Etiqueta: investigación sobre aprendizaje

No es la docencia lo que me interesa investigar, sino el modo en que aprenden (o pueden aprender mejor) mis estudiantes

Definición de objetivos, resultados de aprendizaje y competencia

Hay muchas definiciones de estos conceptos que se entrelazan y dificultan el diferenciarlos con claridad.

De momento, yo me quedo con estas definiciones que da Gairín (2009) en sus páginas 15 a 17. Si en el futuro encuentro alguna mejor ya actualizaré la entrada:

Objetivos: afirmaciones relativas a la docencia, redactadas desde el punto de vista de aquello que intentará cubrir el profesorado con un determinado bloque de aprendizaje (módulo, materia, asignatura, etc.). Están escritos desde el punto de vista del profesor. Pueden incluir conocimientos y habilidades de manera aislada.

Resultados de aprendizaje: afirmaciones sobre las que se espera que un estudiante pueda conocer, comprender y ser capaz de demostrar después de haber completado un proceso de aprendizaje (módulo, asignatura, materia, curso, etc.). Se centran en lo que el estudiante ha alcanzado en vez de en cuáles son las intenciones del profesor. Se centran en aquello que puede demostrar el estudiante al finalizar la actividad de aprendizaje. Pueden incluir conocimientos y habilidades aisladamente. De la misma manera que los objetivos, se pueden describir al finalizar cualquier unidad (módulo, asignatura, etc.)

Competencias: implican el uso integrado de conocimientos, habilidades y actitudes en la acción. Por su naturaleza, solo se podrán alcanzar en estadios finales del proceso educativo (prácticum, trabajo final de estudios, etc.)

Gairín, J. Ed. (2009) «Guía para la evaluación de competencias en el área de Ciencias Sociales.» Barcelona,: Agència per a la Qualitat del Sistema Universitari de Catalunya. Accesible en: http://www.aqu.cat/doc/doc_14646947_1.pdf

Diagrama de Eishenhower de actividades del profesor universitario

Estoy embarcado en una investigación (Action Research) sobre barreras y facilitadores para la investigación (innovación) sobre aprendizaje, por parte del personal docente e investigador (PDI) de universidades españolas. Es decir, cosas que ayudan o frenan a que los PDI investiguemos sobre la docencia/aprendizaje en nuestras asignaturas.

El origen de esta investigación es la constatación de que los PDI «no pedagogos» apenas publicamos los resultados de nuestra investigación sobre aprendizaje (Marin, 2018). Lo que me hace sospechar que, en el fondo, ni investigamos, ni reflexionamos, ni innovamos en este aspecto. Esta sospecha está alentada porque casi nunca oigo hablar a mis «compañeros“ de la docencia basada en evidencia (o el scholarship, que podría ser un sinónimo). La docencia basada en evidencia (EB-learning) se basa en investigar sobre cómo aprenden nuestros alumnos nuestras asignaturas y publicar en revistas ( o difundir por otros medios) los resultados de dichas investigaciones.

Es posible que haya PDI que no investiguen sobre aprendizaje porque no tienen ninguna duda de como abordar/enfocar su docencia en ningún momento, ni en ninguna de sus asignaturas: tienen muy claro qué objetivos de aprendizaje busca; y  qué contenidos/ desarrollo de habilidades y actitudes pretende en sus alumnos, qué secuencia, qué métodos de impartición y de evaluación y qué recursos son los más adecuados para que los alumnos alcancen esos objetivos. Y cuando las cosas cambian -planes de estudio, aulas, madurez de los alumnos….- no tienen ningún problema en encontrar el nuevo ajuste en todas esas variables. Asumo con cierta envida (sana, si existe la envidia de ese tipo), que son seres afortunados y entiendo que no investiguen en algo que no les aporta ningún valor.

Otros PDI pueden considerar que la docencia no es relevante/importante porque son INVESTIGADORES y cualquier otra cosa es quitar tiempo a su importante función de investigar. Tampoco me veo representado en este colectivo.

Yo creo que los PDI de universidades públicas españolas somos esencialmente docentes. O si lo preferís, entre un 50% y un 100% de nuestro tiempo se espera que seamos unos docentes dignos (en esta entrada del blog planteo algunos escenarios sobre esto y en esta otra lo matizo). No me atrevo a decir lo que deben ser los PDI de otros países o de universidades privadas. Pero considerando que los presupuestos de la universidad (al menos la mia) llegan en un 90% por alumnos matriculados; y que según “decreto Wert” (a falta de un estatuto del PDI claro en estas cuestiones), nos pagan por 1.700 horas/año que son equivalentes a 32 ECTS-docentes (un sexenio activo lo equiparan a 8 ects-docentes y 3 (ó 4) sexenios a 16 ECTS-docentes). Por lo tanto, la investigación (toda la actividad investigadora, tanto docente y del área) puede llegar a suponer entre un 25% y un 50% de nuestra paga/dedicación, dependiendo del numero de sexenios ACTIVOS y nuestra categoría profesional (CU o «no CU»).

