Course ideological and political teaching evaluation method

Abstract

The invention relates to the technical field of course ideological and political teaching evaluation, and discloses a course ideological and political teaching evaluation method. The course ideological and political teaching evaluation index system is divided into four dimensions of teaching design, teaching practice, teaching effect and later tracking, and different weights are set for each dimension, so that the problem that the evaluation system is single or the standard is not clear is solved. The teaching design clarifies targets, concepts, modes, contents and methods, ensures the combination of ideological and political education and professional courses, and improves the teaching effect. Teaching practice pays attention to execution of plans, content supply, integration modes and digital resources, so that teachers can adjust teaching contents according to requirements, and the influence of courses is enhanced. Teaching effect evaluation comprehensively measures ideological and political education achievements by reflecting teachers, students' thoughts, skill improvement and social practice. The emotion, thought change and workplace recognition degree of students are tracked and evaluated later, teachers are helped to adjust teaching contents, and the continuity and pertinence of courses are improved.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] The present invention relates to the technical field of course ideological and political teaching evaluation, and in particular to a course ideological and political teaching evaluation method. Background Art

[0002] In the current higher education system, the implementation of ideological and political education has become an important part of promoting comprehensive education. The core concept of ideological and political education is to integrate ideological and political education content into various professional courses. However, with the promotion of ideological and political education, traditional teaching evaluation methods have failed to effectively measure the teaching effect of ideological and political education, and the evaluation system also has many limitations.

[0003] Traditional course teaching evaluation methods mainly focus on the imparting of subject knowledge and students' academic performance, and often ignore the comprehensive evaluation of students' ideological and political qualities. These evaluation methods usually rely on quantitative evaluation, such as single indicators such as test scores, homework scores, and attendance rates, which cannot fully reflect the long-term impact of course ideological and political education on students' thoughts and behaviors. In addition, these traditional evaluation systems fail to fully consider the participation and feedback of different subjects in the process of ideological and political education, and lack a comprehensive evaluation of teacher-student interaction and social practice activities in the teaching process. However, the existing evaluation methods still face many problems in practical application, including the diversity of evaluation subjects, the complexity of evaluation criteria, and the difficulty of implementing the evaluation system. At present, the evaluation system of various dimensions such as teaching design, teaching practice, teaching effect and follow-up of course ideological and political education has not yet reached a mature standard. In the traditional evaluation system, the setting of teaching objectives is too generalized and lacks specific operational standards. In addition, the existing technology is not sufficient for the follow-up evaluation of the later stage of course ideological and political education. Students' ideological and political status, emotional changes, and their degree of participation in social practice have not been effectively quantitatively evaluated. Most evaluation systems tend to focus on the knowledge mastered after the course, ignoring the penetration and influence of ideological and political education in students' daily lives. Social feedback such as workplace recognition and the maturity of students' thoughts are often not included in the evaluation indicators, which makes it impossible to obtain comprehensive and continuous tracking and feedback on the educational effects of ideological and political education in courses.

[0004] In general, the existing evaluation methods for ideological and political courses have significant deficiencies in theoretical framework, evaluation indicators, evaluation subjects and their weight settings. These problems have led to the failure to comprehensively and scientifically evaluate the teaching effect of ideological and political courses, and have also made the promotion and deepening of ideological and political courses face great challenges. Therefore, this case proposes a new evaluation method for ideological and political courses, which effectively improves the evaluation quality and effect of ideological and political courses through the combination of qualitative and quantitative methods, comprehensive indicator system, multi-subject participation, and long-term follow-up evaluation, and promotes the construction of a long-term mechanism for ideological and political education in colleges and universities. Summary of the invention

[0005] The present invention provides a course ideological and political teaching evaluation method, which promotes solving the problems mentioned in the above background technology.

[0006] The present invention provides the following technical solution: a course ideological and political teaching evaluation method, comprising:

[0007] The evaluation index system of ideological and political education in courses is divided into four dimensions, namely, the teaching design of ideological and political education in courses, the teaching practice of ideological and political education in courses, the teaching effect of ideological and political education in courses, and the follow-up of ideological and political education in courses.

[0008] Among them, the teaching design of ideological and political courses includes five indicators: ideological and political teaching objectives C1, ideological and political teaching concepts C2, ideological and political teaching models C3, teaching content C4 and teaching methods C5;

[0009] The teaching practice of ideological and political education in courses includes four indicators: ideological and political education implementation plan C6, ideological and political education content supply C7, ideological and political education integration methods C8, and ideological and political education digital resources C9;

[0010] The teaching effect of ideological and political education in courses includes five indicators: teacher self-reflection C10, student ideological improvement C11, professional skills improvement C12, social practice activities C13 and cultural and sports competition activities C14;

[0011] The follow-up of ideological and political education in the course includes three indicators: student emotions C15, student thoughts C16, and workplace recognition C17;

[0012] Set the indicator weight for each indicator:

[0013] The weights of the indicators for ideological and political teaching objectives, ideological and political teaching concepts, teaching methods, ideological and political implementation plans, ideological and political content supply, ideological and political integration methods, teacher self-reflection, student ideological improvement, professional skills improvement, and social practice activities are all set at 5%;

[0014] The curriculum ideological and political model, teaching content, curriculum ideological and political digital resources, and cultural and sports competition activities are all set at 10%;

[0015] Student emotions and student thoughts were each set at 6%;

[0016] Workplace recognition is set at 8%;

[0017] Set the evaluation subject and weight for each indicator.

[0018] Optionally, setting an evaluation subject and a weight for each indicator specifically includes:

[0019] The evaluation subjects of the ideological and political teaching objectives of the courses include the heads of the majors, teachers in the major groups, leaders of the secondary colleges and administrative departments, with weights of 35%, 30%, 15% and 20% respectively;

[0020] The evaluation subjects of the ideological and political teaching concept objectives of the courses include the heads of the majors, teachers in the major groups, leaders of the secondary colleges and administrative departments, with weights of 35%, 30%, 15% and 20% respectively;

[0021] The evaluation subjects of the course ideological and political model objectives include the heads of the majors, teachers within the major groups, and leaders of the secondary colleges, with weights of 30%, 40%, and 30% respectively;

[0022] The evaluation subjects of teaching content objectives include the head of the major, teachers in the major group, leaders of the secondary colleges and administrative departments, with weights of 35%, 30%, 15% and 20% respectively;

[0023] The evaluation subjects of teaching method objectives include the students and teachers in the group, with weights of 60% and 40% respectively;

[0024] The evaluation subjects of the course ideological and political implementation plan include the major leaders, the secondary college leaders and the administrative departments, with weights of 30%, 30% and 40% respectively;

[0025] The evaluation subjects of the ideological and political content supply objectives of the courses include the students, the heads of the majors and the teachers in the group, with weights of 50%, 20% and 30% respectively;

[0026] The evaluation subjects of the course ideological and political integration method goals include teaching students, professional leaders and teachers in the group, with weights of 60%, 20% and 20% respectively;

[0027] The evaluation subject of the digital resource objectives of ideological and political courses is the administrative department, with a weight of 100%;

[0028] The evaluation subject of the teacher's self-reflection goal is the teacher himself, with a weight of 100%;

[0029] The evaluation subjects of the student ideological improvement goal include students and counselors, with weights of 50% and 50% respectively;

[0030] The evaluation subjects of professional skills improvement goals include teachers themselves, students and teachers in the group, with weights of 30%, 40% and 30% respectively;

[0031] The evaluation subject of social practice activity objectives is the counselor, with a weight of 100%;

[0032] The evaluation subject of the cultural and sports competition activity objectives is the teaching students, with a weight of 100%;

[0033] The evaluation subject of students’ emotional goals is society, with a weight of 100%;

[0034] The evaluation subject of students’ ideological goals is society, with a weight of 100%;

[0035] The evaluation subject of the workplace recognition goal is society, with a weight of 100%;

[0036] The indicators are classified into two types: qualitative indicators and quantitative indicators.

[0037] Optionally, the indicators are classified into two types: qualitative indicators and quantitative indicators, specifically including:

[0038] The indicators that combine qualitative and quantitative aspects include the teaching objectives of ideological and political courses, the teaching concepts of ideological and political courses, the model of ideological and political courses, teaching content, teaching methods, the implementation plan of ideological and political courses, the supply of ideological and political content, teacher self-reflection, student ideological improvement, student emotions, student thoughts and workplace recognition;

[0039] Quantitative indicators include the ways of integrating ideological and political education into courses, digital resources for ideological and political education in courses, social practice activities, and cultural and sports competitions;

[0040] Each item of the qualitative and quantitative indicators is scored using a combination of qualitative and quantitative evaluation indicators;

[0041] Each quantitative indicator is scored using the quantitative indicator scoring strategy.

