Experiential Teaching Method Enhance Surgical Nursing Learning Achievements and Learning Attitude of Five-Year Higher Vocational Nursing Students
Bibliographic record
Abstract
China’s higher vocational nursing education continues to develop. Teaching methods based on classroom lectures are difficult to achieve high-quality teaching results. Nowadays, clinical nursing has an increasing demand for all aspects of higher vocational nursing students. “Surgical Nursing” is a required course for nursing students and the key content of the nurse professional qualification examination. Experiential teaching was introduced as an innovative teaching method. The research aims to achieve several goals: 1) To compare the surgical nursing learning achievement of students between using experiential teaching and traditional teaching methods. 2) To investigate student attitudes toward learning surgical nursing course after using experiential teaching activities. Participants were five-year vocational nursing students studying nursing at a university in Sichuan, China. A control group of 46 students and an experimental group of 46 students were selected through cluster random sampling. This study used the learning achievements and learning attitudes of surgical nursing as research tools. The results of the study showed that participants’ learning achievements and learning attitudes in surgical nursing were significantly improved in experiential teaching methods. These findings highlight the effectiveness and practicality of experiential teaching in higher vocational nursing education. It is recommended that further research be carried out to Experiential teaching methods are used in the teaching of other majors to promote the sustainable development of teaching.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".