risen, especially for doctors, deputy chief doctors, physicists and technicians. There were also statistically differences between different degrees, with significantly rise in scores for undergraduate and doctoral students (Z=3.64, 4.18, P<0.001).Conclusions The flexible application of BOPPPS teaching mode to the online education of such boring disciplines, like radiobiology, is of great significance to raise the theoretical basis of radiotherapy practitioners. |
| HTML 查看全文 查看/发表评论 下载PDF阅读器 |
| 关闭 |
|
|
|