[0042] Optionally, the scoring of each of the indicators combining qualitative and quantitative factors using the evaluation indicators combining qualitative and quantitative factors specifically includes:

[0043] The qualitative analysis is divided into four levels: excellent, good, fair, and poor, and different scores are assigned to each of the four levels;

[0044] Among them, 100 points are given for excellent level, 70 points for good level, 50 points for fair level, and 20 points for poor level;

[0045] For any one of the evaluation indicators combining qualitative and quantitative:

[0046] Obtain the grade of each evaluation subject of the evaluation indicator for the evaluation indicator, and obtain the score corresponding to the grade;

[0047] The indicator grade is calculated by calculating the score of the grade evaluated by each evaluation subject × the weight of the evaluation subject, and summing up all the products. The sum result is the indicator grade.

[0048] Calculate the final score of the indicator: indicator grade point × indicator corresponding weight, the product is the final score of the indicator.

[0049] Optionally, scoring each quantitative indicator using a quantitative indicator scoring strategy specifically includes:

[0050] When the scoring item is the way of integrating ideological and political education into the course, the calculation method for the score of this indicator is:

[0051] Get the number of students in a class;

[0052] Get the number of students participating in the course;

[0053] Obtain points for integrating ideological and political elements;

[0054] Set the score for integrating ideological and political elements, recorded as H8;

[0055] The score H8 is specifically: when the number of points for integrating ideological and political elements = 0, H8 = 0; when 1≤the number of points for integrating ideological and political elements≤5, H8 = 30; when 6≤the number of points for integrating ideological and political elements≤10, H8 = 50; when 11≤the number of points for integrating ideological and political elements≤15, H8 = 65; when 16≤the number of points for integrating ideological and political elements≤20, H8 = 75; when 21≤the number of points for integrating ideological and political elements≤30, H8 = 90; when 30<the number of points for integrating ideological and political elements, H8 = 100;

[0056] Calculate the frequency of student participation, recorded as Q8, and the calculation method is: student participation / (number of students in the class × number of points of integration of ideological and political elements);

[0057] Then the quantitative evaluation index score of the course ideological and political integration method C8 is: C8 quantitative evaluation index score = H8 × Q8 × I8;

[0058] Among them, I8 is the indicator weight corresponding to the way of integrating ideological and political education into indicator courses.

[0059] Optionally, scoring each quantitative indicator using a quantitative indicator scoring strategy specifically includes:

[0060] When the scoring item is the digital resources of the course ideological and political education, the calculation method of the indicator score is:

[0061] Obtain the number of types of digital resources for ideological and political courses;

[0062] Get the number of digital resources for ideological and political courses;

[0063] Set the course ideological and political digital resource score, recorded as H9;

[0064] The score H9 is specifically: if the number of types of digital resources for ideological and political education courses is less than 3, H9 = 0;

[0065] If the number of types of digital resources for ideological and political courses is ≥3, when 1≤the number of digital resources for ideological and political courses≤10, H9=30; when 11≤the number of digital resources for ideological and political courses≤20, H9=50; when 21≤the number of digital resources for ideological and political courses≤30, H9=65; when 31≤the number of digital resources for ideological and political courses≤40, H9=75; when 41≤the number of digital resources for ideological and political courses≤50, H9=90; when 50<the number of digital resources for ideological and political courses, H9=100;

[0066] Then the quantitative evaluation index score of the course ideological and political digital resource C9 is: C9 quantitative evaluation index score = H9 × I9;

[0067] Among them, I9 is ​​the indicator weight corresponding to the indicator course ideological and political digital resources.

[0068] Optionally, scoring each quantitative indicator using a quantitative indicator scoring strategy specifically includes:

[0069] When the scoring item is a social practice activity, the scoring method for this indicator is as follows:

[0070] Get the number of people participating in practical activities;

[0071] Get the total number of students in the class;

[0072] The percentage of participation in practical activities is calculated as H13, which is:

[0073]

[0074] Then the quantitative evaluation index score of social practice activity C13 is: C13 quantitative evaluation index score = 100 × H13 × I13;

[0075] Among them, I13 is the indicator weight corresponding to the indicator social practice.

[0076] Optionally, scoring each quantitative indicator using a quantitative indicator scoring strategy specifically includes:

[0077] When the scoring item is a cultural and sports competition, the calculation method for the indicator score is:

[0078] Get the number of people who won provincial awards, recorded as n1;

[0079] Get the number of people who have won school-level awards, recorded as n2;

[0080] The quantitative evaluation index score of cultural and sports competition activity C14 is:

[0081] Calculate the weighted award value W,

[0082] C14 quantitative evaluation index score = W × I14;

[0083] Among them, I14 is the indicator weight corresponding to the cultural and sports competition activities.

[0084] The present invention has the following beneficial effects:

[0085] 1. By dividing the indicator system of the course ideological and political teaching evaluation method into four dimensions, namely teaching design, teaching practice, teaching effect, and post-follow-up, the problem of a single course ideological and political evaluation system or unclear evaluation standards is effectively solved. Different weights are given to the indicators of each dimension according to their importance and role, thus ensuring that each link in the teaching process can receive full attention and evaluation. First, through the refinement of the course ideological and political teaching design, the teaching objectives, concepts, models, content and methods are clearly defined, and appropriate weights are set, which can help teachers set teaching objectives more accurately, ensure that the teaching content is more closely integrated with ideological and political education, and avoid the problem of missing ideological and political education elements in traditional courses. This step solves the problem of unclear course ideological and political design or disconnection from professional courses, and improves the teaching effect and operability of course ideological and political education. Secondly, the evaluation of the course ideological and political teaching practice dimension focuses on the course implementation plan, content supply, integration method and the use of digital resources. By setting and evaluating these indicators, teachers can adjust and optimize teaching content and methods according to students' needs, effectively improving the penetration and actual influence of course ideological and political content. This step solves the specific implementation difficulties in the process of integrating ideological and political education into courses, improves the feasibility and adaptability of teaching practice, and enhances the popularity and practical effect of ideological and political education in courses. The evaluation of teaching effectiveness can intuitively measure the actual results of ideological and political education in courses through teacher self-reflection, improvement of students' thoughts and skills, social practice and cultural and sports competitions. In particular, for the improvement of students' thoughts, combined with social practice activities and cultural and sports competitions, it can provide students with a more comprehensive growth environment and promote the improvement of their comprehensive quality. This step solves the problem of ignoring students' actual growth in the traditional evaluation system and enhances the connotation of ideological and political education in courses. Finally, through the follow-up of ideological and political education in the later stage of courses, students' emotions, ideological changes and workplace recognition are tracked and evaluated, which solves the problem of insufficient connection between the continuous tracking of ideological and political teaching effects and students' career development. This step not only helps teachers find problems that students encounter in the learning process, but also adjusts the teaching content according to students' emotions and ideological changes, and improves the pertinence and sustainability of the course.

[0086] 2. By clarifying the evaluation subject of each indicator, the participation of all parties is ensured, which can not only ensure the leading role of professional leaders and teacher groups in teaching design and content, but also allow external evaluation subjects such as students, counselors and society to participate in the effect evaluation. This diversified participation of evaluation subjects can fully reflect the actual effect of course ideological and political education from different angles and levels. It solves the problem of single or subjective evaluation in the past, making the evaluation results more objective and comprehensive. Through clear weight setting, the problem of unclear evaluation focus is solved. The weight setting of each indicator is reasonably allocated according to its actual importance in course ideological and political education. For example, the teaching method target weight of course ideological and political education is relatively high, 60% of which comes from student evaluation, while the digital resources of course ideological and political education are completely evaluated by the administrative department with 100% weight. This weight setting can effectively reflect the responsibilities and roles that different subjects should bear in various indicators, ensure that key links receive greater attention, and avoid the situation where one aspect is emphasized while other aspects are ignored. This step makes the focus of the evaluation more prominent and improves the practicality and operability of the evaluation. Dividing indicators into qualitative and quantitative categories can clearly distinguish which indicators can be objectively and quantitatively evaluated through data and which indicators need to rely on subjective opinions for judgment. Qualitative indicators such as "teacher self-reflection" and "student ideological improvement" emphasize in-depth thinking and analysis of the ideological level of teachers and students, while quantitative indicators such as "curriculum ideological and political teaching objectives" and "social practice activities" help to obtain evaluation from specific data and activity effects. This classification helps to comprehensively evaluate the actual effect of curriculum ideological and political education from multiple dimensions and levels, avoiding evaluation bias under a single standard. Through the evaluation of different subjects and the design of diversified indicators, feedback from different angles can be effectively collected to provide a strong basis for subsequent teaching adjustments and course optimization. In particular, through the social evaluation of students' emotions, thoughts and workplace recognition, the long-term effect of curriculum ideological and political education can be tracked, problems can be discovered in a timely manner and targeted improvements can be made to ensure the continuous improvement and upgrading of course content and form. This step provides a guarantee for the sustainable development of curriculum ideological and political education and avoids the limitations of fixed models. By introducing social subjects to participate in the evaluation, especially the social evaluation of indicators such as "student emotions", "student thoughts" and "workplace recognition", it can effectively connect classroom teaching with social practice and enhance the external recognition and influence of curriculum ideological and political education. This evaluation method not only reflects the educational effect, but also is in line with social needs and market evaluation, which helps to cultivate high-quality talents who can adapt to social development.