 

Resumiendo,yo me considero un docente (al menos el 66% de mi tiempo remunerado) y tengo dudas sobre muchos aspectos de mi docencia; y creo que investigar sobre ello me convertiría en un mejor profesional. Además considero que esto es extensible a todas las personas que comparten mi profesión. De modo que hay cosas que me interesa analizar.

Lo primero que he hecho es intentar conocer donde invertimos nuestro tiempo. De momento tengo unos datos que no son generalizables, porque la muestra es muy pequeña y de conveniencia (33 profesores del área de conocimiento de «organización de empresas»). La imagen muestra estos resultados preliminares que confirman que no se dedica mucho tiempo a investigar en docencia/aprendizaje o en innovar en este tema. Aunque se percibe como una actividad de importancia moderada-alta.

Mi siguiente paso (estoy en ello) es identificar las barreras y facilitadores y escribir un artículo sobre el tema (os iré informando).

Referencias

  • Marin-Garcia, J. A. (2018). What are the research focuses regarding learning in the field of operations management in higher education? The case of spain in 2017. Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management, 11(4), 607-616. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.3926/jiem.2550
  • Ramio, C. (2014). Manua para los atribulados profesores universitarios. Madrid: CATARATA.

Publicado: Marin-Garcia, J. (2018). What are the research focuses regarding learning in the field of operations management in higher education? The case of Spain in 2017. Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management, 11(4), 607-616. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.3926/jiem.2550

Publicado: Marin-Garcia, J. (2018). What are the research focuses regarding learning in the field of operations management in higher education? The case of Spain in 2017. Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management, 11(4), 607-616. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.3926/jiem.2550

Purpose: What are the current research topics being studied by higher education professors in the area of operations management in Spain with regard to the learning of their students? Are the approaches that support these investigations adequate?

Design/methodology/approach: For the analysis, we have selected 25 publications in peer-reviewed scientific journals published by Spanish authors in 2017, and we have encoded them using Atlas.ti.

Findings: Most of the research centers on a very basic type of approach to learning, which reproduces the type of research typically conducted more than 40 years ago (type 1). For this reason, we propose an example of how to convert type 1 research questions into type 2 or 3 questions.

Originality/value: This paper collects and summarizes the main works on learning research carried out by members of ACEDEDOT and published in 2017, identifying themes, methods, levels of teacher conception and focus on the type of student learning. We intend to use this information to create a map of the current situation and propose possible suggestions to implement evidence-based instruction on operations management.

Keywords

scholarship, student learning, student engagement, higher education

¿La evaluación por competencias es algo más que evaluar conocimientos, habilidades y/o actitudes?

De momento sólo planteo la pregunta porque no tengo una respuesta clara al respecto por eso está, de momento en «preguntas no resueltas» . Cuando tenga alguna respuesta modificaré esta entrada.

En las organizaciones cada vez se habla más de gestión del talento y eso, de alguna manera, implica gestionar las competencias de los trabajadores. Soy de los que opinan que lo que no se puede medir, difícilmente se puede gestionar. O, dicho de otro modo, dime cómo mides y te diré realmente qué estás gestionando. Por otra parte, las universidades publicas españolas están queriendo moverse a un modelo de evaluación de competencias. De momento sólo es algo que aparece en las memorias de verificación de títulos, donde las competencias tienen un papel prioritario. Sin embargo, no parece que los profesores «de a pie», los que están a cargo de las asignaturas que se imparten tengan muy claro cómo trabajar en este «nuevo» entorno y parece que se reproducen los sistemas o métodos tradicionales.

Por eso me parece relevante reflexionar sobre ¿Qué es la evaluación por competencias? Y, sobre todo, ¿cómo se realiza una adecuada evaluación por competencias?

Publicado-Marin-Garcia & EtAl (2016) Proposal of a Framework for Innovation Competencies Development and Assessment (FINCODA)

Marin-Garcia, J., Andreu Andres, M., Atares-Huerta, L., Aznar-Mas, L., Garcia-Carbonell, A., González-Ladrón-de-Gevara, F., Montero Fleta, B., Perez-Peñalver, M., & Watts, F. (2016). Proposal of a Framework for Innovation Competencies Development and Assessment (FINCODA). WPOM-Working Papers on Operations Management, 7(2), 119-126. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.4995/wpom.v7i2.6472

In this article we propose an innovation competence model of the people which is based on the existing literature to integrate and complement existing models. The main contribution of this work consists in demonstrating the differences and similarities of current models and in providing a conceptual definition for each model element. In this way, both researchers and people in charge of human resources in companies obtain a framework with which to design measuring instruments to assess innovation competence, which can fulfill the twofold demand of validity and reliability.

