结合导师制的混合教学模式提高医学生对临床解剖学的满意度和学习效果

周丽华; 李明哲; Prince Last Mudenda Zilundu; 孙诗竹; 汤地; 付饶; 何裕隆

doi:10.13471/j.cnki.j.sun.yat-sen.univ（med.sci）.20241030.007

您当前的位置：

首页 >

文章列表页 >

结合导师制的混合教学模式提高医学生对临床解剖学的满意度和学习效果

名师名医专栏·献礼百年校庆 | 更新时间：2024-11-08

- 结合导师制的混合教学模式提高医学生对临床解剖学的满意度和学习效果
- Blended Instruction Model Incorporating Preceptorship Enhances Student Satisfaction and Performance in Clinical Anatomy Course
- 中山大学学报（医学科学版） 2024年45卷第6期页码：853-865
- 作者机构：
  
  1.中山大学医学院解剖学教研室，广东深圳 518000
  2.中山大学附属第七医院，广东深圳 518000
  3.中山大学医学院基础与临床医学教学实验室，广东深圳 518000
- 作者简介：
  
  周丽华，第一作者，教授，中山大学第一届卓越教学名师，30年中山大学一线解剖教师，致力解剖教学改革，近3年发表SCI教学论著5篇
  [ "何裕隆，通信作者，二级教授、一级主任医师、博士生导师，南粤优秀教师，宝钢优秀教师。现任中山大学附属第七医院院长、消化医学中心学科带头人。获得中国医师奖、广东省五一劳动奖章、2018至2021年度连续4届中国名医百强榜-百强名医、全国十大领导力院管专家、广东医院优秀院长等荣誉奖项，享受国务院政府特殊津贴专家、担任中国科协决策咨询首席专家。获广东省科技进步一等奖2项、二等奖1项，中华医学科技奖2项。主持国家自然科学基金重点项目2项，国家可持续发展专项1项，其他国家级和省市级项目10余项。发表高水平SCI论文200余篇，包括两篇Nature主刊。连续6年被爱思唯尔评为中国高被引学者。主要研究方向：胃肠肿瘤防治的转化研究。E-mail：heyulong@mail.sysu.edu.cn" ]
- 基金信息：
  
  广东省“新医科”教指委 2023 年教学改革项目(32)
- DOI：10.13471/j.cnki.j.sun.yat-sen.univ（med.sci）.20241030.007
  中图分类号： G642;R-4
- 纸质出版日期：2024-11-20，
  
  收稿日期：2024-08-12，
  
  录用日期：2024-10-17
- 稿件说明：
移动端阅览
周丽华,李明哲,Prince Last Mudenda Zilundu等.结合导师制的混合教学模式提高医学生对临床解剖学的满意度和学习效果[J].中山大学学报（医学科学版）,2024,45(06):853-865.

ZHOU Lihua,LI Mingzhe,Mudenda Zilundu Prince Last,et al.Blended Instruction Model Incorporating Preceptorship Enhances Student Satisfaction and Performance in Clinical Anatomy Course[J].Journal of Sun Yat-sen University(Medical Sciences),2024,45(06):853-865.
周丽华,李明哲,Prince Last Mudenda Zilundu等.结合导师制的混合教学模式提高医学生对临床解剖学的满意度和学习效果[J].中山大学学报（医学科学版）,2024,45(06):853-865. DOI： 10.13471/j.cnki.j.sun.yat-sen.univ（med.sci）.20241030.007.

ZHOU Lihua,LI Mingzhe,Mudenda Zilundu Prince Last,et al.Blended Instruction Model Incorporating Preceptorship Enhances Student Satisfaction and Performance in Clinical Anatomy Course[J].Journal of Sun Yat-sen University(Medical Sciences),2024,45(06):853-865. DOI： 10.13471/j.cnki.j.sun.yat-sen.univ（med.sci）.20241030.007.

摘要

目的

为提高学生应用基础学科知识的能力，本研究在中山大学《临床解剖学》课程中，实施结合导师制的混合教学模式改革，旨在探讨基础和临床教师共同承担临床前期课程的有效性，以求获得更完善的教学方式。

方法

参与者共有375名临床医学专业学生，2名解剖老师，49名手术科医生，7名教辅人员。学生分10个小班以每周分两批次上课，每个小班学生、解剖老师、外科医生、教辅人数比例为40：1：2：1。课程结束后使用SurveyPlanet系统收集学生完成的课程体验量表（CEQ）和教学质量评价量表（SEEQ），并从大学评分系统获取学生成绩，以SPSS软件进行数据分析。