[0087] 3. By formulating different scoring strategies for indicators that combine qualitative and quantitative methods and purely quantitative indicators, it is ensured that the evaluation standards of various indicators match their characteristics. Indicators that combine qualitative and quantitative methods, such as the teaching objectives of ideological and political courses, teaching concepts, and the improvement of students' thoughts, adopt a method that combines qualitative analysis and quantitative scoring, which not only considers specific quantitative data, such as student grades and participation, but also takes into account subjective evaluation, such as teacher reflection and student changes in thinking. This classification scoring can more comprehensively reflect the multi-dimensional effects of ideological and political courses, and avoids the situation of confusing different behaviors with results. For quantitative indicators, such as the integration of ideological and political courses, digital resources, and social practice activities, by using a purely quantitative scoring strategy, specific numbers and statistical data can be used for evaluation, providing a more objective and standardized evaluation method. Through specific quantitative scores and proportions, the actual effect of teaching content and the actual use of resources can be more directly reflected, avoiding the problem of over-reliance on subjective evaluation. This quantitative evaluation method greatly improves the accuracy of the evaluation and enhances its credibility and operability. Incorporating a combination of qualitative and quantitative indicators into the evaluation system of ideological and political education in courses not only focuses on students' knowledge mastery and skill improvement, but also deeply explores the changes in students' thoughts and emotions, further broadening the dimension of evaluation. This all-round evaluation system can comprehensively consider multiple factors such as teaching content, student participation, teaching methods, and student thoughts, ensuring the full cycle and full process of the evaluation of the effectiveness of ideological and political education in courses. By combining qualitative and quantitative evaluation, it is not only possible to clearly grasp the teaching effect of each link, but also to help teachers identify which teaching methods or content have a greater role in promoting students' thoughts. Through quantitative indicators, such as the scoring of the integration of ideological and political education in courses and social practice activities, teaching managers can find shortcomings in course implementation based on data analysis results. For example, if the score of social practice activities is low, the form and content of practical activities can be adjusted in time, and social practice related to professional courses can be increased to ensure that the course content can better meet students' needs. The scoring strategy of quantitative indicators provides more intuitive data feedback, provides data support for the improvement and optimization of ideological and political education in courses, and enhances the flexibility and adjustability of course design.

[0088] 4. By dividing qualitative indicators into four levels, excellent, good, general, and poor, and assigning clear scores to each level, 100 points, 70 points, 50 points, and 20 points, the evaluation is more standardized and specific. Traditional qualitative evaluation is often greatly affected by subjective factors, and the scoring standards are different, resulting in insufficient fairness and consistency in the evaluation results. By dividing the grades and assigning specific scores, it is possible to ensure that different evaluation subjects have a unified standard for scoring the same indicator, thereby improving the objectivity and consistency of the evaluation results. The scoring of qualitative indicators adopts a weighted calculation method, that is, the grade score of each evaluation subject is multiplied by its weight, and then accumulated and summed. This method solves the problem of unclear proportion of different evaluation subjects in the scoring. By assigning different weights to different subjects, the actual influence of different subjects in the evaluation process can be reflected. For example, the evaluation weight of the ideological and political teaching objectives and teaching concepts of the course is relatively high, which can ensure that the evaluation results of the professional leaders and the teacher group on these indicators can have a greater impact on the final score. This weighted calculation method enhances the scientific nature of the evaluation and ensures that the opinions and influence of different subjects are fully reflected. By calculating the indicator grade and final score, it can be ensured that the score of each evaluation indicator not only integrates the opinions of each evaluation subject, but also corresponds to its weight. This calculation method solves the problem of unreasonable scoring distribution and excessive subjectivity in traditional evaluation methods. The final score of each indicator can more accurately reflect the actual role and contribution of the indicator in the overall teaching, avoiding the deviation and one-sidedness brought by the evaluation of a single subject. The evaluation method combining qualitative and quantitative methods is clarified, so that the evaluation of ideological and political education in courses not only relies on quantitative data, such as student grades and participation, but also fully considers subjective factors in the teaching process, such as teacher self-reflection and student ideological improvement. Qualitative scoring ensures that the evaluation results are more comprehensive and accurate by evaluating teaching design, concepts and content, combined with quantitative scoring to measure teaching effects and practical activities. This comprehensive scoring model effectively solves the problem of lack of quantitative basis in traditional qualitative evaluation, making the evaluation results more convincing. By clarifying the weight and scoring criteria of each evaluation subject, the scoring process is more transparent and fair. The evaluation opinions of different subjects such as students, teachers and managers are supported by weights, ensuring that each link can be fairly reflected in the final score. This increase in transparency will help improve the trust in the ideological and political evaluation system of courses and enable all participants to accept and identify with the evaluation results.

[0089] 5. By setting specific scoring rules for the integration of ideological and political education into courses, especially defining the score H8 by "the number of points of integration of ideological and political elements", the scoring criteria are made clearer and more specific. The score of each interval, such as 30 points when the number of points of integration of ideological and political elements is 1 to 5, and 50 points when the number of points of integration of ideological and political elements is 6 to 10, ensures that the degree of integration of ideological and political education into courses can be quantitatively evaluated according to the actual situation of teaching activities. This clear scoring standard solves the problems of vague evaluation and inconsistent standards in traditional scoring methods, and provides an objective and quantitative evaluation basis. By calculating the frequency of student participation (Q8), the number of participants is combined with the number of students in the class and the number of times ideological and political elements are integrated, and the actual participation of students is further accurately evaluated. This method ensures that the score can be adjusted according to the actual student participation, rather than simply relying on the number of points of integration of ideological and political elements, thereby avoiding the problem of over-evaluation of students with low participation but many integration points. At the same time, the quantitative scoring method also improves the transparency of the scoring process. Teachers and managers can clearly see the calculation process and results of each scoring item, which enhances the fairness and credibility of the evaluation results. The quantitative scoring method reduces the interference of subjective factors in the scoring of the ideological and political integration of courses through a clear calculation formula. For example, in traditional qualitative evaluation, there may be inconsistent or overly subjective judgments on the degree of ideological and political integration by teachers or evaluation subjects. However, through the quantitative scoring method, all evaluation subjects score based on the same standard, avoiding the deviation of the evaluation results caused by differences in personal opinions, and ensuring the consistency and fairness of the scoring. The scoring strategy adopts a data-based quantitative evaluation method, which can not only give a clear score, but also help teachers and managers identify which ideological and political elements are fully integrated into the course and which aspects may be insufficient. This provides important data support for subsequent course improvements. If a course has a low number of ideological and political elements or a low frequency of student participation, teachers and managers can adjust the teaching methods or increase the proportion of ideological and political content in a timely manner, thereby improving the overall quality of the course and the effect of ideological and political education. The final score, C8 quantitative evaluation index score = H8 × Q8 × I8, combines the number of ideological and political elements, the frequency of student participation, and the indicator weight I8, ensuring that the score of the ideological and political integration of courses not only considers the breadth of integration and the number of integration points, but also reflects the depth and the frequency of student participation. This comprehensive calculation method can more accurately evaluate the effectiveness of the implementation of ideological and political education in courses, avoiding the one-sidedness brought about by a single indicator evaluation, thus making the overall evaluation more comprehensive and accurate.

