Encouraging undergraduate marketing students to reflect on critical thinking and the digital gender divide

  1. Elena González-Gascón 1
  2. María D. De-Juan-Vigaray 2
  1. 1 Departamento de Estudios Económicos y Financieros, University Miguel Hernández
  2. 2 Department of Marketing, University of Alicante
Revista:
EJIHPE: European Journal of Investigation in Health, Psychology and Education

ISSN: 2174-8144,  2254-9625

Año de publicación: 2021

Volumen: 11

Número: 3

Páginas: 933-952

Tipo: Artículo

DOI: 10.3390/EJIHPE11030069 DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openDialnet editor

Otras publicaciones en: EJIHPE: European Journal of Investigation in Health, Psychology and Education

Objetivos de desarrollo sostenible

Resumen

n today’s society where there is an abundance of accessible, complex, and often false information, critical thinking (CT) is an essential skill so that citizens in general and students in particular can make complex decisions based on scientific evidence, rather than on prejudices, biases, and pre-established beliefs. In this context, the purpose of this study is to discover whether Active Learning (AL) methodology, using different technologies, contributes to improving the CT of the student body, applying it to the Digital Gender Divide (DGD). Three questionnaires were used to collect information, using both a quantitative and a qualitative approach. Open-ended questions are included for fuller answers, which are complemented by content analysis of the recordings and virtual presentations made. The results show that the AL methodology favours the development of CT in the DGD in a remarkable way. Likewise, the various technologies implemented in the methodology (e.g., the Google Applications Site, online round table discussions, role-plays, virtual presentations, and forms) are relevant to improving CT in DGD. It concludes by recommending the implementation of AL with CT as in the one carried out, to help prepare better professionals and raise awareness of how to reduce the DGD.

