Examinar la eficacia relativa de los modelos de enseñanza en línea, mixta y presencial para promover el desarrollo profesional de los profesores de idiomas extranjeros
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.30827/portalin.vi2023c.29619Palabras clave:
enseñanza en línea, enseñanza mixta, enseñanza presencial, el desarrollo y la formación del docente, inglés como lengua extranjeraResumen
El presente trabajo trata de averiguar a través de un estudio experimental la eficacia de tres modalidades de enseñanza, a saber, la modalidad en línea, la mixta y la presencial, en las aulas de inglés universitarias chinas, con el fin de ayudar a los profesores de inglés a conocer las ventajas y desventajas de las modalidades referidas y, de ahí facilitar su desarrollo profesional. En el experimento se han seleccionado primero tres grupos de estudiantes con los que se han adoptado respectivamente la modalidad de enseñanza en línea, la combinada y la presencial, para luego examinar el rendimiento de los estudiantes en el examen semestral. Los resultados del análisis de la varianza con un factor (ANOVA) conducen a la conclusión de que el grupo que ha recibido la modalidad de enseñanza presencial ha rendido mejor en comparación con los otros dos grupos, mientras que las entrevistas en grupo con los estudiantes dejan en claro que las modalidades tanto en línea como mixta constan de más perjuicios que beneficios. Los resultados del estudio demuestran que, siendo un modelo pedagógico emergente y popular en la epidemia, la enseñanza en línea aún no es capaz de reemplazar la enseñanza presencial en términos del rendimiento y la cognición de alumnos en el estudio. Y las conclusiones de este artículo sirven como referencias para el desarrollo y la formación de los profesores de inglés.
Descargas
Citas
Almahasees, Z., Mohsen, K., & Amin, M. O. (2021). Faculty’s and students’ perceptions of online learning during covid-19. Frontiers in Education, 6, 638470. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2021.638470
AlShahrani, F., Talaue, G.M. (2018). Traditional versus blended learning method: A comparative study on its effectiveness in business communication course. International Journal of Advanced Information Technology, 8 (6), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.5121/ijait.2018.8601
Alshawish, E., El-Banna, M. M., & Alrimawi, I. (2021). Comparison of blended versus traditional classrooms among undergraduate nursing students: A quasi-experimental study. Nurse Education Today, 106,105049. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2021.105049
Anthony, B. Jr., Kamaludin, A., Romli, A., Raffei, A. F. M., Phon, D. N. A. L. E., Abdullah, A., et al. (2019). Exploring the role of blended learning for teaching and learning effectiveness in institutions of higher learning: an empirical investigation. Education and Information Technologies, 24, 3433–3466. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-019-09941-z
Atwa, H, Shehata, MH, Al-Ansari, A, Kumar, A, Jaradat, A, Ahmed J and Deifalla A. (2022). Online, face-to-face, or blended learning? Faculty and medical students’ perceptions during the COVID-19 pandemic: A mixed-method study. Frontiers in Medicine, 9:791352. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmed.2022.791352
Blau, G., Drennan, R. (2017). Exploring differences in business undergraduate perceptions by preferred classroom delivery mode. Online Learning, 21(3), 222–234.
Caruso, M., Gadd Colombi, A., & Tebbit, S. (2017). Teaching how to Listen: Blended learning for the development and assessment of listening skills in a second language. Journal of University Teaching & Learning Practice, 14(1). https://doi.org/10.53761/1.14.1.7
Cheung, A. (2021). Synchronous online teaching, a blessing or a curse? Insights from EFL primary students’ interaction during online English lessons. System, 100, 102566. https://doi.org//10.1016/j.system.2021.102566
Creswell, J. W. (2012). Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research (4th ed.). Pearson.
Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2011). Designing and conducting mixed methods research (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Davis, F.D. (1986). A Technology Acceptance Model for Empirically Testing New End-User Information Systems: Theory and Results. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, MIT Sloan School of Management, Cambridge, MA, USA.
Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319–340. https://doi.org/10.2307/249008
Dong, C., Cao, S., & Li, H. (2020). Young children’s online learning during covid-19 pandemic: Chinese parents’ beliefs and attitudes. Children and Youth Services Review, 118, 1-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2020.105440
Dziuban, C., Graham, C. R., Moskal, P. D., Norberg, A., & Sicilia, N. (2018). Blended learning: The new normal and emerging technologies. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 15(1), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-017-0087-5
Du, X., & Jia, Li. (2020). Correlation analysis of middle school students’ self-efficacy and online learning burnout during the period of suspension of classes and non-stop. Mental Health Education in Primary and Secondary School, 11, 44–46.
