Impacto de una capacitación docente en Blended Learning sobre profesores universitarios de biología: un estudio pretest–postest.
Resumen
El estudio evaluó el impacto de un curso de capacitación docente en Blended Learning dirigido a profesores universitarios de biología. Se empleó un diseño cuantitativo cuasi experimental pretest–postest con mediciones repetidas en 20 participantes. Se aplicó una escala Likert de 16 ítems organizada en cuatro dimensiones: conocimiento conceptual, competencia tecnológica, diseño didáctico y evaluación del aprendizaje. Los resultados mostraron incrementos estadísticamente significativos en las puntuaciones globales y por dimensiones, particularmente en el conocimiento del modelo, el uso de LMS y la evaluación en entornos híbridos. Los hallazgos evidencian que la capacitación docente favorece la apropiación inicial del Blended Learning y fortalece las percepciones de competencia pedagógica para su implementación en educación superior en contextos universitarios de enseñanza de la biología.
Citas
Anthony, B., Kamaludin, A., Romli, A., Raffei, A. F. M., Phon, D. N. A. E., Abdullah, A., y Ming, G. L. (2022). Blended learning adoption and implementation in higher education: A systematic review. Technology, Knowledge and Learning, 27, 531–578. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-020-09477-z
Brown, M. G. (2016). Blended instructional practice: A review of the empirical literature on instructors’ adoption and use of online tools in face-to-face teaching. The Internet and Higher Education, 31, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2016.05.001
Garrison, D. R., y Kanuka, H. (2004). Blended learning: Uncovering its transformative potential in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 7(2), 95–105. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2004.02.001
Garrison, D. R., y Vaughan, N. D. (2008). Blended Learning in Higher Education: Framework, Principles, and Guidelines. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Graham, C. R. (2013). Emerging practice and research in blended learning. En M. G. Moore (Ed.), Handbook of distance education (3.ª ed., pp. 333–350). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203803738.ch21
Graham, C. R., Borup, J., Pulham, E., y Larsen, R. (2019). K–12 Blended Teaching Readiness: Model and Instrument Development. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 51(3), 239–258. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2019.1586601
Harper, C. V., McCormick, L. M., y Marron, L. (2024). Face-to-face vs. blended learning in higher education: A quantitative analysis of biological science student outcomes. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 21(2). https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-023-00435-0
Hernández-Sampieri, R., Fernández-Collado, C., y Baptista-Lucio, P. (2014). Metodología de la investigación (6ª ed.). McGraw-Hill.
Hofstein, A., y Lunetta, V. N. (2004). The laboratory in science education: Foundations for the twenty- first century. Science Education, 88(1), 28–54. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.10106
Kirkwood, A., y Price, L. (2014). Technology-enhanced learning and teaching in higher education: ¿what is ‘enhanced’ and how do we know? A critical literature review. Learning, Media and Technology, 39(1), 6–36. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2013.770404
Likert, R. (1932). A technique for the measurement of attitudes. Archives of Psychology, 140, 1–55.
Moskal, P., Dziuban, C., y Hartman, J. (2013). Blended learning: A dangerous idea? The Internet and Higher Education, 18, 15–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2012.12.001
Norman, G. (2010). Likert scales, levels of measurement and the “laws” of statistics. Advances in Health Sciences Education, 15, 625–632. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10459-010-9222-y
Owston, R., Wideman, H., Murphy, J., y Lupshenyuk, D. (2008). Blended teacher professional development: A synthesis of three program evaluations. The Internet and Higher Education, 11(3–4), 201–210. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2008.07.003
Porter, W. W., Graham, C. R., Bodily, R. G., y Sandberg, D. S. (2016). A qualitative analysis of institutional drivers and barriers to blended learning adoption in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 28, 17–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2015.08.003
Porter, W. W., Graham, C. R., Spring, K. A., y Welch, K. R. (2014). Blended learning in higher education: Institutional adoption and implementation. Computers & Education, 75, 185–195. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.02.011
Riffell, S., y Sibley, D. (2005). Using web-based instruction to improve large undergraduate biology courses: An evaluation of a hybrid course format. Computers & Education, 44(3), 217–235. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2004.01.005
Scherer, R., Howard, S. K., Tondeur, J., y Siddiq, F. (2021). Profiling teachers’ readiness for online teaching and learning in higher education: Who’s ready? Computers in Human Behavior, 118, Article 106675. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2020.106675
Sullivan, G. M., y Artino, A. R., Jr. (2013). Analyzing and interpreting data from Likert-type scales. Journal of Graduate Medical Education, 5(4), 541–542. https://doi.org/10.4300/JGME-5-4-18
Vo, H. M., Zhu, C., y Diep, N. A. (2017). The effect of blended learning on student performance at course-level in higher education: A meta-analysis. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 53, 17–28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2017.01.002
Wong, L., Tatnall, A., y Burgess, S. (2014). A framework for investigating blended learning effectiveness. Education + Training, 56(2–3), 233–251. https://doi.org/10.1108/ET-04-2013-0049
Yeou, M. (2016). An investigation of students’ acceptance of Moodle in a blended learning setting using technology acceptance model. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 44(3), 300–318. https://doi.org/10.1177/0047239515618464
