翻转课堂和传统课堂教学中师生交互行为特点研究

doi:10.3761/j.issn.1672-9234.2022.05.001

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

目的对比分析翻转课堂和传统课堂教学中师生的交互行为特点,了解两种课堂教学中师生交互行为差异。方法便利选取南昌大学2017级护理专业学生为对照组,采用传统课堂教学;以2018级护理专业学生为试验组,采用翻转课堂教学。两组分别以内科护理学中“心力衰竭病人的护理”为课堂内容进行教学视频录制,并利用NVivo 11.0软件,结合行为编码系统分析两组教学中师生课堂行为。结果试验组教师言语、学生言语、课堂沉寂和技术行为占总行为的比率分别为35.09%、48.75%、4.89%和11.27%。对照组教师言语、学生言语、课堂沉寂和技术行为占总行为的比率分别为84.65%、8.19%、1.13%和6.04%。两组师生交互行为比率比较差异有统计学意义（P<0.05）。其中,两组教师言语、学生言语和技术行为中的具体行为比率比较差异均有统计学意义（P<0.05）,而两组课堂沉寂行为中具体行为比率比较差异无统计学意义（P=0.062）。结论传统课堂教学与翻转课堂教学在教师言语、学生言语、技术行为中具体行为占比存在差异,而翻转课堂和传统课堂教学中课堂沉寂占比差异不大。

关键词: 教育,护理, 教学方法, 翻转课堂, 传统教学, 行为分析

Abstract:

Objective To compare and analyze the characteristics of interactive behaviors in the flipped classroom and the traditional classroom. Methods Nursing students of Grade 2017 in Nanchang University were assigned to the control group and traditional classroom teaching was used in this group. Students in Grade 2018 were assigned to the experimental group and flipped classroom teaching was used in this group. The chapter of “care of patients with heart failure” in the Medical Nursing was chosen and the whole teaching process was recorded by video. The behaviors of teachers and students in the two groups were analyzed by using NVivo 11.0 software and behavior coding system. Results The proportion of teacher’s speech,student’s speech,classroom silence and technology of the total behaviors in the experimental group were 35.09%,48.75%,4.89% and 11.27%,respectively. The proportion of teacher’s speech,student’s speech,classroom silence and technology of the total behavior in the control group were 84.65%,8.19%,1.13% and 6.04%,respectively. There were significant differences between the two groups（P<0.05）. There were statistically significant differences in the specific behavior ratios of teacher’s speech,students’ speech and technical behavior（P<0.05）,while there were no statistically significant differences in the specific behavior ratios of classroom silence（P=0.062）. Conclusion There are differences in the specific behavior rates of teacher’s speech,students’ speech and technical behaviors between the traditional classroom and the flipped classroom teaching,while the proportion of classroom silence in the flipped classroom and the traditional classroom teaching is not different.

Key words: Education,Nursing, Teaching Methods, Flipped class, Traditional class, Behavior analysis

胡慧维,何朝珠,胡夏菊,李鸿艳. 翻转课堂和传统课堂教学中师生交互行为特点研究[J]. 中华护理教育, 2022, 19(5): 389-393.

HU Hui-wei,HE Chao-zhu,HU Xia-ju,LI Hong-yan. The characteristics of teacher-student interaction behaviors in the traditional class and the flipped class[J]. Chinese Journal of Nursing Education, 2022, 19(5): 389-393.

