Construction of learning and analysis of cognitive load through the use of active methodologies as a function of gender
Resumen
The Breakout educational methodology is an innovative strategy that promotes active learning and student participation. This study analyzes the interaction between cognitive load, gamification and gender in the context of the Breakout methodology, with a sample of 540 future teachers of Primary Education at the University of Seville. Two instruments were used for data collection: the GAMEX scale to evaluate gamification and a cognitive load scale to measure this variable. The results revealed a moderate perception of the difficulty of the tasks, supported by a high valuation of the learning achieved and its improvement. Gamification stood out in dimensions such as fun and absorption, indicating a positive impact on the educational experience, with significant differences according to gender: women perceived knowledge acquisition more positively. Previous experience with Breakout was also associated with a greater tendency to have fun and absorption during the learning process. It is concluded that the Breakout methodology efficiently balances intrinsic and extrinsic cognitive load. Consequently, further research is recommended on gender dynamics in active and gamified educational environments, considering the diversity of the participants.
Texto completo:
PDF (English)Referencias
Andrade-Lotero, L. A. (2012). Teoría de la carga cognitiva, diseño multimedia y aprendizaje: un estado del arte. Magis, Revista Internacional de Investigación en Educación, 5 (10), 75-92.
Bager, T. (2011). Entrepreneurship education and new venture creation: A comprehensive approach. In K. Hindle. & K. Klyver (Eds.), Handbook of research on new venture creation (pp. 299-315). Edgar Elgar Publishing. https://doi.org/10.4337/9780857933065.00024.
Bigg, J. (2003). Teaching for quality learning at University. Society for Research into Higher Education and Open University Press.
Bisquerra, R. (1987). Introducción a la estadística aplicada a la investigación educativa. PPU.
Brenik, A.; Vusic, D.; Milkovic, M. (2019). Evaluation of gender differences based on knowledge adaptation in the field of gamification and computer science. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning, 14(8), 220-228. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijet.v14i08.9847.
Burbules, N. C.; Fan, G.; Repp, P. (2020). Five trends of education and technology in a sustainable future. Geography and Sustainability, 1(2), 93-97. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geosus.2020.05.001.
Cabero-Almenara, J.; Barroso-Osuna, J.; Gutiérrez-Castillo, J. J.; Palacios Rodríguez, A. (2023). T-MOOC, cognitive load and performance: analysis of an experience. Revista Electrónica Interuniversitaria de Formación del Profesorado, 26(1), 99-113. https://doi.org/10.6018/reifop.542121.
Cabero-Almenara, J.; Guillen-Gamez, F. D.; Ruiz-Palmero, J.; Palacios-Rodríguez, A. (2021). Classification models in the digital competence of higher education teachers based on the DigCompEdu Framework: logistic regression and segment tree. Journal of E-Learning and Knowledge Society, 17(1), 49-61. https://doi.org/10.20368/1971-8829/1135472.
Cárdenas, M. P. C.; Cedeño, Á. M. C. (2021). La estimulación del cerebro y su influencia en el aprendizaje de los niños de preescolar. ReHuSo: Revista de Ciencias Humanísticas y Sociales, 6(1), 38-45. https://doi.org/10.5281/ zenodo.5512747.
Clark, R. C.; Mayer, R. E. (2008). E-Learning and the science of instruction: Proven guidelines for consumers and designers of multimedia learning. San Francisco, CA: Pfeiffer /John Wiley & Sons.
Cortizo-Pérez, J. C.; Carrero-García, F. M.; Monsalve-Piqueras, B.; Velasco-Collado, A.; Díaz del Dedo, L. I.; Pérez-Martín, J. (2011). Gamificación y Docencia: Lo que la Universidad tiene que aprender de los Videojuegos. In VIII Jornadas Internacionales de Innovación Universitaria.
Damirchi, E. S.; Pireinaladin, S.; Akbari, T.; Dargahi, S. (2020). The prediction of the student’s tendency to computer games based on the brain-behavioral functions, cognitive flexibility and sensation seeking. Archives of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, 1, 70-76. https://doi.org/10.12740/app/109309.
De Miguel, M. (2006). Metodologías de enseñanza y aprendizaje para el desarrollo de competencias: Orientaciones para el profesorado universitario ante el Espacio Europeo de Educación Superior. Alianza.
Dirckinck‐Holmfeld, L.; Bygholm, A.; Tabo, G. O. (2023). Transforming education through ICT: Exploring students' study practices in a resource‐constrained university setting. British Journal of Educational Technology. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13367.
Gardner, H. (1995). Inteligencias múltiples. La teoría en la práctica. Barcelona: Paidós.
Garzón Artacho, E.; Sola Martínez, T.; Trujillo Torres, J. M.; Rodríguez García, A. M. (2021). Competencia digital docente en educación de adultos: Un estudio en un contexto español. Píxel-Bit. Revista de Medios y Educación, 62, 209-234. https://doi.org/10.12795/pixelbit.89510.
Hernández-Sampieri, R.; Fernández-Collado, C.; Baptista-Lucio, P. (2014). Metodología de la investigación. Madrid: McGraw-Hill Education.
Imran, A. S.; Dalipi, F.; Kastrati, Z. (2019). Predicting student dropout in a MOOC: An evaluation of a deep neural network model. In 5th International Conference on Computing and Artificial Intelligence (ICCAI 2019) (pp. 190-195). https://doi.org/10.1145/3330482.3330514.
