Abstract:

This proposal is framed within a multidisciplinary context and aims to stimulate engagement, commitment, and responsibility in the learning process. Specifically, the initiative was implemented in the Biomedical Engineering Master’s degree, in which all participants, coming from different specialisations and professional backgrounds, worked within the frame of a Learning Management System resource (Moodle). Within this environment, students collaborated in groups and used online forums to discuss an initial abstract, develop an intermediate document (poster), and subsequently conduct a final evaluative exercise involving peer review of oral presentations assessed by student‑constituted panels.

The results of this work derive from surveys assessing students’ perceptions of the applied methodology. Those perceptions highlight the robustness of this strategy as a methodology that enhances self-directed learning and the collective construction of knowledge. Survey data indicate that continuous peer feedback (mainly facilitated through the forums) was a key mechanism for fostering critical thinking and deeper conceptual understanding. A significant proportion of students acknowledged that reviewing other groups’ work directly contributed to improving their own outputs, particularly the final report and the poster. This dynamic reflects the principles of peer assessment and self-assessment that underpin the projects’ pedagogical model, positioning students as active agents in their learning. The forums were perceived as a particularly valuable resource for understanding concepts, methodologies, and approaches developed by other groups, reinforcing the Virtual Campus as an environment that promotes interdisciplinary exchange and peer-to-peer learning (75.7% rated this aspect above 4 on a 5‑point scale N=37). Similarly, the questionnaire shows that continuously following classmates’ progress enables more precise and effective feedback.

Regarding peer assessment, most students felt they had acted rigorously and responsibly (4.7 ± 0.6 on a 5‑point scale, N=37), although some expressed concern about the weight that peer evaluations contributed to the final grade. This perception highlights the need to strengthen the reliability and transparency of the assessment criteria, as well as to reinforce trust in the process. Nevertheless, the feedback received was generally considered useful and formative.

With respect to workload, although more than half of the students considered the number of tasks excessive, they also noted that the structure allowed them to better understand the process, delve deeper into the chosen topic, and develop transversal competencies such as communication, organisation, and time management.

Finally, the findings show that collaborative work extended beyond formal sessions: discussions continued outside the classroom, creating a collaborative environment that enriched learning in physiology from an interdisciplinary perspective. Despite the intensity of the process, students emphasised that the methodology helped them better prepare for assessments, gain a deeper understanding of the content, and feel part of an active learning community. Overall, these results reinforce the idea that, when combined with mechanisms for participation, immediate feedback, and shared responsibility, this methodology becomes a powerful pedagogical tool for competence development and the consolidation of meaningful learning.

Keywords:

Self-training, self-evaluation, motivation, multidisciplinary, Learning Management System.