上海市中小学校无尘板书教具使用效果评价

Effectiveness of dust-free writing board in middle and primary schools in Shanghai

目的探讨上海市中小学校无尘板书教具对教学过程和教师健康的影响,为指导学校配备教具、保护师生健康提供参考和依据。方法分层整群抽取徐汇、长宁、普陀和杨浦区11所使用无尘板书教具的中小学校590名授课教师和4所使用传统板书教具的中小学校234名授课教师进行问卷调查,分析各类板书教具的使用效果。结果无尘组中分别有52.7%,51.6%和59.7%的教师认为无尘板书教具的书写效果、擦拭效果和使用方便程度均优于传统板书教具,有34.3%的教师认为无尘板书教具日常维护较传统板书教具繁琐;与传统板书教具相比,使用无尘板书教具后粉笔产生量降低,教师上呼吸道不舒适感和30 d内上呼吸道刺激症状自报比例降低,差异均有统计学意义（χ^2值分别为212.59,187.57和5.52,P值均〈0.05）;3类无尘板书教具对健康的影响比较中,白板水笔使用效果相对最佳,吸尘板擦使用效果相对较差,差异均有统计学意义（P值均〈0.05）。结论无尘板书教具比传统板书教具更有利于教学活动,且对教师健康影响小于传统板书教具,应予以推广。

Objective To investigate the influence of dust-free teaching aids on teaching procedure and teachers＇ health in middle and primary schools in Shanghai. Methods Survey was conducted in Xuhui, Changning, Putuo and Yangpu district. Faceto-face interviews were completed for 590 teachers from 11 schools with dust-free teaching aids and 234 teachers from 4 schools with traditional teaching aids. Effectiveness of each type of teaching resources was analyzed. Results Writing behavior of teachers was not differ in two groups of teaching resources（ P〉0.05）. Totally, about 52.7%, 51.6% and 59.7% of teachers believed that dust-free teaching aids was better in writing, cleanness and convenience than traditional teaching aids, respectively. However, 34. 3% of teachers thought that maintenance of dust-free teaching aids was much more complicated than traditional ones. Compared with teachers using traditional teaching aids, teachers using dust-free teaching aids reported significantly less discomfort and 30-days irritation symptoms of upper respiratory tract（ χ^2= 212.59,187.57,P〈0.05）. Among three types of dust-free teaching aids, white board was better than dust-free eraser. Conclusion Dust-free teaching aids should be promoted, as they are more beneficial for teaching and had minimum adverse effect on teachers＇ health compared with the traditional ones.