DIGITALA COMPARATIVE OF DIDACTIC METHODS IN THE CLASSROOM AND ITS REPERCUSSION IN TEACHING RESULTS
1 San Pablo CEU University (SPAIN)
2 Universidad Complutense de Madrid (SPAIN)
2 Universidad Complutense de Madrid (SPAIN)
About this paper:
Appears in: INTED2020 Proceedings
Publication year: 2020
Pages: 6860-6863
ISBN: 978-84-09-17939-8
ISSN: 2340-1079
doi: 10.21125/inted.2020.1825
Publication year: 2020
Pages: 6860-6863
ISBN: 978-84-09-17939-8
ISSN: 2340-1079
doi: 10.21125/inted.2020.1825
Conference name: 14th International Technology, Education and Development Conference
Dates: 2-4 March, 2020
Location: Valencia, Spain
Dates: 2-4 March, 2020
Location: Valencia, Spain
Abstract:
Introduction:Nowadays, the new educational tendencies are directed towards more autonomous learning of the students reinforcing knowledge given in the classes. This study compares two alternative methods in order to evaluate its result in the final understanding of the subject taught in a Degree of higher education.
Objective:
To compare the use of mind maps and cooperative work versus work by couples with image labeling and gamification in the Physiology subject of the degree of Dentistry in international modality and verify its impact on teaching results.
Material and methods:
In the activity by couples with image labeling and gamification we use anatomy sheets with physiology concepts (in pairs). On the other hand, the mind map activity consists of dividing the class into two groups, A and B, and then subdividing each group into three teams 1, 2 and 3. Each team is assigned a part of the topic explained in class and a leader is chosen from among the students with whom six classmates will collaborate. A signal sounds every 10 minutes and the six participants must change to the next team in the group. The task should be completed in 30 minutes and once finished the results of groups A and B should be compared and the best Poster is chosen.
Subsequently, the knowledge acquired in the activity is evaluated and a satisfaction survey is carried out. In both cases, the teaching innovation activity is timed.
Results:
We observe that the activity in which mind maps are used produces the best academic result reaching a significant difference. The percentage of pass rate in the Cooperative Group (82.5%) was considerably higher than the Control Group (33.33%), and in the work by couples, the percentage of pass rate (68, 75%) was also higher than the Control Group.
Conclusions:
In both cases, the motivation increases and improves the final results of the subject, although with differences depending on the proposed activity. We believe that the results obtained with cooperative work have preferences.