Contenido del artículo principal

Resumen

Este texto evalúa una propuesta educativa, basada en los principios del Flipped Classroom, implementados en la educación en línea, durante el encierro provocado por Covid-19. La propuesta se implementó en una clase de secundaria portuguesa y combina clases asincrónicas (ASS) con clases sincrónicas (AS). Para caracterizar el ambiente de aprendizaje creado por la propuesta y comprender su influencia en la participación e implicación de los estudiantes, se utilizaron métodos mixtos, recogiéndose datos cuantitativos y cualitativos. El análisis integrado de los datos revela que la propuesta creó un ambiente de aprendizaje adecuado, organizado y apoyado por una fuerte presencia social del docente. El diseño de la SSA mejoró las interacciones entre los estudiantes y el contenido, lo que condujo a altas tasas de compromiso con las tareas, lo que aseguró una preparación eficiente de la SSA. La división de EA en episodios de aprendizaje nos permitió comprender la influencia del diseño de episodios en los patrones de interacción desarrollados. Los enfoques dinámicos e interactivos de la SA permitieron el desarrollo de contenidos iniciados en la SA. Si bien el diseño de algunos episodios permitió apalancar el número de interacciones alumno-alumno, también condicionó la construcción colaborativa de conocimiento a partir de la investigación y los procesos de investigación.

Palabras clave

Aula invertida, Aprender en línea, Análisis del discurso multimodal, Interacciones pedagógicas

Detalles del artículo

Biografía del autor/a

Teresa Ribeirinha, Universidade do Minho

Secondary school teacher and doctoral student at Universidade do Minho

Member of the Centro de Investigação da Educação da Universidade do Minho

Bento Duarte da Silva, Universidade do Minho

Professor at Universidade do Minho

Member of the Centro de Investigação da Educação da Universidade do Minho.

Cómo citar
RibeirinhaT., & Duarte da SilvaB. (2021). El potencial del modelo aula invertida en la educación en línea: una evaluación enfocada en las interacciones pedagógicas. PUBLICACIONES, 51(3), 295-345. https://doi.org/10.30827/publicaciones.v51i3.18076