Koivisto, J.; Hamari J. (2014). Demographic differences in perceived benefits from gamification. Computers in Human Behavior, 35, 179-188. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.03.007.
Konopka, C. L.; Adaime, M. B.; Mosele, P. H. (2015). Active teaching and learning methodologies: Some considerations. Creative Education, 6(14), 1536-1545. https://doi.org/10.4236/ce.2015.614154.
Leppink, J.; Paas, F.; Van der Vleuten, C. P. M. (2013). Development of an instrument for measuring different types of cognitive load. Behav Res, 45, 1058-1072 https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-013-0334-1.
Leppink, J.; Paas, F.; van Gog, T.; van der Vleuten, C. P. M.; van Merriënboer, J. J. G. (2014). Effects of pairs of problems and examples on task performance and different types of cognitive load. Learning and Instruction, 30, 32-42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2013.12.001.
Llorente-Cejudo, C.; Palacios-Rodríguez, A.; Fernández-Scagliusi, V. (2022). Learning landscapes and educational Breakout for the development of digital skills of teachers in training. Interaction Design and Architecture(s) Journal-IxD&A, 53, 176-190, https://doi.org/10.55612/s-5002-053-009.
Lu, C. F.; Wu, S. M.; Shu, Y. M.; Yeh, M. Y. (2018). Applying game-based learning in nursing education: Empathy board game learning. Journal of Nursing, 65(1), 96-103.
Manrique, J. M.; García-Martín, J. (2022). La competencia digital del profesorado de Educación Primaria durante la pandemia (COVID-19). Profesorado, Revista de Currículum y Formación del Profesorado, 26(2), 125-140. https://doi.org/10.30827/profesorado.v26i2.21568.
Martín Párraga, L.; Llorente-Cejudo, C.; Cabero-Almenara, J. (2022). Analysis of teachers’ digital competencies from assessment frameworks and instruments. IJERI: International Journal of Educational Research and Innovation, (18), 62-79. https://doi.org/10.46661/ijeri.7444.
Mayer, R. E. (2005). Cognitive theory of multimedia learning. In R. E. Mayer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (pp. 31-48). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Mellner, C.; Krantz, G.; Lundberg, U. (2006).Symptom reporting and self-rated health among women in mid-life: The role of work characteristics and family responsibilities. International Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 13(1), 1-7. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327558ijbm1301_1.
Mills, M.; Tsang, F.; Präg, P.; Ruggeri, K.; Miani, C.; Hoorens, S. (2014). Gender equality in the workforce. Reconciling work, private and family life in Europe. https://doi.org/10.2838/54302.
Paas, A. R.; Sweller, J. (2003). Cognitive load theory and instructional design: Recent developments, Educational psychologist, 38(1), 1-4, https://doi.org/10.1207/S15326985EP3801_1.
Paños, J. (2017). Educación emprendedora y metodologías activas para su fomento. Revista Electrónica Interuniversitaria de Formación del Profesorado, 20(3), 33-48. https://doi.org/10.6018/reifop.20.3.272221.
Pattier, D.; Reyero, D. (2022). Aportaciones desde la teoría de la educación a la investigación de las relaciones entre cognición y tecnología digital. Educación XX1, 25(2), 223-241. https://doi.org/10.5944/educxx1.31950.
Peñalva, S.; Aguaded, I.; de-Casas-Moreno, P. (2018). El uso de la gamificación como metodología educomunicativa en el contexto universitario. In Gamificación en Iberoamérica. Experiencias desde la comunicación y la educación (pp. 191-210).
Romero-Tena, R.; Barragán-Sánchez, R.; Martínez-Pérez, S.; Palacios-Rodríguez, A. (2022). Habits, norms and use of technologies in early childhood households from a gender perspective. Digital Education Review, (41), 19-31. https://doi.org/10.1344/der.2022.41.19-31.
Rué, J. (2007). Enseñar en la universidad. Narcea.
Silva-Quiroz, J.; Maturana, D. (2017). Una propuesta de modelo para introducir metodologías activas en educación superior. Innovación Educativa, 17(73), 117-131.
Smith, K.; Abrams, S.S. (2019). Gamification and accessibility. International Journal of Information and Learning Technology, 36(2), 104-123.
Solsona Pairó, N. (2013). ¿Existen desigualdades en la formación de chicas y chicos en ciencias?. In IX Congreso Internacional sobre investigación en Didáctica de las Ciencias (pp. 3412-3416).
Sweller, J.; Ayres, P.; Kalyuga, S. (2011). Cognitive load theory. New York, NY: Springer.
Sweller, J.; Van Merriënboer, J. J. G.; Paas, F. G. (1998). Cognitive architecture and instructional design. Educational Psychology Review, 10(3), 251-296. http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1022193728205.
Ubieto, I.; Domingo, M.; García, F. J.; Paulo, A. (2008). Practicar con la teoría: Metodologías activas en información y documentación en el marco del espacio europeo de educación superior. Prensas Universitarias de Zaragoza. https://doi.org/10.26754/uz.978-84-92521-36-4.
Villalustre, L. (2024). Análisis del nivel de pensamiento computacional de los futuros maestros: una propuesta diagnóstica para el diseño de acciones formativas. Pixel-Bit. Revista De Medios Y Educación, (69), 169-194. https://doi.org/10.12795/pixelbit.101205.
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.54988/cv.2025.2.1580
Enlaces refback
- No hay ningún enlace refback.
Campus Virtuales
ISSN: 2255-1514
www.revistacampusvirtuales.es
campusvirtuales@uajournals.com