Email this article 
Hide
Show all
Cooperation for institutional strengthening: shared knowledge in the quest for improved teaching
Abstract
This article presents an evaluation of the institutional cooperation project entitled “Universidad y sociedad del conocimiento. Fortalecimiento institucional en áreas dedicadas a la enseñanza universitaria con nuevas tecnologías” (FEUNT, Universities and knowledge society. Institutional strengthening in areas dedicated to new technology-mediated university teaching), funded by the Spanish Agency for International Development Cooperation (AECID) and undertaken by the University of Santiago de Compostela (USC), Spain, and the National University of Córdoba (UNC), Argentina. The main aim of the four-year project was to incorporate technologies into the institution, with emphasis on improved teaching and institutional conditions. By combining top-down, bottom-up and middle-out strategies (Cummings et al., 2005), the project articulated five programmes (research, lecturer training, technological improvement, teaching materials production, and dissemination and open knowledge), in which lecturer training, educational technology research and technology investment were interrelated. Taking needs into account, investment was made in core technologies and peripheral learning technologies (Salmon, 2005) that allowed the activities to be carried out, while others showing new potential were proposed. The aim of the work was to mobilise institutional culture in order to bring changes in teaching practices (Hargreaves, 2003). Lecturer training was carried out by means of workshops focusing on teaching materials production, viewed as an artefact that enabled teaching staff to reflect on decision-making when confronted with technology-mediated teaching processes (Cochran-Smith & Lytle, 2001). The results of the evaluation evidenced the success of a proposal based on strengthening a working group (Educational Technology Area) to support teaching staff. They also highlighted several weaknesses, particularly in relation to the project’s sustainability.
Keywords
References
BATES, A. W. (2001). Cómo gestionar el cambio tecnológico. Estrategias para los responsables de centros universitarios. Barcelona: Gedisa. 288 pages.
COCHRAN-SMITH, M.; LYTLE, S. L. (2001). “Beyond Certainty: Taking an inquiry stance on practice”. In: A. LIEBERMAN, L. MILLER (eds). Teachers Caught in the Action: Professional Development That Matters. New York: Teacher College Columbia University. Pages 45-59.
CUBAN, L. (2001). Oversold & Underused. USA: Harvard University Press. 256 pages.
CUMMINGS, R. et al. (2005). “Middle-Out Approaches to Reform of University Teaching and Learning: Champions Striding between the Top-Down and Bottom-Up Approaches”. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning. Vol. 6, No 1, pages 1-18.
CZERNIEWICZ, L.; BROWN, C. (2009). “A study of the relationship between institutional policy, organizational culture and e-learning use in four South African universities”. Computers & Education. Vol. 53, No 1, pages 121-131.
DE SOUSA, B. (2012). “La universidad en el siglo XXI. Para una reforma democrática y emancipadora de la universidad”. In: F. RAMÍREZ (coord.). Transformar la Universidad para transformar la sociedad. Quito: Secretaría Nacional de Educación Superior, Ciencia, Tecnología e Innovación. Pages 139-194.
DUART, J. M.; GIL, M.; PUJOL, M.; CASTAÑO, J. (2008). La universidad en la sociedad red. Usos de internet en educación superior. Barcelona: Ariel. 354 pages.
DUART, J. M.; LUPIÁÑEZ, F. (2005). “E-strategias en la introducción y uso de las TIC en la universidad”. In: J. M. DUART, F. LUPIÁÑEZ (coords). Las TIC en la universidad: estrategia y transformación institucional [online monograph]. RUSC. Universities and Knowledge Society Journal. Vol. 2, No 1, pages 5-32. UOC. [Accessed: 15 October 2012].
EDELSTEIN, G. et al. (2009). “El caso de la Universidad Nacional de Córdoba”. In: A. GEWERC (coord.). Paradojas y dilemas de la Universidad en la sociedad del conocimiento. Barcelona: Davinci. Pages 134-151.
GEWERC, A. (2007a). “Sobre brechas digitales y puentes. Apuntes para analizar las políticas de inclusión digital”. In: X. M. CID FERNÁNDEZ, X. RODRÍGUEZ RODRÍGUEZ (coords). A fenda dixital. Santiago de Compostela: Tórculo. Pages 135-142.