This work has been conducted as part of a European project financed by the European Union [«FINCODA» Project 554493-EPP-1-2014-1-FI-EPPKA2-KA] (http://bit.ly/FINCODA-EUsite01). (The European Commission support for the production of this publication does not constitute an endorsement of the contents which reflects the views only of the authors, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained therein); and by the Universitat Politénica de Valencia PIME/2015/A/009/A “Evaluation of innovative behavior indicators in university students”.

Cartton abstract

Keywords

competence assessment; innovation; model; literature review

Publicado- Gumaelius Et Al (2016-on-line) Outreach initiatives operated by universities for increasing interest in science and technology

Lena Gumaelius, Monica Almqvist, Anna Árnadóttir, Anders Axelsson, J. Alberto Conejero, José P. García-Sabater, Lene Klitgaard, Cecilia Kozma, Julien Maheut, Juan Marin-Garcia, Henrik Mickos, Per-Olof Nilsson, Agneta Norén, Margarida Pinho-Lopes, Manfred Prenzel, Johanna Ray, Torgny Roxå, Mirjam Voss
European Journal of Engineering Education
pp. 1-34 | DOI: 10.1080/03043797.2015.1121468

Abstract | PDF | Full text HTML
Since the 1990s, the low number of students choosing to study science and technology in higher education has been on the societal agenda and many initiatives have been launched to promote awareness regarding career options. The initiatives particularly focus on increasing enrolment in the engineering programmes. This article describes and compares eight European initiatives that have been established and operated by universities (and in some cases through collaboration with other actors in society). Each initiative is summarised in a short essay that discusses motivation, organisation, pedagogical approach, and activities. The initiatives are characterised by comparing the driving forces behind their creation, how the initiative activities relate to the activities at the university, size based on the number of participants and cost per participant and pedagogical framework. There seem to be two main tracks for building outreach activities, one where outreach activities are based on the university’s normal activities, and one where outreach activities are designed specifically for the visiting students.

Impartido Taller Publicar la investigación en docencia universitaria

Acabo de regresar de una magnífica experiencia impartiendo el curso: Publicar la investigación en docencia universitaria¿Dónde y cómo publicar investigación en docencia? en la Universidad del Pais Vasco (EHU).

Más de 40 docentes universitarios tremendamente motivados que han compartido sus experiencias, inquietudes y dudas. Da gusto hacer formación en estas condiciones y anima a seguir confiando en la magnifica universidad pública que tenemos (donde, a pesar de la escasez de recursos, estamos logrando resultados alucinantes, gracias a las excelentes personas que aún están en la universidad).

Publicado: Marin-Garcia, J. A., & Santandreu-Mascarell, C. (2015). What do we know about rubrics used in higher education? Intangible Capital, 11(1), 118-145.

Marin-Garcia, J. A., & Santandreu-Mascarell, C. (2015). What do we know about rubrics used in higher education? Intangible Capital, 11(1), 118-145. doi: 1697-9818 – Print ISSN: 2014-3214
http://dx.doi.org/10.3926/ic.538

Acceso al PDF del documento:

http://www.intangiblecapital.org/index.php/ic/article/view/538/462

Purpose: In this paper we compare the search strategies and the results of three recent literature reviews on the rubrics use in education. With all this we aim to identify what is known, what it is not known yet and if there is material to launch a new literature review right now.

Design/methodology/approach: Comparative analysis of three recen literature reviews and systematic literature review.

Findings and Originality/value: Of the 142 papers included in the three recent reviews, few focus on university learning and the results are not broken down by educational level. We believe that there is no conclusive scientific answer to how to create and validate an assessment rubric for university courses, or what purpose they serve , or if it’s worth the effort to develop them. Recommendations for the appropriate use of rubrics are based on anecdotal evidence without robust and proven methodology. Nor is easy to find what subjects, or what objects, and in what contexts have been investigated the rubrics or which validated rubrics are available.

Originality/value: we conducted a new review and we compare the selected papers with those used in previous reviews. We have located 241 new papers not included in previous reviews. Probably all this new material can be used in the future for a meta-analysis

Keywords

rating; scoring; rubric; Higher Education; systematic Literature Review; assessment instrument; educational; learning; self-assessment; peer-assessment

Summary FINCODA project (January 2015 –December 2017) [EU-Grant-554493-EPP-1-2014-1-FI-EPPKA2-KA]

EICE IEMA (Innovación en la Evaluación para la Mejora del Aprendizaje)

Framework for Innovation Competencies Development and Assessment (FINCODA) 554493-EPP-1-2014-1-FI-EPPKA2-KA

Related to the following “Competencias transversales UPVlc”:

  • Creatividad
  • Innovación
  • Trabajo en equipo
  • Liderazgo

Introduction:

Universities don’t have tools to measure the development of students’ innovation competencies during their studies. Therefore we don’t actually know what teaching and learning methods are effective when aspiring the enhancement of innovation competencies, although we should organize higher education in a cost-effective way.