Gao, L.X., & Zhang, L.J. (2020). Teacher learning in difficult times: Examining foreign language teachers’ cognitions about online teaching to tide over COVID-19. Frontiers in Psychology, 11(49653), 1-14. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.549653
Garrison, D. R., & 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
Graham, C. R., Allen, S., & Ure, D. (2005). Benefits and challenges of blended learning environments. In D. B. A. Khosrow-Pour (Ed.), Encyclopaedia of Information Science and Technology (pp. 253–259). Idea Group. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-59140-553-5.ch047
Henderson, M., Selwyn, N., Aston, R. (2015). What works and why? Student perceptions of ‘useful’ digital technology in university teaching and learning. Studies in Higher Education, 42(8), 1567–1579 https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2015.1007946
Ho, V. T., Nakamori, Y., Ho, T. B., & Lim, C. P. (2016). Blended learning model on hands-on approach for in-service secondary school teachers: Combination of e-learning and face-to-face discussion. Education & Information Technologies, 21(1), 185-208. Doi:10.1007/s10639-014-9315-y
Jiang, Y., Chen, Y., Lu, J., & Wang Y. (2021). The effect of the online and offline blended teaching mode on English as a foreign language learners’ listening performance in a Chinese context. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 742742. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.742742
Kauffman, H. (2015). A review of predictive factors of student success in and satisfaction with online learning. Research in Learning Technology, 23(1), 1-13. https://doi.org/10.3402/ rlt. v23.26507
Kazakoff, E. R., Macaruso, P., and Hook, P. (2018). Efficacy of a blended learning approach to elementary school reading instruction for students who are English learners. Educational Technology Research and Development, 66, 429–449. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-017-9565-7
Khatak, S., & Wadhwa, N. (2020). Online versus offline mode of education –is India ready to meet the challenges of online education in lockdown? Journal of the Social Sciences, 48(3), 404–413.
Kebritchi, M., Lipschuetz, A., & Santiague, L. (2017). Issues and challenges for teaching successful online courses in higher education: A literature review. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 46(1), 4–29. https://doi.org/10.1177/0047239516661713
Larson, D. K., & Sung, C. H. (2019). Comparing student performance: online versus blended versus face-to-face. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 13, 31–42. Doi: 10.24059/OLJ.V13I1.1675
Liu, H., Zhu, J., Duan, Y., Nie, Y., Deng, Z., & Hong, X., et al. (2022). Development and students’ evaluation of a blended online and offline pedagogy for physical education theory curriculum in China during the covid-19 pandemic. Educational Technology Research and Development, 1-20. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-022-10131-x
Lord, G., & Lomicka, L. L. (2004). Developing collaborative cyber communities to prepare tomorrow’s teachers. Foreign Language Annals, 37(3), 401–408. Doi: 10.1111/j.1944-9720. 2004.tb02698.x
Means, B., Toyama, Y., Murphy, R., & Baki, M. (2013). The effectiveness of online and blended learning: A meta-analysis of the empirical literature. Teachers College Record, 115(3), 1–47. https://doi.org/10.1177/016146811311500307
Ministry of Education of the People’s Republic of China. (2019). The “6-Excellent and 1-Top” education plan. Retrieved from http://www.moe.gov.cn/jyb_xwfb/gzdt_gzdt/moe_1485/201904/t20190429_380009.html
Miyazoe, T., & Anderson, T. (2010). Learning outcomes and students’ perceptions of online writing: Simultaneous implementation of a forum, blog, and wiki in an EFL blended learning setting. System, 38(2), 185-199. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2010.03.006
Miles, M. B., and Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Mumtaz, S. (2001). Children’s enjoyment and perception of computer use in the home and the school. Computers & Education, 36, 347–362. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0360-1315 (01)00023-9
Muthuprasad., T., Aiswarya, S., Aditya, K. S., & Jha, G. K. (2021). Students’ perception and preference for online education in India during COVID-19 pandemic. Social Sciences & Humanities Open, 3(1): 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssaho.2020.100101
Owston, R., York, D., Murtha, S. (2013). Student perceptions and achievement in a university blended learning strategic initiative. The Internet & Higher Education, 18, 38–46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2012.12.003
Paul, B., & Tenzin, D. (2018). Blended learning and traditional learning: a comparative study of college mechanics courses. Education and Information Technologies, 23(6), 2889–2900. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-018-9748-9
Pei, L., & Wu, H. (2019). Does online learning work better than offline learning in undergraduate medical education? a systematic review and meta-analysis. Medical Education Online, 24(1), 1666538. https://doi.org/10.1080/10872981.2019.1666538
Richards, J. C. (2015). The changing face of language learning: Learning beyond the classroom. RELC Journal, 46(1), 5–22. https://doi.org/10.1177/0033688214561621
Rusanganwa, J. (2013). Multimedia as a means to enhance teaching technical vocabulary to physics undergraduates in Rwanda. English for Specific Purposes, 32(1). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2012.07.002
Shonfeld, M., & Ronen, I. (2015). Online learning for students from diverse backgrounds: Learning disability students, excellent students and average students. IAFOR Journal of Education, 3(2), 13–29.
