Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

ECLECTIC as a learning ecosystem for higher education disruption

  • Long Paper
  • Published:
Universal Access in the Information Society Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The learning teaching paradigm in higher education is currently undergoing great transformation due to the irrefutable imposition, on the one hand, of the new technologies and, on the other, by the characteristics (habits and abilities) presented by the students that arrive to universities. These factors are not compatible with the teaching methodologies commonly used to date, that is, with the traditional model (lectures) consolidated in the nineteenth century. In this context, teachers who resort to active learning have attracted a lot of attention, since this type of approach stimulates students’ motivation and autonomy to acquire more competencies and is one of the guidelines of the European Norms and Guidelines for Quality in Higher Education. Thus, as a way of responding to these challenges, an innovative pilot project was developed, from the pedagogical point of view, implemented in a first cycle course (Management and Information Systems) using active methodologies. In this framework, an approach called ECLECTIC was developed and implemented with the use of three active learning techniques (group project, peer review and peer teaching) in the “New Trends in IT” course, from first semester, second year. The results obtained are very promising, since they have allowed students to engage in and out of the classroom and have resulted in a high-rate course success.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. ECLECTIC—according to Cambridge dictionary, is “Methods, beliefs, ideas, etc. that are eclectic combine whatever seem the best or most useful things from many different areas or systems.”

  2. www.b-on.pt.

  3. http://vark-learn.com/.

  4. www.b-on.pt.

References

  1. Holzinger, A., Nischelwitzer, A., Meisenberger, M.: Lifelong-learning support by m-learning: example scenarios. eLearn (2005). https://doi.org/10.1145/1125280.1125284

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Kapp, K.: The Gamification of Learning and Instruction: Game-Based Methods and Strategies for Training and Education. Wiley, New York (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Office, Australian National Audit: Innovation in the Public Sector: Enabling better Performance, Driving New Directions. National Audit Office, Canberra (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  4. García-Peñalvo, F.J., Colomo-Palacios, R.: Innovative teaching methods in engineering. Eng. Educ. 31(3), 689–693 (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Fonseca, D., Conde, M.Á., García-Peñalvo, F.J.: Improving the information society skills: is knowledge accessible for all? Univers. Access Inf. Soc. 17(2), 229–245 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10209-017-0548-6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Vanderlinde, R., Van Braak, J.: The gap between educational research and practice: views of teachers, school leaders, intermediaries and researchers. Br. Educ. Res. J. 36(2), 299–316 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1080/01411920902919257

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Sun, J., Hsu, Y.: Effect of interactivity on learner perceptions in web-based instruction. Comput. Hum. Behav. 29(1), 171–184 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2012.08.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Giesbers, B., Rienties, B., Tempelaar, D., Gijselaers, W.: Investigating the relations between motivation, tool use, participation, and performance in an e-learning course using web-videoconferencing. Comput. Hum. Behav. 29(1), 285–292 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2012.09.005

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Ma, B., Naha, S., Tran, F.: Future Reality: Virtual, Augmented & Mixed Reality (VR, AR & MR) Primer. BofA Merrill Lynch (2016). http://www.alexboch.com/uploads/3/0/9/6/30960525/future_reality_sep_2016.pdf

  10. Buckley, R.: Why the education sector is ripe for digital disruption (2015). https://www.icio.com/management/insight/item/why-education-sector-is-ripe-for-digital-disruption. Accessed 7 Nov 2018