结果

CEQ和SEEQ问卷收回率分别为60.3%和54.6%。CEQ分析显示学生对课程总体满意度为7.12分，处于中等水平。目标清晰度、教学质量和通用技能发展等维度反映了学生对课程效果满意，而工作量和评估维度则反映出学生担忧课业过重、考试较难。基于性别差异的分析提示男女学生的评价结果无统计学意义。此外，满意度对学习体验的影响很大，满意度较高的学生对课程内容均持肯定态度（

0.01）。SEEQ进一步证实了临床解剖学课程受到普遍欢迎，其中学习、热情和个人交流等方面得分较高。开放式问题的调查结果表明，课程在教学方法上存在不一致性、部分考试内容超出教学内容。对比结合导师制混合教学模式改革前后的学习成绩，发现，实行导师制后的学生成绩有所提高。

结论

结合导师制的混合教学模式不仅提高了学生对《临床解剖学》课程的满意度和学习成绩，还提升了学生的学习能力、学习热情和团队合作能力。未来教学改革需要在教学质量控制、教学大纲内容和考试内容一致性方面继续努力。

Abstract

Objective

To investigate the efficacy of a blended instruction model which incorporated preceptorship into the clinical anatomy course at Sun Yat-sen University and improve satisfaction and performance of medical students.

Methods

The study recruited participants including 375 Chinese students aged 20-24 years old， 2 anatomy professors， 49 surgeons and 7 lab technicians. The students were divided into 10 teams and each team was tutored by 1 anatomy professor， 2 surgeons and 1 lab technician. After the course ended， the Course Experience Questionnaire （CEQ） and Student Experience in Education Questionnaire （SEEQ） were used in the survey to measure the quality of teaching and students’ overall educational experience. Students’ performance scores were collected and analyzed.

Results

The response rates for CEQ and SEEQ were 60.3% （226/375） and 54.6% （200/375）， respectively. CEQ indicated a moderate level of overall satisfaction with 7.12 out of 10. Subscales like Clear Goals， Good Teaching and Generic Skills showed moderately positive reception of the course， while subscales like Appropriate Workload and Appropriate Assessment revealed students’ concerns about heavy workload and difficult exam. There was no statistically significant difference in perceptions between male and female students. The students who are more satisfied with the quality of the course are also more satisfied with the way it is taught （

0.01）. SEEQ further confirmed the universal appeal of the course， with high scores in dimensions like Learning， Enthusiasm and Individual Rapport among the students. Qualitative responses highlighted areas of improvement， such as consistent teaching methods， practical hands-on experience for the students and alignment between what was taught and tested.The students after the preceptorship introduction achieved better academic performance than before.

Conclusions

The blended instruction model incorporating preceptorship enhances the student satisfaction and performance in clinical anatomy course， and also stimulates students’ learning enthusiasm and group interaction. We need further improvement in the teaching quality control， syllabus contents and course assessment for teaching of clinical anatomy.

关键词

混合式学习导师制临床解剖课程满意度课程体验

Keywords

blended learningpreceptorshipclinical anatomysatisfactioncourse experience

references

Fitzgerald JEF， White MJ， Tang SW，et al. Are we teaching sufficient anatomy at medical school？ the opinions of newly qualified doctors［J］. Clin Anat， 2008， 21（7）： 718-724.

Khalil MK， Giannaris EL， Lee V，et al. Integration of clinical anatomical sciences in medical education： design， development and implementation strategies［J］. Clin Anat， 2021， 34（5）： 785-793.

McBride JM，Drake RL. National survey on anatomical sciences in medical education： anatomical sciences in medical education［J］. Anat Sci Educ， 2018， 11（1）： 7-14.

Rockarts J， Brewer‐Deluce D， Shali A， et al. National survey on Canadian undergraduate medical programs： the decline of the anatomical sciences in Canadian medical education［J］. Anat Sci Educ ，2020， 13（3）： 381-389.

Pan S， Chan LK， Yan Y，et al. Survey of gross anatomy education in China： the past and the present［J］. Anat Sci Educ， 2020， 13（3）： 390-400.

Alsoufi A， Alsuyihili A， Msherghi A， et al. Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on medical education： medical students’ knowledge， attitudes， and practices regarding electronic learning［J］. PLoS One， 2020， 15（11）： e0242905.

Cheng X， Chan LK， Pan SQ，et al. Gross anatomy education in China during the COVID-19 pandemic： a national survey［J］. Anat Sci Educ， 2021， 14（1）： 8-18.

