Full text
CONSTRUCTION OF A QUESTIONNAIRE TO KNOW THE TRANSPARENCY IN THE EVALUATION OF THE LEARNING OF ENGINEERING STUDENTS
1. Introduction METHODOLOGICAL PROPOSALS INVOLVEMENT EVALUATION PROCESS PARTICIPATION SHARED EVALUATION LEVELS OF PARTICIPATION FORMATIVE EVALUATION Evaluation Procedures Design Evaluation Tools Negotiating and agreeing TRAINING OF STUDENTS
Portfolio, observations or scales of attitudes MAKE 1. Introduction Preconceptions Purposes Interests Transparency Responsibility Commitment Evaluation Methods Weight of Activities Evaluation Criteria Reports, projects, developmental tests and oral exams EXPLICIT Presence Utility ENGINEERING Experimentation/ adaptation Students
2. Objetives Construct an questionnaire about the transparency of the evaluation methods. Conduct expert validation of the questionnaire. Conduct a pilot study with students of degrees of engineering applying the questionnaire. Analyze the reliability and validity and determined improvements.
3. Methods Survey Methodology Database Validation of the survey Review Experts (n1=5) Scientific literature Cronbach Alpha coefficient Factorial analysis Categorical analysis n2= 50 Engineering 4º grade UMA Pilot Study Reability & Validity Study Sampling 66 items (7 Dimensions) Intentional Industrial TELCOM Likert scale 0 (totally disagree) to 5 (totally agree) 1) Transparency, involvement and accountability in evaluation. 2) Rating information level. 3) Characteristics of evaluation modalities. 4) Educator Feedback. 5) Educational resources and agents for acquiring learning. 6) Procedures, strategies and plans to guide the student's integral learning. 7) Availability of material resources used by educators.
4. Results Validation of the experts and literature review Cronbach Alpha coefficient Categorical analysis (CATPCA ) Pilot Study Reability Study Factorial analysis Internal Consistency (α = 0.923) 19 Components. Explained Variance 85.29% 7 dimensions. Internal Consistency (α from .784 to .944). Redefining and better specifying several items
4. Results Survey Methodology Database Validation of the survey Review Experts (n1=5) Scientific literature Cronbach Alpha coefficient Factorial analysis Categorical analysis n2= 50 Engineering 4º grade UMA Pilot Study Reability & Validity Study Sampling 66 items (7 Dimensions) Intentional Industrial TELCOM Likert scale 0 (totally disagree) to 5 (totally agree) 1) Transparency, involvement and accountability in evaluation. 2) Rating information level. 3) Characteristics of evaluation modalities. 4) Educator Feedback. 5) Educational resources and agents for acquiring learning. 6) Procedures, strategies and plans to guide the student's integral learning. 7) Availability of material resources used by educators.
5. Conclusions QUESTIONNAIRE Evaluate the transparency in the evaluation systems Theoretical support Statistical support 1) Literature review 2) Expert judgment 3) Pilot study Factorial analysis vs Categorical analysis (CATPCA ) Cronbach Alpha coefficient A model more parsimonious Successful analysis of the reliability Literature review 1) Transparency (Alvárez-Rojo et al. 2011). 2) Rating information level (Burton 2016., Pérez et al. 2017., Wood, et al. 2008). 3) Evaluation modalities (Yaniz y Villardón, 2012). 4) Feedback from teachers (ENQA, 2015., Villamañe et al. 2017). 5)Etc.
THANKS FOR YOUR ATTENTION
