Research Article

An Analysis of the Variables Influencing the Selection of Active Methodologies

Melchor Gómez-García 1 * , Roberto Soto-Varela 2 , Moussa Boumadan 1 , César Poyatos-Dorado 1
More Detail
1 Pedagogy, Autonomous University of Madrid, Madrid, SPAIN2 Segovia Faculty of Education, University of Valladolid, Valladolid, SPAIN* Corresponding Author
Contemporary Educational Technology, 14(4), October 2022, ep389, https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/12462
Published: 17 September 2022
OPEN ACCESS   1409 Views   713 Downloads
Download Full Text (PDF)

ABSTRACT

Transferring a pedagogical proposal from a face-to-face environment to a virtual one is not an automatic conversion. It requires a thorough instructional design and the appropriate methodology. The main purpose of this study is to analyze the variables that influence the selection of an active methodology mediated by information and communication technologies for the design of a didactic sequence developed in a digital environment. We have worked with a sample of teachers who have participated in a training experience in which they have built a didactic proposal for a digital environment, selecting an active methodology from a reflective dynamic based on objective criteria. The study shows that there is a positive association between the year the course was taken, the sex of the participants and the stage where the participants work, and the chosen methodology. Finally, the area of knowledge taught is not a determining factor. It is concluded that regardless of the methodological selection, teachers tend to value the didactic component training over the instrumental one, although it is decisive that the training deals with technology, but from a techno pedagogical perspective.
Keywords: methodology, ICT, didactic sequence, teachers

CITATION (APA)

Gómez-García, M., Soto-Varela, R., Boumadan, M., & Poyatos-Dorado, C. (2022). An Analysis of the Variables Influencing the Selection of Active Methodologies. Contemporary Educational Technology, 14(4), ep389. https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/12462

