Auto-evaluación a través de Internetvariables metacognitivas y rendimiento académico

  1. Ibabe Erostarbe, Izaskun
  2. Jaureguizar Alboniga-Mayor, Joana
Journal:
RELATEC: Revista Latinoamericana de Tecnología Educativa

ISSN: 1695-288X

Year of publication: 2007

Volume: 6

Issue: 2

Pages: 59-76

Type: Article

DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openDialnet editor

More publications in: RELATEC: Revista Latinoamericana de Tecnología Educativa

Abstract

The classic distinction between formative and summative assessment has been very useful, although current researches point out that all assessments should be conceptualized as "assessment for learning". Tutor's feedback to students is decisive in any kind of assessment. This study illustrates an innovative teaching experience in university semi-presential teaching environment. The main aim of this project was to verify whether interactive self-assessment improved university studen'ts academic results and their perception of learning. On the basis of the study of Honkimaki, Tynjala y Valkonen (2004), this research tried to analyze whether self-assessment procedures are of benefit to less motivated students. Self-assessment exercises about all topics of the course were created using Hot Potatoes. Student's level of utilization of the tool and satisfaction with it were assessed. The results suggest that students who use interactive self-assessment exercises as a complementary study tool obtain better final marks. Even students with lower levels of motivation used this self-assessment tool. Finally, the importance of metacognitive skills in learning regulation is discussed.