Referencias

  1. Abou-Khalil, V., Helou, S., Khalifé, E., Chen, M. A., Majumdar, R., & Ogata, H. (2021). Emergency Online Learning in Low-Resource Settings: Effective Student Engagement Strategies. Education Sciences, 11(24). https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11010024
  2. Aragon, S., & Johnson, E. (2008). Factors influencing completion and noncompletion of community college online courses. American Journal of Distance Education, 22(3), 146-158.
  3. Berge, Z. L. (2002). Active, interactive, and reflective elearning. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 3(2), 181–190.
  4. Bernard, R. M., Abrami, P. C., Lou, Y., Borokhovski, E., Wade, A., Wozney, L., & Huang, B. (2004). How does distance education compare with classroom instruction? A meta-analysis of the empirical literature. Review of Educational Research, 74(3), 379–439. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543074003379
  5. Bishop, J. L., & Verleger, M. A. (2013). The Flipped classroom: A Survey of the research. Proceedings of the 120th ASEE National Conference (Vol. 30, pp. 1-18). Atlanta, GA: ASEE.
  6. Bower, M., & Hedberg, J. G. (2010). A quantitative multimodal discourse analysis of teaching and learning in a web-conferencing environment–the efficacy of student centred learning designs. Computers & Education, 54(2), 462-478. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2009.08.030
  7. Bozkurt, A., & Sharma, R. C. (2020). Emergency remote teaching in a time of global crisis due to CoronaVirus pandemic. Asian Journal of Distance Education, 15, 1–6. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3778083.
  8. Charalampous, K., & Constantinos M. (2017). The “What Is Happening in This Class” Questionnaire: A Qualitative Examination in Elementary Classrooms, Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 31(3), 379-400. https://doi.org/10.1080/02568543.2017.1310153
  9. Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2013). Pesquisa de métodos mistos. Porto Alegre, RS: Penso.
  10. Coutinho, C. (2013). Análise de conteúdo da comunicação assíncrona: considerações metodológicas e recomendações práticas. Educação, Formação & Tecnologias, 6(1), 21-34.
  11. DeLozier, S. J., & Rhodes, M. G. (2017). Flipped classrooms: A review of key ideas and recommendations for practice. Educational Psychology Review, 29(1), 141-151.
  12. Dotta, S., & Oliveira, C. (2014). En S. Dotta (Org.). Aulas virtuais síncronas: Condução de webconferência multimodal e multimídia em Educação a Distância (pp. 23-32). Editora da UFABC.
  13. Fauzi, S. H. M., & Hussain, R. M. R. (2016). Designing instruction for active and reflective learners in the flipped classroom. Malaysian Journal of Learning and Instruction, 13(2), 147–173.
  14. Fraser, B. J., McRobbie, C. J., & Fisher, D. L. (1996). Development, validation and use of personal and class forms of a new classroom environment instrument. [Paper presentation]. Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New York, NY.
  15. Fraser, B. J., Treagust, D. F., & Dennis, N. C. (1986). Development of an instrument for assessing classroom psychosocial environment at universities and colleges. Studies in Higher Education, 11(1), 43–54.
  16. Gadgil, S., Nokes-Malach, T. J., & Chi, M. T. (2012). Effectiveness of holistic mental model confrontation indriving conceptual change. Learning and Instruction, 22, 47–61.
  17. Garonce, F. (2009). Os Papéis Docentes nas Situações de Webconferência: um estudo de caso acerca da ação educativa presencial conectada (Tese de Doutoramento). Faculdade de Educação, Universidade de Brasília. https://repositorio.unb.br/handle/10482/4284
  18. Grieve, R., Kemp, N., Norris, K., & Padgett, C. R. (2017). Push or pull? Unpacking the social compensation hypothesis of Internet use in an educational context. Computers & Education, 109, 1–10. https://doi.org 10.1016/j.compedu.2017.02.008.
  19. Järvelä, S., & Häkkinen, P. (2002). Web-based cases in teaching and learning – the quality of discussions and a stage of perspective taking in asynchronous communication. Interactive Learning Environments, 10(1),1-22.
  20. Johnson, R. B., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2004). Mixed methods research: A research paradigm whose time has come. Educational Researcher, 33(7), 14-26.
  21. Kent, C., Laslo, E., & Rafaeli, S. (2016). Interactivity in online discussions and learning outcomes. Computers & Education, 97, 116–128. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2016.03.002
  22. Kensky, V. (2020) Interações em e-learning no Ensino Superior. En S. Dias-Trindade, J. A. Moreira, & A. Ferreira (Coord.). Pedagogias Digitais no Ensino Superior (pp. 65-81). CINEP/IPC
  23. Kim, M. K., Kim, S. M., Khera, O., & Getman, J. (2014). The Experience of Three Flipped Classrooms in an Urban University: An Exploration of Design Principles. The Internet and Higher Education, 22, 37-50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2014.04.003
