《护理基本技术》精品资源共享课三级建设指标的构建研究

发布时间：2018-05-04 14:34

本文选题：护理基本技术 + 精品资源共享课　；参考：《湖南中医药大学》2016年硕士论文

【摘要】：目的：1.建立《护理基本技术》精品资源共享课三级建设指标。2.利用Delphi专家咨询法对《护理基本技术》三级建设指标进行论证,使之更符合国家建设标准,为精品资源共享课的建设提供参考。3.将《护理基本技术》精品资源共享课三级建设指标应用到《护理基本技术》精品资源共享课的建设中,保障其建设的有序进行。4.为高校教师、学生以及社会学习者提供优质护理基本技术教学资源。方法：1.采用文献查阅法对国内外开放教育资源和精品资源共享课建设指标相关资料进行理论分析、比较、综合分析,结合临床护理岗位需求调查,收集专家意见,初步拟定《护理基本技术》精品资源共享课三级建设指标并设计调查问卷。2.采取小组讨论法,对《护理基本技术》精品资源共享课三级建设指标及调查问卷进行讨论,反复征求专家意见,修订咨询问卷,形成正式调查问卷。3.采用Delphi法对21名专家进行2轮问卷调查,针对该三级建设指标的必要性、技术可行性、人力可行性及风险性展开咨询;根据课题组讨论拟定指标筛选标准,对咨询结果进行分析,最终确定三级建设指标。结果：1.两轮专家咨询的应答率分别为95.2%、100%,充分反映了专家们对本研究的关心和支持。2.专家的权威系数均值为0.801,表明专家对所咨询的问题较熟悉,可认为专家的权威程度高。3.两轮调查后肯德尔协调系数为0.58～0.68,表明专家对指标重要性的认识渐趋一致,可信度高,结果可取。4.确定了《护理基本技术》精品资源共享课51项三级建设指标,评估了各指标的必要性、技术可行性、人力可行性及风险性。结论：1.专家合作程度及权威程度高,专家意见协调性较好,所形成的三级建设指标实用性、可操作性强。2.对《护理基本技术》精品资源共享课的建设具有一定的预测意义和可操作性,但仍需在应用中进一步验证和完善。
[Abstract]:Purpose 1. Establish the "basic nursing technology" excellent resource sharing class three-level construction index. 2. Delphi expert consultation method was used to demonstrate the three-level construction index of "basic nursing technology" to make it more in line with the national construction standard, and to provide reference for the construction of high-quality resource sharing course. The three-level construction index of "basic nursing technology" quality resource sharing course was applied to the construction of "basic nursing technology" quality resource sharing course, and the construction of the course was ensured to proceed orderly. 4. To provide high-quality nursing teaching resources for college teachers, students and social learners. Method 1: 1. By using the method of literature review, this paper makes a theoretical analysis, comparison, comprehensive analysis, combined with the investigation of the demands of clinical nursing posts, and collects the expert opinions on the construction indexes of open education resources and high-quality resources sharing courses at home and abroad. Draw up the three-level construction index of the quality resource sharing course and design the questionnaire. 2. Adopting the method of group discussion, this paper discusses the three-level construction index and questionnaire of "basic Nursing Technology" resource sharing course, repeatedly solicits the opinions of experts, revises the consultation questionnaire, and forms the formal questionnaire .3. In this paper, 21 experts were investigated by using Delphi method, the necessity, technical feasibility, manpower feasibility and risk of the three-level construction index were consulted, and the selection criteria were drawn up according to the discussion of the project group. The results of the consultation are analyzed and the three-level construction indicators are finally determined. The result is 1: 1. The response rate of the two rounds of expert consultation was 95.2 and 100 respectively, which fully reflected the concern and support of the experts to this study. The average authority coefficient of the expert is 0.801, which indicates that the expert is familiar with the question consulted and can be considered as having a high degree of authority. After two rounds of investigation, Kendall coordination coefficient is 0.58 and 0.68, which indicates that experts' understanding of the importance of indicators is gradually consistent, and the reliability is high. The result is desirable. 4. In this paper, 51 tertiary construction indexes of "basic nursing technology" quality resource sharing course were determined, and the necessity, technical feasibility, manpower feasibility and risk of each index were evaluated. Conclusion 1. The degree of cooperation and authority of experts is high, the coordination of expert opinions is good, the three-level construction index is practical and operable. 2. 2. It has certain predictive significance and maneuverability to the construction of "basic nursing technology" excellent resource sharing course, but it still needs to be further verified and perfected in application.
【学位授予单位】：湖南中医药大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2016
【分类号】：R47-4;G642

【相似文献】