Chen Zhoujing

Hainan Vocational University of Science and Technology

Abstract：

The escalating complexity of modern healthcare requires nursing professionals to possess profound clinical critical thinking capacities. Traditional Lecture-Based Learning (LBL) frequently fails to bridge the epistemological gap between theoretical knowledge and dynamic clinical application. Objective This empirical study aims to evaluate the comparative efficacy of a dual-track pedagogical architecture—integrating Problem-Based Learning (PBL) and Case-Based Learning (CBL)—against conventional teaching methods in elevating the critical thinking disposition and academic competence of nursing students. Method A quasi-experimental comparative design was executed involving 120 third-year nursing undergraduates from a tertiary Grade-A hospital in China, randomized into a control group (n=60, receiving LBL) and an experimental group (n=60, receiving PBL+CBL dual-track teaching). Outcomes were quantified utilizing the Critical Thinking Disposition Inventory-Chinese Version (CTDI-CV), standardized theoretical examinations, and Objective Structured Clinical Examinations (OSCE). Result Post-intervention data revealed that the experimental cohort achieved a significantly higher aggregate CTDI-CV score (335.41 ± 18.22) compared to the control group (292.15 ± 16.45) (P < 0.001). The dual-track methodology also yielded superior objective academic outcomes, with the experimental group outperforming the control group in both theoretical mastery (91.4 ± 3.6 vs. 82.7 ± 4.5, P < 0.001) and practical OSCE execution (92.8 ± 3.2 vs. 83.5 ± 4.1, P < 0.001). Conclusion Harmonizing the contextual realism of CBL with the heuristic momentum of PBL initiates a profound cognitive paradigm shift. The dual-track model systematically cultivates analyticity, systematic inquiry, and clinical foresight, fundamentally outperforming traditional didactic instruction in modern nursing education.

Key Words：

Problem-Based Learning (PBL); Case-Based Learning (CBL); nursing education; critical thinking; dual-track teaching; clinical competence