GEWERC, A. (coord.) (2007b). Modelos de enseñanza y aprendizaje presentes en los usos de plataformas de e-learning en universidades españolas y propuestas de desarrollo [research report]. MEC. [Accessed: 21 December 2012].
GEWERC, A. (coord.) (2009). Paradojas y dilemas de las universidades iberoamericanas ante la sociedad del conocimiento. Barcelona: Davinci. 221 pages.
GEWERC, A. (coord.) (2010). El lugar de las TIC en la enseñanza universitaria: estudio de casos en Iberoamérica. Malaga: Ediciones Aljibe. 258 pages.
GLASER, B. G. (2002). “Constructivist Grounded Theory?” [online periodical]. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung / Forum: Qualitative Social Research, Vol. 3, No 3. [Accessed: 9 April 2012].
GUNI (GLOBAL UNIVERSITY NETWORK FOR INNOVATION) (2008). La educación superior en el mundo: nuevos retos y roles emergentes para el desarrollo humano y social. Informe anual de Global University Network for Innovation. Madrid: Mundi Prensa.
HANNA, D. E. (2003). “Organizational Models in Higher Education, Past and Future”. In: M. MOORE, W. G. ANDERSON (eds). The Handbook of Distance Education. New York: Ehrlbaum Publishers. Pages 67-78.
HARGREAVES, A. (2003). Teaching in the knowledge society. Education in the age of the insecurity. New York: Teacher College Press. Columbia University. 230 pages.
LAW, N.; PELGRUM, W. J.; PLOMP, T. (2008). Pedagogy and ICT use in schools around the world. Findings from the IEA SITES 2006 Study. United Kingdom: Springer & Comparative Education Research Centre. The University of Hong Kong. 296 pages.
LINCOLN, Y. S.; GUBA, E. G. (1986). “Research, evaluation and policy analysis: heuristics and disciplined inquiry”. Policy Studies Review. Vol. 5, No 3, pages 546-565.
MCNAUGHT, C. et al. (2000). Developing a framework for a useable and useful inventory of computer-facilitated learning and support materials in Australian universities. [Evaluations and Investigations Program]. Canberra: DETYA. [Accessed: 9 September 2010].
MONTERO, L. (ed.) (2007). O valor do envoltorio. Un estudo da influencia das TIC nos centros educativos. Vigo: Edicións Xerais. 462 pages.
MUMTAZ, S. (2000). “Factors affecting teachers’ use of information and communication technology: a review of the literature”. Journal of Information Technology for Teacher Education. Vol. 9, No 3, pages 319-341.
SALINAS, J. (2008). Modelos didácticos en los campus virtuales universitarios: Patrones metodológicos generados por los profesores en procesos de enseñanza-aprendizaje en entornos virtuales [research report]. MEC. [Accessed: 21 December 2012].
SALMON, G. (2005). “Flying not flapping: a strategic framework for e-learning and pedagogical innovation in higher education institutions”. ALT-J. Vol. 13, No 3, pages 201-218.
SELWYN, N. (2010). “Degrees of digital division: reconsidering digital inequalities and contemporary higher education”. In: Redefining the Digital Divide in Higher Education [online monograph]. RUSC. Universities and Knowledge Society Journal. Vol. 7, No 1, pages 28-37. UOC. [Accessed: 20 October 2012].
SHOHAM, S.; PERRY, M. (2009). “Knowledge management as a mechanism for technological and organizational change management in Israeli universities”. High Education. Vol. 57, No 2, pages 227-246.
SOMEKH, B. (2008). “Factors affecting teachers’ pedagogical adoption of ICT”. In: J. VOOGT, G. KNEZEK (eds). International Handbook of Information, Technology in Primary and Secondary Education. New York: Springer. Pages 449-460.
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.7238/rusc.v10i2.1737
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
RUSC. Universities and Knowledge Society Journal is an e-journal edited by the Universitat Oberta de Catalunya (Barcelona).
The texts published in this journal are – unless indicated otherwise – covered by the Creative Commons Spain Attribution 3.0 licence. You may copy, distribute, transmit and adapt the work, provided you attribute it (authorship, journal name, publisher) in the manner specified by the author(s) or licensor(s). The full text of the licence can be consulted here: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/es/deed.en.