Aula invertida a distancia vs. aula invertida convencional: un estudio comparativo

IF 0.3 Q3 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Iatreia Pub Date : 2021-09-01 DOI:10.17533/UDEA.IATREIA.104
Luis Carlos Domínguez-Torres, Neil Valentín Vega-Peña, D. Sierra-Barbosa, Juan José Pepín-Rubio
{"title":"Aula invertida a distancia vs. aula invertida convencional: un estudio comparativo","authors":"Luis Carlos Domínguez-Torres, Neil Valentín Vega-Peña, D. Sierra-Barbosa, Juan José Pepín-Rubio","doi":"10.17533/UDEA.IATREIA.104","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction: In this study were compared the effects of the Conventional Flipped Classroom (virtual component for independent study + face-to-face component for the interactive discussion of clinical cases) and the Remote Flipped Classroom (FRFC) (virtual component for independent study + “online” component for the interactive discussion of clinical cases), as a teaching / learning strategy in the face of the COVID-19 pande-mic, on the self-directed learning of surgical students. Methods: Self-directed learning levels, as a result indicator of the change in methodological strategy, were compared in a group of undergraduate students participating in a conventional flipped classroom in 2017 to those of a group of students participating in a remote flipped classroom in 2020, during the surgery course at the Universidad de La Sabana, in Chia-Co-lombia. For this purpose, the Preparedness Scale for Self-Directed Learning (EPAD), validated to the Spa-nish language, was used. Results: In both groups, the levels of self-directed learning were acceptable. No significant effect (posi-tive or negative) of either of the two models of flipped classroom was identified on the self-directed learning (d Cohen =-0.08;IC95%-0.42 – 0.24). Conclusions: The remote flipped classroom is an alternative to the conventional inverted classroom that does not compromise the self-directed learning of surgery students.","PeriodicalId":13066,"journal":{"name":"Iatreia","volume":"34 1","pages":"260-265"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2021-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Iatreia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17533/UDEA.IATREIA.104","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

Introduction: In this study were compared the effects of the Conventional Flipped Classroom (virtual component for independent study + face-to-face component for the interactive discussion of clinical cases) and the Remote Flipped Classroom (FRFC) (virtual component for independent study + “online” component for the interactive discussion of clinical cases), as a teaching / learning strategy in the face of the COVID-19 pande-mic, on the self-directed learning of surgical students. Methods: Self-directed learning levels, as a result indicator of the change in methodological strategy, were compared in a group of undergraduate students participating in a conventional flipped classroom in 2017 to those of a group of students participating in a remote flipped classroom in 2020, during the surgery course at the Universidad de La Sabana, in Chia-Co-lombia. For this purpose, the Preparedness Scale for Self-Directed Learning (EPAD), validated to the Spa-nish language, was used. Results: In both groups, the levels of self-directed learning were acceptable. No significant effect (posi-tive or negative) of either of the two models of flipped classroom was identified on the self-directed learning (d Cohen =-0.08;IC95%-0.42 – 0.24). Conclusions: The remote flipped classroom is an alternative to the conventional inverted classroom that does not compromise the self-directed learning of surgery students.
远程倒置教室与传统倒置教室:比较研究
前言:本研究比较了传统翻转课堂(虚拟自主学习+面对面临床病例互动讨论)和远程翻转课堂(虚拟自主学习+“在线”临床病例互动讨论)作为面对COVID-19大流行的教/学策略对外科学生自主学习的影响。方法:将2017年参加传统翻转课堂的一组本科生与2020年参加远程翻转课堂的一组学生的自主学习水平作为方法学策略变化的结果指标进行比较,该研究是在中国-哥伦比亚萨巴纳大学的外科课程中进行的。本研究采用经西班牙语验证的自我指导学习准备量表(EPAD)。结果:两组学生的自主学习水平均为可接受水平。两种翻转课堂模式对自主学习均无显著影响(正、负)(d Cohen =-0.08;IC95%-0.42 - 0.24)。结论:远程翻转课堂是传统翻转课堂的一种替代,不影响外科学生的自主学习。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Iatreia
Iatreia MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL-
CiteScore
0.30
自引率
50.00%
发文量
53
审稿时长
4 weeks
期刊介绍: La revista IATREIA es la publicación científica oficial de la Facultad de Medicina de la Universidad de Antioquia, cuya misión es difundir conocimientos técnicos y científicos sobre aspectos del proceso salud-enfermedad y sobre la práctica de la medicina y de profesiones afines, sirviendo al mismo tiempo de canal de intercambio de conocimientos y experiencias entre estudiantes y profesionales de la Universidad de Antioquia y de otras regiones del país y fuera de él.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信