Referencias bibliográficas

  • Musgrove, A.T.; Powers, R.J.; Rebar, L.C.; Musgrove, G.J. Real or fake? Resources for teaching college students how to identify fake news. Coll. Undergrad. Libr. 2018, 25, 243–260.
  • Oliveira, L.B.; Rueda, D.L.J.; Carbogim, F.C.; Rodrigues, A.R.B.; Püschel, V.A.A. Effectiveness of teaching strategies on the development of critical thinking in undergraduate nursing students: A meta-analysis. Rev. Esc. Enferm. USP 2016, 50, 350–359.
  • Ortega-Sánchez, D.; Pagès, J. La finalidad de la enseñanza de la historia y la inclusión curricular de los problemas sociales desde la perspectiva de los docentes en formación de educación primaria. Soc. Sci. 2020, 9, 9.
  • Roohr, K.; Olivera-Aguilar, M.; Ling, G.; Rikoon, S. A multi-level modeling approach to investigating students’ critical thinking at higher education institutions. Assess. Eval. High. Educ. 2019, 44, 1–15.
  • Graffam, B. Active learning in medical education: Strategies for beginning implementation. Med. Teach. 2007, 29, 38–42.
  • Prince, M.J. Does active learning work? A review of the research. J. Eng. Educ. 2004, 93, 223–231.
  • Cavanagh, M. Students’ experiences of active engagement through cooperative learning activities in lectures. Act. Learn. High. Educ. 2011, 12, 23–33.
  • Peasah, S.K.; Marshall, L.L. The use of debates as an active learning tool in a college of pharmacy healthcare delivery course. Curr. Pharm. Teach. Learn 2017, 9, 433–440.
  • Lampkin, S.J.; Collins, C.; Danison, R.; Lewis, M. Active learning through a debate series in a first-year pharmacy self-care course. Am. J. Pharm. Educ. 2015, 79, 25.
  • Huang, W.D.; Hood, D.W.; Yoo, S.J. Gender divide and acceptance of collaborative Web 2.0 applications for learning in higher education. Internet. High. Educ. 2013, 16, 57–65.
  • White, K.F.; Gurzick, D.; Lutters, W.G. Wiki anxiety: Impediments to implementing wikis for IT support groups. In Proceedings of the 3rd ACM Symposium on Computer Human Interaction for Management of Information Technology, CHIMIT 2009, Baltimore, MD, USA, 14–18 November 2008; Haber, E.M., Lutters, W.G., Lucas, W.T., Jain, J., Hawkey, K., Eds.; ACM: Baltimore, MD, USA, 2009; pp. 64–67.
  • Huber, G.L. Aprendizaje activo y metodologías educativas. Rev. Educ. 2008, 59–81. Available online: https://www.educacionyfp.gob.es/dam/jcr:14edd70f-c97a-4361-8757-ef0c83ce5bea/re200804-pdf.pdf (accessed on 18 August 2021).
  • Siahaan, P.; Chavez Setiawan, Y.; Janeusse Fratiwi, N.; Samsudin, A.; Suhendi, E. The Development of Critical Thinking Skills and Collaborative Skill Profiles Aided by Multimedia-based Integrated Instruction on Light Refraction Material. Univers. J. Educ. Res. 2020, 8, 2599–2613.
  • Prieto, N.L. Aprendizaje activo en el aula universitaria: El caso del aprendizaje basado en problemas. Miscelánea Comillas 2006, 64, 176–196. Available online: https://revistas.comillas.edu/index.php/miscelaneacomillas/article/view/6558/6367 (accessed on 18 August 2021).
  • Chirino, V.; Ramos, A.; Lozano, A. Reenfocando el aprendizaje activo hacia un modelo de aula invertida. Pautas para la acción docente. CIIE. Rev. Congr. Int. Innovación Educ. 2015, 1, 164–174. Available online: https://www.academia.edu/27964665/CIIE_Revista_del_Congreso_Internacional_de_Innovaci%C3%B3n_Educativa (accessed on 18 August 2021).
  • Alsaleh, N.J. Teaching Critical Thinking Skills: Literature Review. TOJET 2020, 19, 21–39. Available online: https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1239945.pdf (accessed on 18 August 2021).
  • Bensley, D.; Crowe, D.; Bernhardt, P.; Buckner, C.; Allman, A. Teaching and assessing critical thinking skills for argument analysis in psychology. Teach. Psychol. 2010, 37, 91–96.
  • McPeck, J. Critical Thinking and Education; St Martin’s Press: New York, NY, USA, 1981; p. 7.
