Technological environments in co-designing personalized learning paths in higher education
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.21556/edutec.2020.74.1843Keywords:
Virtual learning environments, co-design, learning pathways, technology, agencyAbstract
Methodological tendencies in higher education, based on flexibility and active participation of students, require new technological configurations that facilitate their implementation.
This article presents a study aimed at analysing the tools and functions associated with co-design processes, focused on the construction of personalised learning itineraries in virtual environments in the university context.
Following a Design-Based Research methodology, the study has been carried out in six educational technology courses in Bachelor's Degrees in Primary Education, Early Childhood Education and Pedagogy of the University of the Balearic Islands.
As a result, a functional classification of tools used by teachers was generated. This classification allowed to propose a set-up for a technological environment to support processes of learning co-design of learning pathways that promote self-regulation and student agency.
Any proposal of technological configuration must be in line with the pedagogical design, institutional, logistic or personal decisions.
Funding
FEDER
Ministerio de Economía, Industria y Competitividad
Agencia Estatal de Investigación
Downloads
References
Agudelo, O. L. y Salinas J. (2015). Flexible learning itineraries based on conceptual maps. Journal of New Approaches in Educational Research, 4 (2), 70-76. https://doi.org/10.7821/naer.2015.7.130
Aldridge, J. (2016). Participatory research: Working with vulnerable groups in research and practice. Policy Press.
Arnstein, S. R. (1969). A ladder of citizen participation. Journal of the American Planning Association, 35 (4), 216–224. https://doi.org/10.1080/01944366908977225
Austria-Corrales, F. (2012). Entendiendo el rol del sentido de agencia en el aprendizaje de contenidos teóricos en psicología, I Congreso ALPEFSI, Panamá.
Baek, E. O., Cagiltay, K., Boling, E. y Frick, T. (2007). User-centered design and development. Handbook of research on educational communications and technology. En J.M. Spector, D. Merrill MD, J. van Merrienboer, M. Driscoll. Handbook of research on educational communications and technology (pp. 660–668), Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Bovill, C. (2017). A framework to explore roles within student-staff partnerships in higher education: which students are partners, when and in what ways? International Journal for Students as Partners, 1 (1), 1–5.
Bovill, C. (2020). Co-creation in learning and teaching: the case for a whole-class approach in higher education. Higher Education, 79 (6), 1023–1037. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-019-00453-w
Bovill, C. y Bulley, C. J. (2011). A model of active student participation in curriculum design: exploring desirability and possibility. Improving Student Learning (ISL) 18: Global Theories and Local Practices: Institutional, Disciplinary and Cultural Variations, 176–188. https://eprints.gla.ac.uk/57709/1/57709.pdf
Bovill, C., Felten, P. y Cook-Sather, A. (2014). Engaging students as partners in learning and teaching (2): practical guidance for academic staff and academic developers. International Consortium for Educational Development Conference, http://iced2014.se/proceedings/1146_BovillFeltenCook-Sather%20.pdf
Brown, T. y Wyatt, J. (2010). Design thinking for social innovation IDEO. Development Outreach, 12 (1), 29–31.
Castañeda, S., Peñalosa, E. y Austria, F. (2014). Efectos de perfiles agentivos y no agentivos sobre la formación teórica del psicólogo. Componentes de epistemología personal, cognitivos y autorregulatorios. Facultad de Psicología UNAM / CONACyT.
Coll, C. (2016). La personalización del aprendizaje escolar El qué, el por qué y el cómo de un reto insoslayable. En Vilalta, J.M. (dir.): Reptes de l'educació a Catalunya. Anuari 2015. Fundació Bofill.
