Percepción de estudiantes universitarios de las herramientas de Moodle para la adquisición de competencias

  1. de Castro Pardo, Mónica
  2. Mª del Pilar Laguna Sánchez 1
  3. Concepción de la Fuente-Cabrero 1
  4. Jesús Palomo Martínez 1
  1. 1 Universidad Rey Juan Carlos Universidad Rey Juan CarlosMadrid
Actas:
Teaching&Learning Innovation Institute Conference
  1. Laguna-Sánchez, Pilar
  2. de Castro-Pardo, Mónica
  3. de la Fuente-Cabrero, Concepción
  4. Palomo Martínez, Jesús

Editorial: Universidad de León

ISBN: 978-84-617-5518-9

Año de publicación: 2016

Páginas: 1-9

Tipo: Aportación congreso

GOOGLE SCHOLAR

Resumen

-La evaluación de competencias supone labase del modelo de enseñanza del Espacio Europeode Educación Superior. Por ello, el logro decompetencias por los estudiantes es un indicadorclave para evaluar los estudios universitarios. El augedel e-learning en los últimos años requiereurgentemente de metodologías para evaluar laadquisición de competencias adaptadas al modeloeuropeo. La importancia creciente de la participaciónincrementa la complejidad de las metodologías deevaluación y en ocasiones se pierde rigor, sinembargo el análisis multi-criterio permite integrar laparticipación individual de manera rigurosa en unproceso global. En esta investigación se utiliza elmétodo de las jerarquías analíticas (AHP) paraevaluar la adquisición de una competencia general yuna específica: Aprendizaje Autónomo y Adquisiciónde Contenidos definidos en la guía docente. Serecogen las percepciones individuales de 71estudiantes de GADE on-line que evalúan 7herramientas de Moodle en una asignatura decarácter cuantitativo, y se obtiene una valoraciónconjunta. Los resultados muestran en general unamayor importancia de las unidades didácticas y de lastutorías, frente a otros recursos docentes, aunqueexisten diferencias relativas entre ambascompetencias.