  24. Lai, C.-L., & Hwang, G.-J. (2016). A self-regulated flipped classroom approach to improving students’ learning performance in a mathematics course. Computers & Education, 100, 126–140. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2016.05.006.
  25. Loureiro, M., & Neri de Souza, F. (2009). Arguquest: Argumentação e questionamento como base da aprendizagem activa. En P. Dias & A. J. Osório (Orgs.), Atas da VI Conferência Internacional de TIC na Educação – Challenges 2009 (pp. 859-872). Centro de Competência da Universidade do Minho.
  26. Mandernach, B. J. (2009). Three ways to improve student engagement in the online classroom. Online Classroom: Ideas for Effective Online Instruction, 1–2.
  27. Marshall, H. W., & Kostka, I. (2020). Fostering Teaching Presence through the Synchronous Online Flipped Learning Approach. The Electronic Journal for English as a Second Language, 24(2). https://www.teslej.org/wordpress/issues/volume24/ej94/ej94int/
  28. Martin, F., & Bolliger, D. U. (2018). Engagement Matters: Student Perceptions on the Importance of Engagement Strategies in the Online Learning Environment. Online Learning, 22, 205–222.
  29. McLaughlin, J. E., Griffin, L. M., Esserman, D. A., Davidson, C. A., Glatt, D. M., Roth, M. T., & Mumper, R. J. (2013). Pharmacy student engagement, performance, and perception in a flipped satellite classroom. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 77(9), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.5688/ajpe779196.
  30. Moore, M. (1993) Theory of Transactional Distance. New York: Routledge,
  31. Moore, M. (1989). Three Types of Interaction. Taylor & Francis: Oxfordshire, UK.
  32. Moore, M. (2002). Editorial, what does research say about the learners using computer-mediated communication in distance learning? The American Journal of Distance Education, 16(2), 61-64. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15389286ajde1602_1.
  33. Moore, M. G., & Kearsley, G. (2007). Educação a distância: uma visão integrada. São Paulo: Thomson Learning.
  34. Moos, R. H. (1979). Evaluating Educational Environments: Procedures, Measures, Findings and Policy Implications. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
  35. Muirhead, B. (2005). A Canadian perspective on the uncertain future of distance education. Distance Education, 26(2), 239-254. https://doi.org/10.1080/01587910500168884.
  36. Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory. New York: McGraw-Hill Inc.
  37. Owens, J., Hardcastle, L., & Richardson, B. (2009). Learning From a distance: The Experience of Remote Students. Journal of Distance Education, 23(3), 53-74.
  38. Ribeirinha, T., & Silva, B. (2020). Avaliando a eficácia da componente online da “Sala de Aula Invertida”: um estudo de Investigação-Ação. Revista e-curriculum, 18, (2), 568-589. https://doi.org/10.23925/1809-3876.2020v18i2p568-589.
  39. Silva, B., & Pereira, M. G. (2015). Reflexões sobre dinâmicas e conteúdos da cibercultura numa comunidade de prática educacional. En M. Silva (Org.), Formação de professores para docência online: uma experiência de pesquisa online com programas de pós-graduação (pp. 35-60). WHITEBOOKS
  40. Stöhr, C., Demazière, C., & Adawi, T. (2020). The polarizing effect of the online flipped classroom. Computers & Education, 147. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103789
  41. Tang, T., Abuhmaid, A. M., Olaimat, M., Oudat, D. M., Aldhaeebi, M., & Bamanger, E. (2020). Efficiency of flipped classroom with online-based teaching under COVID-19. Interactive Learning Environments, 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2020.1817761
  42. Tori, R. (2010). Educação sem distância: as tecnologias interativas na redução de distâncias em ensino e aprendizagem. São Paulo: Senac São Paulo.
  43. Van Alten D. C. D., Phielix, C., Janssen, J., & Kester L. (2019). Effects of flipping the classroom on learning outcomes and satisfaction: A meta-analysis. Educational Research Review, 28, 1-18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2019.05.003
  44. Wong, R. (2020). When no one go to school: does online learning meet students’ basic learning needs? Interactive learning environments, 1-17. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2020.1789672.
  45. Wu, W. C. V., Hsieh, J. S. C., & Yang, J. C. (2017). Creating an online learning community in a flipped classroom to enhance EFL learners’ oral proficiency. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 20(2), 142-157.
  46. Yin, R. K. (2015). Estudo de caso: planejamento e método. Porto Alegre: Bookman.
  47. Zhang, W., & Cheng, Y. (2012). Quality assurance in e-learning: PDPP evaluation model and its application. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 13(3), 66–82. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v13i3.1181