[0090] 6. The quantitative scoring strategy designed for the digital resources of ideological and political courses can effectively solve the problem of lack of systematic quantitative evaluation of the utilization of digital resources in traditional scoring methods, and ensure the objectivity, fairness and operability of the scoring through clear standards and calculation methods. The scoring strategy first sets the score H9 by "the number of types of ideological and political digital resources in courses", ensuring that the diversity of digital resources is fully considered. If the number of types of ideological and political digital resources in courses is less than 3, the score is 0; when the number of types exceeds 3, the number of ideological and political digital resources in courses is also included in the scoring criteria, and the score gradually increases with the increase in the number of resources. This scoring method clearly defines the scoring criteria for different types and quantities of digital resources, avoiding the single evaluation dimension of relying solely on quantity or type, making the evaluation more comprehensive and in line with actual application needs. By setting specific scoring intervals, such as 30 points when the number of digital resources is 1-10, 50 points when 11-20, etc., there is a clear mapping relationship between the number of digital resources in each level and the score, which can convert the types and quantities of ideological and political digital resources in courses into quantifiable scores. This quantitative evaluation method can ensure that the efforts of different courses and teachers in resource investment can be reflected concretely and fairly. This quantitative scoring method overcomes the problems of vague evaluation criteria and strong subjectivity in traditional evaluation methods, so that the resource utilization status of ideological and political education in courses can be reflected more objectively and fairly. This scoring strategy not only takes into account the number of digital resources, but also takes into account the types of resources. By limiting the score to 0 when there are less than 3 types of digital resources, it avoids the situation where some courses rely on only a single digital resource, which helps to encourage teachers to introduce diversified digital resources in ideological and political education. This move promotes the diversification of digital resources, enhances the richness and adaptability of ideological and political education content, and thus improves teaching effectiveness. The scoring system calculates the score by combining the type and quantity of resources, thereby reflecting the actual application effect of digital resources in the teaching process. By calculating the score H9, teachers can evaluate the breadth and depth of resource use based on the types and quantities of digital resources they use. In addition, the calculation method of the score of digital resources in ideological and political education can also provide teaching managers with data support on resource allocation and use, helping them to better understand the application status and effect of digital resources in teaching, thereby optimizing resource allocation and improving teaching quality. The scoring strategy clearly states that higher scores can be obtained by increasing the types and quantity of digital resources. This incentive mechanism encourages teachers and teaching managers to pay more attention to the expansion and optimization of digital resources. Teachers may be more proactive in finding new digital resources that meet the goals of ideological and political education and integrate them into the classroom. Over time, this mechanism can continuously promote the updating and upgrading of teaching resources and promote the diversity and modernization of course content.The final score, C9 quantitative evaluation index score = H9 × I9, not only reflects the type and quantity of digital resources, but also combines the index weight I9 to ensure that the relative importance of each resource is reflected. Teachers and managers can use this scoring mechanism to understand which ideological and political resources are most effective in teaching and which resources need to be strengthened or improved. This feedback mechanism can help teachers make adjustments in future teaching and continuously improve the resource allocation and application effect of ideological and political courses. Through the quantitative evaluation of digital resources for ideological and political courses, we can see the depth and breadth of resource utilization in the course, which can help teachers better integrate modern educational technology, improve the interactivity and attractiveness of the classroom, and thus enhance the effect of ideological and political education in the course. Teachers pay more attention to the rational use of digital resources in course design, so that students can contact and understand ideological and political content in different teaching media, and promote the multi-channel and multi-level dissemination of ideological and political education.

[0091] 7. The quantitative scoring strategy designed for social practice activities can effectively solve the subjective and unclear problems of participation in social practice activities, and provide a simple, quantifiable and incentive scoring mechanism. By setting the two basic data of "number of people participating in practice activities" and "total number of students taught", the proportion of participation in social practice activities H13 is calculated, so that the participation in social practice activities is accurately quantified. This scoring method avoids the problem of unclear or subjective evaluation of participation in social practice activities in traditional evaluation methods, and ensures that all participation situations can be clearly and truly reflected in the final score. By calculating the participation ratio, it is ensured that the actual participation in social practice activities can be accurately evaluated, avoiding the situation of relying solely on reports or subjective judgments of teachers. The calculation method of this scoring strategy is clear and concise. The proportion of participation in practice activities H13 is calculated by "number of people participating in practice activities / total number of students taught", and the final score is obtained by "100×H13×I13", where I13 is the weight of the indicator. This calculation method is clear and direct, easy for teachers and managers to understand and apply, and effectively reduces the complexity and confusion in the scoring process. In the traditional scoring method, the scoring of social practice activities may be affected by a variety of subjective factors, while this quantitative scoring method converts these factors into numbers, making the evaluation more objective and consistent. Through this quantitative scoring strategy, the participation enthusiasm of teachers and students will be directly reflected and fed back. When students know that their participation will directly affect the final score, they will be more motivated to participate in social practice activities. This incentive mechanism prompts students to pay more attention to and attach importance to practical activities, and improves the actual participation in social practice activities. This strategy also prompts teachers to pay more attention to improving students' sense of participation and actual effects when designing and organizing social practice activities, further enhancing the value and significance of social practice activities. In traditional teaching evaluation, the evaluation of social practice activities often relies on teachers' personal observations and subjective views, which easily leads to inconsistent evaluation standards and lack of transparency. Through this quantitative scoring mechanism, the proportion of students participating in social practice activities has become a unified standard, and the participation of all students can be measured and evaluated by the same standard, thereby improving the consistency and fairness of scoring. The transparency and fairness of the evaluation process are guaranteed, and the participation of all students can be clearly reflected.

[0092] 8. The quantitative scoring strategy designed for cultural and sports competitions can effectively solve the problems of unclear evaluation and inconsistent standards for participation and award-winning in cultural and sports competitions, and provide a quantitative incentive mechanism to enhance students' motivation to participate and the actual effect of the competition. In traditional evaluation, the evaluation of cultural and sports competitions often relies on the subjective statements of participants or the personal judgment of event organizers, which may lead to inconsistent evaluation standards and strong subjectivity. By setting a specific calculation method, that is, by calculating "the number of people who won provincial awards n1" and "the number of people who won school-level awards n2", and combining the weighted award value W, a clear and unified evaluation standard can be provided for each student's participation and performance. This standard avoids the interference of subjective factors and makes the evaluation of cultural and sports competitions more objective and consistent. By incorporating provincial awards and school-level awards into the evaluation system respectively, and calculating the final score of cultural and sports competitions through the weighted award value W, the incentive mechanism is further strengthened. Students can clearly understand that the number of winners n1 who win higher-level awards will bring them higher scores, which helps to enhance students' motivation to participate in cultural and sports competitions. In particular, weighted calculations for outstanding awards, such as provincial awards, can effectively motivate students to strive for high-level awards, thereby increasing their enthusiasm and competitiveness in participating in competitions. By calculating the weighted award value W, it is ensured that the award received by each student is reasonably evaluated based on their actual performance. This ensures that the comparison between different awards is fair, avoids the practice of simply recording the number of winners, and ensures a comprehensive and accurate evaluation of student performance. In addition, the transparency of the scoring mechanism allows students to clearly understand the relationship between their level of participation and the final score, eliminating concerns about unclear evaluation criteria. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

[0093] Figure 1 It is a schematic diagram of the process of the present invention. DETAILED DESCRIPTION

[0094] The following will be combined with the drawings in the embodiments of the present invention to clearly and completely describe the technical solutions in the embodiments of the present invention. Obviously, the described embodiments are only part of the embodiments of the present invention, not all of the embodiments. Based on the embodiments of the present invention, all other embodiments obtained by ordinary technicians in this field without creative work are within the scope of protection of the present invention.

[0095] Example, see Figure 1 , a course ideological and political teaching evaluation method, including:

[0096] The evaluation index system of ideological and political education in courses is divided into four dimensions, namely, the teaching design of ideological and political education in courses, the teaching practice of ideological and political education in courses, the teaching effect of ideological and political education in courses, and the follow-up of ideological and political education in courses.

[0097] Among them, the teaching design of ideological and political courses includes five indicators: ideological and political teaching objectives C1, ideological and political teaching concepts C2, ideological and political teaching models C3, teaching content C4 and teaching methods C5;

[0098] The teaching practice of ideological and political education in courses includes four indicators: ideological and political education implementation plan C6, ideological and political education content supply C7, ideological and political education integration methods C8, and ideological and political education digital resources C9;

[0099] The teaching effect of ideological and political education in courses includes five indicators: teacher self-reflection C10, student ideological improvement C11, professional skills improvement C12, social practice activities C13 and cultural and sports competition activities C14;

[0100] The follow-up of ideological and political education in the course includes three indicators: student emotions C15, student thoughts C16, and workplace recognition C17;

[0101] Set the indicator weight for each indicator:

[0102] The weights of the indicators for ideological and political teaching objectives, ideological and political teaching concepts, teaching methods, ideological and political implementation plans, ideological and political content supply, ideological and political integration methods, teacher self-reflection, student ideological improvement, professional skills improvement, and social practice activities are all set at 5%;

[0103] The curriculum ideological and political model, teaching content, curriculum ideological and political digital resources, and cultural and sports competition activities are all set at 10%;

[0104] Student emotions and student thoughts were each set at 6%;

[0105] Workplace recognition is set at 8%;

[0106] Set the evaluation subject and weight for each indicator.

[0107] By dividing the indicator system of the evaluation method of ideological and political education into four dimensions, namely, teaching design, teaching practice, teaching effect, and post-follow-up, the problem of a single evaluation system or unclear evaluation criteria for ideological and political education in courses is effectively solved. Different weights are given to the indicators of each dimension according to their importance and role, thus ensuring that each link in the teaching process can receive full attention and evaluation. First, through the refinement of the ideological and political education teaching design, the teaching objectives, concepts, models, content, and methods are clearly defined, and appropriate weights are set, which can help teachers set teaching objectives more accurately, ensure that the teaching content is more closely integrated with ideological and political education, and avoid the problem of missing ideological and political education elements in traditional courses. This step solves the problem of unclear ideological and political education design or disconnection from professional courses, and improves the teaching effect and operability of ideological and political education in courses. Secondly, the evaluation of the ideological and political education teaching practice dimension focuses on the implementation plan of the course, content supply, integration methods, and the use of digital resources. By setting and evaluating these indicators, teachers can adjust and optimize teaching content and methods according to students' needs, effectively improving the penetration and actual influence of ideological and political education content in courses. This step solves the specific implementation difficulties in the process of integrating ideological and political education into courses, improves the feasibility and adaptability of teaching practice, and enhances the popularity and practical effect of ideological and political education in courses. The evaluation of teaching effectiveness can intuitively measure the actual results of ideological and political education in courses by reflecting on teachers' self, the improvement of students' thoughts and skills, social practice and cultural and sports competitions. In particular, for the improvement of students' thoughts, combined with social practice activities and cultural and sports competitions, it can provide students with a more comprehensive growth environment and promote the improvement of their comprehensive quality. This step solves the problem of ignoring students' actual growth in the traditional evaluation system and enhances the connotation of ideological and political education in courses. Finally, through the follow-up of ideological and political education in the later stage of courses, students' emotions, ideological changes and workplace recognition are tracked and evaluated, which solves the problem of insufficient connection between the continuous tracking of ideological and political teaching effects and students' career development. This step not only helps teachers find problems that students encounter in the learning process, but also adjusts the teaching content according to students' emotions and ideological changes, and improves the pertinence and sustainability of the course.

