Estudio psicométrico y validación de un cuestionario para la evaluación del profesorado universitario de enseñanza a distancia || Psychometric study and validation of a questionnaire for the evaluation of online university lecturers

Barra lateral del artículo

PDF
Publicado: dic. 1, 2018

Contenido principal del artículo

Isabel Cañadas
Universidad Miguel Hernández de Elche
España
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7292-0426
Isabel de la Cuétara
Universidad Nacional de Educación a Distancia (UNED)
España
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8737-2020
Vol. 5 Núm. 2 (2018), Artículos, Páginas 102-112
DOI: https://doi.org/10.17979/reipe.2018.5.2.3701
Recibido: jul. 27, 2018 Aceptado: oct. 22, 2018 Publicado: dic. 1, 2018
Cómo citar

Resumen

En este trabajo se presenta el estudio psicométrico del Cuestionario de Evaluación del Profesorado Universitario versión a Distancia (CEPU, versión D), cuya finalidad es evaluar la docencia de los profesores que ejercen su trabajo en la modalidad no presencial, sobre la base de las consideraciones previas del estudiante. El cuestionario ha sido construido utilizando una combinación de metodología cualitativa y cuantitativa. La novedad más relevante de esta escala es que se ha creado a partir de la opinión de los estudiantes sobre las cualidades que debe tener un profesor a distancia (online) para ser considerado un buen profesor. En anteriores trabajos hemos presentado el procedimiento empleado para construir la escala; en este trabajo presentamos el estudio psicométrico del cuestionario específico para tutores a distancia. La muestra se seleccionó mediante muestreo aleatorio por conglomerados, considerando como conglomerado el Campus. Se llevó a cabo un análisis factorial exploratorio (AFE) y a continuación un análisis factorial confirmatorio (AFC). Los resultados indican que el cuestionario tiene una alta fiabilidad y validez, lo que lo convierte en una herramienta de evaluación útil y relevante.

Palabras clave:

calidad universitaria, necesidades de los estudiantes, validez de cuestionarios

Descargas

Los datos de descargas todavía no están disponibles.

Detalles del artículo

Citas

Anderson, J. C., & Gerbing, D. W. (1988). Structural equation modeling in practice: A review and recommended two-step approach. Psychological bulletin, 103(3), 411-423. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.103.3.411

Apodaca, P., & Grad, H. (2005). The dimensionality of student ratings of teaching: integration of uni- and multidimensional mols. Studies in Higher Education, 30(6), 723-748. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075070500340101

Barth, M.M. (2008). Deciphering student evaluations of teaching: A factor analysis approach. Journal of Education for Business, 84, 40–46. https://doi.org/10.3200/JOEB.84.1.40-46

Brown, T. A. (2006). Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research. New York, NY, US: Guilford Press.

Brown, T., Williams, B., Jaberzadeh, S., Roller, L., Palermo, C., McKenna, L. … Sim, J. (2010). Predictors of attitudes to e-learning of Australian health care students. Journal of Applied Research in Higher Education, 2(1), 60-76. https://doi.org/10.1108/17581184201000006

Buchanan, J. (2011). Quality teaching: means for its enhancement? Australian Universities’ Review, 53(1), 66–72. Recuperado de https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ926451

Burdsal, C. A., & Harrison, P. D. (2008). Further evidence supporting the validity of both a multidimensional profile and an overall evaluation of teaching effectiveness. Assesment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 33, 567–576. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602930701699049

Cañadas, I. (2013). Study of the qualities of a good university lecturer of health sciences. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 89, 342-350. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.08.858

Cañadas, I., Cuétara, I., & San Luis, C. (2014). Qualities demanded by on-line universties students about their tutors. International Conference. The Future of Education. 4 Edition. 12, 13 de junio de 2014. Florence.

Casero, A. (2010). Factores moduladores de la percepción de la calidad

docente. RELIEVE, 16(2), 1-17. Recuperado de http://www.uv.es/RELIEVE/v16n2/RELIEVEv16n2_3.htm

Carrascosa, J.R. y Molero, D. (2005). La valoración de la docencia universitaria en función del sexo y del centro de los estudiantes encuestados. Revista Española de Orientación y Psicopedagogía, 16(2), 301-318. Recuperado de http://www.redalyc.org/pdf/3382/338230773007.pdf

De Juan, J, Pérez, R.M, Gómez-Torres, M.J., Vizcaya, M.F. y Mora, J.M. (2007). Buenas prácticas en la evaluación de la docencia y del profesorado universitario. En M. A. Martínez y V. Carrasco (eds.) La multidimensionalidad de la Educación Universitaria. Redes de investigación Docente-Espacio Europeo de Enseñanza Superior, pp. 155-182.

Ferguson, J.M., & De Felice, A.F. (2010). Length of online course and student satisfaction, perceived learning, and academic performance. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning. 11(2), 73-84. Recuperado de https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ895748.pdf

Ferrando, P. J. y Anguiano-Carrasco, C. (2010). El análisis factorial como técnica de investigación en psicología. Papeles del Psicológo, 31 (1), 18-33.

