【摘要】：目的： 本研究旨在初步構(gòu)建一套科學(xué)、導(dǎo)向明確的臨床護(hù)理教師專業(yè)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)框架指標(biāo),以期起到提綱挈領(lǐng)的作用,作為標(biāo)尺衡量臨床護(hù)理教師綜合水平,規(guī)范教師管理秩序,推進(jìn)臨床護(hù)理教師專業(yè)化發(fā)展,且為臨床護(hù)理教師明確自身發(fā)展要求,階梯式成長提供目標(biāo)性指導(dǎo)。再者以期為由教育部批準(zhǔn)第二軍醫(yī)大學(xué)牽頭進(jìn)行“護(hù)理本科教育教學(xué)評價體系研究”課題在臨床護(hù)理教師質(zhì)量控制、專業(yè)認(rèn)證方面提供有益參考。 方法： 1、本研究通過理論分析、文獻(xiàn)回顧,把握國內(nèi)外臨床護(hù)理教師專業(yè)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)方面研究現(xiàn)狀和發(fā)展趨勢,由專家協(xié)調(diào)小組討論分析初步構(gòu)建臨床護(hù)理教師專業(yè)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)框架指標(biāo)。 2、由23位專家經(jīng)兩輪Delphi專家函詢確立各指標(biāo)、內(nèi)涵結(jié)構(gòu)及權(quán)重,最終形成臨床護(hù)理教師專業(yè)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)框架指標(biāo),并通過數(shù)理統(tǒng)計方法對專家意見的協(xié)調(diào)度、積極系數(shù)、權(quán)威系數(shù)等指標(biāo)進(jìn)行計算,檢驗專家咨詢的可靠性和代表性。 結(jié)果： 1、通過理論分析、文獻(xiàn)回顧、專家協(xié)調(diào)小組討論構(gòu)建的《臨床護(hù)理教師專業(yè)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)框架指標(biāo)》初稿,包括4個一級指標(biāo)、11個二級指標(biāo)、38個三級指標(biāo),作為專家咨詢第一輪問卷內(nèi)容。 2、通過兩輪Delphi專家咨詢,確立臨床護(hù)理教師專業(yè)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)框架指標(biāo),包含角色資質(zhì)、綜合質(zhì)素、培訓(xùn)要求、專業(yè)認(rèn)證4個一級指標(biāo)、11個二級指標(biāo)、36個三級指標(biāo),運用優(yōu)序圖法和專家賦值法確定了各級指標(biāo)體系的權(quán)重,并以此為基礎(chǔ)構(gòu)建《臨床護(hù)理教師專業(yè)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)框架指標(biāo)》。 3、德爾菲專家咨詢可靠性分析：問卷回收率分別為92%,100%,說明專家對本研究有很高的積極性；專家組個人權(quán)威系數(shù)在0.70以上,專家群體權(quán)威系數(shù)值為0.87,結(jié)果表明專家組具有較好的權(quán)威性；變異系數(shù)在0.000-0.168,專家咨詢協(xié)調(diào)系數(shù)接近0.5,經(jīng)卡方檢驗p值小于0.05,有統(tǒng)計學(xué)意義。表明專家組對指標(biāo)權(quán)重賦值意見的一致性協(xié)調(diào)集中。 結(jié)論： 通過理論分析、文獻(xiàn)回顧和德爾菲專家咨詢法聯(lián)合構(gòu)建的一套包含4個一級指標(biāo)、11個二級指標(biāo)、36個三級指標(biāo)的《臨床護(hù)理教師專業(yè)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)框架指標(biāo)》是科學(xué)、合理、可靠的�？蔀榕R床護(hù)理教師規(guī)范化、標(biāo)準(zhǔn)化管理提供參考依據(jù)；為臨床護(hù)理教師明確自身發(fā)展要求,階梯式成長提供目的性指導(dǎo)意見；為由教育部批準(zhǔn)第二軍醫(yī)大學(xué)牽頭進(jìn)行“護(hù)理本科教育教學(xué)評價體系研究”課題在臨床護(hù)理教師質(zhì)量控制、專業(yè)認(rèn)證方面提供有益參考。 后續(xù)研究建議：框架指標(biāo)體系雖經(jīng)過了兩輪咨詢,專家給予嚴(yán)謹(jǐn)科學(xué)的指導(dǎo)意見,但部分指標(biāo)較為抽象,可測量性不夠。部分指標(biāo)內(nèi)涵界定的合理性和權(quán)重還有待在后續(xù)研究中不斷修訂、完善。
[Abstract]:Objective: the purpose of this study was to establish a set of scientific and well-directed professional standard frame indicators for clinical nursing teachers, so as to play an important role in measuring the comprehensive level of clinical nursing teachers as a yardstick. To standardize teachers' management order, to promote the professional development of clinical nursing teachers, and to provide targeted guidance for clinical nursing teachers to clarify their own development requirements and step by step growth. Furthermore, it is expected to provide a useful reference for clinical nursing teachers' quality control and professional certification in the subject of "Research on Teaching Evaluation system of undergraduate Nursing Education", which was led by the second military Medical University approved by the Ministry of Education. Methods: 1. Through theoretical analysis and literature review, the present research situation and development trend of clinical nursing teachers' professional standards at home and abroad were grasped. The expert coordination group discussed and analyzed the preliminary construction of clinical nursing teachers professional standard framework indicators. 2. The indexes, connotation structure and weight were established by 23 experts through two rounds of Delphi expert inquiry. Finally, the professional standard frame index of clinical nursing teachers was formed, and the coordination degree and positive coefficient of expert opinion were obtained through mathematical statistics method. Authority coefficient and other indicators are calculated to test the reliability and representativeness of expert consultation. Results: 1. Through theoretical analysis and literature review, the preliminary draft of the Framework of Professional Standards for Clinical Nursing Teachers was discussed by the expert Coordination Group, including 4 primary indicators, 11 secondary indicators and 38 third-level indicators. As the first round of expert consultation questionnaire content. 2, through two rounds of Delphi expert consultation, the professional standard frame index of clinical nursing teacher was established, including role qualification, comprehensive quality, training requirement, professional certification 4 first class index, 11 second class index, 36 third grade index. The weight of each level index system was determined by using the superior order map method and the expert assignment method, and the professional standard frame index of clinical nursing teachers was constructed on the basis of this method. 3, Delphi expert consultation reliability analysis: the questionnaire recovery rate is 92% 100, indicating that experts have a very high enthusiasm for this study; The personal authority coefficient of the expert group is above 0.70, the authority coefficient of the expert group is 0.87, the result shows that the expert group has better authority; The coefficient of variation is 0.000-0.168, the coordination coefficient of expert consultation is close to 0.5, p value of chi-square test is less than 0.05, which has statistical significance. It shows the consistency and concentration of expert group's opinion on index weight assignment. Conclusion: through theoretical analysis, literature review and Delphi's expert consultation, a set of "Professional Standard frame Indexes for Clinical Nursing Teachers", which includes 4 first-grade indexes, 11 second-class indexes and 36 third-grade indexes, is scientific. Reasonable and reliable. It can provide reference basis for standardization and management of clinical nursing teachers, provide guidance for clinical nursing teachers to clarify their own development requirements and step by step growth. For the purpose of approving the second military Medical University by the Ministry of Education to lead the research on the teaching evaluation system of nursing undergraduate education, this paper provides a useful reference for the quality control and professional certification of clinical nursing teachers. The suggestion of follow-up study: although the frame index system has been consulted twice and experts give rigorous and scientific guidance some indexes are abstract and lack of measurability. The rationality and weight of the connotation of some indicators need to be revised and perfected in the follow-up study.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：浙江大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2014
【分類號】：G645.1;R47-4

