中科新闻网古风歌曲待我长发及腰:需要翻译英文资料！高手快进！！！
来源：百度文库 编辑：中科新闻网 时间：2024/04/29 00:02:40
Lack of effects in educational outcome research
How effective are our educational interventions? Movements such as Best Evidence Medical Education (Hart, Harden et al., 1999) are focussed on gathering and disseminating evidence about which educational strategies are effective and ineffective. Review articles continue to examine the evidence whether Problem Based Learning leads to better or worse outcomes than conventional education(Colliver, 2000; Schmidt and Norman, 2000). One preoccupation of these discussions is the importance of identifying the “best” evidence, based on methodological criteria, so that our conclusions will be valid.
In examining criteria of methodological rigour, comparisons with medical research methods are inevitable. If randomized controlled designs on therapeutic interventions can be designed, why not do so for educational interventions? Why not compare a lecture course with small group teaching in a randomized experimental design and see which students score best on their exams? While double blind studies will not be feasible in the field of education, since students and teachers can never be blind to the intervention they are receiving, we should be able to meet most other methodological criteria. Indeed, many studies using randomized interventions have been conducted.
How effective are our educational interventions? Movements such as Best Evidence Medical Education (Hart, Harden et al., 1999) are focussed on gathering and disseminating evidence about which educational strategies are effective and ineffective. Review articles continue to examine the evidence whether Problem Based Learning leads to better or worse outcomes than conventional education(Colliver, 2000; Schmidt and Norman, 2000). One preoccupation of these discussions is the importance of identifying the “best” evidence, based on methodological criteria, so that our conclusions will be valid.
In examining criteria of methodological rigour, comparisons with medical research methods are inevitable. If randomized controlled designs on therapeutic interventions can be designed, why not do so for educational interventions? Why not compare a lecture course with small group teaching in a randomized experimental design and see which students score best on their exams? While double blind studies will not be feasible in the field of education, since students and teachers can never be blind to the intervention they are receiving, we should be able to meet most other methodological criteria. Indeed, many studies using randomized interventions have been conducted.
教育的结果研究的缺乏效果
我们的教育干涉多有效? 如此的运动如最好的证据医学的教育 (雄赤鹿,变硬 et al 。,1999) focussed 一到处聚集而且散播证据哪一教育的策略是有效的和无效的。 检讨文章继续调查证据是否建立学问的问题导致较好或更坏结果胜于传统的教育(Colliver,2000; Schmidt 和诺曼第人,2000). 这些讨论的一个先取是识别最 " 最好 " 证据的重要,被基于的方法标准,所以我们的结论将会是有效的。
在检查方法严格的标准方面，和医学的研究方法的比较是不可避免的。 如果随机化在治疗的干涉上的受约束的设计能被设计, 为什么不为教育的干涉这么做? 为什么不把演讲课程与小的团体作比较教在一随机化实验的设计而且见到哪一学生在他们的考试上刻划得最好? 进退维谷研究将不是能实行的在教育的领域中，不过因为学生和老师无法无法判断他们正在收到的干涉,我们应该能够符合大多数的其他方法的标准。 的确, 许多研究使用随机化干涉已经被引导