Innovación Didáctica en la Enseñanza de Ciencias Experimentales: Estrategias Activas para la Formación de Competencias en Estudiantes Universitarios de Física y Química
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.69639/arandu.v12i2.1017Palabras clave:
innovación didáctica, ciencias experimentales, aprendizaje activo, competencias científicas, educación universitariaResumen
El estudio descrito en este artículo, titulado Enseñanza Innovadora en las Ciencias Experimentales: Estrategias Activas para el Desarrollo de Competencias en Estudiantes Universitarios de Física y Química, tuvo como objetivo evaluar el impacto de los métodos de enseñanza activos en el desarrollo de competencias científicas, cognitivas y afectivas en estudiantes universitarios de asignaturas experimentales. Ante las problemáticas de baja motivación, métodos tradicionales y la limitada conexión con el mundo profesional en las disciplinas de Física y Química, se implementó una intervención metodológica utilizando estrategias activas como el Aprendizaje Basado en Problemas (ABP), el aprendizaje cooperativo, el descubrimiento guiado y entornos de simulación virtual. El enfoque metodológico fue mixto con un diseño cuasi-experimental, que involucró a 148 estudiantes de primer y segundo año de pregrado en ciencias experimentales, asignados a grupos de control y experimentales. Se utilizaron instrumentos cuantitativos como rúbricas de evaluación de competencias, escalas de motivación, y pruebas pretest y postest, junto con entrevistas y diarios reflexivos de los estudiantes como instrumentos cualitativos. Los resultados mostraron mejoras significativas en el rendimiento académico, el desarrollo de habilidades como la colaboración y la resolución de problemas, y el aumento de la motivación intrínseca. Los estudiantes mostraron una percepción positiva del aprendizaje experimental y su utilidad. Estos hallazgos empíricos son ideales para cambiar la metodología de los programas de física y química en niveles universitarios donde se integren de manera sistemática formar críticos en el desarrollo de ejercicios científicos.
Descargas
Citas
Assaf, N. F. (2025). Investigating the efficacy of interactive simulations (PhET) in improving students' understanding of chemistry concepts in a private high school in Abu Dhabi. Proceedings of the Global Conference on Innovations in Education, 2(1), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.33422/eduglobalconf.v2i1.790
Baleni, Z. G. (2015). Online formative assessment in higher education: Its pros and cons. Electronic Journal of e-Learning, 13(4), 228–236.
Bernal Párraga, A. P., et al. (2025). The impact of artificial intelligence on personalized learning in English language education. Ciencia Latina Revista Científica Multidisciplinar, 9(1), 5500–5518. https://doi.org/10.37811/cl_rcm.v9i1.16234
Bernal, A., & Guarda, T. (2020). La gestión de la información es factor determinante para elaborar estrategias innovadoras en política educativa pública. Iberian Journal of Information Systems and Technologies, E27, 35–48. https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/487026121.pdf#page=35
Bloom, B. S. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals. Handbook I: Cognitive domain. New York, NY: David McKay Company.
Bonwell, C. C., & Eison, J. A. (1991). Active learning: Creating excitement in the classroom. ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report No. 1.
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
Brundage, M. J., Meltzer, D. E., & Singh, C. (2023). Peer interaction facilitates co-construction of knowledge in quantum mechanics. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 19(2), 020133. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.19.020133
Bybee, R. W., Taylor, J. A., Gardner, A., Van Scotter, P., Powell, J. C., Westbrook, A., & Landes, N. (2006). The BSCS 5E instructional model: Origins and effectiveness. Colorado Springs, CO: BSCS.
Campbell, D. T., & Stanley, J. C. (2015). Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Designs for Research. Ravenio Books.
Chi, M. T. H., & Wylie, R. (2014). The ICAP framework: Linking cognitive engagement to active learning outcomes. Educational Psychologist, 49(4), 219–243.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2014.965823
Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2018). Research methods in education (8.ª ed.). London, UK: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315456539
Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (4.ª ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2018). Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods Research (3.ª ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications
Crouch, C. H., & Mazur, E. (2001). Peer instruction: Ten years of experience and results. American Journal of Physics, 69(9), 970–977. https://doi.org/10.1119/1.1374249
De Jong, T., Linn, M. C., & Zacharia, Z. C. (2013). Physical and virtual laboratories in science and engineering education. Science, 340(6130), 305–308. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1230579
Field, A. (2013). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics (4.ª ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
Freeman, S., Eddy, S. L., McDonough, M., Smith, M. K., Okoroafor, N., Jordt, H., & Wenderoth, M. P. (2014). Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111(23), 8410–8415. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1319030111
Gay, L. R., Mills, G. E., & Airasian, P. (2012). Educational research: Competencies for analysis and applications (10.ª ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education
Hake, R. R. (1998). Interactive-engagement versus traditional methods: A six-thousand-student survey of mechanics test data for introductory physics courses. American Journal of Physics, 66(1), 64–74. https://doi.org/10.1119/1.18809
Henderson, C., & Dancy, M. H. (2007). Barriers to the use of research-based instructional strategies: The influence of both individual and situational characteristics. Physical Review Special Topics - Physics Education Research, 3(2), 020102. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevSTPER.
Israel, M., & Hay, I. (2006). Research ethics for social scientists: Between ethical conduct and regulatory compliance. London, UK: SAGE Publications. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781849209779
Jara Chiriboga, S. P., et al. (2025). Inteligencia artificial y aprendizaje personalizado en lenguas extranjeras: Un análisis de los chatbots y los asistentes virtuales en educación. Revista Científica De Salud Y Desarrollo Humano, 6(1), 882–905. https://doi.org/10.61368/r.s.d.h.v6i1.515
Karim, M. R., et al. (2020). The combined impact of the flipped classroom and collaborative learning on students' learning of key marketing concepts. International Journal of Instruction, 13(3), 1–16.
Kvale, S., & Brinkmann, S. (2009). InterViews: Learning the craft of qualitative research interviewing (2.ª ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
Lahlali, M., et al. (2024). PhET interactive simulations as an effective tool for teaching chemistry. International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology, 9(4), 123–130.
Likert, R. (1932). A technique for the measurement of attitudes. Archives of Psychology, 140, 1–55.
Makransky, G., Terkildsen, T. S., & Mayer, R. E. (2019). Adding immersive virtual reality to a science lab simulation causes more presence but less learning. Learning and Instruction, 60, 225–236. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2017.12.007
Maxwell, J. A. (2021). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach (3.ª ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
Mazur, E. (1997). Peer instruction: A user's manual. Prentice Hall.
Mertens, D. M. (2019). Research and evaluation in education and psychology: Integrating diversity with quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods (5.ª ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
Michael, J. (2006). Where's the evidence that active learning works? Advances in Physiology Education, 30(4), 159–167. https://doi.org/10.1152/advan.00053.2006
Mohafa, M., et al. (2022). Integration of interactive computer simulations in teaching and learning chemistry. Journal of Technology and Science Education, 12(2), 268–278. https://doi.org/10.3926/jotse.2682
National Research Council. (2000). Inquiry and the National Science Education Standards: A Guide for Teaching and Learning. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/9596
Patton, M. Q. (2015). Qualitative research & evaluation methods: Integrating theory and practice (4.ª ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
Piaget, J. (1970). Piaget's Theory (G. Gellerier & J. Langer, Trans.). En P. H. Mussen (Ed.), Carmichael's Manual of Child Psychology (3.ª ed., Vol. 1). New York, NY: Wiley
Prince, M. (2004). Does active learning work? A review of the research. Journal of Engineering Education, 93(3), 223–231. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2168-9830.2004.tb00809.x
Resnik, D. B. (2011). What is ethics in research & why is it important. National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences.
https://www.niehs.nih.gov/research/resources/bioethics/whatis/index.cfm
Sieber, J. E. (1992). Planning ethically responsible research: A guide for students and internal review boards. Newbury Park, CA: SAGE Publications.
Theobald, E. J., et al. (2020). Active learning narrows achievement gaps for underrepresented students in undergraduate science, technology, engineering, and math. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 117(12), 6476–6483.
https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1916903117
Wallace, C. S., Prather, E. E., Milsom, J. A., Johns, K., & Manne, S. (2020). Students taught by a first-time instructor using active learning teaching strategies outperform students taught by a highly-regarded traditional instructor. arXiv preprint arXiv:2004.09684. https://arxiv.org/abs/2004.09684
Wieman, C. E., Adams, W. K., & Perkins, K. K. (2008). PhET: Simulations that enhance learning. Science, 322(5902), 682–683. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1161948
Wood, D. F. (2003). Problem based learning. BMJ, 326(7384), 328–330. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.326.7384.328
Publicado
Cómo citar
Número
Sección
Licencia
Derechos de autor 2025 John Eduardo Guiñanzaca Vaca
Esta obra está bajo una licencia internacional Creative Commons Atribución 4.0.
Esta publicación está bajo una 
