- -

Validación de un cuestionario para la evaluación de la interacción en la enseñanza universitaria

RiuNet: Repositorio Institucional de la Universidad Politécnica de Valencia

Compartir/Enviar a

Citas

Estadísticas

  • Estadisticas de Uso

Validación de un cuestionario para la evaluación de la interacción en la enseñanza universitaria

Mostrar el registro sencillo del ítem

Ficheros en el ítem

Thumbnail
Nombre: REDU_20-1_15918 ...
Tamaño: 632.9Kb
Formato: PDF
Abrir
dc.contributor.author Alvarez-Alvarez, Carmen es_ES
dc.contributor.author Sánchez-Ruiz, Lidia es_ES
dc.contributor.author Sarabia Cobo, Carmen es_ES
dc.contributor.author Montoya-del Corte, Javier es_ES
dc.date.accessioned 2022-07-14T09:30:41Z
dc.date.available 2022-07-14T09:30:41Z
dc.date.issued 2022-06-30
dc.identifier.uri http://hdl.handle.net/10251/184148
dc.description.abstract [EN] Although  interaction  in  the  teaching-learning process is a widely researched phenomenon, there are no instruments to measure it at the university level. With this in mind, this article aims to validate the questionnaire Instrument for Measuring Interaction in Higher Education (IMIHE) , which  consists  of  35  Likert-type  items. The validation has been carried out with a sample of 2,170 university students of different Official Degrees and Masters of all  academic  years  in  a  University  in  the  north of Spain According to our results, the questionnaire has shown good properties and  good  reliability  measures  in  seven key factors. It can be concluded that the IMIHE is a tool that contributes to initiate and improve the evaluation of interaction processes  in  university  teaching.  We consider  it  to  be  a  useful  instrument  both  for faculty, as a self-assessment tool, and for universities as a whole as a general diagnostic tool to foster interaction in their classrooms. es_ES
dc.description.abstract [ES] A pesar de que la interacción en los procesos de enseñanza-aprendizaje es un fenómeno muy investigado, en el ámbito universitario no existen instrumentos para medirla. Teniendo esto en cuenta, este artículo tiene como objetivo validar el cuestionario "Instrumento de Medición de la Interacción en la Educación Superior (cuestionario IMIES)", que consta de 35 ítems tipo Likert. La validación se ha realizado con una muestra de 2.170 estudiantes universitarios de diferentes Grados y Másteres Oficiales de todos los cursos académicos en una Universidad del norte de España Según nuestros resultados, el cuestionario ha mostrado buenas propiedades y buenas medidas de fiabilidad en siete factores clave. Se puede concluir que el IMIES es una herramienta que contribuye a iniciar y mejorar la evaluación de los procesos de interacción en la enseñanza universitaria. Consideramos que es un instrumento útil tanto para el profesorado, como herramienta de autoevaluación, como para las universidades en su conjunto como herramienta de diagnóstico general para fomentar la interacción en sus aulas. es_ES
dc.description.sponsorship Universidad de Cantabria es_ES
dc.language Español es_ES
dc.publisher Universitat Politècnica de València es_ES
dc.relation.ispartof REDU. Revista de Docencia Universitaria es_ES
dc.rights Reconocimiento - No comercial - Sin obra derivada (by-nc-nd) es_ES
dc.subject Interaction es_ES
dc.subject University es_ES
dc.subject Student es_ES
dc.subject Questionnaire es_ES
dc.subject Validation es_ES
dc.subject Interacción es_ES
dc.subject Universidad es_ES
dc.subject Estudiante es_ES
dc.subject Cuestionario es_ES
dc.subject Validación es_ES
dc.title Validación de un cuestionario para la evaluación de la interacción en la enseñanza universitaria es_ES
dc.title.alternative Validation of a questionnaire to interaction assessment in university teaching es_ES
dc.type Artículo es_ES
dc.identifier.doi 10.4995/redu.2022.15918
dc.rights.accessRights Abierto es_ES
dc.description.bibliographicCitation Alvarez-Alvarez, C.; Sánchez-Ruiz, L.; Sarabia Cobo, C.; Montoya-Del Corte, J. (2022). Validación de un cuestionario para la evaluación de la interacción en la enseñanza universitaria. REDU. Revista de Docencia Universitaria. 20(1):145-160. https://doi.org/10.4995/redu.2022.15918 es_ES
dc.description.accrualMethod OJS es_ES
dc.relation.publisherversion https://doi.org/10.4995/redu.2022.15918 es_ES
dc.description.upvformatpinicio 145 es_ES
dc.description.upvformatpfin 160 es_ES
dc.type.version info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion es_ES
dc.description.volume 20 es_ES
dc.description.issue 1 es_ES
dc.identifier.eissn 1887-4592
dc.relation.pasarela OJS\15918 es_ES
