Skip to main content

Advertisement

Springer Nature Link
Log in

A good practice for making training accessible to university faculty members through ICTs: syllabus planning support training

  • Long Paper
  • Published:
Universal Access in the Information Society Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study focuses on a case study developed at a higher education institution, which comprises developing a new virtual teaching unit (VTU) aimed at supporting classroom teaching based on usability and accessibility criteria to help increase teaching quality by improving syllabus design. This study seeks to determine the impact of this new VTU on transfer and to assess the quality of its intervention without disregarding project sustainability by selecting the information and communication technologies that were used. After contextualizing and briefly introducing the primary variables of the project, this study describes how good practices have been developed as well as presents the corresponding results and the conclusions. The overall assessment reveals highly satisfactory results, both in terms of impact and intervention, regarding usability, accessibility, transfer, and sustainability.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14
Fig. 15
Fig. 16
Fig. 17
Fig. 18
Fig. 19

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. EHEA is the European Higher Education Area.

  2. Funded by the European Commission under the SOCRATES Program, the Tuning project was launched in 2000 and was led by the University of Deusto (Spain) and the University of Gröningen (The Netherlands).

  3. MFUD is the Spanish acronym for teacher education model used at the University of Deusto.

  4. MAUD is the Spanish acronym for teaching–learning model used at the University of Deusto.

  5. ANECA (As per its acronym in Spanish, the National Agency for Quality Assessment and Accreditation) is the body responsible for assessing, certifying, and accrediting activities performed within the Spanish university system to guarantee continuous improvement and adherence to EHEA. Established in 2001, it is currently an Autonomous Body of the General Country Administration, attached to the Ministry that oversees Spanish universities.

  6. ALUD is the acronym of the Online Learning platform used at UD.

References

  1. ANECA (2015) DOCENTIA, Programa de apoyo para la evaluación de la actividad docente del profesorado universitario. Integración y actualización del programa 2005.v1. http://www.aneca.es/content/download/13305/164819/file/DOCENTIA_nuevadoc_v1_final.pdf. Accessed on 26 Dec 2019

  2. Caballero, K., Bolívar, A.: El profesorado universitario como docente: hacia una identidad profesional que integre decencia e investigación. REDU Rev. Docencia Univ. 13, 57–77 (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  3. De Pablos, J., Colas, P., Villaciervos, P.: Políticas educativas, buenas prácticas con TIC en la Comunidad Autónoma Andaluza. Rev. Teoría de la Educ. Educ. Cult. en la Soc. de la Inf. Universidad de Salamanca 11(1), 180–202 (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Delors J (1996) La educación encierra un tesoro. Informe a la UNESCO de la Comisión Internacional sobre la educación para el siglo XXI. Ediciones UNESCO, París

  5. Díaz, V., López, M.: La formación docente universitaria a través de las TIC. Pixel-Bit Rev. Med. Educ. 35, 97–103 (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  6. EEES, Espacio Europeo de Educación Superior. Declaración conjunta de los ministros europeos de educación (1999) Bolonia. eees.umh.es › contenidos › Documentos › DeclaracionBolonia. Accessed 26 Dec 2019

  7. Gairín, J.: Formación de profesores basada en competencias. Bordón Rev. Pedagog. 63(1), 93–108 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  8. García Ramos, J.M.: Valoración de la competencia docente del profesor universitario. Una aproximación empírica. Rev. Complut. Educ. 8(2), 81–108 (1997)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Gil Coria, E.: La pedagogía de los jesuitas, ayer y hoy. Universidad de Comillas, Madrid (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Glenda, B.P., de la Giraldo, C.L.: Brecha digital universitaria, apropiación de herramientas asincrónicas en docentes de educación superior: caso Universidad ECOTEC. Rev. Cient. ECOCIENCIA 5(6), 1–18 (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Gómez, C., Gómez, M.: Retos y cambios en la organización universitaria. Hacia un modelo de enseñanza-aprendizaje. Rev. Int. Organ. (2014). https://doi.org/10.17345/rio13.85-109