[0108] The setting of evaluation subject and weight for each indicator specifically includes:

[0109] The evaluation subjects of the ideological and political teaching objectives of the courses include the heads of the majors, teachers in the major groups, leaders of the secondary colleges and administrative departments, with weights of 35%, 30%, 15% and 20% respectively;

[0110] The evaluation subjects of the ideological and political teaching concept objectives of the courses include the heads of the majors, teachers in the major groups, leaders of the secondary colleges and administrative departments, with weights of 35%, 30%, 15% and 20% respectively;

[0111] The evaluation subjects of the course ideological and political model objectives include the heads of the majors, teachers within the major groups, and leaders of the secondary colleges, with weights of 30%, 40%, and 30% respectively;

[0112] The evaluation subjects of teaching content objectives include the head of the major, teachers in the major group, leaders of the secondary colleges and administrative departments, with weights of 35%, 30%, 15% and 20% respectively;

[0113] The evaluation subjects of teaching method objectives include the students and teachers in the group, with weights of 60% and 40% respectively;

[0114] The evaluation subjects of the course ideological and political implementation plan include the major leaders, the secondary college leaders and the administrative departments, with weights of 30%, 30% and 40% respectively;

[0115] The evaluation subjects of the ideological and political content supply objectives of the courses include the students, the heads of the majors and the teachers in the group, with weights of 50%, 20% and 30% respectively;

[0116] The evaluation subjects of the course ideological and political integration method goals include teaching students, professional leaders and teachers in the group, with weights of 60%, 20% and 20% respectively;

[0117] The evaluation subject of the digital resource objectives of ideological and political courses is the administrative department, with a weight of 100%;

[0118] The evaluation subject of the teacher's self-reflection goal is the teacher himself, with a weight of 100%;

[0119] The evaluation subjects of the student ideological improvement goal include students and counselors, with weights of 50% and 50% respectively;

[0120] The evaluation subjects of professional skills improvement goals include teachers themselves, students and teachers in the group, with weights of 30%, 40% and 30% respectively;

[0121] The evaluation subject of social practice activity objectives is the counselor, with a weight of 100%;

[0122] The evaluation subject of the cultural and sports competition activity objectives is the teaching students, with a weight of 100%;

[0123] The evaluation subject of students’ emotional goals is society, with a weight of 100%;

[0124] The evaluation subject of students’ ideological goals is society, with a weight of 100%;

[0125] The evaluation subject of the workplace recognition goal is society, with a weight of 100%;

[0126] The indicators are classified into two types: qualitative indicators and quantitative indicators.

[0127] By clarifying the evaluation subject of each indicator, the participation of all parties is ensured, which can not only ensure the leading role of professional leaders and teacher groups in teaching design and content, but also allow external evaluation subjects such as students, counselors and society to participate in the effect evaluation. This diversified participation of evaluation subjects can fully reflect the actual effect of course ideological and political education from different angles and levels. It solves the problem of single or subjective evaluation in the past, making the evaluation results more objective and comprehensive. Through clear weight setting, the problem of unclear evaluation focus is solved. The weight setting of each indicator is reasonably allocated according to its actual importance in course ideological and political education. For example, the teaching method target weight of course ideological and political education is relatively high, 60% of which comes from student evaluation, while the digital resources of course ideological and political education are completely evaluated by the administrative department with 100% weight. This weight setting can effectively reflect the responsibilities and roles that different subjects should bear in various indicators, ensure that key links receive greater attention, and avoid the situation where one aspect is emphasized while other aspects are ignored. This step makes the focus of evaluation more prominent and improves the practicality and operability of the evaluation. Dividing indicators into qualitative and quantitative categories can clearly distinguish which indicators can be objectively and quantitatively evaluated through data and which indicators need to rely on subjective opinions for judgment. Qualitative indicators such as "teacher self-reflection" and "student ideological improvement" emphasize in-depth thinking and analysis of the ideological level of teachers and students, while quantitative indicators such as "curriculum ideological and political teaching objectives" and "social practice activities" help to obtain evaluation from specific data and activity effects. This classification helps to comprehensively evaluate the actual effect of curriculum ideological and political education from multiple dimensions and levels, avoiding evaluation bias under a single standard. Through the evaluation of different subjects and the design of diversified indicators, feedback from different angles can be effectively collected to provide a strong basis for subsequent teaching adjustments and course optimization. In particular, through the social evaluation of students' emotions, thoughts and workplace recognition, the long-term effect of curriculum ideological and political education can be tracked, problems can be discovered in a timely manner and targeted improvements can be made to ensure the continuous improvement and upgrading of course content and form. This step provides a guarantee for the sustainable development of curriculum ideological and political education and avoids the limitations of fixed models. By introducing social subjects to participate in the evaluation, especially the social evaluation of indicators such as "student emotions", "student thoughts" and "workplace recognition", it can effectively connect classroom teaching with social practice and enhance the external recognition and influence of curriculum ideological and political education. This evaluation method not only reflects the educational effect, but also is in line with social needs and market evaluation, which helps to cultivate high-quality talents who can adapt to social development.

[0128] The indicators are classified into two types: qualitative indicators and quantitative indicators, specifically including:

[0129] The indicators that combine qualitative and quantitative aspects include the teaching objectives of ideological and political courses, the teaching concepts of ideological and political courses, the model of ideological and political courses, teaching content, teaching methods, the implementation plan of ideological and political courses, the supply of ideological and political content, teacher self-reflection, student ideological improvement, student emotions, student thoughts and workplace recognition;

[0130] Quantitative indicators include the ways of integrating ideological and political education into courses, digital resources for ideological and political education in courses, social practice activities, and cultural and sports competitions;

[0131] Each item of the qualitative and quantitative indicators is scored using a combination of qualitative and quantitative evaluation indicators;

[0132] Each quantitative indicator is scored using the quantitative indicator scoring strategy.

[0133] By formulating different scoring strategies for indicators that combine qualitative and quantitative methods and purely quantitative indicators, it is ensured that the evaluation standards of various indicators match their characteristics. Indicators that combine qualitative and quantitative methods, such as the teaching objectives of ideological and political courses, teaching concepts, and the improvement of students' thoughts, adopt a method that combines qualitative analysis and quantitative scoring, which not only considers specific quantitative data, such as student grades and participation, but also takes into account subjective evaluation, such as teacher reflection and student changes in thinking. This classification scoring can more comprehensively reflect the multi-dimensional effects of ideological and political courses, and avoids the situation of confusing different behaviors with results. For quantitative indicators, such as the integration of ideological and political courses, digital resources, and social practice activities, by using a purely quantitative scoring strategy, specific numbers and statistical data can be used for evaluation, providing a more objective and standardized evaluation method. Through specific quantitative scores and proportions, the actual effect of teaching content and the actual use of resources can be more directly reflected, avoiding the problem of over-reliance on subjective evaluation. This quantitative evaluation method greatly improves the accuracy of the evaluation and enhances its credibility and operability. Incorporating a combination of qualitative and quantitative indicators into the evaluation system of ideological and political education in courses not only focuses on students' knowledge mastery and skill improvement, but also deeply explores the changes in students' thoughts and emotions, further broadening the dimension of evaluation. This all-round evaluation system can comprehensively consider multiple factors such as teaching content, student participation, teaching methods, and student thoughts, ensuring the full cycle and full process of the evaluation of the effectiveness of ideological and political education in courses. By combining qualitative and quantitative evaluation, it is not only possible to clearly grasp the teaching effect of each link, but also to help teachers identify which teaching methods or content have a greater role in promoting students' thoughts. Through quantitative indicators, such as the scoring of the integration of ideological and political education in courses and social practice activities, teaching managers can find shortcomings in course implementation based on data analysis results. For example, if the score of social practice activities is low, the form and content of practical activities can be adjusted in time, and social practice related to professional courses can be increased to ensure that the course content can better meet students' needs. The scoring strategy of quantitative indicators provides more intuitive data feedback, provides data support for the improvement and optimization of ideological and political education in courses, and enhances the flexibility and adjustability of course design.

