Besse Matthias, Wiltfang Jens, Belz Michael, Signerski-Krieger Jörg
Klinik für Psychiatrie und Psychotherapie, Universitätsmedizin Göttingen, v. Siebold-Str. 5, 37075, Göttingen, Deutschland.
Deutsches Zentrum für Neurodegenerative Erkrankungen e. V. (DZNE), Göttingen, Deutschland.
Nervenarzt. 2022 Jan;93(1):1-10. doi: 10.1007/s00115-021-01081-5. Epub 2021 Mar 3.
In response to the coronavirus pandemic, most universities implemented digital teaching at short notice for the summer semester 2020 (SS20), whereas they simultaneously shut down classroom teaching. In the psychiatric clinic of the University Medical Center Göttingen, students' ratings concerning the learning effect and their substantive assessment for both forms of teaching were comparatively evaluated to determine the quality of this process.
Overall, 350 students who had visited classroom teaching (winter semester, WS18/19 to WS19/20) vs. digital teaching (SS20) assessed their form of teaching post hoc, within a standardized survey. They rated the individual learning effect in seven psychiatric subjects and did a substantive assessment on eight dimensions. In addition, they rated their expenditure of time.
For digital teaching, the individual learning effect was rated as either being equivalent or superior (subjects: psychotherapy, schizophrenia). Despite a significantly heightened expenditure of time, digital teaching was substantively assessed as being equivalent to classroom teaching or superior (dimensions: independent processing of learning goals, overall format of lecture). Concerning their anticipated preparation for the professional practice, students rated digital teaching as being inferior to classroom teaching.
A pandemic-driven conversion from classroom to digital teaching did not result in a loss of quality on the dimensions measured in this comparative evaluation. With a view to professional practice, digital teaching should complement classroom teaching and be part of future curricula.
为应对新冠疫情,大多数大学在2020年夏季学期(SS20)短时间内实施了数字化教学,同时关闭了课堂教学。在哥廷根大学医学中心的精神科诊所,对学生关于两种教学形式的学习效果评分及其实质性评价进行了比较评估,以确定这一过程的质量。
总体而言,350名参加过课堂教学(2018/19冬季学期至2019/20冬季学期)与数字化教学(SS20)的学生在一项标准化调查中事后评估了他们的教学形式。他们对七个精神科科目中的个人学习效果进行了评分,并在八个维度上进行了实质性评价。此外,他们还对自己的时间投入进行了评分。
对于数字化教学,个人学习效果被评为等同于或优于课堂教学(科目:心理治疗、精神分裂症)。尽管时间投入显著增加,但数字化教学在实质性评价中被认为等同于课堂教学或优于课堂教学(维度:学习目标的独立处理、讲座的整体形式)。关于他们对专业实践的预期准备,学生们认为数字化教学不如课堂教学。
疫情驱动的从课堂教学向数字化教学的转变在本次比较评估所衡量的维度上并未导致质量下降。着眼于专业实践,数字化教学应补充课堂教学并成为未来课程的一部分。