Referencias bibliográficas

  • Alfalla-Luque, R., Medina-Lopez, C., & Arenas-Marquez, F. J. (2011). A step forward in operations management training: student visions and their response to different learning environments. Cuadernos de Economía y Dirección de la Empresa, 14(1), 40-52.
  • ANECA (2015) Libro Blanco del título de grado en economía y empresa. Recuperado de http://www.aneca.es/var/media/150292/librobla nco_economia_def.pdf
  • Baartman, L., & Ruijs, L. (2011). Comparing students’ perceived and actual competence in higher vocational education. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 36(4), 385- 398.
  • Bergsmann, E., Schultes, M. T., Winter, P., Schober, B., & Spiel, C. (2015). Evaluation of competence-based teaching in higher education: From theory to practice. Evaluation and program planning, 52, 1-9.
  • Bolívar, A. (2008). El discurso de las competencias en España: educación básica y educación superior. Revista de Docencia Universitaria.
  • Broadbent, J., & Poon, W. L. (2015). Selfregulated learning strategies & academic achievement in online higher education learning environments: A systematic review. The Internet and Higher Education, 27, 1-13.
  • Chao, R. J., & Chen, Y. H. (2009). Evaluation of the criteria and effectiveness of distance elearning with consistent fuzzy preference relations. Expert Systems with Applications, 36(7), 10657-10662.
  • de Castro, M., Fuente, C. & Laguna, P. (Junio de 2016). Evaluación de la competencia aprendizaje autónomo por estudiantes de administración y dirección de empresas online en Moodle usando análisis multi-criterio, en Verano Tacoronte (Presidencia), XXX Annual Conference of the Academy. Conferencia llevada a cabo en AEDEM, Las Palmas de Gran Canaria.
  • Collins, A., & Halverson, R. (2009). Rethinking education in the age of technology: The digital revolution and schooling in America. Teachers College Press.
  • Ćukušić, M., Garača, Ž., & Jadrić, M. (2014). Online self-assessment and students' success in higher education institutions. Computers & Education, 72, 100-109.
  • Deschacht, N., & Goeman, K. (2015). The effect of blended learning on course persistence and performance of adult learners: A differencein-differences analysis. Computers & Education, 87, 83-89.
  • Douglas, J., McClelland, R., & Davies, J. (2008). The development of a conceptual model of student satisfaction with their experience in higher education. Quality Assurance in Education, 16(1), 19-35.
  • Escobar-Rodriguez, T., & Monge-Lozano, P. (2012). The acceptance of Moodle technology by business administration students. Computers & Education, 58(4), 1085-1093.
  • Gómez-Ruiz, M. A., Rodríguez-Gómez, G., & Ibarra-Sáiz, M. S. (2013). COMPES: Autoinforme sobre las competencias básicas relacionadas con la evaluación de los estudiantes universitarios.
  • González, J., & Wagenaar, R. (Eds.). (2003). Tuning educational structures in Europe. Final report. Phase one. Bilbao: University of Deusto.
  • González-Pachón, J., & Romero, C. (2004). A method for dealing with inconsistencies in pairwise comparisons. European Journal of Operational Research, 158(2), 351-361.
  • Gregory, R., & Keeney, R. L. (1994). Creating policy alternatives using stakeholder values. Management Science, 40(8), 1035-1048.
  • Guerrero, D., Palma, M., & La Rosa, G. (2014). Developing competences in engineering students. The case of project management course. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 112, 832-841.
  • Gutiérrez, S. S. M., Torres, N. J., & SánchezBeato, E. J. (2016). La evaluación del alumnado universitario en el Espacio Europeo de Educación Superior. Aula Abierta, 44(1), 7-14.
  • Haughton, J., & Kelly, A. (2015). Student Performance in an Introductory Business Statistics Course: Does Delivery Mode Matter?. Journal of Education for Business, 90(1), 31-43.
  • Herrera, M.A. and Casado, J. (2015) Interaction Analysis of a Blog/ journal in teaching practice. The Internet and Higher Education 27,22-43.
  • Huang, E. Y., Lin, S. W., & Huang, T. K. (2012). What type of learning style leads to online participation in the mixed-mode elearning environment? A study of software usage instruction. Computers & Education, 58(1), 338-349.
  • Li, H. L., & Ma, L. C. (2007). Detecting and adjusting ordinal and cardinal inconsistencies through a graphical and optimal approach in AHP models. Computers & operations research, 34(3), 780-798.
  • Lin, T. C., Ho, H. P., & Chang, C. T. (2014). Evaluation Model for Applying an E-Learning System in a Course: An Analytic Hierarchy Process—Multi-Choice Goal Programming Approach. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 50(1), 135-157.
  • Martínez-Caro, E., Cegarra-Navarro, J. G., & Cepeda-Carrión, G. (2015). An application of the performance-evaluation model for e-learning quality in higher education. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, 26(5-6), 632-647.
  • Nafría, J. M. D., Cendón, J. A., & Alonso, L. P. (2015). Building up eParticipatory decisionmaking from the local to the global scale. Study case at the European Higher Education Area. Computers in Human Behavior, 47, 26-41.
  • Nazarenko, A. L. (2015). Blended Learning vs Traditional Learning: What Works?(A Case Study Research). Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 200, 77-82.
  • Nicol, D., & Milligan, C. (2006). Rethinking technology-supported assessment practices in relation to the seven principles of good feedback practice. Innovative assessment in higher education, 64-77.
  • OECD (2014). Skills Beyond School. Synthesis Report. OCDE Reviews of Vocational Education and Trainning. Recuperado de https://www.oecd.org/edu/skills-beyondschool/Skills-Beyond-School-SynthesisReport.pdf
  • Ozkan, S., & Koseler, R. (2009). Multidimensional students’ evaluation of e-learning systems in the higher education context: An empirical investigation. Computers & Education, 53(4), 1285-1296.
  • Quesada-Serra, V., Rodríguez-Gómez, G., & Ibarra-Sáiz, M. S. (2016). What are we missing? Spanish lecturers’ perceptions of their assessment practices. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 53(1), 48-59.
  • Rodríguez, G.,Ibarra, M.S. y Cubero, J. (2016). Competencias básicas relacionadas con la evaluación. Un estudio sobre la percepción de los estudiantes universitarios. Educación XXI. En prensa.
  • Saaty, T. L. (2005). The analytic hierarchy and analytic network processes for the measurement of intangible criteria and for decision-making. In Multiple criteria decision analysis: state of the art surveys (pp. 345-405). Springer New York.
  • Sadler, D. R. (2009). Indeterminacy in the use of preset criteria for assessment and grading. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 34(2), 159-179.
  • Shee, D. Y., & Wang, Y. S. (2008). Multicriteria evaluation of the web-based e-learning system: A methodology based on learner satisfaction and its applications. Computers & Education, 50(3), 894-905.
  • Schunk, D. H., & Pajares, F. (2009). Selfefficacy theory. Handbook of motivation at school, 35-53.
  • Smith, C. D., Worsfold, K., Davies, L., Fisher, R., & McPhail, R. (2013). Assessment literacy and student learning: the case for explicitly developing students ‘assessment literacy’. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 38(1), 44-60.
  • Su, Y. H., Feng, L. Y., Yang, C. C., & Chen, T. L. (2012). How teachers support university students’ lifelong learning development for sustainable futures: The student's perspective. Futures, 44(2), 158-165.
  • Thune, C. (2005). Standards and guidelines for quality assurance in the European Higher Education Area. Report, European Association for Quality Assurance in the European Higher Education.
  • Tuning, P. (2003). Tuning educational structures in Europe. Informe final, Bilbao: Universidad de Deusto.
  • United Nations (2016). Competencies for the future. Recuperado de https://careers.un.org/lbw/attachments/competen cies_booklet_en.pdf
  • Wu, J. H., Tennyson, R. D., & Hsia, T. L. (2010). A study of student satisfaction in a blended e-learning system environment. Computers & Education, 55(1), 155-164.