Educational innovation for middle basic education. Methodologies based on the active participation of students
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.64747/fwt3f229Keywords:
educational innovation, active methodologies, meaningful learning, digital tools, student engagementAbstract
Education is continuously challenged by the need to transform teaching and learning processes, especially during times of crisis such as the COVID-19 pandemic. This global event revealed critical shortcomings in the implementation of active learning strategies, the integration of digital tools, and the digital literacy of both educators and students. Moreover, families increasingly became involved in the daily educational routine, altering traditional classroom dynamics. This case study, conducted in an educational institution near Quito, Ecuador, identified methodological weaknesses in subjects such as Language and Literature, Natural Sciences, and Mathematics, which were directly linked to low student motivation and limited classroom engagement. The aim of this article is to analyze teaching and learning processes in the middle basic education level and to explore innovative methodologies that enhance meaningful learning and promote active student involvement. A mixed-methods approach was applied, combining qualitative and quantitative techniques—specifically non-participant observation and surveys—to collect comprehensive data from the school environment. Based on the results, an educational innovation proposal was developed for fifth to seventh grade, recommending Project-Based Learning in Language and Literature, collaborative learning in Natural Sciences, and gamification in Mathematics. These strategies are intended to enrich educational experiences, boost academic achievement, and foster a more engaging and student-centered learning environment.
References
Ávalos, C., Pérez-Escoda, A., y Monge, L. (2019). Lean startup as a learning methodology for developing digital and research competencies. Journal of New Approaches in Educational Research, 8(2), 227–242. https://doi.org/10.7821/naer.2019.7.438
Blazar, D., & Kraft, M. A. (2017). Teacher and Teaching Effects on Students’ Attitudes and Behaviors. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 39(1), 146–170. https://doi.org/10.3102/0162373716670260
Bostock, J. (2019). Exploring in-service trainee teacher expertise and practice: Developing pedagogical content knowledge. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 56(5), 605–616. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2018.1562358
Bottino, R. M., Ferlino, L., Ott, M., y Tavella, M. (2007). Developing strategic and reasoning abilities with computer games at primary school level. Computers and Education, 49(4), 1272–1286. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2006.02.003
Cárdenas-Contreras, B. N., García-Herrera, D. G., Álvarez-Lozano, M. I., y Erazo-Álvarez, J. C. (2020). Aprendizaje Basado en Proyectos una Estrategia Metodológica para la Enseñanza de Ciencias Sociales en Bachillerato. Cienciamatria, 6(3), 49–73. https://doi.org/10.35381/cm.v6i3.390
Cárdenas Navas, A. M., y Colmenares Gulumá, E. (2007). El trabajo en equipo en el área de ciencias naturales y educación ambiental. In Revista de Educación, Fundación Convivencia (p. 10). https://fundacionconvivencia.org/apc-aa-files/60e8cc4464eed61f01c071bc0caca88c/el-trabajo-en-equipo-en-el-area-de-ciencias-naturales-y-educacin-ambiental.pdf
Cavalcante, M. T. L., Jiménez, P. L., y Navarro-Segura, L. (2019). Methodologies to enhance innovation competencies in social work education. Social Work Education, 00(00), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/02615479.2019.1674801
Coma-Rosello, T., Aguelo-Arguis, A., Alvarez, P., Sanz, C., y Baldassarri, S. (2018). Analysis of Innovative Approaches in the Class Using Conceptual Maps and Considering the Learning Styles of Students. Revista Iberoamericana de Tecnologias Del Aprendizaje, 13(4), 120–129. https://doi.org/10.1109/RITA.2018.2879388
Dirección Nacional de Normativa Jurídico Educativa del Ministerio de Educación. (2017). Reglamento general a la L.O.E.I. Ministerio de Educación, 1332, 116. https://educacion.gob.ec/wp-content/uploads/downloads/2017/05/Reglamento-General-Ley-Organica-Educacion-Intercultural.pdf
Escuela de Educación Básica Luis Pasteur. (2019). Calificaciones 5to, 6to, 7mo periodo académico 2018-2019.
Gallardo, V. B., y Turkienicz, B. (2020). Converting the Schoolyard Into a Learning Space: A Strategy for Public Education. Space and Culture, 23(4), 444–461. https://doi.org/10.1177/1206331218767057
Glaesser, J. (2019). Competence in educational theory and practice: a critical discussion. Oxford Review of Education, 45(1), 70–85.https://doi.org/10.1080/03054985.2018.1493987
Goméz, G. (2008). El uso de la tecnología de la información y la comunicación y el diseño curricular. Revista Educación, 32(1), 77–97. http://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=44032107
Hasni, A., Bousadra, F., Belletête, V., Benabdallah, A., Nicole, M. C., & Dumais, N. (2016). Trends in research on project-based science and technology teaching and learning at K–12 levels: a systematic review. Studies in Science Education, 52(2), 199–231. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057267.2016.1226573
Hoth, J., Kaiser, G., Busse, A., Döhrmann, M., König, J., y Blömeke, S. (2017). Professional competences of teachers for fostering creativity and supporting high-achieving students. ZDM - Mathematics Education, 49(1), 107–120. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-016-0817-5
IDEP, A. (2017). Innovación Educativa. Revista Educación y Ciudad, 33, 11–12. https://doi.org/10.36737/01230425.v0.n33.2017.1644
Iglesias, Marcos; Lozano, Inés, Roldan, I. (2018). La calidad e innovación en la formación docente: un estudio en dos centros educativos. file:///C:/Users/Usuario/Downloads/3090-Texto del artículo-1453-3-10-20180619 (3).pdf
Jociles Rubio, M. I. (2018). La observación participante en el estudio etnográfico de las prácticas sociales. Revista Colombiana de Antropología, 54(1), 121–150. https://doi.org/10.22380/2539472x.386
Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T., y Holubec, E. J. (1999). El aprendizaje cooperativo en el aula- Cooperative Learning in the classroom. In (Ascd). https://s3.amazonaws.com/academia.edu.documents/33597188/El_aprendizaje_cooperativo_en_el_aula.pdf?AWSAccessKeyId=AKIAIWOWYYGZ2Y53UL3A&Expires=1523202421&Signature=14%2FtbeRvkjp271elPkF5TnBK%2FcE%3D&response-content-disposition=inline%3B filename%3DEl_apr
Keinänen, M., Ursin, J., y Nissinen, K. (2018). How to measure students’ innovation competences in higher education: Evaluation of an assessment tool in authentic learning environments. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 58(May), 30–36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2018.05.007
Long, T., Cummins, J., y Waugh, M. (2017). Use of the flipped classroom instructional model in higher education: instructors’ perspectives. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 29(2), 179–200. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12528-016-9119-8
Mena, S., Ortega, A., Serrano, R., Jurado, X., Burbano, M., y Salguero, E. (2019). Currículo de Educación General Básica Media. 2, 527. file:///C:/Users/loco_/Desktop/EGB-Media.pdf
Ministerio de Educación del Ecuador. (2010). Currículo de los niveles de educación obligatoria.