Bibliographic References

  • Amabile, T. M. (1983). The Social Psychology of Creativity: A Componential Conceptualization. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45 (2), 357-376.
  • Area, M. (2005). Internet en la docencia universitaria. Webs docentes y aulas virtuales. http://webpages.ull.es/users/manarea/guiadidacticawebs.pdf [Verificado el 20 de junio de 2007]
  • Ausubel, N. H. (1983). Psicología Educativa: Un punto de vista cognoscitivo. México: Trillas, 2ª edición.
  • Black, P. y William, D. (1998). Inside the black box: raising standards through classroom assessment. Phi Delta Kappan, 80 (2), 139-144.
  • Bloom, B.S. (1984). Taxonomy of educational objectives, handbook 1: Cognitive domain. Boston: Addison-Wesley.
  • Brookhart, S.M. (2001). Successful students’ formative and summative use of assessment information. Assessment in Education, 8 (2), 153-169.
  • Brown, A.L. (1980). Metacognitive development and reading. En R.J. Spiro, B.C. Bruce y W.F. Brewer (Eds.), Theoretical issues in reading comprehension (pp. 458-482). Mahwah, New Jersey: Erlbaum.
  • Brown, A.L. (1987). Metacognition, executive control, self-regulation, and other more mysterious mechanisms. En E. Weinert y R. Kluwe (Eds.), Metacognition, motivation, and understanding (pp. 65-116). Mahwah, Nueva Jersey: Erlbaum.
  • Bruning, R.H., Schraw, G.J. y Ronning, R.R. (2002). Psicología cognitiva e instrucción. Madrid: Alianza.
  • Carrasco, A., Gracia, E. y de la Iglesia, C. (2005). Las TIC en la construcción del Espacio Europeo de Educación Superior. Dos experiencias docentes en Teoría Económica. Revista Iberoamericana de Educación, 36, 1-16.
  • Challis, D. (2005). Committing to quality learning through adaptive online assessment. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 30 (5), 519–527.
  • Collis, B., De-Boer, W. y Slotman, K. (2001). Feedback for web-based assignments. Journal of Computer-Assisted-Learning, 17, 306-313.
  • Cross, K.P. y Steadman, M.H. (1996). Classroom Research: Implementing the Scholarship of Teaching. San Francisco: JosseyBass Publishers.
  • Flavell, J.H. (1976). Metacognitive aspects of problem solving. En L.B. Resnick (Ed.) The nature of intelligence (pp 231-235). Hillslade, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum.
  • Gómez Alvarez, L. (2006). Respeto por los estilos de aprendizaje y otros principios de práctica docente efectiva: modelo para curso on-line centrado en el estudiante. II Congreso Internacional de Estilos de Aprendizaje. Chile.
  • Hiltz, S. R., Arbaugh, J. B., Benbunan-Fich, R. y Shea, P. (2004). ALN Research: What we know and what we need to know about contextual influences. En J. Bourne and J. C. Moore (Eds.), Elements of Quality Online Education: Into the Mainstream. (p. 109-124). Needham, MA.: Sloan-C.
  • Honkimaki, S., Tynjala, P. y Valkonen, S. (2004). University students' study orientations, learning experiences and study success in innovative courses. Studies in Higher Education, 29 (4), 431-449.
  • Kulhavy, R. W. y Stock, W. A. (1989). Feedback in written instruction: The place of response certitude. Educational Psychology Review, 1 (4), 279-308.
  • Lara, S. (2003). La evaluación formativa a través de Internet. En M. Cebrián (Ed.), Enseñanza virtual para la innovación universitaria (pp. 105-117). Madrid: Narcea.
  • Lowry, R. (2005). Computer-aided self assessment –an effective tool. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 6 (4), 198-203.
  • Martínez, R.J. y Moreno, R. (2005). Validez de indicadores de trabajo del estudiante en el proyectado EEES: Una replicación. IX Congreso de Metodología de las Ciencias Sociales y de la Salud. Granada.
  • Marzano, R. J., Norford, J. S., Paynter, D. E., Pickering, D. J. y Gaddy, B. B. (2001). Handbook for classroom instruction that works. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
  • Oliver, R. y McLoughlin, C. (2001). Tools for the Teacher. En F. Lockwood y A. Gooley (Eds.) Issues and Innovations in Distance Education. (pp. 138-149). Londres: Bogan Page.
  • Palomares, T., Fernández, K., Madroño, J.I., González, J., Chica, Y., Torres, A., Chomón, Sáez, F.J. y Bilbao, P. (2005). Las tecnologías de la información y comunicación como factor del aprendizaje en la docencia universitaria. En A. Goñi (Ed.), Innovación educativa en la Universidad (pp. 145-156). Bilbao: Servicio Editorial de la U.PV.-E.H.U.
  • Peat, M. y Franklin, S. (2002). Supporting student learning. The use of computerbased formative assessment modules. British Journal of Educational Technology, 33 (5), 515-523.
  • Pickard, M. J. (2007). The new Bloom’s taxonomy: an overview for family and consumer sciences. Journal of Family and Consumer Sciences Education, 25 (1), 45-55.
  • Plous, S. (2000). Tips on creating and maintaining an educational World Wide Web site. Teaching of Psychology, 27, 63-70.
  • Printrich, P.R. (2002). The role metacognitive knowledge in learning, teaching, and assessing. Theory into Practice, 41 (4), 220.
  • Prosser, M. y Trigwell, K. (1999). Understanding and learning in teaching: The experience in higher education. Philadelphia, PA: Society for Research into Higher Education & Open University Press.
  • Quinn, D. y Reid, I. (2003). Using innovative online quizzes to assist learning. http://ausweb.scu.edu.au/aw03/papers/quinn/paper.html [Verificado el 16 de junio de 2007]
  • Ricketts, C. y Wilks, S.J. (2002). Improving Student Performance Through Computer-based Assessment: insights from recent research. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 27 (5), 475-479.
  • Rotger, B. (1990). Evaluación Formativa. Madrid: Cincel.
  • Sadler, D.R. (1989). Formative assessment and the design of instructional systems. Instructional Science, 18, 119-144.
  • Schuttler, R. y Burdick, J. (2006). Creating a Unified System of Assessment. En M. Hricko y S.L. Howell (Eds.), Online Assessment and Measurement (pp.165-181). London: Information Science Publishing.
  • Scriven, M.S. (1967). The methodology of evaluation. En Perspectives of curriculum evaluation (AERA Monograph Series on Curriculum Evaluation, nº 1). Chicago, Rand McNally.
  • Sherman, R.C. (1998). Using the World Wide Web to teach everyday applications of social psychology. Teaching of Psychology, 25, 212-216.
  • Sternberg, R.J. y Lubart, T.I. (1995). Defying the crowd: Cultivating creativity in a culture of conformity. Nueva York: Free Press.
  • Taras, M. (2001). The use of tutor feedback and student self-assessment in sumative assessment tasks: towards transparency for student and for tutors. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 26(9), 605-614.
  • Taras, M. (2002). Using assessment for learning and learning from assessment. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 27 (2), 501-510.
  • Taras, M. (2003). To feedback or not to feedback in student self-assessment. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 28 (5), 549-565.
  • Vadhan, V. y Stander, P. (1994). Metacognitive ability and test performance among college students. The Journal of Psychology, 128, 307-309.
  • Ward, M. y Newlands, D. (1998). Use of the Web in undergraduate teaching. Computers and Education, 31, 171-184.
  • Zúñiga-Carrasco, M. (1988). Une conception de l’apprentissage: Recherche sur le point de vue de l’apprenant. Bulletin de Psychologie Scolaire et d’Orientation, 8, 164-190.
Data source: Dialnet