Efectos académicos de una enseñanza mixta versus metodología única centrada en el profesor y enfoques de aprendizaje

IF 2 4区 教育学 Q2 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Revista De Educacion Pub Date : 2021-01-01 DOI:10.4438/1988-592X-RE-2021-392-481
A. G. Marcos, Fermín Navaridas Nalda, María Asunción Jiménez Trens, F. Elías, Joaquín B. Ordieres Meré
{"title":"Efectos académicos de una enseñanza mixta versus metodología única centrada en el profesor y enfoques de aprendizaje","authors":"A. G. Marcos, Fermín Navaridas Nalda, María Asunción Jiménez Trens, F. Elías, Joaquín B. Ordieres Meré","doi":"10.4438/1988-592X-RE-2021-392-481","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Recent research in the area of higher education appears to indicate that a mixed teaching methodology that combines direct instruction by the teacher and student-centered activities improves the quality of learning, as indicated by student satisfaction and academic performance. However, the successful implementation of such methodology depends to a great extent on the teacher?s understanding of how students approach their learning. In light of this thesis, the present study seeks to: (1) identify the engineering students? approaches to learning; (2) determine if a mixed methodology that combines lectures and problem-based learning (PBL) activities improves the quality of students? academic results more than traditional teaching methodology that consists primarily of the teacher?s explanations and assignments; and (3) explore the relationships between students? academic results and the approaches to learning and the teaching-learning methods that have been investigated. Utilizing a quasiexperimental design, 160 engineering students were divided into two groups: an experimental group where students completed the course with a mixed teaching methodology, and a control group wherein students attended a course following a more teacher-centered methodology. The analyzed results show that engineering students mainly adopt a deep learning approach. One of the main findings of this study is that a mixed methodology, such as the presented in this work, is more effective because it improves students? satisfaction and academic performance significantly. It also promotes deeper processing than a teacher-centered methodology that is based on lectures and individual practical assignments. In addition, it has been supported that the main approaches to learning that the students in the study used are not consistent. The methods that they use vary significantly depending on the requirements of the instructional context and how students understand it.","PeriodicalId":21314,"journal":{"name":"Revista De Educacion","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Revista De Educacion","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4438/1988-592X-RE-2021-392-481","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Recent research in the area of higher education appears to indicate that a mixed teaching methodology that combines direct instruction by the teacher and student-centered activities improves the quality of learning, as indicated by student satisfaction and academic performance. However, the successful implementation of such methodology depends to a great extent on the teacher?s understanding of how students approach their learning. In light of this thesis, the present study seeks to: (1) identify the engineering students? approaches to learning; (2) determine if a mixed methodology that combines lectures and problem-based learning (PBL) activities improves the quality of students? academic results more than traditional teaching methodology that consists primarily of the teacher?s explanations and assignments; and (3) explore the relationships between students? academic results and the approaches to learning and the teaching-learning methods that have been investigated. Utilizing a quasiexperimental design, 160 engineering students were divided into two groups: an experimental group where students completed the course with a mixed teaching methodology, and a control group wherein students attended a course following a more teacher-centered methodology. The analyzed results show that engineering students mainly adopt a deep learning approach. One of the main findings of this study is that a mixed methodology, such as the presented in this work, is more effective because it improves students? satisfaction and academic performance significantly. It also promotes deeper processing than a teacher-centered methodology that is based on lectures and individual practical assignments. In addition, it has been supported that the main approaches to learning that the students in the study used are not consistent. The methods that they use vary significantly depending on the requirements of the instructional context and how students understand it.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
最近在高等教育领域的研究似乎表明,结合教师直接指导和以学生为中心的活动的混合教学方法可以提高学习质量,正如学生满意度和学习成绩所表明的那样。然而,这种方法的成功实施在很大程度上取决于教师?S对学生如何学习的理解。根据本论文,本研究旨在:(1)识别工程学生?学习方法;(2)确定将讲座和基于问题的学习(PBL)活动相结合的混合方法是否能提高学生的质量?学术成果多于传统的教学方法,主要由教师组成?S解释和作业;(3)探究学生之间的关系?学术成果和学习方法以及已被调查的教学方法。利用准实验设计,160名工科学生被分为两组:实验组的学生以混合教学方法完成课程,对照组的学生以教师为中心的方法完成课程。分析结果表明,工科学生主要采用深度学习方法。这项研究的主要发现之一是,混合方法,如在这项工作中提出的,是更有效的,因为它提高了学生?满意度与学业成绩显著相关。与以教师为中心的基于讲座和个人实践作业的方法相比,它也促进了更深层次的处理。此外,研究表明,研究中学生使用的主要学习方法并不一致。根据教学环境的要求和学生的理解方式,他们使用的方法有很大的不同。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Revista De Educacion
Revista De Educacion EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
2.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
8 weeks
期刊介绍: La Revista de Educación es una publicación científica del Ministerio de Educación y Formación Profesional español. Fundada en 1940, y manteniendo el título de Revista de Educación desde 1952, es un testigo privilegiado de la evolución de la educación en las últimas décadas, así como un reconocido medio de difusión de los avances en la investigación y la innovación en este campo, tanto desde una perspectiva nacional como internacional. La revista es editada por la Subdirección General de Atención al Ciudadano, Documentación y Publicaciones, y actualmente está adscrita al Instituto Nacional de Evaluación Educativa de la Dirección General de Evaluación y Cooperación Territorial. Cada año se publican cuatro números con tres secciones: Investigaciones, Ensayos y Reseñas. Uno de los números anuales podrá contar con una sección Monográfica con convocatoria pública en esta web. Todos los artículos enviados a las diferentes secciones están sometidos a evaluación externa. En el primer número del año se incluye un índice bibliográfico, y en el segundo un editorial con la Memoria anual que recoge las principales estadísticas del proceso editor de ese período, los índices de calidad e impacto, así como el listado de revisores externos.
期刊最新文献
PISA 2018 in England, Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales: Is the data really representative of all four corners of the UK? The structures and processes governing education research in the UK from 1990-2020: A systematic scoping review Modelo para las pruebas de admisión a los estudios de maestro a partir de un proceso de diseño participativo Context and Implications Document for: Teaching sciences and mathematics—A challenge for higher education institutions: A systematic review Teaching sciences and mathematics – A challenge for higher education institutions: A systematic review
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1