Percepción de los profesores de matemáticas sobre la evaluación electrónica formativa para la educación sostenible
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.48017/dj.v10i3.3512Palabras clave:
Educación de posgrado en matemáticas, herramientas digitales de aprendizaje, desafíos en el diseño de evaluacionesResumen
La educación sostenible busca crear entornos de aprendizaje equitativos y accesibles que fomenten el aprendizaje permanente y la adaptabilidad, y las herramientas digitales desempeñan un papel fundamental para lograr estos objetivos. La evaluación formativa, especialmente a través de plataformas electrónicas, se reconoce cada vez más como una práctica sostenible que mejora la participación de los estudiantes y los resultados de aprendizaje al proporcionar retroalimentación oportuna y facilitar la mejora continua. Mediante un diseño de investigación de métodos mixtos, este estudio explora las percepciones de los estudiantes de maestría en matemáticas sobre la evaluación formativa en línea, basándose tanto en las respuestas de una encuesta cuantitativa como en reflexiones cualitativas basadas en sus roles como estudiantes y diseñadores de evaluaciones. Un total de 62 participantes seleccionados intencionalmente se inscribieron en el curso Análisis 1, impartido por la investigadora. Los resultados mostraron diversas percepciones entre los docentes de matemáticas con respecto a diferentes aspectos de la evaluación formativa en línea. La media más alta se encontró en el ítem "La retroalimentación es rápida" (M = 4,40, DE = 0,89), mientras que la media más baja se encontró en el ítem "La evaluación formativa en línea beneficia a más estudiantes que la evaluación en papel" (M = 3,44, DE = 0,91). Al preguntarles sobre los desafíos encontrados en la creación de evaluaciones formativas en línea de opción múltiple, los encuestados mencionaron dificultades en el diseño de preguntas de pensamiento de orden superior, el equilibrio de la dificultad de las preguntas y la preocupación de que la mezcla aleatoria de preguntas de Google Classroom pudiera alterar la estructura de la evaluación. A pesar de las preocupaciones, el análisis estadístico no mostró una correlación significativa entre las percepciones de los docentes sobre la contribución y la eficacia de la evaluación formativa en línea y su uso real o niveles de comodidad. Aun así, los hallazgos resaltan ideas clave sobre sus beneficios percibidos y desafíos prácticos, lo que respalda las prácticas de evaluación sostenibles en la educación matemática de posgrado. A pesar de las preocupaciones, el análisis estadístico no reveló una relación significativa entre el uso real o los niveles de comodidad de los docentes y sus percepciones sobre la contribución y la eficacia de la evaluación formativa en línea. Sin embargo, los resultados respaldan prácticas de evaluación sostenibles en la educación matemática de posgrado al arrojar luz sobre aspectos importantes acerca de sus ventajas percibidas y sus dificultades en el mundo real.
Métricas
Citas
Afacan Adanır, G., İsmailova, R., Omuraliev, A., & Muhametjanova, G. (2020). Learners’ perceptions of online exams: A comparative study in Turkey and Kyrgyzstan. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 21(3), 1-17. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v21i3.4679
Al Breiki, M., Yahaya, W. A. J. W., & Jaafar, W. A. (2023). The Role of the Online Professional Learning Community in Developing Formative E-assessment Strategies for In-Service Omani Teachers. Journal of Creative Practices in Language Learning and Teaching (CPLT), 11(3), 233-246.
Alamr, S. M., Leon-Urrutia, M., & Carr, L. A. (2023, September). E-assessment in Computer Science Higher Education. In Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Education Technology and Computers (pp. 378-383). https://doi.org/10.1145/3629296.3629357
Almuhanna, M. (2023). Improving E-Assessment Based on University Students' Experiences. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology-TOJET, 22(1), 130-143.
Anwar, S., Muhammad, Y., & Bokhari, T. B. (2022). Teachers’ intentions & challenges concerning e-assessment at the virtual university of Pakistan: A phenomenological study. Research Journal of Social Sciences and Economics Review, 3(2), 92-101.
Astiandani, F. R., & Anam, S. U. (2021). EFL Teachers' Perceptions Towards the Implementation of Online Formative Assessment Amidst the Covid-19 Pandemic. ELT Worldwide, 8(2), 269-277. http://dx.doi.org/10.26858/eltww.v8i2.21326
Al-Hattami, A. A. (2020). E-Assessment of students performance during the E-Teaching and learning. International Journal of Advanced Science and Technology, 29(8), 1537-1547.