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 李會娟;任哲;龐冬;楊萍;金三麗;路潛;;不同教育層次實習(xí)護(hù)生對臨床帶教老師有效教學(xué)行為評價的研究[J];中國護(hù)理管理;2011年05期

2 孟萬;教師的專業(yè)素質(zhì)及其立體架構(gòu):校長的視角[J];高等教育研究;2004年06期

3 平衛(wèi)偉;Delphi法的研究進(jìn)展及其在醫(yī)學(xué)中的應(yīng)用[J];疾病控制雜志;2003年03期

4 周詠梅;葉文琴;張玲娟;陸小英;;國內(nèi)外護(hù)士分級現(xiàn)狀與我國護(hù)士能級結(jié)構(gòu)設(shè)置[J];解放軍護(hù)理雜志;2007年01期

5 尹自芳;姜安麗;;我國護(hù)理學(xué)本科專業(yè)設(shè)置標(biāo)準(zhǔn)構(gòu)建的研究[J];解放軍護(hù)理雜志;2008年08期

6 蔣競瑩;教師專業(yè)化及教師專業(yè)發(fā)展綜述[J];教育探索;2004年04期

7 金瑞華;栗潔婷;;我國臨床護(hù)理教師隊伍現(xiàn)狀及其建設(shè)[J];護(hù)理研究;2007年35期

8 饒永梅;;澳大利亞臨床護(hù)理教學(xué)對中國護(hù)理教育的啟發(fā)[J];衛(wèi)生職業(yè)教育;2009年10期

9 金新政,厲巖;優(yōu)序圖和層次分析法在確定權(quán)重時的比較研究及應(yīng)用[J];中國衛(wèi)生統(tǒng)計;2001年02期

10 姜安麗;朱玲玲;李靜;;《護(hù)理學(xué)本科教學(xué)基本要求》構(gòu)建的調(diào)查研究[J];中華護(hù)理雜志;2009年04期

相關(guān)博士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 胡韻;軍隊院校護(hù)理學(xué)專業(yè)教育標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的研究與構(gòu)建[D];第二軍醫(yī)大學(xué);2010年

，

本文編號：2390022