Companies are lacking of tools and methods to assess innovation competencies as part of their knowledge management activities: in recruitment processes, in internal development activities and when subcontracting training services for their staff.

We urgently need new reliable and valid tools for innovation competencies assessment that could be used throughout the young innovators path from university to working life organizations.

Our project perfectly implements two priorities of ET 2020 Strategic Framework, namely “Strategic objective 2: Improving the quality and efficiency of education and training” and “Strategic objective 4: Enhancing creativity and innovation, including entrepreneurship, at all levels of education and training”. To make these priorities true in higher education, we need active university-enterprise cooperation and valid tools to measure intended learning outcomes.

FINCODA project will produce several remarkable tangible outputs:

  • A toolkit for behaviour assessment: available as an electronic guide on the Internet. It can be used as a self learning material of guide for training purposes.
  • Software application for innovation competencies assessment (basic version is OER and more advanced versions may include small fee for maintenance work of the tool)
  • Massive Open Online Courses related to:
    • Behaviour assessment (MOOC 1)
    • Behaviour assessment and the use of innovation competencies assessment tool (MOOC 2)
  • Workshop (Joint Rater training workshop for all Partners). Month 13

Rater training workshop, targeted mainly for partner organizations. It will be organized in Hamburg Germany. It serves the purposes of training key staff from all partners to behaviour assessment as well as testing the novel toolkit. Participants will later on act as trainers in their own organizations and in cooperation events with other stakeholders.

  • Workshops (Innovation competencies assessment workshops). Months 26-35

Innovation competencies assessment workshops will be organized in all partner countries. There will be joint format agreed in project level and HE partners are responsible for organizing those workshops in their countries, by utilizing their expertise and premises. In English, Finnish, Dutch, Spanish, German.

Members

5 European universities that form a strategic alliance called CARPE (Consortium of Applied Research and Professional Education).

  • TUAS (Turku University of Applied Science), HAW (Hamburg University of Applied Sciences), HU (University of Applied Sciences, The Netherlands) , MMU (Manchester Metropolitan University), UPVLC (Universitat Politècnica de València).

9 Employers of innovators and developers of new innovations; innovation intensive companies from 5 different corners of Europe.

  • Elomatic Ltd (Finland). Leading European consulting & engineering company and a global provider of 3D Plant & Ship Design Software Cadmatic with over 700 engineering professionals.
  • Hamburger Hafen und Logistik AG (HHLA, Germany) makes annually enormous investments in both vocational and in-service training for their nearly 5000 employees.
  • Lactoprot (Germany) use outstanding innovative technologies to optimize production processes and quality in their core business. Focused on the processing of milk.
  • ECDL (The Netherlands) is a multinational operator that has profound experience working with schools, educators and commercial enterprises.
  • John Caunt Scientific Ltd. (UK) specializes in product innovation as the core activity of their nuclear radiation detection, measurement and shielding products business.
  • Carter & Corson Partnership Ltd. (UK) has over 14 years’ experience in designing, developing and implementing competency frameworks and diagnostics in recruitment, assessment, development and training. They will work closely with partner HEIs in refinement and validation of assessment tool.
  • Enterprise Europe Northwest EENNW (UK). Professional network targeted at helping SMEs, Universities & organizations to grow, be competitive & partner within Europe & third country partners.
  • Celestica (Spain) provide electronics manufacturing services by their 30 000 employees and execute their business in Centers of Excellence strategically located in North America, Europe and Asia.
  • Schneider Electric España SA creates new innovations to meet the planet’s energy challenge and make the smart grid a reality.

HE students and staff of participating companies.

Overview of short term results and long term outcome indicators

Short term   results Target groups/potential beneficiaries Quantitative indicators Qualitative indicators
New practical and academic knowledge about the innovation competences Companies, work places, academics Number of publications Topics of discussion among practitioners and academics
Innovation competencies assessment Barometer HR people in companies, students and teachers in universities Frequency of use of Barometer Web service User feedback

 

Long term   outcome Target groups/potential beneficiaries Quantitative indicators Qualitative indicators
Curriculum development in HEIs Students Numbers of courses assessed by innovation competence criteria Completion rates

Feedback from students in student satisfaction surveys

 
Personnel assessment methods Companies, workers Performance of recruitment process, number of new innovations Maturity of staff to participate innovation intensive work
New cooperation level between companies and universities Companies, work places, students Number of agreements between companies and universities based on the recruitment path framework Succeeding in the first recruitment according to students and employers

 

 

 

Contacto:

Juan A. Marin-Garcia (DOE)

jamarin@omp.upv.es

Coordinador del proyecto en UPVlc