Clases de inglés como escenarios para un pensamiento superior y autonomía

Contenido principal del artículo

Yomaira Angélica Herreño Contreras

Resumen

Este documento describe los hallazgos preliminares de un proyecto de investigación en torno a la implementación de metas SMART (Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Realistic, and Time-based) en contextos de EILE (Enseñanza del Inglés como Lengua Extranjera) con el fin de fomentar habilidades de pensamiento superior (Analizar, Evaluar, Crear). El estudio se realizó en la Universidad Santo Tomás (Villavicencio-Colombia), bajo el enfoque de la investigación cualitativa e implementó el ciclo de investigación- acción. Luego, los instrumentos de recolección de datos fueron el diario de los estudiantes, una rúbrica para evaluar la habilidad de habla y una encuesta. Los resultados revelaron que la población (estudiantes de sexto semestre de derecho) adquirió destrezas en el análisis, la evaluación y la creación a partir del estudio de problemáticas actuales. Además, dieron los primeros pasos hacia interacciones comunicativas más elaboradas, y avanzaron en la senda hacia la autonomía.

Detalles del artículo

Cómo citar
Herreño Contreras, Y. A. (2021). Clases de inglés como escenarios para un pensamiento superior y autonomía. Shimmering Words: Research and Pedagogy E-Journal, 10(1), 99-112. Recuperado a partir de http://revistas.ustatunja.edu.co/index.php/shimmering/article/view/2106
Sección
Artículos-10
Biografía del autor/a

Yomaira Angélica Herreño Contreras

B.A in Modern Languages (Universidad Surcolombiana) and Master in Compared Literature and Literary Translation (Universitat Pompeu Fabra). English Professor at Universidad Santo Tomás in Villavicencio and researcher subscribed to DRIE (Doing Research to Improve Education), research group of the Foreign Language Institute.

Citas

Anderson, L., & Krathwohl, D. (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives.

Addison Wesley Longman.

Ariza Ariza, J. A. (2008). Unveiling students’ understanding of autonomy: puzzling out a path to learning beyond the EFL classroom. PROFILE Issues in Teachers` Professional Development, (10), 47-74. Retrieved from: http://www.scielo.org.co/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1657-07902008000200004&lng=en&tlng=en.

Bloom, B., Engelhart, M., Furst, E, Hill, W., & Krathwohl, D. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives. The classification of educational goals. Handbook I: cognitive domain. David McKay.

Buendía Arias, X. P. (2015). A comparison of Chinese and Colombian university EFL students regarding learner autonomy. PROFILE Issues in Teachers’ Professional Development, 17(1), 35-53. Retrieved from: http://dx.doi.org/10.15446/profile.v17n1.41821.

Burns, A. (2009). Action research in second language teacher education. In A. Burns & J. C. Richards (eds.), The Cambridge guide to second language teacher education (pp. 289-297). Cambridge.

Chen, M. (2016). Theoretical framework for integrating higher-order thinking into L2 speaking. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 6(2). 17-226. Retrieved from: http://dx.doi.org/10.17507/tpls.0602.01.

Cirocki, A. (2016). Developing learner autonomy through tasks: theory, research, practice.
Lingua Books.

Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2007). Research methods in education. Routledge.

De Silva, R. (2014). Rubrics for assessment: their effects on ESL students’ authentic task
performance. [Conference]. 4th CELC Symposium. Alternative Pedagogies in the English Language & Communication Classroom, Singapore, National University of Singapore. Retrieved from: http://www.nus.edu.sg/celc/research/books/4th%20Symposium%20proceedings/19).%20
Radhikda%20De%20Silva.pdf

De Vaus, D. (2014). Surveys in social research. 6th ed. Routledge.

Ghanizadeh, A. (2017). The Interplay between reflective thinking, critical thinking, self-monitoring, and academic achievement in higher education.

High Educ, 74. 101–114. Retrieved from: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-| 016-0031-yGlaser, B., & Holton, J. (2004). Remodeling grounded theory. Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 5(2), Article 4.

Glaser, B., & Strauss, A. (1999). The discovery of grounded theory. Strategies for qualitative
research. Aldine Transaction.

Lazarus, A. (2004). Reality check: is your behavior aligned with organizational goals? The Physician Executive, 30(5). 50-52.

Lewis, A., & Smith, D. (1993). Defining higher order thinking. Theory Into Practice, 32 (3), 131-137.

Mills, G. E. (2003). Action research: a guide for the teacher researcher: Merrill/Prentice Hall.
Pineda, D. (2014). The feasibility of assessing teenagers’ oral English language performance with a rubric. PROFILE Issues in Teachers’ Professional Development, 16(1), 181-198. Retrieved from:https://revistas.unal.edu.co/index.php/profile/article/view/43203/44484.

Rubin, J. (2015). Using goal setting and task analysis to enhance task-based language learning
and teaching. [Conference]. SCOLT, Decatur,

Georgia State University. Retrieved from: https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1080303.pdf

Moeller, A., Theiler, J., & Wu, C. (2012). Goal setting and student achievement: Alongitudinal study. The Modern Language Journal, 96(2), 153-169. Retrieved from: https://www.jstor.org/stable/41684067?seq=1

Vollstedt M., & Rezat, S. (2019) An introduction to grounded theory with a special focus on axial coding and the coding paradigm. In G. Kaiser & N.

Presmeg (eds.), Compendium for early career researchers in mathematics Education. ICME-13
Monographs. Springer, Cham. Retrieved from: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-15636-7_4

Walton D. (2018). Legal reasoning and argumentation. In G. Bongiovanni.,

G. Postema., A. Rotolo., G. Sartor., C. Valentini., & D. Walton (eds.), Handbook of legal reasoning and argumentation. Springer, Dordrecht. Retrieved from: https://doi-org.crai-ustadigital.usantotomas.edu.co/10.1007/978-90-481-9452-0_3

Wijetunge, T. (2019). Promoting speaker autonomy and language confidence through Bloom’s taxonomy-based lessons. Proceedings of the International Conference on Future of Education, 2(1), 73-84. Retrieved from:https://doi.org/10.17501/26307413.2019.2108