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Gómez, M., García Valcárcel, A.: Formación y profesionalización docente del profesorado universitario. Rev. Investig. Educ. 20(1), 153–171 (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  13. González, M., Raposo, M.: Necesidades formativas del profesorado universitario en el contexto de la convergencia europea. Rev. Investig. Educ. 26(2), 285–306 (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Guenaga, M., Mechaca, I., Romero, S., Eguíluz, A.: A tool to evaluate the level of inclusion of digital learning objects. Procedia Comput. Sci. (2012). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2012.10.017

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Henry SL (2000) Simplemente pregunta: integración de la accesibilidad en el diseño. www.lulu.com. Acceso 1 2020

  16. Hewett et al. (1992) ACM SIGCHI curricula for human-computer interaction. Technical Report. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, United States. https://doi.org/10.1145/2594128

  17. ISO 9241-11:2018. Ergonomics of human-system interaction—part 11: usability: definitions and concepts. https://www.iso.org/obp/ui/#iso:std:iso:9241:-11:ed-2:v1:en. Access 2 Jan 2020

  18. ISO/IEC 40500:2012. Information Technology. W3C web content accessibility guidelines (WCAG) 2.0. https://www.iso.org. Access 27 Dec 2019

  19. Kolb, D.: The learning style inventory: technical manual. McBer and Company, Boston (1976)

    Google Scholar 

  20. March, A.F.: Formación pedagógica y desarrollo profesional de los profesores de universidad: análisis de las diferentes estrategias. Rev. Educ. 331, 171–197 (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  21. Martínez, P.C.: El método de estudio de caso: estrategia metodológica de la investigación científica. Pensamiento y Gestión 20, 165–193 (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  22. Nielsen J (1994) 10 Usability heuristics for user interface design. https://www.nngroup.com/articles/ten-usability-heuristics/. Access 2 Jan 2020

  23. Nielsen J, Loranger H (2007) Usabilidad. Prioridad en el diseño web. Anaya Multimedia, Madrid

  24. Ortega V (2002) Tendencias de la Educación Universitaria en el siglo XXI. Arbor. https://doi.org/10.3989/arbor.2002.i681.1109

  25. Portal de Administración Electrónica del Gobierno de España. https://administracionelectronica.gob.es/. Access 2 Jan 2020

  26. Ramírez-Castañeda, L.A., Sepúlveda-López, J.J.: Digital divide and digital inclusion: socio-technological phenomena. Rev. EIA (2018). https://doi.org/10.24050/reia.v15i30.1152

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Romero, M.R., Castejón, F.J., López, V.M., y Fraile, A.: Evaluación formativa, competencias comunicativas y TIC en la formación del profesorado. Rev. Comunicar (2017). https://doi.org/10.3916/C52-2017-07

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Serrano, E., Moratilla, A., Olmeda, I.: Directrices técnicas referidas a la accesibilidad Web. Ana. Doc. (2009). https://doi.org/10.6018/analesdoc.12.0.70361

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Simons, H.: El estudio de caso: teoría y práctica. Ediciones Morata, Madrid (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  30. Sociedad Española de documentación e información científica (SEDIC). https://www.sedic.es. Access 27 Dec 2019

  31. Stake, R.E.: Investigación con estudio de caso, 5th edn. Ediciones Morata, Madrid (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  32. Tirados, R., Maura, V.G.: Diagnóstico de necesidades y estrategias de formación docente en las universidades. Rev. Iberoam. Educ. (2007). https://doi.org/10.35362/rie4362365

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Tuning Educational Structures in Europe (2006) La contribución de las universidades al proceso de Bolonia Obtenido de www.unideusto.org/tuningeu/images/stories/…/General_Brochure_Spanish_version.pdf(PROTECTED). Access 27 Dec 2019

