期刊文献+

高校思政课教师背景性因素与教学效果相关性的实证研究——以江西省为例 被引量:3

An Empirical Study of the Relevance between Teacher Background Factor and the Teaching Effects in College Ideological Classes
下载PDF
导出
摘要 "把思想政治工作贯穿教育教学全过程"折射出党和政府对"立德树人"工作的高度关注。了解高校思政课教学现状并研究教师背景性因素与教学效果的相关性有利于更有针对性地提升高校思政课教学效果。通过对江西省五所高校思政课现状的调查研究发现,高校思政课教师的教学效果总体上处于比较好的水平,得到了学生比较高的认可,教师对教学充满热情并用心投入,但教学能力与教学策略还需提高与优化。由于受教师的性别、教龄、学历、职称及任教课程等因素的影响,高校思政课教学效果呈现不同的差异和特点。为此,需要进一步提升高校思政课教师教学能力与教学策略;更好地提升高校思政课教师的教学热情与投入;依据学情而有针对性地进行课程的校本化设置。 Presently, the college ideological works are unprecedentedly emphasized, as indicated in comrade Xi Jinping's statement that " we should take ideological works throughout the education and teaching processes" , which is a signal of the Party and the government's highly concern of " a people and morality-oriented education" . In class ideological class, teachers' background factors are influential on the teaching effect, an understanding of which will facilitate improvement of the effects. We conducted a survey of the situation of ideological classes carried out in five universities in Jiangxi, by which we find better teaching effects and higher student appreciation. Nevertheless, as we find it, teachers need to improve their teaching capability and their strategies in spite of their high enthusiasm and devotions. Due to the differences in teachers' gender, history of teaching, academic degree, professional title and the classes they chosen, there are great varieties in teaching effects. As a conclusion, it is necessary to further improve the teachers' teaching capability and strategies, to enhance the teachers' teaching enthusiasms and devotions, and to adopt school-based class arrangements according to universities' realities.
作者 石劲松
出处 《井冈山大学学报(社会科学版)》 2017年第5期106-114,120,共10页 Journal of Jinggangshan University(Social Sciences)
基金 江西省教育科学规划课题"高校思政课教师特征与教学效果相关性的实证研究--以江西省为例"(项目编号:15YB067)
关键词 思政课 教师背景性因素 教学效果 相关性 ideological classes teacher background factors teaching effects relevance
  • 相关文献

参考文献1

二级参考文献9

  • 1张春兴.教育心理学 重订版[M].台北:东华书局股份有限公司,2000,3.173—287.
  • 2赵增梅 孟庆茂.大学生评价教师教学效果二阶维度分析.新世纪心理与教育测量展望[M].上海:上海教育出版社,2003.253—267.
  • 3Pike, Cathy King. (1998). A Validation Study of an Instrument Designed to Measure Teaching Effectiveness.Journal of Social Work Education. Vol. 34. No. 2 :261 - 271.
  • 4Petehers, M. K. , & Chow, J. C. (1988). Interpreting students' course evaluation: A look at the underlying conceptual dimensions. Journal of Teaching in Social Work,2(2): 51-61.
  • 5Kulik, J., &McKeachie, M. (1975). The evaluation of teachers in higher education. In F. N. Kerlinger (Ed.),Review of research in education Itasca, IL: Peacock:. 210 -240.
  • 6Marsh, H. W. & Dunkin, M. J. (1992). Students'evaluation of university teaching: a multidimensional perspective, in: J. C. SMART(ED. ) Higher Education:handbook of research and practice, Vol. 8 (New York,Agathon Press).
  • 7Kolitch, Elaine, Dean, A. V. (1999). Student Ratings of Instruction in the USA: hidden assumption and missing conceptions about good' s teaching, Studies in Higher Education, Vol. 24 Issue 1 :P27, 16.
  • 8Marsh, H. W. (1987). Students' evaluation of university teaching: research findings, methodological issues, and directions for future research. International Journal of Educational Research, 11:253 - 38.
  • 9孟庆茂 赵增梅.大学生评价教师教学效果的多维性研究.新世纪测验学术发展趋势[M].台北心理出版公司,1999.541—560.

共引文献76

引证文献3

二级引证文献13

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部