dc.description.references Álvarez-Álvarez, C., Vejo-Sainz, R. (2017). ¿ Cómo se sitúan las escuelas españolas del medio rural ante la innovación? Un estudio exploratorio mediante entrevistas. Aula abierta, 45(1), 25-32. es_ES
dc.description.references Álvarez-Álvarez, C., Sánchez-Ruiz, L., Ruthven, A., Montoya, J. (2019). Innovating in University Teaching Through Classroom Interaction. Journal of Education, Innovation, and Communication, 1(1), 8–18. https://doi.org/10.34097/jeicom_1_1_1 es_ES
dc.description.references Alves, C, Mercuri, E, Da Silva, L. (2011). Escala de Interação com Pares: construção e evidências de validade para estudantes do ensino superior. Psico-USF, 16(1), 11–21. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1413-82712011000100003 es_ES
dc.description.references Bai, Y, Chang, T.S. (2016). Effects of class size and attendance policy on university classroom interaction in Taiwan. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 53(3): 316–328. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2014.997776 es_ES
dc.description.references Baudrit, A. (2012). Being a tutor of nursing students today: A sustainable and complex mission? Recherche en soins infirmiers, (4), 6-12. https://doi.org/10.3917/rsi.111.0006 es_ES
dc.description.references Boden, K.K., Zepeda, C.D., Nokes-Malach, T.J. (2020). Achievement goals and conceptual learning: An examination of teacher talk. Journal of Educational Psychology, 112(6), 1221. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000421 es_ES
dc.description.references Carr, R. (2015). Active learning: The importance of developing a comprehensive measure. Active Learning in Higher Education, 16(3), 173-186. https://doi.org/10.1177/1469787415589529 es_ES
dc.description.references De Longhi, A.L., Ferreyra, H.A., Peme, C. (2012). La interacción comunicativa en clases de ciencias naturales. Un análisis didáctico a través de circuitos discursivos. Revista Eureka sobre enseñanza y divulgación de las ciencias, 9(2), 178-195. es_ES
dc.description.references Duschl, R., Osborne, J. (2002). Supporting and Promoting Argumentation Discourse in Science Education. Studies in Science Education, 38(1), 39-72. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057260208560187 es_ES
dc.description.references Dwyer, T. (2015). Persistence in higher education through student–faculty interactions in the classroom of a commuter institution. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 54(4), 325-334. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2015.1112297 es_ES
dc.description.references Fusco, E. (2012) Effective Questioning Strategies in the Classroom: A Step-by-Step Approach to Engaged Thinking and Learning, K-8. New York: Teachers College Press. es_ES
dc.description.references Gauci, S.A., Dantas, A.M., Williams, D.A., Kemm, R.E. (2009). Promoting student-centered active learning in lectures with a personal response system. Advances in Physiology Education, 33(1), 60-71. https://doi.org/10.1152/advan.00109.2007 es_ES
dc.description.references Hartikainen, S., Rintala, H., Pylväs, L., Nokelainen, P. (2019). The concept of active learning and the measurement of learning outcomes: A review of research in engineering higher education. Education Sciences, 9(4), 276. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci9040276 es_ES
dc.description.references Haneda, M., Teemant, A., Sherman, B. (2016). Instructional coaching through dialogic interaction: helping a teacher to become agentive in her practice. Language and education, 31(1), 46-64. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500782.2016.1230127 es_ES
dc.description.references Hattie, J. (2012). Visible Learning for Teachers. Maximizing impact on learning. New York: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203181522 es_ES
dc.description.references Hardman, J. (2015). Tutor–student interaction in seminar teaching: Implications for professional development. Active Learning in Higher Education, 17(1), 63-76. https://doi.org/10.1177/1469787415616728 es_ES
dc.description.references Heaslip, G., Donovan, P., Cullen, J.G. (2013). Student response systems and learner engagement in large classes. Active Learning in Higher Education, 15(1), 11-24. https://doi.org/10.1177/1469787413514648 es_ES
dc.description.references Howe, C., Abedin, M. (2013). Classroom dialogue: a systematic review across four decades of research. Cambridge Journal of Education, 43(3), 325-356. https://doi.org/10.1080/0305764X.2013.786024 es_ES
dc.description.references Laudadío, J., Mazzitelli, C. (2018). Adaptation and validation of the Questionnaire on Teacher Interaction in Higher Education. Interdisciplinaria, 35(1), 153-170. https://doi.org/10.16888/interd.2018.35.1.8 es_ES
