Objective To identify the differences of various evaluation methods for comprehensive experimental assessment of nursing students (major field in emergency and intensive care). Methods Fifty-five nursing students (major in emergency and intensive care) from Binzhou Medical College, Grade 2015 were enrolled by cluster sampling, The students' self evaluation, mutual evaluation and teacher evaluation were used to evaluate,and the results were compared with Tukey's multiple comparisons by one-way ANOVA, and the satisfaction was evaluated. Results The total scores of students' self evaluation, students' mutual evaluation and teachers' evaluation were(77.13±3.16、 80.05±3.66、 78.36±2.56) respectively.There were statistically significant differences among the total score of the three evaluation methods (F=3.452,P<0.05).In the comparison of students' self evaluation and teachers' evaluation, students' self score of critical thinking ability was (12.33±1.19), teachers' score was (13.76±1.68); students' score of scientific research ability was (9.82±0.96) and teachers' score was (10.73±1.38); the differences were statistically significant (all P<0.05). In the comparison of students' mutual evaluation and teachers' evaluation, students' mutual score of critical thinking ability was (12.69±1.07), teachers' score was (13.76±1.68); students' score of scientific research ability was (9.78±1.08) and teachers' score was (10.73±1.38); the differences were statistically significant (all P<0.05). In the comparison of students' self evaluation and mutual evaluation, students' self evaluation of interpersonal relationship ability was (8.38±0.65) and students' mutual evaluation was (8.12±0.86). The difference was statistically significant (P<0.05). The results of satisfaction questionnaire showed that 100%(55/55) students were very satisfied with the comprehensive experimental. Conclusions There are differences in different evaluation methods of comprehensive experiment for nursing students (major field in emergency and intensive care), but students can be evaluated from different angles, and make clear the direction of their efforts,which is in favor of the overall development of students.
Wang Hui
,
Zhao Peizhong
,
Xu Rui
. Comparison of three evaluation methods in comprehensive experimental examination among nursing students(major field in emergency and intensive care)[J]. Chinese Journal of Medical Education, 2019
, 39(5)
: 397
-400
.
DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.1673-677X.2019.05.018
[1]胡蓉芳, 姜小鹰, 郑诚英, 等. 综合性设计性实验模式在《急危重症护理学》教学中的应用[J].福建医科大学学报(社会科学版),2013,14(3):38-41.
[2]王辉. 急危重症监护方向学生专业能力的培训与考核[J].护理研究,2015,29(8B):3265-3266.DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1009 6493.2015.26.020.
[3]徐仁华,袁圳伟,刘成霞,等.思维能力训练在专升本ICU专业护生实践教学中的应用[J].护士进修杂志,2013,28(10):922-923. DOI:10.16821/j.cnki.hsjx.2013.10.026.
[4]Watson R, Stimpson A, Topping A, et al. Clinical competence assessment in nursing: A systematic review of the literature[J]. J Adv Nurs, 2002,39(5):421-431.
[5]王聪, 沈军. 护理学综合性实验评价指标体系的构建[J].护理研究,2014,28(4):423-425. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1009-6493.2014.04.014.
[6]王晓杰, 李敏, 郭淑丽. 护理本科生临床实践行为表现自评与他评的比较研究[J].护理管理杂志,2009,9(6):14-15. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1671-315X.2009.06.006.