Índice de volúmenes - Índice de revistas - Índice de artículos - Mapa ---- Atrás

Revista Comunicar 62: Ecologías de aprendizaje en la era digital (Vol. 28 - 2020)

Redes de aprendizaje personalizadas en contextos universitarios de aprendizaje semipresencial

Personalised learning networks in the university blended learning context

https://doi.org/10.3916/C62-2020-02

Feifei Han

Robert Ellis

Abstract

En la Educación Superior, pocos estudios han investigado simultáneamente las dimensiones cognitivas, sociales y materiales de una misma población. Desde una perspectiva ecológica del aprendizaje, este estudio examina la interrelación entre elementos clave a partir de estas dimensiones en las redes personalizadas de 365 estudiantes. Los datos procedentes de cuestionarios, análisis de aprendizaje y calificaciones del curso permiten considerar estos aspectos en la experiencia de aprendizaje y en el rendimiento académico. Los participantes registraron niveles cualitativamente dispares en el nivel de implicación en el curso, oscilando de un enfoque orientado a la comprensión a enfoques basados en la reproducción de contenidos, lo que, junto a sus opciones de colaboración, generó cinco patrones distintos. Los resultados revelaron que una orientación más comprensiva y una cooperación con estudiantes de orientaciones similares tiende a asociarse con mejores rendimientos en el aprendizaje semipresencial. Sus redes personalizadas se caracterizaron por enfoques más profundos hacia el aprendizaje presencial y virtual; percepciones positivas hacia la integración de ambos contextos; el diseño del curso, por la forma y modo de colaboración; y por una mayor implicación en las actividades en línea. El estudio tuvo implicaciones significativas de aplicación en el desarrollo teórico de la investigación en la ecología del aprendizaje, así como en la forma de guiar el diseño del currículum, la práctica docente y el aprendizaje.

In researching student learning experience in Higher Education, a dearth of studies has investigated cognitive, social, and material dimensions simultaneously with the same population. From an ecological perspective of learning, this study examined the interrelatedness amongst key elements in these dimensions of 365 undergraduates’ personalised learning networks. Data were collected from questionnaires, learning analytics, and course marks to measure these elements in the blended learning experience and academic performance. Students reported qualitatively different cognitive engagement between an understanding and a reproducing learning orientation towards learning, which when combined with their choices of collaboration, generated five qualitatively different patterns of collaboration. The results revealed that students had an understanding learning orientation and chose to collaborate with students of similar learning orientation tended to have more successful blended learning experience. Their personalised learning networks were characterized by self-reported adoption of deep approaches to face-to-face and online learning; positive perceptions of the integration between online environment and the course design; the way they collaborated and positioned themselves in their collaborative networks; and they were more engaged with online learning activities in the course. The study had significant implications to inform theory development in learning ecology research and to guide curriculum design, teaching, and learning.

Keywords

Perspectiva ecológica, red de aprendizaje personalizada, interrelación, dimensión cognitiva, dimensión social, dimensión material, experiencia de aprendizaje semipresencial, estudiantes universitarios

Ecological perspective, personalised learning network, interrelatedness, cognitive dimension, social dimension, material dimension, blended learning experience, university students

Archivo PDF español

Archivo PDF inglés

Referencias

Barnett, R. (2018). The ecological university: A feasible utopia. London: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315194899-1

Barron, B. (2004). Learning ecologies for technological fluency: Gender and experience differences. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 31(1), 1-36. https://doi.org/10.2190/1n20-vv12-4rb5-33va

Barron, B. (2006). Interest and self-sustained learning as catalysts of development: A learning ecology perspective. Human Development, 49(4), 193-224. https://doi.org/10.1159/000094368

Barron, B., Wise, S., & Martin, C. (2013). Creating within and across life spaces: The role of a computer clubhouse in a child’s learning ecology. In B. Bevan, P. Bell, R. Stevens & A. Razfar (Eds.), LOST Opportunities (pp. 99-118). Dordrecht: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-4304-5_8

Biggs, J., Kember, D., & Leung, D. (2001). The revised two-factor study process questionnaire: R-SPQ-2F. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 71, 133-149. https://doi.org/10.1348/000709901158433

Bliuc, A.M, Ellis, R., Goodyear, P., & Piggott, L. (2010). Learning through face-to-face and online discussions: Associations between students’ conceptions, approaches and academic performance in political science. British Journal of Educational Technology, 41(3), 512-524. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2009.00966.x

Bonacich, P. (2007). Some unique properties of eigenvector centrality. Social Networks, 29(4), 555-564. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socnet.2007.04.002

Brewe, E., Kramer, L., & Sawtelle, V. (2012). Investigating student communities with network analysis of interactions in a physics learning center. Physical Review Special Topics-PER, 8, 010101. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevSTPER.8.010101

Cadima, R., Ojeda, J., & Monguet, M. (2012). Social networks and performance in distributed learning communities. Educational Technology and Society, 15(4), 296-304. https://bit.ly/2ZTD616

