Application of diversified teaching modes combined with individualized teaching methods in muscle and bone ultrasound training classes
10.3760/cma.j.cn116021-20240430-01888
- VernacularTitle:多元化教学模式联合个体化教学方法在肌骨超声培训班中的应用
- Author:
Hongping SONG
1
;
Jing WANG
;
Yunan JIA
;
Lu LUO
;
Jikun HAO
;
Dingzhang CHEN
Author Information
1. 中国人民解放军空军军医大学第一附属医院超声医学科，西安 710032
- Keywords:
Muscle and bone ultrasound training;
Diversified teaching modes;
Individualized teaching methods;
Satisfaction
- From:
Chinese Journal of Medical Education Research
2024;23(11):1500-1505
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective:To explore the teaching effect of combining diversified teaching modes with individualized teaching methods in musculoskeletal ultrasound training classes compared with traditional teaching modes.Methods:The 109 trainees participated in the muscle and bone ultrasound training classes from June 2020 to June 2022 were included as the research subjects and divided into the observation group ( n=53) and control group ( n=56). The control group received traditional teaching modes, while the observation group received diversified teaching modes in combination with individualized teaching methods. The differences in teaching satisfaction and final exam scores between the two groups were compared after training. Statistical analysis was conducted using the software SPSS 27.0. Categorical data were presented as cases and percentages, while continuous data were presented as mean±standard deviation. The intergroup differences in continuous variables were compared using the t-test, while the intergroup differences in categorical variables were compared using the chi-square test. Results:There were no significant differences in age, sex, education, and professional title between the control group and the observation group ( P>0.05). The comprehensive satisfaction score of ultrasound teaching was (88.08±6.65) in the observation group and (80.71±8.59) in the control group, with a significant difference between the two groups ( χ2=5.02, P<0.01). Before training, the test scores of the control group and the observation group were (62.61±5.39) and (63.87±7.77), respectively, and there was no significant difference between the two groups ( t=0.98, P=0.330). The final scores, theoretical exam, computer operation, and video reading exam scores of the control group were (84.07±1.49), (82.39±1.97), (85.13±2.55), and (86.79±6.06), respectively, while those of the observation group were (90.06±2.17), (88.28±3.19), (88.92±3.23), and (96.23±5.96); there were significant differences between the two groups in these four indicators ( t=16.75, 11.53, 6.79, and 8.20, respectively; P<0.01). The scores were compared for the two groups of trainees classified based on their unit level, professional title, and educational background. Trainees with the same unit level, professional title, and educational background showed no significant differences in test scores between the two groups, though their final scores were significantly different ( P<0.01). Conclusions:The combination of diversified teaching modes and individualized teaching methods can increase the learning enthusiasm of trainees, improve the teaching effect of training classes, and increase the satisfaction of trainees.