Conole, G. (2013). Designing for learning in an open world. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-8517-0
Dabbagh, N. y Kitsantas, A. (2012). Personal learning environments, social media, and self-regulated learning: A natural formula for connecting formal and informal learning. Internet and Higher Education. 15 (1), 3–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2011.06.002
de Benito, B., Darder, A., y Salinas, J. (2012). Los itinerarios de aprendizaje mediante mapas conceptuales como recurso para la representación del conocimiento. Edutec. Revista Electrónica de Tecnología Educativa, (39), 189. https://doi.org/10.21556/edutec.2012.39.372
de Benito, B., Villatoro, S. y Salinas, J. (2020). Propuesta de itinerarios personalizados de aprendizaje en la formación inicial docente. En Lindín, C., Esteban, M. B., Bergmann, J. C. F., Castells, N., y Rivera-Vargas, P. (Ed.). Llibre d'actes de la I Conferència Internacional de Recerca en Educació. Educació 2019: reptes, tendències i compromisos. Universitat de Barcelona, LiberLibro, 567–576.
Design-Based Research Collective. (2003). Design-Based Research: An emerging paradigm for educational inquiry. Educational Researcher, 32 (1), 5–8. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X032001005
Ehn, P. (2008). Participation in design things. Proceedings of the 10th Anniversary conference on participatory design. New York: ACM. https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.5555/1795234.1795248
Escofet, A., Grasa, M., Morín, V., Novella, A., Payá, M. y Rubio, L. (2020). Impulso del compromiso de los estudiantes universitarios mediante procesos de codiseño. En Lindín, C., Esteban, M. B., Bergmann, J. C. F., Castells, N., y Rivera-Vargas, P. (Ed.) . Llibre d'actes de la I Conferència Internacional de Recerca en Educació. Educació 2019: reptes, tendències i compromisos. Universitat de Barcelona, LiberLibro, 904–910.
Gros, B., (2019). La investigación sobre el diseño participativo de entornos digitales de aprendizaje. Universidad de Barcelona, 1-70. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.24298.06087
González, A. A., Roig, A. E., Suari, N. O., Juanola, M. M., Ayuste González, A., Escofet Roig, A. y Masgrau Juanola, M. (2016). Learning service and codesign in teacher training: integration ways of students' experiences and perspectives. Bordón- Revista de Pedagogía, 68(2), 169–183.
Jääskelä, P, Poikkeus, A. M., Vasalampi, K., Valleala, U. M. y Rasku-Puttonen, H. (2016). Assessing agency of university students: validation of the AUS Scale. Studies in Higher Education, 42 (11) 2061–2079. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2015.1130693
Kalantzis, M. y Cope, B. (2010). The teacher as designer: Pedagogy in the new media age. E-Learning, 7(3), 200–222. https://doi.org/10.2304/elea.2010.7.3.200
Kinzie, J. y Kuh, G. (2017). Reframing student success in college: Advancing Know-What and Know-How. Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning, 49 (3), 19–27. https://doi.org/10.1080/00091383.2017.1321429
Könings, K. D., Seidel, T. y van Merriënboer, J. J. G. (2014). Participatory design of learning environments: Integrating perspectives of students, teachers, and designers. Instructional Science, 42 (1), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-013-9305-2
Kuh, G.D. (2008). High-impact educational practices: What they are, who has access to them, and why they matter. Association of American Colleges and Universities.
Magolda, M. B. B. y Astin, A. W. (1993). What "Doesn't" matter in college?.What matters in college: Four critical years revisited. Educational Researcher, 22 (8), 32–34. https://doi.org/10.2307/1176821
Marcelo, C. y Rijo, D. (2019). Aprendizaje autorregulado de estudiantes universitarios: Los usos de las tecnologías digitales, Revista Caribeña de Investigación Educativa (RECIE), 3(1), 62–81.
Minguillón, J., Mor, E., Santanach, F. y Ortiz, L. G. (2005). Personalización del proceso de aprendizaje usando learning objects reutilizables. Revista de Educación a Distancia (RED), 0(0), 1–10.