Cope, B., & Kalantzis, M. (2017). E-learning ecologies: Principles for new learning and assessment. New York: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315639215

Crawford, K., Gordon, S., Nicholas, J., & Prosser, M. (1998). Qualitatively different experiences of learning mathematics at university. Learning and Instruction, 8(5), 455-468. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0959-4752(98)00005-X

De-Nooy, W., Mrvar, A., & Batagelj, V. (2011). Exploratory social network analysis with Pajek (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511996368

Ellis, R., & Bliuc, A. (2016). An exploration into first-year university students’ approaches to inquiry and online learning technologies in blended environments. British Journal of Educational Technology, 47(5), 970-980. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12385

Ellis, R., & Goodyear, P. (2019). The education ecology of universities: Integrating learning, strategy and the academy. London: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781351135863

Ellis, R., Bliuc, A., & Goodyear, P. (2012). Student experiences of engaged enquiry in pharmacy education: Digital natives or something else? Higher Education, 64(5), 609-626. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-012-9515-6

Ellis, R., Pardo, A., & Han, F. (2016). Quality in blended learning environments – significant differences in how students approach learning collaborations. Computers & Education, 102, 90-102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2016.07.006

Entwistle, N., & Ramsden, P. (2015). Understanding student learning. London: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.1016/b978-0-12-805359-1.00012-7

Fenwick, T. (2014). Sociomateriality in medical practice and learning: Attuning to what matters. Medical Education, 48(1), 44-52. https://doi.org/10.1111/medu.12295

Fenwick, T., & Landri, P. (2012). Materialities, textures and pedagogies: Socio-material assemblages in education. Pedagogy, Culture & Society, 20(1), 1-7. https://doi.org/10.1080/14681366.2012.649421

Fenwick, T., Nerland, M., & Jensen, K. (2012). Sociomaterial approaches to conceptualizing professional learning and practice. Journal of Education and Work, 25(1), 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1080/13639080.2012.644901

Freeman, L. (1977). A set of measures of centrality based on betweenness. Sociometry, 40(1), 35-41. https://doi.org/10.2307/3033543

Han, F., & Ellis, R. (2019a). Initial development and validation of the perceptions of the blended learning environment questionnaire. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734282919834091

Han, F., & Ellis, R. (2019b). Identifying consistent patterns of quality learning discussions in blended learning. Internet and Higher Education, 40, 12-19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2018.09.002

Jackson, N. (2013). The concept of learning ecologies. In N. Jackson & G. Cooper (Eds.), Lifewide learning, education and personal development e-book (pp. 1-21). https://bit.ly/28Jc8As

Kember, D. (2015). Taking qualitative studies beyond findings of a limited number of categories, with motivational orientation as an example. In V. Donche, S. De-Mayer, D. Gijbels, & H. Van-den-Bergh (Eds.), Methodological challenges in research on student learning (pp. 91-106). Antwerp: Garant Publishers. https://bit.ly/2Z2uyUx

Nelson-Laird, T., Seifert, T., Pascarella, E., Mayhew, M., & Blaich, C. (2014). Deeply affecting first-year students’ thinking: Deep approaches to learning and three dimensions of cognitive development. Journal of Higher Education, 85(3), 402-432. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221546.2014.11777333

Patterson, L., & Holladay, R. (2017). Deep learning ecologies: An invitation to complex teaching and learning. Circle Pines, MN: Human Systems Dynamics Institute. https://amzn.to/33tSPGr

Pintrich, P. (2004). A conceptual framework for assessing motivation and self-regulated learning in college students. Educational Psychology Review, 16(4), 385-407. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-004-0006-x

Prosser, M., & Trigwell, K. (2017). Student learning and the experience of teaching. HERDSA Review of Higher Education, 4, 5-27. https://bit.ly/2H07sYo

Quardokus, K., & Henderson, C. (2015). Promoting instructional change: Using social network analysis to understand the informal structure of academic departments. Higher Education, 70(3), 315-335. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-014-9831-0

Rienties, B., Héliot, Y., & Jindal-Snape, D. (2013). Understanding social learning relations of international students in a large classroom using social network analysis. Studies in Higher Education, 66(4), 489-504. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-013-9617-9

Rodríguez-Hidalgo, R., Zhu, C., Questier, F., & Torrens-Alfonso, A. (2011). Using social network analysis for analysing online threaded discussions. International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research, 10(3), 128-146. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221546.2014.11777333

Tomás-Miquel, J., Expósito-Langa, M., & Nicolau-Juliá, D. (2016). The influence of relationship networks on academic performance in higher education: A comparative study between students of a creative and a non-creative discipline. Higher Education, 71(3), 307-322. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-015-9904-8

Vermunt, J., & Donche, V. (2017). A learning patterns perspective on student learning in higher education: State of the art and moving forward. Educational Psychology Review, 29(2), 269-299. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-017-9414-6

Wasserman, S., & Faust, K. (1994). Social network analysis: Methods and applications. New York: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511815478