Ministerio de Educación Ecuador. (2019). Currículo de los niveles de educación obligatoria del Subnivel Medio. Ecuador.
Molina-Torres, M. P., y Ortiz-Urbano, R. (2020). Active learning methodologies in teacher training for cultural sustainability. Sustainability (Switzerland), 12(21), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12219043
Moser Opitz, E., Schnepel, S., Krähenmann, H., Jandl, S., Felder, F., y Dessemontet, R. S. (2020). The impact of special education resources and the general and the special education teacher’s competence on pupil mathematical achievement gain in inclusive classrooms. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 0(0), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2020.1821451
Murillo, A. (2017). Marco de referencia para la evaluación de proyectos de innovación educativa - Guía de Aplicación. https://observatorio.tec.mx/edu-news/innovacion-educativa
Nind, M., y Lewthwaite, S. (2018). Methods that teach: developing pedagogic research methods, developing pedagogy. International Journal of Research and Method in Education, 41(4), 398–410. https://doi.org/10.1080/1743727X.2018.1427057
Paulo. (2019). Alternativas emergentes de mediación pedagógica en la sociedad del conocimiento para la educación superior: tecnología educativa, entornos virtuales de aprendizaje y posibles paradigmas globales de innovación aplicables al contexto colombiano. 1–9. https://repository.unad.edu.co/bitstream/handle/10596/30719/vdbedoyag.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y
Pedone, C. (2000). El trabajo de campo y los métodos cualitativos: Necesidad de nuevas reflexiones desde las geografías latinoamericanas. Scripta Nova. Revista Electronica de Geografia y Ciencias Sociales, 4(4), 57. https://doi.org/10.1344/sn2000.4.186
Pliego, N. (2011). Cooperative learning and its advantages in intercultural education. Hekademos: Revista Educativa Digital, 63–76. http://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/articulo?codigo=3746890&info=resumen&idioma=ENG
Propuesta De La Comuidad Educativa. (2016). No Title. https://educacion.gob.ec/wp-content/uploads/downloads/2016/03/PLAN-DECENAL-PROPUESTA.pdf
República del Ecuador. (2008). Derechos del buen vivir. Constitución Del Ecuador, 132.
Roa González, J. (2021). Evaluación de la implantación de la Gamificación como metodología activa en la Educación Secundaria española. ReiDoCrea: Revista Electrónica de Investigación Docencia Creativa, 2001, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.30827/digibug.66357
Rogach, O. V., Frolova, E. V., y Ryabova, T. M. (2019). Trajectories of building a career of a teacher within academic competition. European Journal of Contemporary Education, 8(2), 338–347. https://doi.org/10.13187/ejced.2019.2.338
Roselli, N. D. (2016). El aprendizaje colaborativo: Bases teóricas y estrategias aplicables en la enseñanza universitaria. Propósitos y Representaciones, 4(1), 219–250. https://doi.org/10.20511/pyr2016.v4n1.90
Şahan, H. H. (2020). The relationship of prospective teachers’ educational philosophy and life-long learning tendencies to their teaching-learning process competencies. Pegem Eğitim ve Öğretim Dergisi, 10(4), 1325–1367. https://doi.org/10.14527/pegegog.2020.040
Saltan, F., y Arslan, K. (2017). A comparison of in-service and pre-service teachers’ technological pedagogical content knowledge self-confidence. Cogent Education, 4(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2017.1311501
Scott, C. L., y Luna, C. (2015). El Futuro Del Aprendizaje. 1–19. http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0024/002429/242996s.pdf
Serna, A. (2010). El Método Didáctico. Educación Física y Deporte, 7(1–2), 42–46. http://aprendeenlinea.udea.edu.co/revistas/index.php/educacionfisicaydeporte/article/view/4679
Thomas, S. (2001). Dimensions of secondary school effectiveness: Comparative analyses across regions. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 12(3), 285–322. https://doi.org/10.1076/sesi.12.3.285.3448
Van Griethuijsen, R. A. L. F., Kunst, E. M., van Woerkom, M., Wesselink, R., y Poell, R. F. (2020). Does implementation of competence-based education mediate the impact of team learning on student satisfaction? Journal of Vocational Education and Training, 72(4), 516–535. https://doi.org/10.1080/13636820.2019.1644364
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Eloy Francisco Caranqui Flores, Ximena Margarita Nuñez Torres, Laura Inés Troya Valencia, Carmen Petita Tubay Cañizares (Autor/a)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