图/表 3

参考文献 17

[1]	高星, 章雅青, 王琳, 等. 基于小规模限制性在线课程的翻转课堂在护理管理学教学中的应用[J]. 中华护理教育, 2021, 18(7):613-617.
	Gao X, Zhang YQ, Wang L, et al. Application of flipped classroom based on small private online course in Nursing Management[J]. Chin J Nurs Educ, 2021, 18(7):613-617.
[2]	彭宇, 沙丽艳, 董建俐, 等. 基于SPOC的混合式教学在护理专业教学中应用效果的系统评价[J]. 中华护理教育, 2021, 18(5):446-451.
	Peng Y, Sha LY, Dong JL, et al. The systematic review of the effects of mixed teaching based on small private online course (SPOC) in nursing education[J]. Chin J Nurs Educ, 2021, 18(5):446-451.
[3]	Flanders N. Intent,action and feedback:a preparation for teaching[J]. Journal of Teacher Education, 1963:14.
[4]	顾小清, 王炜. 支持教师专业发展的课堂分析技术新探索[J]. 中国电化教育, 2004(7):18-21.
	Gu XQ, Wang W. New exploration of classroom analysis technology to support teacher professional development[J]. China Educ Technol, 2004(7):18-21.
[5]	杨平展, 刘娟文, 罗平. 关于教学行为分类系统VICS的讨论[J]. 教师, 2009(6):3-4.
	Yang PZ, Liu JW, Luo P. Discussion on the teaching behavior classification system VICS[J]. Teacher, 2009(6):3-4.
[6]	傅德荣, 章慧敏, 刘清堂. 教育信息处理[M]. 2版. 北京: 北京师范大学出版社, 2011.
[7]	Cohen EG, Flanders NA. Analyzing teaching behavior[J]. Am Educ Res J, 1971, 8(3):589.
[8]	黄斌, 杨馨宇, 李晓艳. 改进型课堂教学行为云模型的应用研究:以传统课堂和翻转课堂的个案分析为例[J]. 课程教学研究, 2021(1):70-77.
	Huang B, Yang XY, Li XY. Research on the application of im-proved classroom teaching behavior cloud model:a case study of traditional classroom and flipped classroom[J]. J Curric Instr, 2021(1):70-77.
[9]	闻娟, 刘晓燕, 刘勤勇. 智能互联背景下教师课堂教学评价分析[J]. 上海教育评估研究, 2021, 10(6):37-41.
	Wen J, Liu XY, Liu QY. Analysis of teachers’ classroom teaching evaluation based on intelligent Internet[J]. Shanghai J Educ Eval, 2021, 10(6):37-41.
[10]	郭艳侠, 梁珣, 张敏. 翻转课堂结合对分课堂教学模式在老年护理学教学中的应用[J]. 护理学杂志, 2020, 35(15):72-74.
	Guo YX, Liang X, Zhang M. Application of flipped class combined with presentation-assimilation-discussion teaching mode in the course of Geriatric Nursing[J]. J Nurs Sci, 2020, 35(15):72-74.
[11]	邝孔秀, 刘芳, 劳金晶. 小学数学教师课堂提问的现状与改进策略[J]. 课程教材教法, 2020, 40(10):77-81.
	Kuang KX, Liu F, Lao JJ. The status quo and improvement strategy of classroom questioning of elementary school mathematics teachers[J]. Curric Teach Mater Method, 2020, 40(10):77-81.
[12]	Archila PA, Molina J, Danies G, et al. Using the controversy over human race to introduce students to the identification and the evaluation of arguments[J]. Sci Educ, 2021:1-32.
[13]	Dehghanzadeh S, Jafaraghaee F. Comparing the effects of traditional lecture and flipped classroom on nursing students’ critical thinking disposition:a quasi-experimental study[J]. Nurse Educ Today, 2018, 71:151-156. doi: 10.1016/j.nedt.2018.09.027
[14]	Field JC, Zhang ED, Milke V, et al. Patterns of verbal interaction and student satisfaction within a clinical setting:a video-enhanced observational study[J]. Eur J Dent Educ, 2019, 23(1):e45-e52.
[15]	Deshpande S, Ritzenthaler D, Sun A, et al. A unique flipped classroom approach shows promising results in physician assistant education[J]. Med Teach, 2020, 42(3):285-290. doi: 10.1080/0142159X.2019.1679360 pmid: 31633996
[16]	阮娟娟, 邵菡清, 曹阳, 等. 基于虚拟仿真技术的翻转课堂教学在儿科护生临床带教中的应用[J]. 中国高等医学教育, 2021(8):45-46.
[17]	王觅, 文欣远, 李宁宁, 等. 大单元教学视角下基于LSA的同步课堂师生交互行为研究[J]. 电化教育研究, 2020, 41(8):74-81.