Azharini, R., Rosidin, U., & Perdana, R. (2023, May). Analysis of Student Needs for e-Assessment Tools Oriented to Higher Order Thinking Skills (Host) in Thematic Learning to Measure Soft Skills and Hard Skills Competence. In 4th International Conference on Progressive Education 2022 (ICOPE 2022) (pp. 79-87). Atlantis Press. https://doi.org/10.2991/978-2-38476-060-2_9
Babo, R. (2021). Improving individual and collaborative E-assessment through multiple-choice questions and WebAVALIAA: A new e-assessment strategy implemented at a Portuguese university (Doctoral dissertation, Itä-Suomen yliopisto).
Bakker, A., Cai, J., & Zenger, L. (2021). Future themes of mathematics education research: An international survey before and during the pandemic. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 107(1), 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-021-10043-y
Baneres, D., Whitelock, D., Ras, E., Karadeniz, A., Guerrero-Roldan, E., and Rodriguez, M., 2019. Technology enhanced learning or learning driven by technology. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, Available at: [Accessed 10 April 2021]
Barana, A., Conte, A., Fissore, C., Marchisio, M., & Rabellino, S. (2019). Learning Analytics to improve Formative Assessment strategies. Journal of E‑Learning and Knowledge Society, 15(3), 75–88. https://doi.org/10.20368/1971-8829/1135057
Bearman, M., Nieminen, J. H., & Ajjawi, R. (2023). Designing assessment in a digital world: an organising framework. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 48(3), 291-304.
Binova, L., Puspitaloka, N., & Rahmawati, M. (2024). Narrative Inquiry of EFL Students’ Experiences in Learning Grammar by Using Quizizz as a Formative Assessment Tool. Jurnal Ilmiah Wahana Pendidikan, 10(2), 564-571.
Campbell, S., Greenwood, M., Prior, S., Shearer, T., Walkem, K., Young, S., Bywaters, D., & Walker, K. (2020). Purposive sampling: Complex or simple? Research case examples. Journal of Research in Nursing, 25(8), 652–661. https://doi.org/10.1177/1744987120927206
Caspari-Sadeghi, S., Forster-Heinlein, B., Mägdefrau, J., & Bachl, L. Sustainable e-assessment in mathematics instruction. Exploring new ways to connect, 145.
Creswell, J. W., Plano Clark, V. L., & Fetters, M. D. (2021). Designing and conducting mixed methods research (4th ed.). Sage.
Commission on Higher Education. (2020, September 2). CHED Memorandum Order No. 4, series of 2020: Guidelines on the implementation of flexible learning. https://ched.gov.ph/wp-content/uploads/CMO-No.-4-s.-2020-Guidelines-on-the-Implementation-of-Flexible-Learning.pdf
Dawadi, S., Shrestha, S., & Giri, R. A. (2021). “Mixed-methods research: A discussion on its types, challenges, and criticisms.” Journal of Practical Studies in Education, 2(2), 25–36.
Deeva, I., Fong, C., & Schallert, D. L. (2021). Effects of learner choice over automated, immediate feedback in computer-based assessment settings. Learning and Instruction, 96, Article 102065. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2024.102065
Dewanti, S. S., Kartowagiran, B., & Jailani, R. (2020). Lecturers' Experience In Assessing 21st-Century Mathematics Competency In Indonesia. Problems of Education in the 21st Century, 78(4), 500.
Divjak, B., Žugec, P., & Pažur Aničić, K. (2024). E-assessment in mathematics in higher education: a student perspective. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 55(8), 2046-2068. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020739X.2022.2117659
Doğan, N., Kıbrıslıoğlu, N., Keleci̇Oğlu, H., & Hambleton, R. K. (2020). An overview of e-assessment. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 35(Special Issue), 1-5. https://doi.org/10.16986/HUJE.2020063669
Dy, E. H. L., Tan, A. J., & Errabo, D. D. (2021, June). Students' Perceptions and Anxieties towards e-Assessment: Implications for Online Classroom Delivery. In 2021 IEEE International Conference on Educational Technology (ICET) (pp. 191-195). IEEE.