  34. Universidad de Alicante, Accesibilidad Web. En http://accesibilidadweb.dlsi.ua.es/. Access 2 Jan 2020

  35. Universidad de Deusto: Marco Pedagógico. Universidad de Deusto, Bilbao (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  36. Universidad de Deusto: Normas y Orientaciones para la Elaboración de programas y Guías de Aprendizaje. Universidad de Deusto, Bilbao (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  37. Universidad de Deusto: Manual para la Garantía Interna de Calidad Docente: Modelo de desarrollo profesional en la Universidad de Deusto. Universidad de Deusto, Bilbao (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  38. Universidad de Deusto (2016) El modelo de Formación. Universidad de Deusto, Disponible en https://www.deusto.es/cs/Satellite/deusto/es/modelo-de-formacion-de-la-universidad-de-deusto/documento?i=1340094971726. Access 20 Dec 2019

  39. Usability.gov (2020) Usability.gov is the primary government source for information on usability and user-centered design. U.S. Department of Health & Human Services

  40. Villa A, García Olalla A (2006) Garantía Interna de Calidad Docente: Propuesta de un modelo de desarrollo profesional en la Universidad de Deusto. En E. Arregui y otros (Coord.), Políticas de Gestión de las Organizaciones Educativas. Implicaciones para el currículum universitario en el marco europeo. Universidad de Oviedo, Oviedo

  41. Villa, A., García Olalla, A.: Un sistema de garantía de calidad de la docencia: un estudio de caso. Rev. Electrón. Interuniv. Form. Profr. 17(3), 65–78 (2014). https://doi.org/10.6018/reifop.17.3.204061

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Villa, A., Poblete, M., García Olalla, A.: Aprendizaje basado en competencias: una propuesta para la evaluación de las competencias genéricas. Universidad de Deusto, Bilbao (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  43. World Wide Web Consortium (W3C). https://www3c.es. Access 27 Dec 2019

  44. Zaharía AM (2017) Usabilidad, accesibilidad y arquitectura de la información en el diseño web. Fundamentos y nociones básicas para el profesional de la información. In Flores (coord) Periodismo en nuevos formatos, pp. 113–124

Download references

Acknowledgements

The project described herein would not have been possible without the valuable support provided by the University of Deusto through the IX Convening for Teaching Innovation Projects.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Information, Electronics and Communications Technologies Department, School of Engineering, The University of Deusto, Bilbao, Spain

    Susana Romero Yesa

  2. Private Law Department, School of Law, The University of Deusto, Bilbao, Spain

    Marian Aláez-Martínez

  3. Social Work and Sociology Department, School of Social and Human Sciences, The University of Deusto, San Sebastián, Spain

    Ane Ferran Zubillaga

  4. Educational Innovation and Organization Department, School of Psychology and Education, The University of Deusto, Bilbao, Spain

    Ana García-Olalla

Authors
  1. Susana Romero Yesa
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Marian Aláez-Martínez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Ane Ferran Zubillaga
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Ana García-Olalla
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Susana Romero Yesa.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

On behalf of all authors, the corresponding author states that there is no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

The application related to the project entitled A Good Practice for Making Training Accessible to University Faculty Members through ICTs: Syllabus Planning Support Training, submitted by Marian Aláez Martínez, was assessed by the Research Ethics Committee of the University of Deusto. As documented in the record of the proceedings of its meeting held on April 16, 2020, the research ethics committee qualifies the project as: FAVOURABLE.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Romero Yesa, S., Aláez-Martínez, M., Ferran Zubillaga, A. et al. A good practice for making training accessible to university faculty members through ICTs: syllabus planning support training. Univ Access Inf Soc 20, 573–593 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10209-020-00767-y

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10209-020-00767-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation

pFad - Phonifier reborn

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


Alternative Proxies:

Alternative Proxy

pFad Proxy

pFad v3 Proxy

pFad v4 Proxy