论文部分内容阅读
目的了解中小学生安全教育干预效果,探索中小学生安全意识和技能培养的最佳时期,为学校有效开展安全教育提供依据。方法采用分层整群抽样方法,在郑州市教学水平中等的城、乡学校中,分别抽取中、小学校各3所,共12所。依据要求分为对照组1、对照组2和干预组,聘请专业人士对干预组进行为期1 a干预,以安全教育问卷调查及抽取部分学生现场模拟考核方式评价干预效果。结果干预后对照组1、对照组2、干预组知识知晓率升高幅度分别为11.6%,13.1%,29.4%,各组干预前后差异均有统计学意义(P值均<0.01);正向态度平均率升高幅度分别为-1.6%,1.9%,2.2%,各组干预前后差异均有统计学意义(P值均<0.01);正向行为平均率升高幅度分别为1.6%,-2.7%,6.9%,仅干预组前后差异有统计学意义(P<0.01)。3组现场考核知信行综合得分分别为(18.14±6.43)、(18.10±5.85)、(20.13±7.75)分,差异有统计学意义(F=4.861,P<0.01)。小学低年级3组间现场考核得分无明显差异,小学高年级和初中3组间现场考核差异均有统计学意义(P值均<0.01)。现场考核得分分级比较,得分≥60分的比率性别、城乡间差异均无统计学意义(P值均>0.05);不同年级干预组均高于其他2个对照组(P值均<0.01)。结论安全教育干预能够大幅度提高中小学生的安全知识,并使正向行为有效改善。安全意识培养越早越好,安全技能应从小学高年级开始注重培养,初中阶段加大培养力度,特别是医疗急救知识和技能。
Objective To understand the effects of safety education intervention in primary and secondary school students and to explore the best period of primary and secondary school students’ safety awareness and skills training so as to provide the basis for effective safety education in schools. Methods The method of stratified cluster sampling was adopted. Among the schools in cities and towns with medium teaching level in Zhengzhou, three schools of primary and secondary schools were selected respectively, a total of 12. According to the requirements, they were divided into control group 1, control group 2 and intervention group. Professionals were recruited to perform 1-month intervention on the intervention group. Safety education questionnaire and part of the students’ on-site simulation were used to evaluate the intervention effect. Results After intervention, the rate of awareness increase in the control group 1 and the control group 2 and the intervention group was 11.6%, 13.1% and 29.4%, respectively. There was significant difference between before and after intervention in each group (P <0.01) The average rate of increase in attitude was -1.6%, 1.9% and 2.2%, respectively, and there was significant difference between before and after intervention (P <0.01); the average rate of positive behavior increased by 1.6% 2.7% and 6.9%, respectively. There was significant difference between before and after treatment (P <0.01). The scores of the three groups in field test were (18.14 ± 6.43), (18.10 ± 5.85) and (20.13 ± 7.75) points, respectively, the difference was statistically significant (F = 4.861, P <0.01). There was no significant difference in the field test score among the three grades in the lower grades of primary school. There were significant differences in the field test between the upper primary and the junior middle school among the three groups (P <0.01). There was no significant difference between male and female (P> 0.05). The scores in different grades were higher than the other two control groups (P <0.01). Conclusions Safety education intervention can greatly improve the safety knowledge of primary and secondary school students and improve the positive behavior effectively. The sooner the better security awareness training, safety skills should focus on training from the upper primary grade, increase training in junior high school, especially the medical emergency knowledge and skills.