Face to Face vs Virtual Teaching at the University Level DOI: https://doi.org/10.37843/rted.v16i1.362
Main Article Content
Abstract
Due to the pandemic experienced in 2020, there was a turn in the educational field. Students had to adapt to the new educational modality through digital platforms to return to face-to-face teaching later. The objective was to know the student's opinion on which of the two face-to-face or virtual educational modalities he lived in before and during the COVID-19 pandemic was the one that generated the most academic achievement and in which activities he obtained the most benefit. The research was based on the deductive method, positivist paradigm with a quantitative approach, non-experimental design, descriptive type, and cross-section. The population surveyed was 115 students at a public university who met the requirement of having completed at least one semester in person and another online. The Cronbach's Alpha was generated for the instrument, obtaining a value of .952, which consisted of 22 items divided into three dimensions. A Likert scale with five response levels was used for the student's response options. Four data analyzes were carried out, and as a result, it was obtained that the student favors the face-to-face modality for the development of all academic activities and the feedback provided by the professor. In contrast, in virtual modality, they prefer developing the topics and applying exams. Concluding that for the student to take a learning unit in a mixed modality would be ideal, determining it by the type of activity to be carried out.
Downloads
Metrics
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Those authors who have publications in our journal accept the following terms:
- When a work is accepted for publication, the author retains rights of reproduction, distribution of his/her article for exploitation in all countries of the world in the format provided by our magazine and any other magnetic medium, optical, and digital.
- Authors will retain their copyright and guarantee the journal the right first to publish their work, which will be simultaneously subject to the Creative Commons Acknowledgment License (Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0)). That allows third parties to copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format, under the following conditions: Acknowledgment - You must properly acknowledge authorship, provide a link to the license, and indicate if any changes have been made. You may do so in any reasonable way, but not in a way that suggests you have the licensor's endorsement or receive it for your use. NonCommercial - You may not use the material for a commercial purpose. NoDerivatives - If you remix, transform, or build from the material, you cannot broadcast the modified material. There are no additional restrictions - You cannot apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict you from doing what the license allows.
- Authors may adopt other non-exclusive license agreements to distribute the published version of the work (e.g., deposit it in an institutional archive or publish it in a monographic volume) provided that the initial publication in this journal is indicated.
- Authors are allowed and recommended to disseminate their work through the Internet (e.g., in institutional telematic archives, repositories, libraries, or their website), producing exciting exchanges and increasing the published work's citations.
- Request of withdrawal an article has to be done in writing by the author to the Editor, becoming effective after a written response from the Editor. For this purpose, the author or authors will send correspondence via e-mail: [email protected].
- The author will not receive financial compensation for the publication of his work.
- All Docentes 2.0 Journal publications are under the Open Journal System (OJS) platform at: https://ojs.docentes20.com/.
References
Abreu, J. (2020). Tiempos de Coronavirus: La Educación en Línea como Respuesta a la Crisis. Daena: International Journal of Good Conscience. 15(1) pp. 1-15. http://www.spentamexico.org/v15-n1/A1.15(1)1-15.pdf
Aguilar-Gordon, F. (2020). Del Aprendizaje en escenarios presenciales al aprendizaje virtual en tiempos de pandemia. Estudios Pedagógicos (Valdivia). 46 (3), 213-223. https://doi.org/10.4067/S0718-07052020000300213 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4067/S0718-07052020000300213
Cárdenas-Contreras, G. E. (2022). Docencia Universitaria y Competencias para la Era Pospandemia: Un proceso hacia la Alfabetización Digital. Revista Internacional Tecnológica - Educativa Docentes 2.0, 14(2), pp. 5-142. https://doi.org/10.37843/rted.v14i2.299 DOI: https://doi.org/10.37843/rted.v14i2.299
De la Fuente-Fernández, S. (2011). Análisis Factorial. Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, Facultad de Ciencias Económicas y Empresariales.
Hernández-Sampieri, R., Fernández-Collado, C., & Baptista-Lucio, P. (2014). Metodología de la investigación (6a. ed.). McGraw-Hill.
IBM. (2018). Visión General. Obtenido de https://www.ibm.com/mx-es/marketplace/spss-statistics
Jiménez-Galán, Y. I., Hernández-Jaime, J., & Rodríguez-Flores, E. (2021). Educación en línea y evaluación del aprendizaje: de lo presencial a lo virtual. RIDE. Revista Iberoamericana para la Investigación y el Desarrollo, 12(23). https://doi.org/10.23913/ride.v12i23.1005 DOI: https://doi.org/10.23913/ride.v12i23.1005
Medina, M. E., & Alfaro, C. N. (2021). Efectividad del aprendizaje en línea desde la perspectiva del alumno universitario. En W.A.A. (Ed.), Educación en clave de metodologías y mediaciones (pp. 73-86). GKA Ediciones.
Montero-Granados, R. (2016). Modelos de regresión lineal múltiple. Universidad de Granada, Departamento de Economía Aplicada
Ojeda-Beltran, A., Ortega-Álvarez, D. & Boom-Carcamo, E. (2020). Análisis de la percepción de estudiantes presenciales acerca de clases virtuales como respuesta a la crisis del Covid-19. Revista Espacios, 41 (42), pp. 81-92. DOI: 10.48082/espacios-a20v41n42p0 DOI: https://doi.org/10.48082/espacios-a20v41n42p07
Ortiz-Arellano, E. (2013). Epistemología de la Investigación Cuantitativa y Cualitativa: Paradigmas y Objetivos. Revista de Claseshistoria (408). http://www.claseshistoria.com/revista/2013/articulos/ortiz-epistemologia-investigacion.html
Rodríguez, A., & Pérez, A. (2017). Métodos científicos de indagación y de construcción del conocimiento. Escuela de administración de negocios, 179-200. doi: https://doi.org/10.21158/01208160.n82.2017.1647
Rosales-Gracia, S., Gómez-López, V, Durán- Rodríguez, S., Salinas- Fregoso, M., & Saldaña- Cedillo, S. (2008). Modalidad híbrida y presencial. comparación de dos modalidades educativas. Revista de la Educación Superior. XXXVII (4), (148), pp. 23-29. ISSN: 0185-2760.
Solis-Recendez, B. E, Córdova Lara, G de E., Sigg, M de L., Villa Cisneros, J. L. & Ramírez Aguilera, A. M. (2022). “Comparación de la eficacia académica entre las modalidades presencial y en línea de un curso propedéutico universitario” Revista Iberoamericana de Tecnología en Educación y Educación en Tecnología, no. 31, pp. 53-59, doi: 10.24215/1809959.31. e5 DOI: https://doi.org/10.24215/18509959.31.e5
Universidad Autónoma de Nuevo León (2023). Misión y Visión. https://www.uanl.mx/mision-y-vision/