Academic quality with pedagogical innovation through Gowin’s V tool and active methodologies in the use of descriptive guides in the subject of physical sciences in engineering
Keywords:
Meaningful Learning, Descriptive Lab Guides, Active Methodologies, STEAM, V for GowinAbstract
The objective of this applied research was to strengthen academic quality in basic sciences in engineering through the design and implementation of descriptive laboratory guides supported by Gowin’s didactic tool V and the use of active methodologies. The study was developed in the subjects of Physics I, II and III, with a population of 464 students and a final sample of 211 participants, in addition to the participation of 50 teachers, following the ADDIE methodological model with a participatory action research approach.
In the diagnostic phase, 169 laboratory guidelines were analyzed, of which only 1.8% corresponded to a descriptive approach, while the rest responded to a prescriptive model, characterized by low effectiveness in the development of autonomy, critical thinking and experiential learning. Next, a descriptive, open and flexible guide was designed and implemented, which incorporates active methodologies such as STEAM, gamification and successful learning models such as project-based, problem-based learning and research.
The results show that 80.2% of the students reached an advanced level, strengthening critical thinking, reflection, inquiry and contrast by solving real problems according to their professional profile. Likewise, 99.1% showed a low theoretical-practical assimilation with prescriptive guides, qualifying them as not very pedagogical, monotonous and rigid, while descriptive guides favored motivation, collective leadership and the use of technological tools.
It is concluded that the model of descriptive guides, supported by Gowin’s V and active methodologies, constitutes a sustainable, effective and replicable pedagogical strategy to guarantee quality higher education.
Downloads
References
Boom-Cárcamo, E., Buelvas-Gutiérrez, L., Acosta-Oñate, L., & Boom-Cárcamo, D. (2024). Gamification and problem- based learning (PBL): Development of creativity in the teaching-learning process of mathematics in university students. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 53. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.tsc.2024.101614
Buelvas-Gutiérrez, L., Acosta-Oñate, L., Boom-Cárcamo, E., & Alfaro-Bernales, E. (2024). Application of Gowin’s V and active methodologies for meaningful learning of basic sciences in engineering students; [Aplicación de V de Gowin y metodologías activas, para el aprendizaje significativo de las ciencias básicas en estudiantes de ingeniería]. Formacion Universitaria, 17(6), 145 – 154. https://doi.org/10.4067/S0718-50062024000600145
Chen, S. Y., Lai, C. F., Lai, Y. H., & Su, Y. S. (2022). Effect
of project-based learning on development of students’ creative thinking. International Journal of Electrical Engineering and Education, 59(3), 232–250. https://doi. org/10.1177/0020720919846808
Čubela, D., Rossner, A., & Neis, P. (2023). Using Problem- Based Learning and Gamification as a Catalyst for Student Engagement in Data-Driven Engineering Education: A Report. Education Sciences, 13(12), 1223. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13121223
Galleno-Agustin, M. G., & Cabansag, M. G. (2023). Disaster readiness and risk reduction management module using Kolb’s model. International Journal of Evaluation and Research in Education (IJERE), 12(2), 703. https://doi. org/10.11591/ijere.v12i2.24471
Huang, Y. (2024). Information-based teaching model of college modeling foundation course based on ADDIE model. Applied Mathematics and Nonlinear Sciences,
9(1). https://doi.org/10.2478/amns.2023.2.00086
Macurí, E. (2023). La educación STEAM en la Licenciatura de Ciencias Físicas. Periodicidad: Semestral, 6(2), 2023. http://portal.amelica.org/ameli/ journal/390/3904299004/
Madhavi, M., Neetha, T., & Indrakanti, R. (2024). Engineering Education Transformation: Project- Based Learning’s Effect on Problem-Solving and Lifelong Learning. Journal of Engineering Education Transformations, 38(Special Issue 1), 16 – 24. https:// doi.org/10.16920/jeet/2024/v38is1/24206
O’Connor, S., Power, J., Blom, N., Tanner, D., & Mulvihill,
E. S. (2023). Comparing Engineering Students Perceptions of Online and Traditional Face-to-Face Environments During a Problem and Project Based Learning (PBL) Module. SEFI 2023 - 51st Annual Conference of the European Society for Engineering Education: Engineering Education for Sustainability, Proceedings. https://doi.org/10.21427/1KYN-QA10
Prada Núñez, R., Hernández Suarez, C. A., & Gamboa Suarez, A. A. (2022). Evaluación del aprendizaje en física: Un análisis del concepto de fuerza. Revista Boletín Redipe, 10(13), 734–743. https://doi.org/10.36260/rbr. v10i13.1784
Sánchez, O. (2018). Aplicación de Rúbricas para Evaluación de Resultados de Aprendizaje en Estudiantes del Programa de Maestría de la Enseñanza de la Matemática. Encuentro Internacional de Educación En Ingeniería ACOFI. https://acofipapers.org/index.php/eiei/article/ view/312
Vásquez Villanueva, C. A., Briceño Ledesma, N. S., Garamendi Revatta, S., & Quintana Vargas, E. (2022). Los estilos de aprendizaje, según los modelos de Kolb, Felder y Silverman: ventajas y desventajas. Paidagogo,
4(1). https://doi.org/10.52936/p.v4i1.99
Vera, A., Poblete, S., & Días, C. (2018). Percepción de estrategias y estilos de aprendizaje en estudiantes universitarios de primer año.
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