  11. Walker, J.D., Cotner, S.H., Baepler, P.M., Decker, M.D.: A delicate balance: integrating active learning into a large lecture course. CBE Life Sci. Educ. 7, 361–367 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Araújo, U.F.: The fourth educational revolution: the change of times, spaces and relations in the school from the use of technologies and social inclusion. ETD Educ. Temát. Digit. 12(1), 31–48 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Chickering, A.W., Gamson, Z.F.: Seven principles for good practice. AAHE Bull. 39, 3–7 (1987)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Freeman, S., Eddy, S.L., McDonough, M., Smith, M.K., Okoroafor, N., Jordt, H., Wenderoth, M.P.: Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 111(23), 8410–8415 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Fraser, J.M., Tinman, A.L., Miller, K., Dowd, J.E., Tucker, L., Mazur, E.: Teaching and physics education research: bridging the gap. Rep. Prog. Phys. 77, 1–17 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Maia, E.R., Júnior, J.F.L., Pereira, J.S., Eloi, A.C., Gomes, C.C., Nobre, M.M.F.: Validation of active teaching–learning methodologies in the promotion of child food health. Rev. Nutr. 25(1), 79–88 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Jossey-Bass Bonwell, C.C., Eison, J.A.: Active learning: creating excitement in the classroom. ASHE–ERIC higher education rep. no. 1, The George Washington University, School of Education and Human Development, Washington, DC (1991)

  18. Davis, B.G.: Tools for Teaching, 2nd edn. Jossey-Bass Publishers, San Francisco (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Wentzel, K.R., Wigfield, A.: Handbook of Motivation at School. Taylor and Francis-library, Boca Raton (2009)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  20. Felder, R.M., Brent, R.: Navigating the bumpy road to student centered instruction (1996). http://www4.ncsu.edu/unity/lockers/users/f/felder/public/Papers/Resist.html.Accessed 10 Dec 2018

  21. European Commission: The digital competence framework 2.0 (2017). https://ec.europa.eu/jrc/en/digcomp/digital-competence-framework.Accessed 16 Dec 2018

  22. Gregg, D.G., Kulkarni, U.R., Vinzé, A.S.: Understanding the philosophical underpinnings of software engineering research in information systems. Inf. Syst. Front. 3(2), 169–183 (2001)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Hevner, A., March, S., Park, J., Ram, S.: Design science in information systems research. Manag. Inf. Syst. Q. 28(1), 75–105 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Connelly, L.M.: Reviewing the literature. Medsurg Nurs. 19(4), 245–246 (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  25. Peffers, K., Rothenberger, M., Tuunanen, T., Vaezi, R.: Design science research evaluation. In: International Conference on Design Science Research in Information Systems, pp. 398–410. Springer, Berlin (2012)

  26. Archer, L.B.: Systematic method for designers. In: Cross, N. (ed.) Developments in Design Methodology, vol. 1. WIley, New York (1984)

    Google Scholar 

  27. Eekels, J., Roozenburg, N.F.: A methodological comparison of the structures of scientific research and engineering design: their similarities and differences. Des. Stud. 12(4), 197–203 (1991)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Mcphee, K.: Design theory and software design. Paper presented at the Department of Computer Science, University of Alberta (1997)

  29. Fernandes, S., Abelha, M., Fernandes, S.M., Albuquerque, A.S.: Implementation of PBL in a social education programme at the Portucalense University. In: Proceedings of the Conference: 9th International Symposium on Project Approaches in Engineering Education (PAEE) and 15th Active Learning in Engineering Education Workshop (ALE), pp 446–455 (2018)

  30. Campenhoudt, L.V., Quivy, R.: Manual de investigação em ciências sociais. Gradiva Publicações, Lisbon (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  31. Vos, H., Graaff, E.: Developing metacognition: a basis for active learning. Eur. J. Eng. Educ. 29(4), 543–548 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Gudwin, R.R.: Aprendizagem ativa (2015). http://faculty.dca.fee.unicamp.br/gudwin/activelearning. Accessed 17 Nov 2018

  33. Konopka, C.L., Adaime, M.B., Mosele, P.H.: Active teaching and learning methodologies: some considerations. Creat. Educ. 6(14), 1536–1545 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Bligh, D.A.: What’s the Use of Lectures?. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  35. Duron, R., Limbach, B., Waugh, W.: Critical thinking frame group for any discipline. Int. J. Teach. Learn. High. Educ. 17(2), 160–166 (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  36. World Economic Forum: What are the 21st-century skills every student needs? (2016). https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2016/03/21st-century-skills-future-jobs-students/. Accessed 15 Dec 2018

  37. Hacker, D.J.: Metacognition in Educational Theory and Practice. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  38. Kane, L.: Educators, learners and active learning methodologies. Int. J. Lifelong Educ. 23(3), 275–286 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Kolb, D.: Experiential Learning: Experience as the Source of Learning and Development. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ (1984)