Mor, Y. y Craft, B. (2012). Learning design: Reflections upon the current landscape. Research in Learning Technology, 20, 85–94. https://doi.org/10.3402/rlt.v20i0.19196
Naseer, M., Zhang, W. y Zhu, W. (2020). Early Prediction of a team performance in the initial assessment phases of a software project for sustainable software engineering education. Sustainability. 12. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12114663.
OECD (2019). Panorama de la educación. Indicadores de la OCDE 2019. Informe español. España. https://www.oecd.org/skills/OECD-skills-strategy-2019-ES.pdf
Pérez, A., Marín, V.I. y Tur, G. (2018). Information management tools for the development of self-Regulated learning skills in pre-service teacher education. @tic revista d'innovació educativa, 21, 31–39.
Reeves, T.C. (2006). Design research from the technology perspective. In van-den Akker, J., Gravemeijer, K., McKenney, S., y Nieveen, N. (Eds.), Educational design research. (pp. 86–109). Routledge.
Richey, R. C., Klein, J. D. y Nelson, W. (2004). Developmental research: Studies of instructional design and development. En Jonassen, D. (Ed.), Handbook of research for educational communications and technology, (pp. 1099–1130). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.
Robertson, M. y Al-Zahrani, A. (2012). Self-Efficacy and ICT Integration into Initial teacher education in Saudi Arabia: Matching Policy with Practice. 28 (7), Australasian Journal of Educational Technology. 1136-1151 https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.793
Robertson, T. y Simonsen, J. (2012). Challenges and opportunities in contemporary participatory design. Design Issues, 28(3), 3–9. https://doi.org/10.1162/DESI_a_00157
Salinas, J. (2013). Enseñanza flexible y aprendizaje abierto, fundamentos clave de los PLEs. En L. Castañeda y J Adell (Eds). Entornos Personales de Aprendizaje: claves para el ecosistema educativo en red (pp-53-71). Marfil.
Salinas, J. y Agudelo O. (2016). Itinerarios flexibles de aprendizaje y mapas conceptuales: un Abanico de Posibilidades para todos los niveles educativos. En A. J. Cañas, P. Reiska, J. D. Novak (Eds). Innovating with Concept Mapping. Proceedings off the Seventh International Conference on Concept Mapping (Vol 2), Tallinn University.
Salinas-Ibáñez, J. y De-Benito, B. (2020). Construction of personalized learning pathways through mixed methods. Comunicar, 65, 31–42 . https://doi.org/10.3916/c65-2020-03
Salinas, J., De Benito, B., Marín, V., Moreno, J. y Morales, M. E. (2010). Herramientas y sistemas de gestión del conocimiento para el desarrollo de metodologías centradas en la colaboración y el intercambio. Edutec 2010. E-learning 2.0: Enseñar y Aprender en la Sociedad del Conocimiento, Bilbao, España.
Wang, F. y Hannafin, M. J. (2005). Design-based research and technology- enhanced learning environments. Educational Technology Research and Development, 53(4), 5–23.
Yot, C. y Marcelo, C. (2017). University students' self-regulated learning using digital technologies. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education. 14(38), 1-18. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-017-0076-8.
Zimmerman, B. J. (2000). Theories of self-regulated learning and academic achievement: an overview and analysis. En B. J. Zimmerman y D. H. Schunk (Eds.) Self-regulated learning and academic achievement: Theoretical Perspectives. (pp. 1-37). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
Zimmerman, B. J. y Moylan, A. R. (2009). Self-regulation: Where metacognition and motivation intersect. En D. J. Hacker, J. Dunlosky y A. C. Graesser (Eds.), Handbook of Metacognition in Education (pp. 299–315). Routledge.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
By submitting the paper, the authors assign the publication rights to the journal Edutec. For its part, Edutec authorises its distribution as long as its content is not altered and its origin is indicated. At the end of each article published in Edutec, the citation procedure is indicated.
The management and editorial board of Edutec Revista Electrónica de Tecnología Educativa do not accept any responsibility for the statements and ideas expressed by the authors in their work.
Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version)