dc.description.references Majlesi, A.R., Broth, M. (2012). Emergent learnables in second language classroom interaction. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction, 1(3–4), 193-207. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.LCSI.2012.08.004 es_ES
dc.description.references Matthews, K., Dwyer, A., Hine, L., Turner, J. (2018). Conceptions of students as partners. Higher Education, 76, 957-971. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-018-0257-y es_ES
dc.description.references McCoy, L., Pettit, R.K., Kellar, C., Morgan, C. (2018). Tracking active learning in the medical school curriculum: a learning-centered approach. Journal of medical education and curricular development, 5, https://doi.org/10.1177/2382120518765135. es_ES
dc.description.references Micari, M., Pazos, P. (2014). Worrying about what others think: A social-comparison concern intervention in small learning groups. Active Learning in Higher Education, 15(3), 249-262. https://doi.org/10.1177/1469787414544874 es_ES
dc.description.references Moliní, F., Sánchez, D. (2019). To encourage the participation in class of university students and evaluate it as objectively as possible. REDU. Revista de Docencia Universitaria, 17(1), 211-227. https://doi.org/10.4995/redu.2019.10702 es_ES
dc.description.references Orona, G.A., Li, Q., McPartlan, P., Bartek, C., Xu, D. (2022). What predicts the use of interaction-oriented pedagogies? The role of self-efficacy, motivation, and employment stability. Computers & Education, 184, 104498. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2022.104498 es_ES
dc.description.references Pielmeier, M., Huber, S., Seidel, T. (2018). Is teacher judgment accuracy of students’ characteristics beneficial for verbal teacher-student interactions in classroom?. Teaching and Teacher Education, 76, 255-266. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2018.01.002 es_ES
dc.description.references Roberts, D. (2019). Higher education lectures: From passive to active learning via imagery? Active Learning in Higher Education, 20(1), 63-77. https://doi.org/10.1177/1469787417731198 es_ES
dc.description.references Rubie-Davies, C.M. (2007). Classroom interactions: Exploring the practices of high- and low-expectation teachers. British Journal of Educational psychology, 77(2), 289-306. https://doi.org/10.1348/000709906X101601 es_ES
dc.description.references Scott, P.H., Mortimer, E.F., Aguiar, O.G. (2006). The tension between authoritative and dialogic discourse: A fundamental characteristic of meaning making interactions in high school. Science Education, 90(4), 605-631. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20131 es_ES
dc.description.references Steen-Utheima, A., Wittekb, A.L. (2017). Dialogic feedback and potentialities for student learning. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction, 15, 18-30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lcsi.2017.06.002 es_ES
dc.description.references Stockero, S.L., Rupnow, R.L., Pascoe, A.E. (2017). Learning to notice important student mathematical thinking in complex classroom interactions. Teaching and Teacher Education, 63, 384-395. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2017.01.006 es_ES
dc.description.references Tronchoni, H., Izquierdo, C., Anguera, M.T. (2018). Interacción participativa en las clases magistrales: fundamentación y construcción de un instrumento de observación. Publicaciones, 48(1), 81-108. https://doi.org/10.30827/publicaciones.v48i1.7331 es_ES
dc.description.references Tan, Y.J., Gwendoline, C.L., Fulmer, G. (2019). Validation of Classroom Teacher Interaction Skills Scale. Asia-Pacific Education Review, 28(5), 429-446. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-019-00444-6 es_ES
dc.description.references Vercellotti, M.L. (2018). Do interactive learning spaces increase student achievement? A comparison of classroom context. Active Learning in Higher Education, 19(3), 197-210. https://doi.org/10.1177/1469787417735606 es_ES
dc.description.references Wells, G. (1999). Dialogic inquiry: Towards a socio-cultural practice and theory of education. UK: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511605895 es_ES
dc.description.references Wong, W.H., Chapman, E. (2022). Student satisfaction and interaction in higher education. Higher Education, 1-22. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-022-00874-0 es_ES


Este ítem aparece en la(s) siguiente(s) colección(ones)

Mostrar el registro sencillo del ítem