Aula invertida y aprendizaje ubicuo en educación superior
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.22684374Palabras clave:
aula invertida, aprendizaje ubicuo, educación superior, aprendizaje activo, estudiantes universitariosResumen
El aula invertida constituye una estrategia que reorganiza el proceso de enseñanza y puede favorecer experiencias de aprendizaje flexibles y continuas. En este contexto, el objetivo del presente estudio fue determinar la influencia del aula invertida en el aprendizaje ubicuo de estudiantes universitarios. Para ello, se desarrolló un estudio cuantitativo, cuasiexperimental, con pretest y postest y grupos no equivalentes. Participaron 234 estudiantes, distribuidos en 117 del grupo control y 117 del grupo experimental. El aprendizaje ubicuo se evaluó mediante la Prueba de Evaluación de Aprendizaje Ubicuo (PEAU). Debido a las diferencias iniciales entre los grupos, se aplicó un análisis de covarianza (ANCOVA), utilizando el pretest como covariable. Después del ajuste, el grupo experimental presentó una media de 88,41 puntos, frente a 81,05 del grupo control. La diferencia fue estadísticamente significativa, F(1,231) = 20,32; p < 0,001; η²p = 0,081. En consecuencia, se concluye que la participación en la metodología de aula invertida se asocia con mayores niveles de aprendizaje ubicuo, aun después de controlar las diferencias iniciales entre los grupos.
Descargas
Referencias
Abeysekera, L., & Dawson, P. (2015). Motivation and cognitive load in the flipped classroom: Definition, rationale and a call for research. Higher Education Research & Development, 34(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2014.934336
Akçayır, G., & Akçayır, M. (2018). The flipped classroom: A review of its advantages and challenges. Computers & Education, 126, 334–345. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.07.021
Awidi, I. T., & Paynter, M. (2019). The impact of a flipped classroom approach on student learning experience. Computers & Education, 128, 269–283. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.09.013
Bishop, J., & Verleger, M. A. (2013). The flipped classroom: A survey of the research. Documento presentado en la 2013 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition. https://peer.asee.org/22585
Cumming, G. (2014). The new statistics: Why and how. Psychological Science, 25(1), 7–29. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797613504966
Des Jarlais, D. C., Lyles, C., & Crepaz, N. (2004). Improving the reporting quality of nonrandomized evaluations of behavioral and public health interventions: The TREND statement. American Journal of Public Health, 94(3), 361–366. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.94.3.361
Freeman, S., Eddy, S. L., McDonough, M., Smith, M. K., Okoroafor, N., Jordt, H., & Wenderoth, M. P. (2014). Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111(23), 8410–8415. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1319030111
Hew, K. F., & Lo, C. K. (2018). Flipped classroom improves student learning in health professions education: A meta-analysis. BMC Medical Education, 18, 38. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-018-1144-z
Hwang, G.-J. (2014). Definition, framework and research issues of smart learning environments - a context-aware ubiquitous learning perspective. Smart Learning Environments, 1, 4. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s40561-014-0004-5
McNeish, D., & Stapleton, L. M. (2016). The effect of small sample size on two-level model estimates: A review and illustration. Educational Psychology Review, 28, 295–314. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-014-9287-x
Naveed, Q. N., Choudhary, H., Ahmad, N., Alqahtani, J., & Qahmash, A. I. (2023). Mobile learning in higher education: A systematic literature review. Sustainability, 15(18), 13566. https://doi.org/10.3390/su151813566
O’Flaherty, J., & Phillips, C. (2015). The use of flipped classrooms in higher education: A scoping review. The Internet and Higher Education, 25, 85–95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2015.02.002
Pimmer, C., Mateescu, M., & Gröhbiel, U. (2016). Mobile and ubiquitous learning in higher education settings: A systematic review of empirical studies. Computers in Human Behavior, 63, 490–501. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.05.057
Shadish, W. R., Cook, T. D., & Campbell, D. T. (2002). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for generalized causal inference. Houghton Mifflin.
Strelan, P., Osborn, A., & Palmer, E. (2020). The flipped classroom: A meta-analysis of effects on student performance across disciplines and education levels. Educational Research Review, 30, 100314. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2020.100314
Stuart, E. A. (2010). Matching methods for causal inference: A review and a look forward. Statistical Science, 25(1), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1214/09-STS313
Thai, N. T. T., De Wever, B., & Valcke, M. (2017). The impact of a flipped classroom design on learning performance in higher education: Looking for the best “blend” of lectures and guiding questions with feedback. Computers & Education, 107, 113–126. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2017.01.003
van Alten, D. C. D., Phielix, C., Janssen, J., & Kester, L. (2019). Effects of flipping the classroom on learning outcomes and satisfaction: A meta-analysis. Educational Research Review, 28, 100281. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2019.05.003
van Breukelen, G. J. P. (2013). ANCOVA versus CHANGE from baseline in nonrandomized studies: The difference. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 48(6), 895–922. https://doi.org/10.1080/00273171.2013.831743
Virtanen, M. A., Haavisto, E., Liikanen, E., & Kääriäinen, M. (2018). Ubiquitous learning environments in higher education: A scoping literature review. Education and Information Technologies, 23, 985–998. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-017-9646-6
Descargas
Publicado
Número
Sección
Licencia
Esta obra está bajo una licencia internacional Creative Commons Atribución 4.0.
La revista se acoge a la licencia Licencia Atribución (CC BY), permitiendo la posibilidad de copiar, distribuir, exhibir, y producir obras derivadas, siempre y cuando se reconozca y cite al autor.