[0134] Each of the indicators combining qualitative and quantitative factors is scored using the evaluation indicators combining qualitative and quantitative factors, specifically including:

[0135] The qualitative analysis is divided into four levels: excellent, good, fair, and poor, and different scores are assigned to each of the four levels;

[0136] Among them, 100 points are given for excellent level, 70 points for good level, 50 points for fair level, and 20 points for poor level;

[0137] For any one of the evaluation indicators combining qualitative and quantitative:

[0138] Obtain the grade of each evaluation subject of the evaluation indicator for the evaluation indicator, and obtain the score corresponding to the grade;

[0139] The indicator grade is calculated by calculating the score of the grade evaluated by each evaluation subject × the weight of the evaluation subject, and summing up all the products. The sum result is the indicator grade.

[0140] Calculate the final score of the indicator: indicator grade point × indicator corresponding weight, the product is the final score of the indicator.

[0141] By dividing qualitative indicators into four levels, excellent, good, fair, and poor, and assigning clear scores to each level, 100 points, 70 points, 50 points, and 20 points, the evaluation is more standardized and specific. Traditional qualitative evaluation is often greatly affected by subjective factors, and the scoring standards are different, resulting in insufficient fairness and consistency in the evaluation results. By dividing the grades and assigning specific scores, it is possible to ensure that different evaluation subjects have a unified standard for scoring the same indicator, thereby improving the objectivity and consistency of the evaluation results. The scoring of qualitative indicators adopts a weighted calculation method, that is, the grade score of each evaluation subject is multiplied by its weight, and then accumulated and summed. This method solves the problem of unclear proportion of different evaluation subjects in the scoring. By assigning different weights to different subjects, the actual influence of different subjects in the evaluation process can be reflected. For example, the evaluation weights of the ideological and political teaching objectives and teaching concepts of the course are relatively high, which can ensure that the evaluation results of the professional leaders and the teacher group on these indicators can have a greater impact on the final score. This weighted calculation method enhances the scientific nature of the evaluation and ensures that the opinions and influence of different subjects are fully reflected. By calculating the indicator grade and final score, it can be ensured that the score of each evaluation indicator not only integrates the opinions of each evaluation subject, but also corresponds to its weight. This calculation method solves the problem of unreasonable scoring distribution and excessive subjectivity in traditional evaluation methods. The final score of each indicator can more accurately reflect the actual role and contribution of the indicator in the overall teaching, avoiding the deviation and one-sidedness brought by the evaluation of a single subject. The evaluation method combining qualitative and quantitative methods is clarified, so that the evaluation of ideological and political education in courses not only relies on quantitative data, such as student grades and participation, but also fully considers subjective factors in the teaching process, such as teacher self-reflection and student ideological improvement. Qualitative scoring ensures that the evaluation results are more comprehensive and accurate by evaluating teaching design, concepts and content, combined with quantitative scoring to measure teaching effects and practical activities. This comprehensive scoring model effectively solves the problem of lack of quantitative basis in traditional qualitative evaluation, making the evaluation results more convincing. By clarifying the weight and scoring criteria of each evaluation subject, the scoring process is more transparent and fair. The evaluation opinions of different subjects such as students, teachers and managers are supported by weights, ensuring that each link can be fairly reflected in the final score. This increase in transparency will help improve the trust in the ideological and political evaluation system of courses and enable all participants to accept and identify with the evaluation results.

[0142] Each of the quantitative indicators is scored using the quantitative indicator scoring strategy, specifically including:

[0143] When the scoring item is the way of integrating ideological and political education into the course, the calculation method for the score of this indicator is:

[0144] Get the number of students in a class;

[0145] Get the number of students participating in the course;

[0146] Obtain points for integrating ideological and political elements;

[0147] Set the score for integrating ideological and political elements, recorded as H8;

[0148] The score H8 is specifically: when the number of points for integrating ideological and political elements = 0, H8 = 0; when 1≤the number of points for integrating ideological and political elements≤5, H8 = 30; when 6≤the number of points for integrating ideological and political elements≤10, H8 = 50; when 11≤the number of points for integrating ideological and political elements≤15, H8 = 65; when 16≤the number of points for integrating ideological and political elements≤20, H8 = 75; when 21≤the number of points for integrating ideological and political elements≤30, H8 = 90; when 30<the number of points for integrating ideological and political elements, H8 = 100;

[0149] Calculate the frequency of student participation, recorded as Q8, and the calculation method is: student participation / (number of students in the class × number of points of integration of ideological and political elements);

[0150] Then the quantitative evaluation index score of the course ideological and political integration method C8 is: C8 quantitative evaluation index score = H8 × Q8 × I8;

[0151] Among them, I8 is the indicator weight corresponding to the way of integrating ideological and political education into indicator courses.

[0152] By setting specific scoring rules for the integration of ideological and political education into courses, especially defining the score H8 by "the number of points of integration of ideological and political elements", the scoring criteria are made clearer and more specific. The score of each interval, such as 30 points when the number of points of integration of ideological and political elements is 1 to 5, and 50 points when the number of points of integration of ideological and political elements is 6 to 10, ensures that the degree of integration of ideological and political education into courses can be quantitatively evaluated according to the actual situation of teaching activities. This clear scoring standard solves the problems of vague evaluation and inconsistent standards in traditional scoring methods, and provides an objective and quantitative evaluation basis. By calculating the frequency of student participation (Q8), the number of participants is combined with the number of students in the class and the number of times the ideological and political elements are integrated, and the actual degree of student participation is further accurately evaluated. This method ensures that the score can be adjusted according to the actual student participation, rather than simply relying on the number of points of integration of ideological and political elements, thereby avoiding the problem of over-evaluation of students with low participation but many integration points. At the same time, the quantitative scoring method also improves the transparency of the scoring process. Teachers and managers can clearly see the calculation process and results of each scoring item, which enhances the fairness and credibility of the evaluation results. The quantitative scoring method reduces the interference of subjective factors in the scoring of the ideological and political integration of courses through a clear calculation formula. For example, in traditional qualitative evaluation, there may be inconsistent or overly subjective judgments on the degree of ideological and political integration by teachers or evaluation subjects. However, through the quantitative scoring method, all evaluation subjects score based on the same standard, avoiding the deviation of the evaluation results caused by differences in personal opinions, and ensuring the consistency and fairness of the scoring. The scoring strategy adopts a data-based quantitative evaluation method, which can not only give a clear score, but also help teachers and managers identify which ideological and political elements are fully integrated into the course and which aspects may be insufficient. This provides important data support for subsequent course improvements. If a course has a low number of ideological and political elements or a low frequency of student participation, teachers and managers can adjust the teaching methods or increase the proportion of ideological and political content in a timely manner, thereby improving the overall quality of the course and the effect of ideological and political education. The final score, C8 quantitative evaluation index score = H8 × Q8 × I8, combines the number of ideological and political elements, the frequency of student participation, and the indicator weight I8, ensuring that the score of the ideological and political integration of courses not only considers the breadth of integration and the number of integration points, but also reflects the depth and the frequency of student participation. This comprehensive calculation method can more accurately evaluate the effectiveness of the implementation of ideological and political education in courses, avoiding the one-sidedness brought about by a single indicator evaluation, thus making the overall evaluation more comprehensive and accurate.

[0153] Each of the quantitative indicators is scored using the quantitative indicator scoring strategy, specifically including:

[0154] When the scoring item is the digital resources of the course ideological and political education, the calculation method of the indicator score is:

[0155] Obtain the number of types of digital resources for ideological and political courses;

[0156] Get the number of digital resources for ideological and political courses;

[0157] Set the course ideological and political digital resource score, recorded as H9;

[0158] The score H9 is specifically: if the number of types of digital resources for ideological and political education courses is less than 3, H9 = 0;

[0159] If the number of types of digital resources for ideological and political courses is ≥3, when 1≤the number of digital resources for ideological and political courses≤10, H9=30; when 11≤the number of digital resources for ideological and political courses≤20, H9=50; when 21≤the number of digital resources for ideological and political courses≤30, H9=65; when 31≤the number of digital resources for ideological and political courses≤40, H9=75; when 41≤the number of digital resources for ideological and political courses≤50, H9=90; when 50<the number of digital resources for ideological and political courses, H9=100;

[0160] Then the quantitative evaluation index score of the course ideological and political digital resource C9 is: C9 quantitative evaluation index score = H9 × I9;

[0161] Among them, I9 is ​​the indicator weight corresponding to the indicator course ideological and political digital resources.