Fu, F.L. (2010). Comparison of students’ satisfaction and dissatisfaction factors in different classroom types in higher education. En Tsang P., Cheung S.K.S., Lee V.S.K. y Huang R. (eds) Hybrid Learning. ICHL 2010. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 6248, pp. 2-38. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-14657-2_38

Harman, H.H. (1976) Modern factor analysis. Third edition. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Horn, J. L. (1965). A rationale and test for the number of factors in factor analysis. Psychometrica, 30(2), 179–185. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02289447

Hung, M.L., & Chou, Ch. (2014). Students’ perceptions of instructors’ roles in blended and online learning environments: A comparative study. Computers & Education, 81, 315–325. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.10.022

Hu, L. & Bentler, P. (1995). Evaluating model fit. In R. Hoyle (Ed.), Structural equation modelling: Concepts, issues and applications (pp.76-99). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Kuo, Y.C., Walker, A.E., Belland, B.R., & Schroder, K.E.E., (2013). A predictive study of satisfaction in online education programs. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learnig, 14(1), 16-39. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v14i1.1338

Lattin, J. M., Carroll, J. D., Green, P. E., & Green, P. E. (2003). Analyzing multivariate data. Pacific Grove, CA: Thomson Brooks/Cole.

Lorenzo-Seva, U., & Ferrando, P. J. (2013). FACTOR 9.2: A Comprehensive program for fitting exploratory and semiconfirmatory factor analysis and IRT models. Applied Psychological Measurement, 37(6), 497–498. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146621613487794

MacDonald, K., & Gobson, C.E. (2011) Your tutor is your friend: using experiential learning to enhance second year transition. Journal of Applied Research in Higher Education, 3(2), pp.107–115. https://doi.org/10.1108/17581181111198656

Martínez Arias, R. (1995). Psicometría: Teoría de los tests psicológicos y educativos. Madrid: Síntesis.

Marsh, H.W. (2007). Students’ evaluations of university teaching: dimensionality, reliability, validity, potential biases and usefulness. En R.P. Perry y J.C. Smart (eds.) The Scholarship of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education: An Evidence-Based Perspective, pp. 319–383.

Mortelmans, D., & Spooren, P. (2009). A revalidation of the SET37-questionnaire for student evaluations of teaching. Educational Studies, 35, pp.547–552. https://doi.org/10.1080/03055690902880299

Muthén, B., & Kaplan D. (1985). A comparison of some methodologies for the factor analysis of non-normal Likert variables: A note on the size of the mode. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 45, 19-30. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8317.1985.tb00832.x

Naaj, M., Nachouki, M., & Ankit, A. (2012). Evaluating student satisfaction with blended learning in a gender-segregated environment. Journal of Information Technology Education: Research, 11(1), 185-200. Recuperado de https://www.learntechlib.org/p/111500/

Okoro, C.O., & Chukwudi, E.K. (2011). The ideal teacher and the motivated student in a changing environment. Journal of Educational and Social Research, 1(3), 107 112.Recuperado de http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/cedaw/docs/co/NigeriaCO30.pdf

Onwuegbuzie, A.J., Daniel, L.G., & Collins, K.M.T. (2009). A metavalidation model for assessing the score validity of student teaching evaluations. Quality & Quantity, 43, 197–209. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-007-9112-4

Pan, D., Tan, G.S.H., Ragupathi, K., Booluck, K., Roop, R., & Ip,Y.K. (2009). Profiling teacher/teaching using descriptors derived from qualitative feedback: Formative and summative applications. Research in Higher Education, 50, 73–100. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-008-9109-4

Pozo-Munoz, C., Rebolloso-Pacheco, E., & Fernandez-Ramirez, B. (2000). The 'Ideal Teacher'. Implications for student evaluation of teacher effectiveness. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 25(3), 253-263. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602930050135121

Rogers, J., & Smith, M. (2011). Demonstrating genuine interest in students' needs and progress: Implications for student satisfaction with courses. Journal of Applied Research in Higher Education, 3(1), 6–14. https://doi.org/10.1108/17581181111150865

Rothman, T., Romeo, L., Brennan, M., & Mitchell, D. (2011). Criteria for assessing student satisfaction with online courses. International Journal for e-Learning Securit, 1, 27-32. Recuperado de http://www.infonomics-society.org/IJeLS/Criteria for Assessing Student Satisfaction with Online Courses.pdf

San Luis, C., & Cañadas, I. (2014). Qualitative and quantitative methods to

assess the qualities of a lecturer: What qualities are demanded by on-line

and on-site students? Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 143,

-111. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.07.369

Schmid, J., & Leiman, J. M. (1957). The development of hierarchical factor solutions. Psychometrika, 22, 53-61. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF02289209

Snook, S. C., & Gorsuch, R. L. (1989). Component analysis versus common factor analysis: A Monte Carlo study. Psychological Bulletin, 106(1), 148-154. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.106.1.148

Spencer, K. J. and Schmelkin, L. P. (2002). Student perspectives on teaching and its evaluation. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 27, 397–409. https://doi.org/10.1080/0260293022000009285

Spooren, P., Brockx, B., & Mortelmans, D. (2013). On the validity of student evaluation of teaching: The State of the Art. Review of Educational Research, 83(4), 598–642. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654313496870

Su, F., & Wood, M. (2012). What makes a good university lecturer? Students’ perceptions of teaching excellence Journal of Applied Research in Higher Education, 4 (2), 142-155. https://doi.org/10.1108/17581181211273110

Tanaka, J.S., & Huba, G.J. (1985). A fit index for covariance structure models under arbitrary GLS estimation. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 38, 197–201. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8317.1985.tb00834.x

Timmerman, M. E., & Lorenzo-Seva, U. (2011). Dimensionality assessment of ordered polytomous items with parallel analysis. Psychological Methods, 16(2), 209-220. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0023353