    Google Scholar 

  40. Abdulwahed, M., Nagy, Z.K.: Applying Kolb’s experiential learning cycle for laboratory education. J. Eng. Educ. 98(3), 283–294 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Garnett, R.F., Vanderlinden, L.K.: Reflexive pedagogy: disciplinary idioms as resources for teaching. Teach. High. Educ. 16(6), 629–640 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Matthew, B., Jessel, J.: Reflective and reflexive practice in initial teacher education: a crucial case study. Teach. High. Educ. 3, 231–244 (1998)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Burke, P.J., Dunn, S.: Communicating science: exploring reflexive pedagogical approaches. Teach. High. Educ. 11, 219–231 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Pukdesree, S.: The comparative study of collaborative learning and SDLC model to develop IT group projects. TEM J. 6(4), 800–809 (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  45. Ekblaw, R.: Effective use of group projects in online learning. Contemp. Issues Educ. Res. 9(3), 121–128 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Caruso, H.M., Wooley, A.W.: Harnessing the power of emergent interdependence to promote diverse team collaboration. Divers. Groups 11, 245–266 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Mannix, E., Neale, M.A.: What differences make a difference? The promise and reality of diverse teams in organizations. Psychol. Sci. Public Interest 6(2), 31–55 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Astin, A.: What Matters in College? Four Critical Years Revisited. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco (1993)

    Google Scholar 

  49. Tinto, V.: Leaving College: Rethinking the Causes and Cures of Student Attrition. University of Chicago Press, Chicago (1987)

    Google Scholar 

  50. National Survey of Student Engagement Report (2006). http://nsse.iub.edu/NSSE_2006_Annual_Report/docs/NSSE_2006_Annual_Report.pdf

  51. Park, J.J., Long, P., Choe, N.H., Schallert, D.L.: The contribution of self-compassion and compassion to others to students’ emotions and project commitment when experiencing conflict in group projects. Int. J. Educ. Res. 88, 20–30 (2018)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Pond, K., Ul-Haq, R.: Learning to assess students using peer review. Stud. Educ. Eval. 23(4), 331–348 (1997)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Trautmann, N.M., Carlsen, W.S., Eick, C.J., Gardner, F.E., Kenyon, L., Moscovici, H., Moore, J.C., Thompson, M., West, S.: Online peer review, learning science as it’s practiced. J. Coll. Sci. Teach. 32(7), 443–447 (2003)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Prins, F.J., Sluijsmans, D., Kirschner, P., Strijbos, J.: Formative peer assessment in a CSCL environment: a case study. Assess. Eval. High. Educ. 40(4), 417–444 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Gehringer, E.F.: Strategies and mechanisms for electronic peer review. In: 30th Annual Frontiers in Education Conference, 2000. FIE 2000, vol. 1, p. F1B-2

  56. Nicol, D.J., Macfarlane-Dick, D.: Formative assessment and self-regulated learning: a model and seven principles of good feedback practice. Stud. High. Educ. 31(2), 199–218 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Reese-Durham, N.: Peer evaluation as an active learning strategy. J. Instr. Psychol. 32(4), 338–348 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  58. Krammer, C.: Using peer groups in nursing education. Nurse Educ. 7, 17–21 (1982)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Aburahma, M.H., Mohamed, H.M.: Peer teaching as an educational tool in Pharmacy schools; fruitful or futile. Curr. Pharm. Teach. Learn. 9, 1170–1179 (2017)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. Briggs, S.: How peer teaching improves student learning and 10 ways to encourage it (2013). https://www.opencolleges.edu.au/informed/features/peer-teaching/. Accessed 18 Nov 2018

