Content validity of an analytical rubric of the design of didactic sequences as an improvement of the pedagogical practice of the teaching team from the socioformation approach

0Citations
Citations of this article
34Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

The educational context traditionally determines an administrative practice of planning and evaluation processes. In this sense, there is a lack of instruments to evaluate the design of didactic sequences with the challenge of transferring knowledge that tackles contextual problems and make a teaching intervention with methodological bases for solving problems. This study aims to describe the design of a didactic sequence rubric to improve pedagogical practice. The methodology was implemented using an instrumental study of content validity based on the socioformation approach with the following steps: 1) analysis of similar instruments; 2) construction of a rubric with the socioformation approach; 3) revision and improvement of the instrument by experts; 4) application of the instrument to a pilot group; and 5) validation of content by a group of judges in the educational area. The results of the Aiken’s V with the significance of p <0.05 show a value above 8.0. Some items whose level of significance was 0.71 were eliminated. The reliability analysis shows a value of Cronbach’s alpha of 0.891; the Aiken and Cronbach coefficient methodologies applied determined the rubric’s content validity. In conclusion, a pertinent instrument to evaluate the design of didactic sequences is presented, and the need to extend this study with an exploratory factor analysis that determines its construct validity is set out.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Guevara-Rodríguez, G., & Veytia-Bucheli, M. G. (2020). Content validity of an analytical rubric of the design of didactic sequences as an improvement of the pedagogical practice of the teaching team from the socioformation approach. Revista Electronica Educare, 25(1), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.15359/ree.25-1.20

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free