Li L， Wu H， Xie A， et al. Students’ initial perspectives on online learning experience in China during the COVID-19 outbreak： expanding online education for future doctors on a national scale［J］. BMC Med Educ， 2021， 21（1）： 584.

Wang C， Xie A， Wang W，et al. Association between medical students’ prior experiences and perceptions of formal online education developed in response to COVID-19： a cross-sectional study in China［J］. BMJ Open， 2020， 10（10）： e041886.

Girotto LC， Enns SC， de Oliveira MS， et al. Preceptors’ perception of their role as educators and professionals in a health system［J］. BMC Med Educ， 2019， 19（1）： 203.

Ross BM， Cameron E， Greenwood D. A qualitative investigation of the experiences of students and preceptors taking part in remote and rural community experiential placements during early medical training［J］. J Med Educ Curric Dev， 2019， 6， 2382120519859311.

Elnicki MD， Halbritter KA， Antonelli MA，et al. Educational and career outcomes of an internal medicine preceptorship for first-year medical students［J］. J Gener Int Med， 1999， 14（6）： 341-346.

Thivierge-Southidara M， Courchesne M， Bonneau S， et al. Effect of a surgical observership on the perceptions and career choices of preclinical medical students： a mixed-methods study［J］. Can J Surg， 2022， 65（1）： E1-E8.

Chan LK， Yang J， Irby DM. Application of the one-minute preceptor technique by novice teachers in the gross anatomy laboratory［J］. Anat Sci Educ， 2015， 8（6）： 539-546.

Ganatra S， Doblanko T， Rasmussen K，et al. Perceived effectiveness and applicability of think-pair-share including storytelling （TPS-S） to enhance clinical learning［J］. Teach Learn Med， 2021， 33（2）： 184-195.

Marsh HW. Seeq： a reliable， valid， and useful instrument for collecting students’ evaluations of university teaching［J］. Br J Educ Psychol， 1982， 52（1）： 77-95.

Azyyati N， Mohd Noor Z，Mohamed M. Student ratings of teaching effectiveness： an importance - performance analysis （IPA）［J］. J Educ Social Res， 2016， 6（3）： 33-44.

Grech J， Grech J. Nursing students’ evaluation of a gamified public health educational webinar： a comparative pilot study［J］. Nursing Open， 2021， 8（4）： 1812-1821.

Obrero-Gaitán E， Nieto-Escamez FA， Zagalaz-Anula N， et al. An innovative approach for online neuroanatomy and neurorrehabilitation teaching based on 3D virtual anatomical models using leap motion controller during COVID-19 pandemic［J］. Front Psychol， 2021， 12： 590196.

Ramsden P. A performance indicator of teaching quality in higher education： the course experience questionnaire［J］. Stud High Educ， 1991， 16（2）： 129-150.

McWatt SC， Newton GS， Umphrey GJ，et al. Dissection versus prosection： a comparative assessment of the course experiences， approaches to learning， and academic performance of non‐medical undergraduate students in human anatomy［J］. Anat Sci Educ， 2021， 14（2）： 184-200.

Tucker B， Jones S， Straker L. Online student evaluation improves course experience questionnaire results in a physiotherapy program［J］. High Educ Res Dev， 2008， 27（3）： 281-296.

Liu Q， Peng W， Zhang F，et al. The effectiveness of blended learning in health professions： systematic review and meta-analysis［J］. J Med Int Res， 2016， 18（1）： e2.

Kolb D. Experiential learning： experience as the source of learning and development［M］. Prentice-Hall， 1984.

Furney SL， Orsini AN， Orsetti KE，et al. Teaching the one-minute preceptor［J］. J Gener Int Med， 2001， 16（9）： 620-624.

McIntyre C， Natsheh C， Leblanc K，et al. An analysis of Canadian doctor of pharmacy student experiences in non-traditional student-preceptor models［J］. Am J Pharmaceut Educ， 2019， 83（10）： 7367.

Lyon PM， Hendry GD. The use of the Course Experience Questionnaire as a monitoring evaluation tool in a problem-based medical programme［J］. Assessm Evaluat High Educ， 2002， 27（4）： 339-352.

Jannah N， Fitrisia D， Fitriani SS，et al. Nursing students’ attitude towards problem-based learning in the classroom［J］. Enfermería Clínica， 2022， 32： S24-S29.

Marchant J， González C， Fauré J. The impact of a university teaching development programme on student approaches to studying and learning experience： evidence from Chile［J］. Assessm Evaluat High Educ， 2018， 43（5）： 697-709.

