A total of 600 questionnaires were distributed, and 568 valid questionnaires were recovered, for a recovery rate of 94.7%. Among the respondents, clinical medical students of grades 16, 17 and 18 accounted for 234 (41.2%), 154 (27.11%), and 180 (31.69%), and there were 256 males (43.66%) and 194 students (34.15%) who had participated in or were participating in large-scale entrepreneurship programmes.
- The scientific research and teaching mode desired by students
1.1 The survey results show that more than 70% of the students in both groups (84.54% in the large-scale innovation group and 75.4% in the non-large-scale innovation group) think that essential courses on scientific research design, experimental records and thesis writing are needed. Furthermore, the scientific research courses should focus on experimental technology, research topic selection and design, literature retrieval and reading, data analysis, and paper writing. The results are shown in Table 1.
1.2 In terms of teaching methods, 47.89% (46.39%) of students prefer practical projects, while 34.51% (41.24%) of students want teacher-student interaction.
Among the students, 66.31% wanted their mentors to participate in the project in person, and 20.42% (19.59% 20.86%) wanted their teachers to guide them macroscopically. In terms of instructor arrangement, nearly half of the students (49.3%, 44.33% and 51.87%) would like a "double tutor system", such as joint guidance of college and clinical teachers, and many preferred "assistance from members of the research group"; see Table 2 for details.
2.1 The results of the survey on the timing of the implementation of a project show that 82.75% of the students (92.78% of Dacheng, 77.54% of non-Dacheng) believe that conducting scientific research projects has a positive effect and can improve their comprehensive abilities. Only 5.28% (0% of the Dacheng students 8.02% of the non- Dacheng students) think that scientific research projects will consume considerable amounts of time and affect their normal study schedule and life. A significant difference was observed between the two groups (P < 0.01). In terms of the time spent each week in the implementation of a project, 64.08% of the students thought that 10 Mel 20 h was the most appropriate and would not have a substantial impact on their studying and life. In terms of time allocation, students were willing to spend their time on literature review (28.17% of students) and experiment execution (35.21% of students), and there was a significant difference between the two groups (P < 0.05). See Table 3 for details.
2.2 Attitude towards sacrificing holidays to complete scientific research and training
The survey results show that 71.13% of the students in the large-scale entrepreneurship group (54.01% in the non-large-scale entrepreneurship group) are willing to use holidays to complete scientific research training, and 25.77% (37.43% in the non-large-scale entrepreneurship group) are willing to receive targeted training in the process of implementation: only 1.03% of the students rejected such training. A significant difference was observed between the two groups (P < 0.05). A total of 14.43% of the students in the major innovation group (17.65% in the non-major entrepreneurship group) were willing to sacrifice all their holidays, and 63.92% (56.15%) of the students were willing to sacrifice most of their holidays. The specific results are shown in Table 4 and figure 1.
- The creation of a scientific research atmosphere
3.1 The results of the survey show that 81.44% of the students in the Dachang group think that case-based teaching combined with problem-based learning (PBL) can enhance their interest in scientific research and that the joint teaching method is the most effective. By contrast, 81.82% of the students in the non-Dai Chuang group hold the same view. See Table 5 for details.
3.2 The effect of classroom discussion teaching on the cultivation of interest in scientific research
A total of 81.44% of the students in the major innovation group (82.89% in the non-major innovation group) thought that discussion could stimulate students' enthusiasm to conduct scientific research, while 77.32% (70.59% in the non-major innovation group) thought that discussion could lead to improved thinking. More than 25% of the students in the two groups believed that discussion could stimulate students' interest and arouse their enthusiasm for learning.
- Reward mechanism
4.1 Measures to promote the development of large-scale innovative projects
The innovation group preferred to increase the laboratory opening, and 35.29% of the students in the non-large-scale innovation group preferred to optimize the application process and conduct scientific research lectures for undergraduates. See figure 2 for details.
4.2 Regarding "whether you want to add to the scholarship programme or not", 91.75% of the students in the innovation group did, and 75.4% of the students in the non-large innovation group held the same view, but 24.60% of the students disagreed. There was a significant difference between the two groups (P < 0.01); see Table 6.
4.3 For the multiple choice about "what rewards should students who participate in Dacheng" receive, 81.44% of the students in the Dachang group (67.91% of non-Dai Chuang) thought that participation in the Dai Chuang project should be used as a bonus programme for scholarship and research, and 64.95% (54.55% of the non-Dachang Group) thought that participation should support the publication of papers. More than 25% of the students in the two groups preferred the former; see figures 3 and 4.
- Broaden the experimental platform and integrate experimental resources
5.1 The two groups of students agree that opening laboratories to students can strengthen the sense of teamwork and promote the cultivation of high-quality talent.See figure 5 for details.
A Very good. The purpose of open laboratories is to improve the quality of teaching and achieve the goal of cultivating high-quality talent.
B The experiment is based on a team-based division of labor and cooperation to cultivate students' sense of teamwork.
C Scientific research is closely related to the development of experiments, and students' rigorous scientific attitude and comprehensive quality have been improved through the process of continuous speculation, verification and comprehension.
D Experience the various experimental operations in the laboratory so that the level of teaching and scientific research can be improved through integration.
E An open laboratory enriches and improves the structure and flexibility of experimental teaching, enabling students to innovate.
5.2 We also gained a preliminary understanding of the two groups of students’ thoughts on the opening hours of the laboratory. In view of the heavy task load and time shortage of medical students, most students want the laboratory to be open all day and hope that teachers or graduate students will be on duty for effective supervision and management. See figures 6 and 7.
A Open all day means that the laboratory is open to students all day if conditions permit
B Regular opening refers to the laboratory's opening at a fixed time based on actual conditions.
C Regular opening refers to the laboratory's opening at a fixed time based on actual conditions.
D Staged opening refers to the practice of laboratory opening at certain stages to support the completion of students' learning tasks.
- Allocation of scientific research funds
When asked "how the school can improve the allocation of funds", 79.28% of the students in the Dai Chuang group (65.78% of the non-Dachang Group) wanted to adjust the proportion of funds invested in national and school-level projects, whereas 10.31% (non-Dachang 19.25%) thought that the number of projects should be reduced and their quality should be improved. A total of 2.06% (non-Dachang 8.02%) of the students wanted to change the method of reporting accounts and strengthen the review process. Moreover, a total of 3.09% (non-major venture 3.21%) of the students wanted funding between the research groups to complement each other, whereas 5.15% (non-major venture 3.74%) of students did not think such funding was required. See figure 8 for details.