  61. Ramaswamy, S., Harris, I., Tschirner, U.: Student peer teaching: an innovative approach to instruction in science and engineering education. J. Sci. Educ. Technol. 10(2), 165–171 (2001)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  62. Johnson, D.W., Maruyama, G., Johnson, R., Nelson, D., Skon, L.: The effects of cooperative, competitive, and individualistic goal structures on achievement: a meta-analysis. Psychol. Bull. 89, 47–62 (1981)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  63. Clarke, B., Feltham, W.: Facilitating peer group teaching within nurse education. Nurse Educ. Today 10, 54–57 (1990)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  64. Secomb, J.: A systematic review of peer teaching and learning in clinical education. J. Clin. Nurs. 17(6), 703–716 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  65. Currens, J.: The 2:1 clinical placement. Physiotherapy 89, 540–554 (2003)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  66. Topping, K.: The effectiveness of peer tutoring in further and higher education. High. Educ. 32, 321–345 (1996)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  67. Pande, P.S., Neuman, R.P., Cavanagh, R.R.: The Six Sigma way-how GE, Motorola and other top companies are honing their performance. The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc, New York (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  68. Santos, A.B., Martins, M.F.: Contribuições do Seis Sigma: Estudos de caso em multinacionais. Produção 20(1), 42–53 (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  69. Grzega, J., Schöner, M.: The didactic model LdL (Lernen durch Lehren) as a way of preparing students for communication in a knowledge society. J. Educ. Teach. 34(3), 167–175 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  70. Carré, P., Tétart, M.: Les ateliers de pédagogie personnalisée ou l’autoformation accompagnée en actes. L’Harmattan, Paris (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  71. Martin, J.P.: Zum Aufbau didaktischer Teilkompetenzen beim Schuler: Fremdsprachenunterricht auf der lerntheoretischen Basis des Informationsverarbeitungsansatzes [On pupils? Development of Aspects of Didactic Competence: Foreign Language Teaching on the Basis of the Information Processing Approach in Learning Theory]. Narr, Tübingen (1985)

  72. Grzega, J.: Learning by teaching: the didactic model LdL in university classes (2005). http://www.ldl.de/material/berichte/uni/ldl-engl.pdf. Accessed 6 Nov 2018

  73. Grzega, J.: Developing more than just linguistic competence: the model LdL for teaching foreign languages (with a note on Basic Global English). Hum. Lang. Teach. 8(5), 1–7 (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  74. Moreira, F., Ferreira, M.J.: Teaching and learning modelling and specification based on mobile devices and cloud. Int. J. Technol. Hum. Interact. (IJTHI) 13(4), 33–49 (2017)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  75. Fonseca, D., Martí, N., Redondo, E., Navarro, I., Sánchez, A.: Relationship between student profile, tool use, participation, and academic performance with the use of augmented reality technology for visualized architecture models. Comput. Hum. Behav. 31, 434–445 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  76. Pestana, M., Gageiro, J.A.: SPSS – Análise de Dados para Ciências Sociais - A complementaridade do SPSS, 6ª edição. Edições Sílabo, Lisboa (2014)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. REMIT, IJP, Universidade Portucalense, Porto, Portugal

    Fernando Moreira

  2. IEETA, Universidade Aveiro, Aveiro, Portugal

    Fernando Moreira

  3. REMIT, Universidade Portucalense, Porto, Portugal

    Maria João Ferreira & Carla Santos Pereira

  4. Centro Algoritmi, Universidade Minho, Braga, Portugal

    Maria João Ferreira

  5. CEMAT, Instituto Superior Técnico, Universidade Técnica de Lisboa, Lisbon, Portugal

    Carla Santos Pereira

  6. Centro de Informática, Universidade Federal de Pernambuco, Recife, Brazil

    Alex Sandro Gomes

  7. University of Cauca, Popayán, Colombia

    Cesar Collazos

  8. La Salle, Universitat Ramon Llull, Barcelona, Spain

    David Fonseca Escudero

Authors
  1. Fernando Moreira
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Maria João Ferreira
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Carla Santos Pereira
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Alex Sandro Gomes
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Cesar Collazos
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. David Fonseca Escudero
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Fernando Moreira.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Moreira, F., Ferreira, M.J., Pereira, C.S. et al. ECLECTIC as a learning ecosystem for higher education disruption. Univ Access Inf Soc 18, 615–631 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10209-019-00682-x

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10209-019-00682-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation