混合式学习:评估护理专业学生的观点。

Ilze Steenkamp, Jennifer Chipps
{"title":"混合式学习:评估护理专业学生的观点。","authors":"Ilze Steenkamp, Jennifer Chipps","doi":"10.4102/curationis.v47i1.2579","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong> Blended learning combines face-to-face and online learning and has recently gained popularity, accelerated by the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, often without active evaluation.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong> This study aimed to assess university nursing students' perceptions of a blended learning approach during the COVID-19 pandemic.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong> The population was 150 third-year nursing students from a university in the Western Cape, South Africa, using all-inclusive sampling. A one-group, pre-and post-evaluation study was conducted using a self-administered questionnaire (Student Perceptions of Blended Learning scale). Differences were assessed using Chi-squared and Mann-Whitney U tests with a significance level of p  0.05.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong> Before implementing blended learning, 128 students (85.3%) completed the questionnaire, while 95 (63.3%) did so after. Demographics and access showed no significant differences between the groups. Post-implementation showed a 10.1% increase in preference for blended learning (χ2 = 2.832, p = 0.092). Ease of use was rated significantly higher before implementation (3.07 ± 0.49), with no significant change post-implementation (2.99 ± 0.58). The blended learning process received lower ratings compared to content, with no significant differences before or after implementation for either (process: 2.55 ± 0.58 vs 2.54 ± 0.63; content: 2.75 ± 0.52 vs 2.79 ± 0.52).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong> Nursing students had a positive perception of blended learning, though the online learning component posed challenges with time and module comprehension.Contribution: The findings can help higher education institutions evaluate existing online management systems and guide nurse educators in meeting students' needs when developing module resources.</p>","PeriodicalId":93959,"journal":{"name":"Curationis","volume":"47 1","pages":"e1-e8"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11304200/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Blended learning: Assessing nursing students' perspectives.\",\"authors\":\"Ilze Steenkamp, Jennifer Chipps\",\"doi\":\"10.4102/curationis.v47i1.2579\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong> Blended learning combines face-to-face and online learning and has recently gained popularity, accelerated by the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, often without active evaluation.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong> This study aimed to assess university nursing students' perceptions of a blended learning approach during the COVID-19 pandemic.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong> The population was 150 third-year nursing students from a university in the Western Cape, South Africa, using all-inclusive sampling. A one-group, pre-and post-evaluation study was conducted using a self-administered questionnaire (Student Perceptions of Blended Learning scale). Differences were assessed using Chi-squared and Mann-Whitney U tests with a significance level of p  0.05.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong> Before implementing blended learning, 128 students (85.3%) completed the questionnaire, while 95 (63.3%) did so after. Demographics and access showed no significant differences between the groups. Post-implementation showed a 10.1% increase in preference for blended learning (χ2 = 2.832, p = 0.092). Ease of use was rated significantly higher before implementation (3.07 ± 0.49), with no significant change post-implementation (2.99 ± 0.58). The blended learning process received lower ratings compared to content, with no significant differences before or after implementation for either (process: 2.55 ± 0.58 vs 2.54 ± 0.63; content: 2.75 ± 0.52 vs 2.79 ± 0.52).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong> Nursing students had a positive perception of blended learning, though the online learning component posed challenges with time and module comprehension.Contribution: The findings can help higher education institutions evaluate existing online management systems and guide nurse educators in meeting students' needs when developing module resources.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":93959,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Curationis\",\"volume\":\"47 1\",\"pages\":\"e1-e8\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11304200/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Curationis\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4102/curationis.v47i1.2579\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Curationis","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4102/curationis.v47i1.2579","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景: 混合式学习将面授学习和在线学习结合在一起,最近由于2019年冠状病毒病(COVID-19)大流行而得到了普及,但往往没有进行积极的评估: 本研究旨在评估大学护理专业学生在 COVID-19 大流行期间对混合式学习方法的看法: 研究对象是来自南非西开普省一所大学的 150 名三年级护理专业学生,采用全包式抽样。采用自填式问卷(学生对混合式学习的看法量表)进行了单组前后评价研究。差异采用卡方检验(Chi-squared)和曼-惠特尼 U 检验(Mann-Whitney U)进行评估,显著性水平为 p 0.05: 实施混合式学习前,128 名学生(85.3%)完成了问卷调查,实施混合式学习后,95 名学生(63.3%)完成了问卷调查。两组学生的人口统计学和入学情况无明显差异。实施混合式学习后,学生对混合式学习的偏好增加了 10.1%(χ2 = 2.832,p = 0.092)。实施前,易用性的评分明显较高(3.07 ± 0.49),实施后没有明显变化(2.99 ± 0.58)。与内容相比,混合式学习过程的评分较低,两者在实施前后无明显差异(过程:2.55 ± 0.58 vs 2.54 ± 0.63;内容:2.75 ± 0.52 vs 2.79 ± 0.52): 结论:护理专业学生对混合式学习有积极的看法,尽管在线学习部分在时间和模块理解方面存在挑战:贡献:研究结果有助于高等教育机构评估现有的在线管理系统,并指导护士教育者在开发模块资源时满足学生的需求。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Blended learning: Assessing nursing students' perspectives.

Background:  Blended learning combines face-to-face and online learning and has recently gained popularity, accelerated by the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, often without active evaluation.

Objectives:  This study aimed to assess university nursing students' perceptions of a blended learning approach during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Method:  The population was 150 third-year nursing students from a university in the Western Cape, South Africa, using all-inclusive sampling. A one-group, pre-and post-evaluation study was conducted using a self-administered questionnaire (Student Perceptions of Blended Learning scale). Differences were assessed using Chi-squared and Mann-Whitney U tests with a significance level of p  0.05.

Results:  Before implementing blended learning, 128 students (85.3%) completed the questionnaire, while 95 (63.3%) did so after. Demographics and access showed no significant differences between the groups. Post-implementation showed a 10.1% increase in preference for blended learning (χ2 = 2.832, p = 0.092). Ease of use was rated significantly higher before implementation (3.07 ± 0.49), with no significant change post-implementation (2.99 ± 0.58). The blended learning process received lower ratings compared to content, with no significant differences before or after implementation for either (process: 2.55 ± 0.58 vs 2.54 ± 0.63; content: 2.75 ± 0.52 vs 2.79 ± 0.52).

Conclusion:  Nursing students had a positive perception of blended learning, though the online learning component posed challenges with time and module comprehension.Contribution: The findings can help higher education institutions evaluate existing online management systems and guide nurse educators in meeting students' needs when developing module resources.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信