Elsani, E., & Fahriany, F. (2024, June). Teachers’ Perspective Integrating Quizizz as an e-Assessment ICT Technique to Deliver English Grammar. In Proceeding of Annual International Conference on Islamic Education and Language (AICIEL) (pp. 501-512).
Ferdousi, B. (2024). Impact of Formative and Summative e-Assessment on Active Learning.
Ghouali, K., Benmoussat, S., & Ruiz Cecilia, R. (2020). E-assessment on the spotlight: Present and future prospects. https://doi.org/10.30827/DIGIBUG.59151
McCallum, S., & Milner, M. M. (2020). The effectiveness of formative assessment: Student views and staff reflections. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 46(1), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2020.1754761
OECD. (2021). OECD Digital Education Outlook 2021: Pushing the Frontiers with Artificial Intelligence, Blockchain and Robots. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/589b283f-en
OECD. (2020). Remote online exams in higher education during the COVID-19 crisis. OECD Education Policy Perspectives, No. 6. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/f53e2177-en
Orsi, M., & Juliano, L. (2021). Impact of Formative E-Assessment on Attendance. Journal of Higher Education Theory and Practice, 21(15), 218-225.
Peculea, L. (2020). Perspectives of future teachers on formative e-assessment using the classroom response system. European Proceedings of Social and Behavioural Sciences. http://dx.doi.org/10.15405/epsbs.2020.06.40
Petrova, T., Ivanova, M., & Naydenova, I. (2020). EVALUATION OF E-ASSESSMENT: THE STUDENTS'PERSPECTIVE. In The International Scientific Conference eLearning and Software for Education (Vol. 2, pp. 199-206). " Carol I" National Defence University.
Prendes-Espinosa, P., García-Tudela, P. A., & Gutiérrez-Porlán, I. (2022). Formative E-Assessment: A Qualitative Study Based on Master's Degrees. International Education Studies, 15(2), 1-13.
Say, R., Visentin, D., Saunders, A., Atherton, I., Carr, A., & King, C. (2024). Where less is more: Limited feedback in formative online multiple choice tests improves student self regulation. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 40(1), 89–103. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12868
UNESCO. (2021). AI and education: Guidance for policy-makers. UNESCO. https://doi.org/10.15220/978-92-3-100453-4-en
Valdez, M. T. C. C., & Maderal, L. D. (2021). An Analysis of Students' Perception of Online Assessments and Its Relation to Motivation towards Mathematics Learning. Electronic Journal of E-Learning, 19(5), 416-431.
Yilmaz, F. G. K., Ustun, A. B., & Yilmaz, R. (2020). Investigation of Pre-service Teachers’ Opinions on Advantages and Disadvantages of Online Formative Assessment: An Example of Online Multiple-Choice Exam. Journal of Teacher Education & Lifelong Learning, 2(1), 10–19. https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/tell/issue/52517/718396
Descargas
Publicado
Cómo citar
Número
Sección
Licencia
Derechos de autor 2025 Maria Elena Magcalen

Esta obra está bajo una licencia internacional Creative Commons Atribución 4.0.
O periodico Diversitas Journal expressa que os artigos são de unica responsabilidade dos Autores, conhecedores da legislação Brasileira e internacional. Os artigos são revisados pelos pares e devem ter o cuidado de avisar da possível incidencia de plagiarismo. Contudo o plagio é uma ação incontestavel dos autores. A Diversitas Journal não publicará artigos com indicios de Plagiarismos. Artigos com plagios serão tratados em conformidade com os procedimentos de plagiarismo COPE.
A violação dos direitos autorais constitui crime, previsto no artigo 184, do Código Penal Brasileiro:
“Art. 184 Violar direitos de autor e os que lhe são conexos: Pena – detenção, de 3 (três) meses a 1 (um) ano, ou multa. § 1o Se a violação consistir em reprodução total ou parcial, com intuito de lucro direto ou indireto, por qualquer meio ou processo, de obra intelectual, interpretação, execução ou fonograma, sem autorização expressa do autor, do artista intérprete ou executante, do produtor, conforme o caso, ou de quem os represente: Pena – reclusão, de 2 (dois) a 4 (quatro) anos, e multa.”