REFERENCES

  1. Aguaded, I., Jaramillo-Dent, D., & Delgado-Ponce, A. (2021). Currículum Alfamed. de formación de profesores en educación mediática [Alfamed curriculum. Teacher training in media education]. MIL (Media Information Literacy) en la era pos-COVID-19 [MIL (Media Information Literacy) in the post-COVID 19 era].
  2. Aguirregabiria-Barturen, J., & García Olalla, A. (2020). Aprendizaje basado en proyectos y desarrollo sostenible en el grado de educación primaria [Project-based learning and sustainable development in the primary education degree]. Enseñanza De Las Ciencias: Revista de Investigación y Experiencias Didácticas [Enseñanza De Las Ciencias: Journal of Research and Didactic Experiences], 38(2), 5-24. https://doi.org/10.5565/rev/ensciencias.2717
  3. Alonso, A. (2020). Aprendizaje basado en proyectos (ABP) y clase invertida con TIC [Project-based learning (PBL) and flipped class with ICT]. In M. Raposo Rivas, & M. Cebrián de la Serna (Eds.), Tecnologías para la formación de educadores en la sociedad de conocimiento [Technologies for the training of educators in the knowledge society] (pp. 149-158). Pirámide.
  4. Area, M., & Adell, J. (2021). Tecnologías digitales y cambio educativo. Una aproximación crítica [Digital technologies and educational change. A critical approach]. REICE. Revista Iberoamericana sobre Calidad, Eficacia y Cambio en Educación [REICE. Ibero-American Journal on Quality, Effectiveness and Change in Education], 19(4), 83-96. https://doi.org/10.15366/reice2021.19.4.005
  5. Area, M., & Sanabria, A. L. (2014). Opiniones, expectativas y valoraciones del profesorado participante en el Programa Escuela 2.0 en España [Opinions, expectations and evaluations of the teachers participating in the Escuela 2.0 Program in Spain]. Revista Educar [Educate Magazine], 50(1), 15-39. https://doi.org/10.5565/rev/educar.64
  6. Botella, A. M., & Adell, J. R. (2016). Una propuesta experimental en la enseñanza de la música en secundaria [An experimental proposal in the teaching of music in secondary school]. MAVAE. Cuadernos de Música, Artes Visuales y Artes [MAVAE. Notebooks of Music, Visual Arts and Arts].
  7. Bray, B., & McClaskey, K. (2014). Make learning personal: The what, who, wow, where, and why. Corwin Press.
  8. Caballero, K. (2013). La formación del profesorado universitario y su influencia en el desarrollo de la actividad professional [The training of university teachers and their influence on the development of professional activity]. Revista de Docencia Universitaria [University Teaching Magazine], 11(2), 391-391. https://doi.org/10.4995/redu.2013.5582
  9. Cabero, J., & Barroso, J. (2016). ICT teacher training: A view of the TPACK model/Formación del profesorado en TIC: Una visión del modelo TPACK. Culture and Education, 28(3), 633-663. https://doi.org/10.1080/11356405.2016.1203526
  10. Cabero-Almenara, J., & Llorente-Cejudo, C. (2020). COVID-19: Transformación radical de la digitalización de las instituciones universitarias [COVID-19: Radical transformation of the digitization of university institutions]. Campus Virtuales [Virtual Campuses], 9(2), 25-34.
  11. Cabero-Almenara, J., & Valencia, R. (2020). And COVID-19 transformed the educational system: Reflections and experiences to learn. IJERI: International Journal of Educational Research and Innovation, 15, 218-228. https://doi.org/10.46661/ijeri.5246
  12. Cabero-Almenara, J., Gallego-Pérez, O., Puentes Puente, Á., & Jiménez Rosa, T. (2018). La “aceptación de la tecnología de la formación virtual” y su relación con la capacitación docente en docencia virtual [The “acceptance of virtual training technology” and its relationship with teacher training in virtual teaching]. EDMETIC, Revista de Educación Mediática y TIC [EDMETIC, Journal of Media Education and ICT], 7(1), 225-241. https://doi.org/10.21071/edmetic.v7i1.10028
  13. Cabero-Almenara, J., Romero-Tena, R., & Palacios-Rodríguez, A. (2020). Evaluation of teacher digital competence frameworks through expert judgement: The use of the expert competence coefficient. Journal of New Approaches in Educational Research, 9(2), 275-293. https://doi.org/10.7821/naer.2020.7.578
  14. Castañeda, L., Esteve, F., & Adell, J. (2018). ¿Por qué es necesario repensar la competencia docente para el mundo digital [Why is it necessary to rethink teaching competence for the digital world?]. Revista de Educación a Distancia [Distance Education Magazine], 56. https://doi.org/10.6018/red/56/6
  15. Chen, C. H., & Yang, Y. C. (2019). Revisiting the effects of project-based learning on students’ academic achievement: A meta-analysis investigating moderators. Educational Research Review, 26, 71-81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2018.11.001
  16. DeLozier, S. J., & Rhodes, M. G. (2017). Flipped classrooms: A review of key ideas and recommendations for practice. Educational Psychology Review, 29(1), 141-151. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-015-9356-9
  17. Engel, A., & Coll, C. (2022). Entornos híbridos de enseñanza y aprendizaje para promover la personalización del aprendizaje [Hybrid teaching and learning environments to promote the personalization of learning]. Revista Iberoamericana De Educación a Distancia [Ibero-American Journal of Distance Education], 25(1), 225-242. https://doi.org/10.5944/ried.25.1.31489
  18. García-Peñalvo, F. J., & Seoane-Pardo, A. M. (2015). Una revisión actualizada del concepto de eLearning. Décimo aniversario [An updated review of the concept of eLearning. Tenth anniversary]. Education in the Knowledge Society, 16(1), 119-144. https://doi.org/10.14201/eks2015161119144
  19. García-Valcárcel, A., Basilotta, V., Cabezas, M., Casillas, S., González, L., Hernández, A., & Mena, J. J. (2015). La formación del profesorado universitario en tecnologías de la información y la comunicación en la Universidad de Salamanca [The training of university teachers in information and communication technologies at the University of Salamanca]. RELATEC: Revista Latinoamericana de Tecnología Educativa [RELATEC: Latin American Journal of Educational Technology], 14(1), 75-88.
  20. Garzón Artacho, E., Sola Martínez, T., Trujillo Torres, J. M., & Rodríguez García, A. M. (2021). Competencia digital docente en educación de adultos: Un estudio en un contexto espYEARl [Teaching digital competence in adult education: A study in a spYEARl context]. Píxel-Bit. Revista de Medios y Educación [Pixel-Bit. Media and Education Magazine], 62, 209-234. https://doi.org/10.12795/pixelbit.89510
