Discussion on the improvement of nuclear medicine teaching quality from the analysis of test paper
从试卷分析谈核医学教学质量改进

摘要

目的 研究试卷分析法对核医学教学质量改进的影响。方法 选取86名临床专业学生作为研究对象，学生均在2019年1月到2019年10月期间在我校临床学习，运用分组式结果分析，需要研究人员将学生按照1:1比例分为观察组（n=43例）与对照组（n=43例），对照组临床专业学生运用常规教学方式，观察组需要对临床专业学生试卷进行分析，采用教学质量改进措施，对比两种学生非显像类题目失分率、显像类题目失分率、选择题成绩、英文题成绩以及简答题成绩。结果 观察组临床学生非显像类题目失分率为6.98%，对照组临床学生非显像类题目失分率为23.26%，对照组学生失分率明显高于观察组，数据对比存在差异，具有统计意义（P＜0.05）。观察组临床专业学生对试卷分析后，运用教学质量改进措施选择题成绩为92.13±6.28分、英文题成绩为93.24±3.75、简答题成绩为90.13±2.37分，而对照组临床专业学生用常规教学法选择题成绩为81.65±4.25分、英文题成绩为73.25±4.69分、简答题成绩为71.36±4.25分，观察组学生分数高于对照组，组间差异显著（P＜0.05）。结论 对临床专业学生试卷进行分析，运用教学质量改进措施可以有效提升学生专业水平，提高学生考试成绩，值得推广使用。

Abstract

Objective: To study the influence of test paper analysis on the improvement of nuclear medicine teaching quality.
Methods: 86 clinical students were selected as the research objects. The students were clinically studied in our school from January 2019 to October 2019. Using grouped results analysis, researchers need to divide students into observations group (n = 43 cases) and control group (n = 43 cases), according to a 1: 1 ratio. The clinical students of the control group use conventional teaching methods. The observation group needs to analyze the clinical students ‘test papers and adopt teaching quality improvement measures to compare the two students’. The loss rate of image problems, the loss rate of development problems, the results of multiple choice questions, the results of English questions and the results of short answer questions.
Results: The rate of non-imaging problems of clinical students in the observation group was 6.98%, and the rate of non-imaging problems of clinical students in the control group was 23.26%. The rate of loss of the students in the control group was significantly higher than that of the observation group, with statistical significance (P <0.05). Observation group clinical students analyzed the test paper, using the teaching quality improvement measures, the multiple choice score was 92.13 ± 6.28 points, the English question score was 93.24 ± 3.75, the short answer question score was 90.13 ± 2.37 points, while the control group clinical students used conventional teaching The multiple-choice question score was 81.65 ± 4.25 points, the English question score was 73.25 ± 4.69 points, and the short answer question score was 71.36 ± 4.25 points. The scores of the students in the observation group were higher than those in the control group, and the difference between the groups was significant (P <0.05).
Conclusion  : The analysis of clinical professional students' test papers and the use of teaching quality improvement measures can effectively improve students' professional level and improve students' test scores, which is worthy of popularization and use.