“泵站课程设计”教学效果评估指标体系构建研究
Research on the Construction of Teaching Effect Evaluation Index System for “Pump Station Course Design”
摘要: 为解决工科实践教学评价中“重结果轻过程、主体单一、指标脱离工程实际”的问题,以河海大学农业水利工程专业核心实践课程“泵站课程设计”为研究对象,基于柯氏模型(Kirkpatrick Model)的“反应–学习–行为–结果”四层级逻辑,结合课程教学目标与工程实践特点,通过对柯氏模型进行场景化改造,构建了涵盖4个一级指标、19个二级指标的教学效果评估指标体系,涉及课程适配性、知识应用能力、能力迁移效果等维度,融合学生自评、教师评价、行业专家评审及用人单位反馈的多元评价主体,实现从即时反馈到长期影响的全流程评价。通过层次分析法确定指标权重,突出核心设计环节质量与知识复用能力的重要性,为提升实践教学质量提供科学工具与理论支撑。
Abstract: To address the problems of “valuing results over processes, single evaluation subject, and indicators divorced from engineering practice” in the evaluation of engineering practical teaching, this study takes “Pump Station Course Design”—a core practical course for the major of Agricultural Water Conservancy Engineering at Hohai University—as the research object. Based on the four-level logic of “Reaction-Learning-Behavior-Result” of the Kirkpatrick Model, combined with the course teaching objectives and engineering practice characteristics, a teaching effect evaluation index system covering 4 first-level indicators and 19 second-level indicators is constructed through scenario-based transformation of the Kirkpatrick Model. The system involves dimensions such as course adaptability, knowledge application ability, and ability transfer effect, integrating multiple evaluation subjects including student self-evaluation, teacher evaluation, industry expert review, and employer feedback to realize the whole-process evaluation from immediate feedback to long-term impact. The Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) is adopted to determine the index weights, highlighting the importance of the quality of core design links and knowledge transfer ability. This study provides a scientific tool and theoretical support for improving the quality of practical teaching.
文章引用:张睿. “泵站课程设计”教学效果评估指标体系构建研究[J]. 教育进展, 2026, 16(1): 84-92. https://doi.org/10.12677/ae.2026.161013

参考文献

[1] 及炜煜, 刘占省, 杨璐. 基于新工科建设的高等工程实践教育模式创新——以智能建造专业为例[J]. 中国高等教育, 2025(Z1): 76-80.
[2] Kirkpatrick, D.L. and Kirkpatrick, J.D. (2006) Evaluating Training Programs: The Four Levels. 3rd Edition, Berrett-Koehler Publishers.
[3] 陈燕红, 侯幸赟, 郑骄阳, 等. 基于柯氏评估模型的临床药师培训考核评价体系的构建[J]. 教育进展, 2023, 13(6): 4079-4086. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[4] 贺晓娇, 包雯心. 柯氏四级评估模型赋能: 筑牢“三全育人”长效机制根基[J]. 创新教育研究, 2025, 13(4): 105-111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[5] 贺三维, 梅磊. 基于柯氏模型的MOOC教学质量评价研究[J]. 物流工程与管理, 2021, 43(9): 209-212, 183.
[6] 屈展, 柴健, 黄学芳. 基于柯氏模型的混合教学效果评价研究[J]. 创新创业理论研究与实践, 2024, 7(20): 9-11, 46.
[7] 苏伯文, 赵树平, 胡其亮. 基于柯氏模型的高校线上教学效果评价研究[J]. 上饶师范学院学报, 2021, 41(3): 98-105.
[8] 周宏娣, 李靖, 李西兴. 基于Kirkpatrick模型的本科教学翻转课堂教学质量评价方法[J]. 教育科学, 2022(1): 129-132.
[9] 朱楠嵩. 基于“柯氏模型”的混合式教学评价模式研究——以延边大学数字化化学实验课程为例[J]. 现代教育科学, 2023(6): 115-121, 138.
[10] 陈超辉, 田罗庚, 陈雄, 等. 基于柯氏模型评估启发式教学模式在大气物理学中的应用效果[J]. 高教学刊, 2025, 11(16): 120-123.
[11] 李洪杰, 叶明珠, 张慧晶, 等. 基于Kirkpatrick Model的医学专业课程思政教育评价体系构建研究[J]. 教育进展, 2025(6): 722-727.
[12] 杨宾宾, 王俊芹, 宗义湘. 基于柯氏模型的高校课程思政教学效果评价体系的构建[J]. 湖北开放职业学院学报, 2023, 36(9): 94-96.
[13] 冯苑. 基于“柯氏评估模型”的硕士研究生培养质量评价体系研究——以江西师范大学土地资源管理专业为例[J]. 黑龙江教育(理论与实践), 2024(4): 9-12.
[14] Saaty, T.L. (1980) The Analytic Hierarchy Process. McGraw-Hill.
[15] 姜雨, 韩圣. 人力资源管理专业课课程设计教学效果评估指标体系构建研究[J]. 价值工程, 2016, 35(27): 205-207.