[0162] The quantitative scoring strategy designed for the digital resources of ideological and political courses can effectively solve the problem of lack of systematic quantitative evaluation of the utilization of digital resources in traditional scoring methods, and ensure the objectivity, fairness and operability of the scoring through clear standards and calculation methods. The scoring strategy first sets the score H9 by "the number of types of ideological and political digital resources in courses", ensuring that the diversity of digital resources is fully considered. If the number of types of ideological and political digital resources in courses is less than 3, the score is 0; when the number of types exceeds 3, the number of ideological and political digital resources in courses is also included in the scoring criteria, and the score gradually increases with the increase in the number of resources. This scoring method clearly defines the scoring criteria for different types and quantities of digital resources, avoiding the single evaluation dimension of relying solely on quantity or type, making the evaluation more comprehensive and in line with actual application needs. By setting specific scoring intervals, such as 30 points when the number of digital resources is 1-10, 50 points when 11-20, etc., there is a clear mapping relationship between the number of digital resources in each level and the score, which can convert the types and quantities of ideological and political digital resources in courses into quantifiable scores. This quantitative evaluation method can ensure that the efforts of different courses and teachers in resource investment can be reflected concretely and fairly. This quantitative scoring method overcomes the problems of vague evaluation criteria and strong subjectivity in traditional evaluation methods, so that the resource utilization status of ideological and political education in courses can be reflected more objectively and fairly. This scoring strategy not only takes into account the number of digital resources, but also takes into account the types of resources. By limiting the score to 0 when there are less than 3 types of digital resources, it avoids the situation where some courses rely on only a single digital resource, which helps to encourage teachers to introduce diversified digital resources in ideological and political education. This move promotes the diversification of digital resources, enhances the richness and adaptability of ideological and political education content, and thus improves teaching effectiveness. The scoring system calculates the score by combining the type and quantity of resources, thereby reflecting the actual application effect of digital resources in the teaching process. By calculating the score H9, teachers can evaluate the breadth and depth of resource use based on the types and quantities of digital resources they use. In addition, the calculation method of the score of digital resources in ideological and political education can also provide teaching managers with data support on resource allocation and use, helping them to better understand the application status and effect of digital resources in teaching, thereby optimizing resource allocation and improving teaching quality. The scoring strategy clearly states that higher scores can be obtained by increasing the types and quantity of digital resources. This incentive mechanism encourages teachers and teaching managers to pay more attention to the expansion and optimization of digital resources. Teachers may be more proactive in finding new digital resources that meet the goals of ideological and political education and integrate them into the classroom. Over time, this mechanism can continuously promote the updating and upgrading of teaching resources and promote the diversity and modernization of course content.The final score, C9 quantitative evaluation index score = H9 × I9, not only reflects the type and quantity of digital resources, but also combines the index weight I9 to ensure that the relative importance of each resource is reflected. Teachers and managers can use this scoring mechanism to understand which ideological and political resources are most effective in teaching and which resources need to be strengthened or improved. This feedback mechanism can help teachers make adjustments in future teaching and continuously improve the resource allocation and application effect of ideological and political courses. Through the quantitative evaluation of digital resources for ideological and political courses, we can see the depth and breadth of resource utilization in the course, which can help teachers better integrate modern educational technology, improve the interactivity and attractiveness of the classroom, and thus enhance the effect of ideological and political education in the course. Teachers pay more attention to the rational use of digital resources in course design, so that students can contact and understand ideological and political content in different teaching media, and promote the multi-channel and multi-level dissemination of ideological and political education.

[0163] Each of the quantitative indicators is scored using the quantitative indicator scoring strategy, specifically including:

[0164] When the scoring item is a social practice activity, the scoring method for this indicator is as follows:

[0165] Get the number of people participating in practical activities;

[0166] Get the total number of students in the class;

[0167] The percentage of participation in practical activities is calculated as H13, which is:

[0168]

[0169] Then the quantitative evaluation index score of social practice activity C13 is: C13 quantitative evaluation index score = 100 × H13 × I13;

[0170] Among them, I13 is the indicator weight corresponding to the indicator social practice.

[0171] The quantitative scoring strategy designed for social practice activities can effectively solve the subjective and unclear problems of participation in social practice activities, and provide a simple, quantifiable and incentive scoring mechanism. By setting the two basic data of "number of people participating in practice activities" and "total number of students taught", the proportion of participation in social practice activities H13 is calculated, so that the participation in social practice activities is accurately quantified. This scoring method avoids the problem of unclear or subjective evaluation of participation in social practice activities in traditional evaluation methods, and ensures that all participation situations can be clearly and truly reflected in the final score. By calculating the participation ratio, the actual participation in social practice activities can be accurately evaluated, avoiding the situation of relying solely on reports or subjective judgments of teachers. The calculation method of this scoring strategy is clear and concise. The participation ratio H13 is calculated by "number of people participating in practice activities / total number of students taught", and the final score is obtained by "100×H13×I13", where I13 is the weight of the indicator. This calculation method is clear and direct, which is easy for teachers and managers to understand and apply, and effectively reduces the complexity and confusion in the scoring process. In the traditional scoring method, the scoring of social practice activities may be affected by a variety of subjective factors, while this quantitative scoring method converts these factors into numbers, making the evaluation more objective and consistent. Through this quantitative scoring strategy, the participation enthusiasm of teachers and students will be directly reflected and fed back. When students know that their participation will directly affect the final score, they will be more motivated to participate in social practice activities. This incentive mechanism prompts students to pay more attention to and attach importance to practical activities, and improves the actual participation in social practice activities. This strategy also prompts teachers to pay more attention to improving students' sense of participation and actual effects when designing and organizing social practice activities, further enhancing the value and significance of social practice activities. In traditional teaching evaluation, the evaluation of social practice activities often relies on teachers' personal observations and subjective views, which easily leads to inconsistent evaluation standards and lack of transparency. Through this quantitative scoring mechanism, the proportion of students participating in social practice activities has become a unified standard, and the participation of all students can be measured and evaluated by the same standard, thereby improving the consistency and fairness of scoring. The transparency and fairness of the evaluation process are guaranteed, and the participation of all students can be clearly reflected.

[0172] Each of the quantitative indicators is scored using the quantitative indicator scoring strategy, specifically including:

[0173] When the scoring item is a cultural and sports competition, the calculation method for the indicator score is:

[0174] Get the number of people who won provincial awards, recorded as n1;

[0175] Get the number of people who have won school-level awards, recorded as n2;

[0176] The quantitative evaluation index score of cultural and sports competition activity C14 is:

[0177] Calculate the weighted award value W,

[0178] C14 quantitative evaluation index score = W × I14;

[0179] Among them, I14 is the indicator weight corresponding to the cultural and sports competition activities.

[0180] The quantitative scoring strategy designed for cultural and sports competitions can effectively solve the problems of unclear evaluation and inconsistent standards for participation and award-winning in cultural and sports competitions, and provide a quantitative incentive mechanism to enhance students' motivation to participate and the actual effect of the competition. In traditional evaluation, the evaluation of cultural and sports competitions often relies on the subjective statements of participants or the personal judgment of event organizers, which may lead to inconsistent evaluation standards and strong subjectivity. By setting a specific calculation method, that is, by calculating "the number of people who won provincial awards n1" and "the number of people who won school-level awards n2", combined with the weighted award value W, a clear and unified evaluation standard can be provided for each student's participation and performance. This standard avoids the interference of subjective factors and makes the evaluation of cultural and sports competitions more objective and consistent. By incorporating provincial awards and school-level awards into the evaluation system respectively, and calculating the final score of cultural and sports competitions through the weighted award value W, the incentive mechanism is further strengthened. Students can clearly understand that the number of winners n1 who win higher-level awards will bring them higher scores, which helps to enhance students' motivation to participate in cultural and sports competitions. In particular, weighted calculations for outstanding awards, such as provincial awards, can effectively motivate students to strive for high-level awards, thereby increasing their enthusiasm and competitiveness in participating in competitions. By calculating the weighted award value W, it is ensured that the award received by each student is reasonably evaluated based on their actual performance. This ensures that the comparison between different awards is fair, avoids the practice of simply recording the number of winners, and ensures a comprehensive and accurate evaluation of student performance. In addition, the transparency of the scoring mechanism allows students to clearly understand the relationship between their level of participation and the final score, eliminating concerns about unclear evaluation criteria.

[0181] It should be noted that, in this article, relational terms such as first and second, etc. are only used to distinguish one entity or operation from another entity or operation, and do not necessarily require or imply any such actual relationship or order between these entities or operations. Moreover, the terms "include", "comprise" or any other variants thereof are intended to cover non-exclusive inclusion, so that a process, method, article or device including a series of elements includes not only those elements, but also other elements not explicitly listed, or also includes elements inherent to such process, method, article or device.

[0182] The above is only a preferred embodiment of the present invention. It should be pointed out that for ordinary technicians in this technical field, several improvements and modifications can be made without departing from the technical principles of the present invention. These improvements and modifications should also be regarded as the scope of protection of the present invention.