Short, J., Williams, E., & Christie, B. (1976). The Social Psychology of Telecommunications. Wiley.
Smith, B. (2003). Computer-mediated negotiated interaction: An expanded model. The Modern Language Journal, 87(1), 38–57. https://doi.org/10.1111/1540-4781.00177
Tao, J., & Gao, X. (2022). Teaching and learning languages online: Challenges and responses. System, 107, 102819. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2022.102819
Torres-Vallejos, J., Juarros-Basterretxea, J., Oyanedel, J.C., & Sato, M. (2021). A bifactor model of subjective well-being at personal, community, and country levels: A case with three Latin-American countries. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 641641. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.641641
Yan, L., Du, Y., Yu, Z., & Zhao, M. (2020). Survey on the psychological status of primary school pupils in online learning during the pandemic. Mental Health Education for Primary and Secondary Schools, 18, 11–14.
Yen, S. C., Lo, Y., Lee, A., and Enriquez, J. M. (2018). Learning online, offline, and in-between: comparing student academic outcomes and course satisfaction in face-to-face, online, and blended teaching modalities. Education and Information Technology, 23, 2141–2153. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-018-9707-5
Wang, Z., Jiang, Q., & Li, Z. (2022). How to promote online education through educational software: An analytical study of factor analysis and structural equation modelling with Chinese users as an example. Systems, 10, 100. https://doi.org/10.3390/systems10040100
White, C. (2017). Distance language teaching with technology. In C. Chapelle, & S. Sauro (Eds.), The handbook of technology and second language teaching and learning (pp. 135–148). Wiley & Sons.
Wut, TM., & Xu, J. (2021). Person-to-person interactions in online classroom settings under the impact of COVID-19: A social presence theory perspective. Asia Pacific Education Review, 22, 371–383. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12564-021-09673-1
Zhou, C. (2018). Empirical study on the effectiveness of teaching model of college English writing within blended learning mode. Educational Sciences: Theory and Practice, 18(5). https://doi.org/10.12738/estp.2018.5.009
Zhang, J., Dai, Y., & Zhao, F. (2022). Comparative Study on Online and Offline Teaching for Creative Idea Generation. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 872099. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.872099
Descargas
Publicado
Cómo citar
Número
Sección
Licencia
Los autores que publican en esta revista están de acuerdo con los siguientes términos:
- Los autores conservan los derechos de autor y garantizan a la revista el derecho de ser la primera publicación del trabajo al igual que licenciado bajo una Creative Commons Attribution License que permite a otros compartir el trabajo con un reconocimiento de la autoría del trabajo y la publicación inicial en esta revista.
- Los autores pueden establecer por separado acuerdos adicionales para la distribución no exclusiva de la versión de la obra publicada en la revista (por ejemplo, situarlo en un repositorio institucional o publicarlo en un libro), con un reconocimiento de su publicación inicial en esta revista.
- Se permite y se anima a los autores a difundir sus trabajos electrónicamente (por ejemplo, en repositorios institucionales o en su propio sitio web) antes y durante el proceso de envío, ya que puede dar lugar a intercambios productivos, así como a una citación más temprana y mayor de los trabajos publicados (Véase The Effect of Open Access) (en inglés).