  21. González-Gómez, D., Jeong, J. S., Rodríguez, D. A., & Cañada-Cañada, F. (2016). Performance and perception in the flipped learning model: An initial approach to evaluate the effectiveness of a new teaching methodology in a general science classroom. Journal of Science and Technology, 25(3), 450-459. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-016-9605-9
  22. González-Sanmamed, M., Estévez, I., Souto-Seijo, A., & Muñoz-Carril, P. C. (2021). Ecologías digitales de aprendizaje y desarrollo profesional del docente Universitario [Digital ecologies of learning and professional development of university teachers]. Comunicar [Communicate], 28(62), 9-18. https://doi.org/10.3916/C62-2020-01
  23. Hinojo Lucena, F. J., López Belmonte, J., Fuentes Cabrera, A., Trujillo Torres, J. M., & Pozo Sánchez, S. (2020). Academic effects of the use of flipped learning in physical education. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(1), 276. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17010276
  24. Hou, H. T., Yu, T. F., Wu, Y. X., Sung, Y. T., & Chang, K. E. (2016). Development and evaluation of a web map mind tool environment with the theory of spatial thinking and project-based learning strategy. British Journal of Educational Technology, 47(2), 390-402. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12241
  25. INTEF. (2020). Marco común de competencia digital docente [Common framework for teaching digital competence]. https://bit.ly/36WfCin
  26. INTEF. (2022). Diseño de experiencias de aprendizaje para la educación a distancia [Design of learning experiences for distance education]. https://www.educacionyfp.gob.es/dam/jcr:44ed2f18-9077-49d4-a127-aaf5b819e769/07-ficha-intef-dise-o-de-experiencias.pdf
  27. Jeong, J. S., Cañada-Cañada, F., & González-Gómez, D. (2018). The study of flipped-classroom for pre-service science teachers. Education Sciences, 8(4), 1-11. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci8040163
  28. Kalman, J., & Guerrero, E. (2013). A social practice approach to understanding teachers’ learning to use technology and digital literacies in the classroom. E-Learning and Digital Media, 10(3), 260-275. https://doi.org/10.2304%2Felea.2013.10.3.260
  29. Lobato-Fraile, C., & Madinabeitia-Ezkurra, A. (2011). Perfiles motivacionales del profesorado ante la formación en metodologías activas en la Universidad [Motivational profiles of teachers before training in active methodologies at the university]. Formación Universitaria [University Education], 4(1), 37-48. https://doi.org/10.4067/S0718-50062011000100006
  30. Lorente, E. (2017). El trabajo por proyectos en primaria: Dos experiencias, dos mundos [Project work in primary school: Two experiences, two worlds]. Quaderns Digitals: Revista de Nuevas Tecnologías y Sociedad [Quaderns Digitals: Magazine of New Technologies and Society], 85, 13.
  31. Muntaner-Guasp, J. J., Pinya Medina, C., & Mut Amengual, B. (2020). El impacto de las metodologías activas en los resultados académicos [The impact of active methodologies on academic results]. Profesorado. Revista de Currículum y Formación del Profesorado [Faculty. Curriculum Magazine and Faculty Formation], 24, 1. https://doi.org/10.30827/profesorado.v24i1.8846
  32. Negre, C. (2017). BreakOutEdu, microgamificación y aprendizaje significativo–educaweb.com [BreakOutEdu, microgamification and meaningful learning–educaweb.com]. https://www.educaweb.com/noticia/2017/07/26/breakoutedu-microgamificacion-aprendizaje-significativo-15068/
  33. Neves, R. M., Lima, R. M., & Mesquita, D. (2021). Teacher competences for active learning in engineering education. Sustainability, 13(16), 9231. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13169231
  34. Ng, L.-K., & Lo, C.-K. (2022). Flipped classroom and gamification approach: Its impact on performance and academic commitment on sustainable learning in education. Sustainability, 14(9), 5428. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14095428
  35. Ortega-Sánchez D., & Gómez-Trigueros, I. M. (2019). Gamification, social problems, and gender in the teaching of social sciences: Representations and discourse of trainee teachers. Plos ONE, 14(6), 1-19. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0218869
  36. Ozdener, N. (2018). Gamification for enhancing Web 2.0 based educational activities: The case of pre-service grade school teachers using educational Wiki pages. Telematics and Informatics, 35(3), 564-578. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2017.04.003
  37. Sánchez-Romero, J. L., Jimeno-Morenilla, A., Pertegal-Felices, M. L., & Mora-Mora, H. (2019). Design and application of project-based learning methodologies for small groups within computer fundamentals subjects. IEEE Access, 7, 12456-12466. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2893972
  38. Seman, L. O., Hausmann, R., & Bezerra, E. A. (2018). On the students’ perceptions of the knowledge formation when submitted to a project-based learning environment using web applications. Computers & Education, 117, 16-30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2017.10.001
  39. Soto-Varela, R., Boumadan, M., Gómez-García, M., & Matosas-López, L. (2021). Matriz para el diseño de experiencias de aprendizaje en entornos digitales en línea [Matrix for the design of learning experiences in online digital environments]. In E. Sánchez-Vega, F. D. Guillén-Gámez, M. Gómez-García, & T. Linde-Valenzuela (Eds.), Procesos de enseñanza-aprendizaje innovadores mediados por tecnología [Innovative teaching-learning processes mediated by technology] (pp. 113-124). Octaedro.
  40. Trujillo, F. (2012). Enseñanza basada en proyectos: Una propuesta eficaz para el aprendizaje y el desarrollo de las competencias básicas [Project-based teaching: An effective proposal for learning and developing basic skills]. Revista Eufonía [Eufonia Magazine], 55, 7-15.
  41. Trujillo, F. (2017). Aprendizaje basado en proyectos: Líneas de avance para una innovación [Project-based learning: Lines of advance for an innovation]. Textos de Didáctica de la Lengua y la Literature [Texts of Didactics of Language and Literature], 78, 42-48.
  42. Vaillant, D. (2014). Formación de profesores en escenarios TIC [Teacher training in IT scenarios]. Revista e-Curriculum [e-Curriculum Magazine], 12(2), 1128-1142.
  43. Zimmer, W. K., McTigue, E. M., & Matsuda, N. (2021). Development and validation of the teachers’ digital learning identity survey. International Journal of Educational Research, 105, 1-18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2020.101717