Johnston ANB， Hamill J， Barton MJ，et al. Student learning styles in anatomy and physiology courses： meeting the needs of nursing students［J］. Nur Educ Pract， 2015， 15（6）： 415-420.

Abdellatif H， Al Mushaiqri M， Albalushi H，et al. Teaching， learning and assessing anatomy with artificial intelligence： the road to a better future［J］. Int J Environ Res Public Health， 2022， 19（21）： Article 21.

Ali H，Mohd Dodeen H. An adaptation of the course experience questionnaire to the Arab learning context［J］. Assessm Evaluat High Educ， 2021， 46（7）： 1104-1114.

Warfvinge P， Löfgreen J， Andersson K，et al. The rapid transition from campus to online teaching - how are students’ perception of learning experiences affected？［J］. Eur J Engin Educ， 2022， 47（2）： 211-229.

Grammatikopoulos V， Linardakis M， Gregoriadis A，et al. Assessing the Students’ Evaluations of Educational Quality （SEEQ） questionnaire in Greek higher education［J］. High Educ， 2015， 70（3）： 395-408.

Knipfer C， Wagner F， Knipfer K，et al. Learners’ acceptance of a webinar for continuing medical education［J］. Int J Oral Maxil Surg， 2019， 48（6）： 841-846.

Rowan S， Newness EJ， Tetradis S，et al. Should student evaluation of teaching play a significant role in the formal assessment of dental faculty？ two viewpoints［J］. J Dent Educ， 2017， 81（11）： 1362-1372.

Bergman EM， de Bruin AB， Herrler A，et al. Students’ perceptions of anatomy across the undergraduate problem-based learning medical curriculum： a phenomenographical study［J］. BMC Med Educ， 2013， 13（1）： 152.

Hall S， Stephens J， Parton W，et al. Identifying medical studentperceptions on the difficulty of learning different topics of the undergraduate anatomy curriculum［J］. Med Sci Educ， 2018， 28（3）： 469-472.

Mwabaleke JA， Usman IM， Tito AE，et al. Perceptions and challenges faced by undergraduate medical students in studying anatomy： a case study at Kampala International University -Western Campus， Uganda［J］. Adv Med Educ Pract， 2023， 14： 1129-1135.

Syed Abd Halim SA， Yusoff MSB， Yaman MN，et al. Clinical students’ reflections on the preclinical anatomy learning experience［J］. J Taibah Univ Med Sci， 2022， 18（4）： 757-770.

Khalil MK， Abdel Meguid EM， Elkhider IA. Teaching of anatomical sciences： a blended learning approach［J］. Clin Anat， 2018， 31（3）： 323-329.

Al Ansari A， Strachan K， Al Balooshi S，et al. Influence of student feedback on the quality of teaching among clinical teachers in Bahrain［J］. Med Sci Educ， 2019， 30（1）： 253-262.

Thijssen MWP， Rege M， Solheim OJ. Teacher relationship skills and student learning［J］. Econom Educ Rev， 2022， 89： 102251.

孙琰琰，张士强，李治华，等. 临床医生走进局部解剖学课堂的教学实践及反馈［J］. 中国高等医学教育， 2024（2）： 70-71.

Sun YY， Zhang SQ， Li ZH， et al. Clinical doctors enter the teaching practice and feedback of local anatomy classes［J］. Chin High Med Edu， 2024（2）： 70-71.

张利，王维，蒋香菊，等. 人体解剖学与外科学融合式教学模式探索［J］. 解剖学研究， 2021， 43（1）： 94-96.

Zhang L， Wang W， Jiang XJ， et al. Exploration of the integrated teaching mode of human anatomy and surgery［J］. Anat Res， 2021， 43（1）： 94-96.

Rangachari PK. Answering huxley： “Now” students take a “then” exam［J］. Adv Physio Educ， 2019， 43（3）： 397-400.

Barthakur A， Joksimovic S， Kovanovic V， et al. Assessing the sequencing of learning objectives in a study program using evidence-based practice［J］. Assessm Evaluat High Educ， 2022， 47（8）： 1429-1443.

Field J， Martin N， Duane B，et al. Embedding environmental sustainability within oral health professional curricula—recommendations for teaching and assessment of learning outcomes［J］. Eur J Dental Educ， 2023， 27（3）： 650-661.

Hugo-Van Dyk L， Nyoni CN， Williams M，et al. Preceptor support during the COVID-19 pandemic： recommendations for continuing development［J］. Curationis， 2022， 45（1）：2370.

浏览量

下载量

CSCD

文章被引用时，请邮件提醒。

提交

工具集

关联资源

暂无数据