Innovative Models of Higher Education Management and Student Training Mechanisms in the Context of Internet Plus
Sep 26, 2025
About this article
Published Online: Sep 26, 2025
Received: Jan 01, 2025
Accepted: May 01, 2025
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/amns-2025-1036
Keywords
© 2025 Shucheng Li, published by Sciendo.
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Figure 1.
Figure 2.
Figure 3.
Figure 4.
Figure 5.
Application effect evaluation index
| Index | Index judgment | Metric |
|---|---|---|
| Learning resources | Knowledge organization visualization | It is useful to show the knowledge of knowledge. |
| Recommendation for learning resources | Learning resources are recommended. | |
| Learning companion | Peer group | Learning peer group is effective. |
| Learning path | Recommendation for learning path | The learning path is recommended. |
| Learning path rendering | The learning path is clearer in the form of knowledge. | |
| Perceptual ease of use | System operability | The system works simple. |
| Perceptual usefulness | The usefulness of the system | The system can help me learn. |
| User attitude | Learners’ satisfaction | I am willing to use the system to study. |
| Behavior will | The use of learners | I often use the system to study. |
The basic situation of the survey
| Categories | Options | Number | Proportion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gender | man | 12 | 24% |
| female | 38 | 76% | |
| Professional background | science | 24 | 48% |
| Liberal arts | 26 | 52% | |
| Educational background | Specialty and below | 6 | 12% |
| undergraduate | 15 | 30% | |
| Master graduate | 20 | 40% | |
| Doctoral student | 9 | 18% |
Final grade matching sample t test
| Laboratory class | Cross-reference class | |
|---|---|---|
| Mean value | -3.131 | -0.095 |
| Standard deviation | 8.512 | 12.315 |
| Standard error mean | 1.359 | 1.845 |
| The difference is 95% of the confidence interval | -5.818 | -3.845 |
| The difference is 95% true interval limit | -0.423 | 3.648 |
| t | -2.359 | -0.047 |
| freedom | 41 | 41 |
| Significance (double tail) | 0.026 | 0.954 |
Final and interim performance independent sample t test
| Midterm | Final examination | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Assumed equal variance | Unassuming equal variance | Assumed equal variance | Unassuming equal variance | ||
| Levin variance equivalence test | F | 2.175 | 8.914 | ||
| significance | 0.146 | 0.003 | |||
| Average equivalent t test | t | 0.215 | 0.213 | 1.978 | 2.003 |
| freedom | 84 | 81.456 | 83 | 78.945 | |
| Significance (double tail) | 0.825 | 0.829 | 0.052 | 0.047 | |
| Mean difference | 0.364 | 0.346 | 3.374 | 3.381 | |
| Standard error difference | 1.651 | 1.625 | 1.705 | 1.687 | |
| The difference is 95% of the confidence interval | -2.911 | -2.891 | -0.008 | 0.026 | |
| The difference is 95% true interval limit | 3.617 | 3.545 | 6.779 | 6.745 | |
The midterm and final results are compared and analyzed
| Mean value | Case number | Standard deviation | Standard error mean | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Laboratory class (midterm) | 86.23 | 42 | 6.451 | 1.03 |
| Laboratory class (Final examination) | 89.95 | 42 | 6.235 | 0.98 |
| Cross-reference class (midterm) | 85.12 | 42 | 8.269 | 1.21 |
| Cross-reference class (Final examination) | 85.23 | 42 | 8.965 | 1.36 |