  • Ennis, R.H. Critical thinking assessment. Theory Into Pract. 1993, 32, 179–186.
  • Paul, R.; Elder, L. The Miniature Guide to Critical Thinking Concepts and Tools, 4rd ed.; The Foundation for Critical Thinking: Tomales, CA, USA, 2006; p. 4.
  • López, G. Pensamiento crítico en el aula. Docencia E Investig. 2013, 22, 41–60. Available online: https://www.educacion.to.uclm.es/pdf/revistaDI/3_22_2012.pdf (accessed on 18 August 2021).
  • Pullman, G. Persuasion: History, Theory, Practice; Hackett Indianapolis: Indianapolis, IN, USA, 2013; p. 97.
  • Zelaieta, E.; Camino, I. El desarrollo del pensamiento crítico en la formación inicial del profesorado: Análisis de una estrategia pedagógica desde la visión del alumnado. Rev. Currículum Form. Profr. 2018, 22, 197–214. Available online: https://revistaseug.ugr.es/index.php/profesorado/article/view/9925 (accessed on 18 August 2021).
  • Ortega-Sánchez, D.; Gómez-Trigueros, I.M. MOOCs and NOOCs in the Training of Future Geography and History Teachers: A Comparative Cross-Sectional Study Based on the TPACK Model. IEEE Access 2020, 8, 4035–4042.
  • Barragán, R.; Ruiz, E. Brecha de género e inclusión digital. El potencial de las redes sociales en educación. Profesorado. Rev. De Currículum Form. Profr. 2013, 17, 309–323. Available online: https://recyt.fecyt.es/index.php/profesorado/article/view/41591 (accessed on 18 August 2021).
  • Boucaud, D.; Nabel, M.; Eggers, C. Oxford-Style Debates in a Microbiology Course for Majors: A Method for Delivering Content and Engaging Critical Thinking Skills. JMBE 2013, 14, 2–11.
  • Castro, N.R.; Swart, J. Building a roundtable for a sustainable hazelnut supply chain. J. Clean. Prod. 2017, 168, 1398–1412.
  • Sogunro, O.A. Efficacy of role-playing pedagogy in training leaders: Some reflections. Manag. Dev. 2004, 23, 355–371.
  • Hanna, L.; Barry, J.; Donnelly, R. Using debate to teach pharmacy students about ethical issues. Am. J. Pharm. Educ. 2014, 78, 57.
  • Arrue, M.; Unanue, S.; Merida, D. Guided university debate: Effect of a new teaching-learning strategy for undergraduate nursing students. Nurse Educ. Today 2017, 59, 26–32.
  • Farruggio, P. Bilingual Education: Using a Virtual Guest Speaker and Online Discussion to Expand Latino Preservice Teachers’ Consciousness. Multicult. Educ. 2009, 17, 33–37.
  • Fadzila, H.M.; Abd Raufb, R.A. Learning Environmental Issues through Documentaries: Exploring the Perceptions of University Students. Int. J. Innov. Creat. Chang. 2019, 7, 227–242. Available online: https://www.ijicc.net/images/vol7iss6/7615_Fadzil_2019_E_R.pdf (accessed on 18 August 2021).
  • Franco, S. A doctoral seminar in qualitative research methods: Lessons learned. International. J. Dr. Stud. 2016, 11, 323–339.
  • Hoshi, S. Beyond classroom discourse: Learning as participation in native speaker–learner and learner–learner interactions. Foreign Lang. Ann. 2015, 48, 755–770.
  • Cabezas González, M.; Casillas Martín, S.; Sanches-Ferreira, M.; Teixeira Diogo, F.L. ¿Condicionan el género y la edad el nivel de competencia digital? Un estudio con estudiantes universitarios. Fonseca J. Commun. 2017, 15, 109–125.
  • Centeno Moreno, G.; Cubo Delgado, S. Evaluación de la competencia digital y las actitudes hacia las TIC del alumnado universitario. RIE 2013, 31, 517–536.
  • Sevillano-García, M.L.; Vázquez-Cano, E. The Impact of Digital Mobile Devices in Higher Education. J. Educ. Techno. Soc. 2015, 18, 106–118. Available online: https://www.jstor.org/stable/jeductechsoci.18.1.106 (accessed on 18 August 2021).
  • Draucker, C.B.; Martsolf, D.S.; Ross, R.; Rusk, T.B. Theoretical sampling and category development in grounded theory. Qual. Health Res. 2007, 17, 1137–1148.
  • Battaglia, M. Nonprobability Sampling. In Encyclopedia of Survey Research Methods; Lavrakas, P.J., Ed.; SAGE Publications, Inc.: Thousand Oaks, CA, USA, 2008; pp. 524–527.
