You are here

ON-LINE QUIZZES TO EVALUATE COMPREHENSION AND INTEGRATION SKILLS

Journal Name:

Publication Year:

DOI: 
http://dx.doi.org/10.3926/jotse.189
Abstract (2. Language): 
This work demonstrates the use of a 2.0 tool, namely, Socrative, to evaluate one of the cross-curricular competences indicated by the Universitat Politècnica de València, specifically, comprehension and integration. It has been applied to the courses in different areas: sciences, engineering and languages. As part of its implementation, activities were proposed that could be done at the beginning, during or at the end of the class to, on the one hand, help students acquire the knowledge associated with the course(s), and on the other, gather evidence that demonstrates acquisition of said competence. The results show a high level of satisfaction by the students with the use of the Socrative tool as an element to promote active participation and the acquisition of the cross-curricular competence of comprehension and integration; therefore, its extension to other courses has been suggested.
75
90

REFERENCES

References: 

De Haro, J.J. (2008, Enero 4). Aplicaciones 2.0. EDUCATIVA, Available online at:
http://jjdeharo.blogspot.com.es
DiNucci, D. (1999). Fragmented future. Cengage Learning, Inc., 53(4), 32.
O’Reilly, T. (2011), Economías y ecosistemas de contenidos, V Foro Internacional de Contenidos
Digitales, 22-24/11/2011, Madrid, spainFernández, E. (2006). Web 2.0: Sindicación de contenidos [RSS]. Didáctica, Innovación y Multimedia,
8. Available online at: http://dim.pangea.org/revista8.htm
Flores, M. (2011). Recursos de la Web 2.0 en la Educación. Revista Electrónica de Investigación
Educativa, 13(1). Disponible online at: http://redie.uabc.mx/vol13no1/contenido-floresvalentin.html
Graesser, A.C., Person, N.K., & Huber, J. (1993). Question asking during tutoring and in the
design of educational software. In M. Rabinowitz (Ed.), Cognitive science foundations of instruction
(pp. 149-172). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Harris, J., & Hofer, M. (2009). Instructional planning activity types as vehicles for curriculumbased
TPACK development. In C. D. Maddux, (ed.). Research highlights in technology and teacher
education (pp. 99-108). Chesapeake, VA: Society for Information Technology in Teacher
Education (SITE).
Hyman, R.T. (1979). Strategic questioning. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall.
León, J.A., Peñalba, G., & Escudero, I. (2002). Profe, ¿puedo preguntar? Una breve introducción
a la interacción de preguntas y respuestas entre profesor y alumno. Psicología Educativa, 8(2),
107-126.
Manuguerra, M., & Petocz, P. (2011). Promoting Student Engagement by integrating New
Technology into Tertiary Education: The Role of the iPad. Asian Social Science, 7(11), 61-65.
http://dx.doi.org/10.5539/ass.v7n11p61
Navarro, J.M., & Olmo, F. (2014). Socrative, una aplicación web 2.0 para evaluar la comprensión
de los estudiantes. In V. Botti, M.A. Fernández, J. Simó & F. Fargueta (eds.), Jornadas de
Innovación Educativa y Docencia en Red de la Universitat Politécnica de València. (pp. 69-79). Valencia:
Editorial Universitat Politécnica de València.
Olmo, F., & Navarro, J.M. (2014). La tutoría virtual en la enseñanza universitaria. La
individualización de la formación. Revista del CIDUI, 2. Available online at:
http://www.cidui.org/revistacidui/index.php/cidui/article/view/605
Sun, J.C.-Y. (2014). Influence of polling technologies on student engagement: An analysis of
student motivation, academic performance, and brainwave data. Computers & education, 72, 80-89.
Available online at: http://www.cidui.org/revistacidui/index.php/cidui/article/view/605
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2013.10.010Trujillo, J.M, & Hinojo, F.J. (2010). Apropiación de recursos y estrategias 2.0 para la innovación
educativa en la docencia universitaria. Enseñanza & Teaching, 28, 61-77.

Thank you for copying data from http://www.arastirmax.com