Claims

1. A method for evaluating ideological and political teaching in a course, characterized in that: include: The evaluation index system of ideological and political education in courses is divided into four dimensions, namely, the teaching design of ideological and political education in courses, the teaching practice of ideological and political education in courses, the teaching effect of ideological and political education in courses, and the follow-up of ideological and political education in courses. Among them, the teaching design of ideological and political courses includes five indicators: ideological and political teaching objectives C1, ideological and political teaching concepts C2, ideological and political teaching models C3, teaching content C4 and teaching methods C5; The teaching practice of ideological and political education in courses includes four indicators: ideological and political education implementation plan C6, ideological and political education content supply C7, ideological and political education integration methods C8, and ideological and political education digital resources C9; The teaching effect of ideological and political education in courses includes five indicators: teacher self-reflection C10, student ideological improvement C11, professional skills improvement C12, social practice activities C13 and cultural and sports competition activities C14; The follow-up of ideological and political education in the course includes three indicators: student emotions C15, student thoughts C16, and workplace recognition C17; Set the indicator weight for each indicator: The weights of the indicators for ideological and political teaching objectives, ideological and political teaching concepts, teaching methods, ideological and political implementation plans, ideological and political content supply, ideological and political integration methods, teacher self-reflection, student ideological improvement, professional skills improvement, and social practice activities are all set at 5%; The curriculum ideological and political model, teaching content, curriculum ideological and political digital resources, and cultural and sports competition activities are all set at 10%; Student emotions and student thoughts were each set at 6%; Workplace recognition is set at 8%; Set the evaluation subject and weight for each indicator.

2. According to a method for evaluating ideological and political education in a course, the method is characterized in that: The setting of evaluation subject and weight for each indicator specifically includes: The evaluation subjects of the ideological and political teaching objectives of the courses include the heads of the majors, teachers in the major groups, leaders of the secondary colleges and administrative departments, with weights of 35%, 30%, 15% and 20% respectively; The evaluation subjects of the ideological and political teaching concept objectives of the courses include the heads of the majors, teachers in the major groups, leaders of the secondary colleges and administrative departments, with weights of 35%, 30%, 15% and 20% respectively; The evaluation subjects of the course ideological and political model objectives include the heads of the majors, teachers within the major groups, and leaders of the secondary colleges, with weights of 30%, 40%, and 30% respectively; The evaluation subjects of teaching content objectives include the head of the major, teachers in the major group, leaders of the secondary colleges and administrative departments, with weights of 35%, 30%, 15% and 20% respectively; The evaluation subjects of teaching method objectives include the teaching students and the teachers in the group, with weights of 60% and 40% respectively; The evaluation subjects of the course ideological and political implementation plan include the major leaders, the secondary college leaders and the administrative departments, with weights of 30%, 30% and 40% respectively; The evaluation subjects of the ideological and political content supply objectives of the courses include the students, the heads of the majors and the teachers in the group, with weights of 50%, 20% and 30% respectively; The evaluation subjects of the course ideological and political integration method goals include teaching students, professional leaders and teachers in the group, with weights of 60%, 20% and 20% respectively; The evaluation subject of the digital resource objectives of ideological and political courses is the administrative department, with a weight of 100%; The evaluation subject of the teacher's self-reflection goal is the teacher himself, with a weight of 100%; The evaluation subjects of the student ideological improvement goal include students and counselors, with weights of 50% and 50% respectively; The evaluation subjects of professional skills improvement goals include teachers themselves, students and teachers in the group, with weights of 30%, 40% and 30% respectively; The evaluation subject of social practice activity objectives is the counselor, with a weight of 100%; The evaluation subject of the cultural and sports competition activity objectives is the teaching students, with a weight of 100%; The evaluation subject of students’ emotional goals is society, with a weight of 100%; The evaluation subject of students’ ideological goals is society, with a weight of 100%; The evaluation subject of the workplace recognition goal is society, with a weight of 100%; The indicators are classified into two types: qualitative indicators and quantitative indicators.

3. A course ideological and political teaching evaluation method according to claim 3, characterized in that: The indicators are classified into two types: qualitative indicators and quantitative indicators, specifically including: The indicators that combine qualitative and quantitative aspects include the teaching objectives of ideological and political courses, the teaching concepts of ideological and political courses, the model of ideological and political courses, teaching content, teaching methods, the implementation plan of ideological and political courses, the supply of ideological and political content, teacher self-reflection, student ideological improvement, student emotions, student thoughts and workplace recognition; Quantitative indicators include the ways of integrating ideological and political education into courses, digital resources for ideological and political education in courses, social practice activities, and cultural and sports competitions; Each item of the qualitative and quantitative indicators is scored using a combination of qualitative and quantitative evaluation indicators; Each quantitative indicator is scored using the quantitative indicator scoring strategy.

4. A method for evaluating ideological and political education in a course according to claim 3, characterized in that: Each of the indicators combining qualitative and quantitative factors is scored using the evaluation indicators combining qualitative and quantitative factors, specifically including: The qualitative analysis is divided into four levels: excellent, good, fair, and poor, and different scores are assigned to each of the four levels; Among them, 100 points are given for excellent level, 70 points for good level, 50 points for fair level, and 20 points for poor level; For any one of the evaluation indicators combining qualitative and quantitative: Obtain the grade of each evaluation subject of the evaluation indicator for the evaluation indicator, and obtain the score corresponding to the grade; The indicator grade is calculated by calculating the score of the grade evaluated by each evaluation subject × the weight of the evaluation subject, and summing up all the products. The sum result is the indicator grade. Calculate the final score of the indicator: indicator grade point × indicator corresponding weight, the product is the final score of the indicator.

5. According to claim 3, a method for evaluating ideological and political teaching in a course is characterized in that: Each of the quantitative indicators is scored using the quantitative indicator scoring strategy, specifically including: When the scoring item is the way of integrating ideological and political education into the course, the calculation method for the score of this indicator is: Get the number of students in a class; Get the number of students participating in the course; Obtain points for integrating ideological and political elements; Set the score for integrating ideological and political elements, recorded as H8; The score H8 is specifically: when the number of points for integrating ideological and political elements = 0, H8 = 0; when 1≤the number of points for integrating ideological and political elements≤5, H8 = 30; when 6≤the number of points for integrating ideological and political elements≤10, H8 = 50; when 11≤the number of points for integrating ideological and political elements≤15, H8 = 65; when 16≤the number of points for integrating ideological and political elements≤20, H8 = 75; when 21≤the number of points for integrating ideological and political elements≤30, H8 = 90; when 30<the number of points for integrating ideological and political elements, H8 = 100; Calculate the frequency of student participation, recorded as Q8, and the calculation method is: student participation / (number of students in the class × number of points of integration of ideological and political elements); Then the quantitative evaluation index score of the course ideological and political integration method C8 is: C8 quantitative evaluation index score = H8 × Q8 × I8; Among them, I8 is the indicator weight corresponding to the way of integrating ideological and political education into indicator courses.

6. A method for evaluating ideological and political teaching in a course according to claim 3, characterized in that: Each of the quantitative indicators is scored using the quantitative indicator scoring strategy, specifically including: When the scoring item is the digital resources of the course ideological and political education, the calculation method of the indicator score is: Obtain the number of types of digital resources for ideological and political education in courses; Get the number of digital resources for ideological and political courses; Set the course ideological and political digital resource score, recorded as H9; The score H9 is specifically: if the number of types of digital resources for ideological and political education courses is less than 3, H9 = 0; If the number of types of digital resources for ideological and political courses is ≥3, when 1≤the number of digital resources for ideological and political courses≤10, H9=30; when 11≤the number of digital resources for ideological and political courses≤20, H9=50; when 21≤the number of digital resources for ideological and political courses≤30, H9=65; when 31≤the number of digital resources for ideological and political courses≤40, H9=75; when 41≤the number of digital resources for ideological and political courses≤50, H9=90; when 50<the number of digital resources for ideological and political courses, H9=100; Then the quantitative evaluation index score of the course ideological and political digital resource C9 is: C9 quantitative evaluation index score = H9 × I9; Among them, I9 is ​​the indicator weight corresponding to the indicator course ideological and political digital resources.

7. A method for evaluating ideological and political teaching in a course according to claim 3, characterized in that: Each of the quantitative indicators is scored using the quantitative indicator scoring strategy, specifically including: When the scoring item is a social practice activity, the scoring method for this indicator is as follows: Get the number of people participating in practical activities; Get the total number of students in the class; The percentage of participation in practical activities is calculated as H13, which is: Then the quantitative evaluation index score of social practice activity C13 is: C13 quantitative evaluation index score = 100 × H13 × I13; Among them, I13 is the indicator weight corresponding to the indicator social practice.

8. A method for evaluating ideological and political education in a course according to claim 3, characterized in that: Each of the quantitative indicators is scored using the quantitative indicator scoring strategy, specifically including: When the scoring item is a cultural and sports competition, the calculation method for the indicator score is: Get the number of people who won provincial awards, recorded as n1; Get the number of people who have won school-level awards, recorded as n2; The quantitative evaluation index score of cultural and sports competition activity C14 is: Calculate the weighted award value W, C14 quantitative evaluation index score = W × I14; Among them, I14 is the indicator weight corresponding to the indicator cultural and sports competition activities.

Images