  • Palinkas, L.A.; Horwitz, S.M.; Green, C.A.; Wisdom, J.P.; Duan, N.; Hoagwood, K. Purposeful sampling for qualitative data collection and analysis in mixed method implementation research. Adm. Policy Ment. Health 2015, 42, 533–544.
  • Barbour, R. Doing Focus Groups; SAGE Publications: London, UK, 2007; p. 174.
  • Rao, D.; Stupans, I. Exploring the potential of role-play in higher education: Development of a typology and teacher guidelines. Innov. Educ. Teach. Int. 2012, 49, 427–436.
  • Evans, R.; Kotchetkova, I. Qualitative research and deliberative methods: Promise or peril? Qual. Res. 2009, 9, 625–643.
  • Guest, G.; Bunce, A.; Johnson, L. How many interviews are enough? An experiment with data saturation and variability. Field Methods 2006, 18, 59–82.
  • Olivares, S.; Wong, M. Medición de la autopercepción de la disposición al pensamiento crítico en estudiantes de medicina. In Proceedings of the XII Congreso Nacional de Investigación Educativa. Aportes y Reflexiones de la Investigación para la Equidad y la Mejora Educativas, Guanajuato, COMIE, Ciudad de México, Mexico, 18–22 November 2013; pp. 1–12. Available online: http://www.comie.org.mx/congreso/memoriaelectronica/v12/doc/0430.pdf (accessed on 18 August 2021).
  • Barron, B. When smart groups fail. J. Learn. Sci. 2003, 12, 307–359.
  • Blatchford, P.; Kutnick, P.; Baines, E.; Galton, M. Toward a social pedagogy of classroom group work. Int. J. Educ. Res. 2003, 39, 153–172.
  • Kelle, U. Combining qualitative and quantitative methods in research practice: Purposes and advantages. Qual. Res. Psychol. 2006, 3, 293–311.
  • Facione, P. Pensamiento Crítico: ¿Qué es y por qué es importante? Insight Assess. 2007, 22, 23–56. Available online: https://www.insightassessment.com/wp-content/uploads/PensamientoCriticoFacione.pdf (accessed on 18 August 2021).
  • De-Juan-Vigaray, M.D.; González-Gascón, E. Aprendizaje activo con proceso reflexivo: Una innovación docente para incrementar el mainstream de género en retailing. In El compromiso Académico y Social a Través de la Investigación e Innovación Educativas en la Enseñanza Superior; Roig-Vila, R., Ed.; Octaedro: Barcelona, Spain, 2018; pp. 541–551. Available online: http://hdl.handle.net/10045/87652 (accessed on 18 August 2021).
  • Gokhale, A.A. Collaborative learning enhances critical thinking. J. Technol. Educ. 1995, 7, 22–30.
  • De-Juan Vigaray, M.D. (Commercial Distribution, 2020) 22042 Commercial Distribution Syllabus Academic Year 2020–2021. Objectives and Competences. Available online: https://cvnet.cpd.ua.es/Guia-Docente/?wlengua=en&wcodasi=22042&scaca=2020-21# (accessed on 18 August 2021).
  • Petrucco, C.; Ferranti, C. Developing Critical Thinking in online search. J. E-Learn. Knowl. Soc. 2017, 13, 35–45. Available online: https://www.learntechlib.org/p/180979/ (accessed on 18 August 2021).
  • Yen, Y.C.; Hou, H.T.; Chang, K.E. Applying role-playing strategy to enhance learners’ writing and speaking skills in EFL courses using Facebook and Skype as learning: A case study in Taiwan. Comput. Assist. Lang. Learn. 2015, 28, 383–406.
  • Rodger, D.; Stewart-Lord, A. Students’ perceptions of debating as a learning strategy: A qualitative study. Nurse Educ. Pract. 2020, 42, 102681.
  • Koklanaris, N.; MacKenzie, A.P.; Fino, M.E.; Arslan, A.A.; Seubert, D.E. Debate preparation/participation: An active, effective learning tool. Teach. Learn. Med. 2008, 20, 235–238.
  • Berland, L.K.; Reiser, B.J. Making sense of argumentation and explanation. Sci. Educ. 2009, 93, 26–55.
  • Sampieri, R.H. Metodología de la Investigación: Las Rutas Cuantitativa, Cualitativa y Mixta; McGraw Hill: Mexico, México, 2018; p. 439.
  • Vandall-Walker, V.; Park, C.; Munich, K. Outcomes of Modified Formal Online. Debating in Graduate Nursing Education. Int. J. Nurs. Educ. Scholarsh. 2012, 9, 1–14.
Fuente de los datos: Dialnet