DOI: https://doi.org/10.37811/cl_rcm.v6i6.3657
The teaching assessment from an innovation perspective in the teachers of Tolima university languages center
Brillyd Lorena Galindo Navarro
https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7755-4675
Susan Lorena Zorro Capera
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2169-7324
Victor Alberto Orozco Roa
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3555-0550
Ibagué - Colombia
ABSTRACT
The present investigation is carried out with the intention of guiding a pertinent practice of teacher evaluation, oriented to the advancement of education. The participants in the development of the project are the teachers and coordinators of the Language Center of the Tolima University; to whom instruments such as, the questionnaire that consists of open and closed questions, it is possible to know their perspectives regarding the teacher evaluation, to give way to the design of a precise and effective evaluation, accurate to the purpose of the teacher evaluation; preceded by an interview directed to the participating teachers, in order to involve the teacher in the result in construction of the final proposal, adjusted to a formative approach of the educator. In this way, it seeks to contribute to the own development of teacher evaluation, considering teachers as a principle of origin for lifelong learning, and the recognition of students as human beings, with strengths and weaknesses in their learning.
Key words: teacher evaluation; self-evaluation; coevaluation; heteroevaluation; teachers.
Correspondencia: [email protected]
Artículo recibido 15 octubre 2022 Aceptado para publicación: 15 noviembre 2022
Conflictos de Interés: Ninguna que declarar
Todo el contenido de Ciencia
Latina Revista Científica Multidisciplinar, publicados en este sitio están
disponibles bajo Licencia Creative Commons 
.
Cómo citar: Galindo Navarro, B. L., Zorro Capera , S. L., & Orozco Roa, V. A. (2022). La evaluación docente desde una perspectiva de innovación en los profesores del centro de idiomas de la universidad de Tolima. Ciencia Latina Revista Científica Multidisciplinar, 6(6), 1999-2012. https://doi.org/10.37811/cl_rcm.v6i6.3657
La evaluación docente desde una perspectiva de innovación en los profesores del centro de idiomas de la universidad de Tolima
RESUMEN
La presente investigación se efectúa con la intención de guiar una práctica pertinente de evaluación docente, orientada al avance de la educación. Los participantes en el desarrollo del proyecto son los docentes y coordinadores del Centro de Idiomas de la Universidad de Tolima; a quienes se administró instrumentos como, el cuestionario que consta de preguntas abiertas y cerradas, se logra conocer sus perspectivas con respecto a la evaluación docente, para dar paso al diseño de una evaluación precisa y eficaz, acertada al propósito de la evaluación docente; precedida de entrevista dirigida a los profesores participantes, con el fin de involucrar a los docentes en el resultado en construcción de la propuesta final, ajustado a un enfoque formativo del educador. De esta manera, se busca contribuir al desarrollo propio de la evaluación docente, teniendo en cuenta los docentes como princípio de origen para la formación permanente, y al reconocimiento de los estudiantes como seres humanos, con fortalezas y debilidades en su aprendizaje.
Palabras Claves: evaluación docente; autoevaluación; coevaluación; heteroevaluación; docentes.
INTRODUCTION
Currently the evaluation is a subject of controversy and uncertainty. Theoretically, teacher evaluation is supported as a means of progress, unlike in practice, there is no evidence of an appropriate application of this knowledge; on the contrary, it is full of gaps, which prevent the fundamental development of evaluation as an alternative to optimize processes (Santos, A., 2012). The impact of evaluation and the urgency in providing guidance to the agents involved in education is vital, because of its importance. Evaluation should be contextualized as a strategy that leads to improving education as a source of progress in English language learning (Pérez, J., 2008), from the analysis of difficulties, problems, inconveniences, errors; as situations to generate feedback alternatives in search of building changes and transformation, strengthening educational institutions. García, L & Meza, L (2016).
The perception of teachers about teacher evaluation is essential, because it allows them to review needs and work to strengthen their teaching work and the Institution (Valdés, A.; Castillo, E.; Sánchez, P., 2009) . The research generated a proposal for teacher evaluation, with the aim of improving the competence of the educator from their knowledge, practices and experiences lived in the classroom. The evaluation system designed, whose purpose is to guide the activities of teachers and managers in the evaluation, are based on innovative strategies of teacher evaluation based on theoretical sources that support autonomy, self-regulation, dialogue, collaborative work, and evaluation as a source of progress in education.
Teacher evaluation.
Teacher evaluation in education has a background of opportunity to improve and transform teaching. It is based as a determinant basis for decision making and reforms to improve the quality of education (Rodriguez, W., 2010). Different evaluation techniques are carried out, aimed at administrative compliance in accreditation processes and as access to stimuli (Rueda, M., 2018). However, in evaluation practices we should consider, rather than following standardized guidelines, to think about providing real possibilities of training and response to the needs of teachers and students (Niño, L. 2005: Niño, L. & Gama, A. 2013). The procedure for establishing a teacher evaluation conducive to reform education should be thought from an inclusive matrix of the teaching staff (Rueda, M. and de Diego M, 2012), who coexist and interact with students in the classroom. It is worth highlighting that "evaluation is a resource for the feedback of the teaching and learning process that allows adjusting, correcting, reformulating and improving it permanently" (García, L. and Meza, L., 2016). Although, Charotte, D. (2002) refers that the quality assurance of a good evaluation system is not only to give a “supported feedback”, but also to allow reflection through communication. Currently, the participation of the teaching staff is unknown, who are not included in the evaluation systems and are unaware of the results of the evaluations applied in the educational institutions, without allowing the teachers to participate in their own reflection (De Chaparro, G. et al., 2008; De Diego, M.; Rueda, M. 2012).
Self-evaluation.
Self-evaluation is part of the evaluation system, and is a practical and effective technique, developing it conscientiously, with the purpose of improvement, contributes to student learning and to the advancement of teachers' pedagogical practices. Although self-evaluation has been inherent to education and should be worked as a possibility of growth through "self-regulation". (García, L. and Meza, G. 2016). Similar to Charlotte, D. (2002), who defines teacher self-evaluation as an opportunity to expand and improve their practice, where "self-directed" components are implicit. The error is an opportunity in the teaching and learning process, taking advantage of it as a stimulus and generating force for new learning (García, Stella 2016: García and Meza, 2016). Tamayo, L. et al. (2017) make reference that an evaluation instrument should lead to self-reflection on the pedagogical action in each particular case of the student. It can be determined that teacher self-evaluation involves processes of self-reflection and self-education of the teacher on his pedagogical practices, where the error can be determined as an opportunity to improve his work, and thus achieve its purpose.
Co-evaluation.
Co-evaluation emerges as group work, in which ideas, thoughts and experiences are exchanged in a context of reflection and dialogue, leading to transcendental aspects capable of influencing the development and progress of any context. In the field of teacher evaluation, it is a broad environment to explore and find solutions to different circumstances that teachers face in the classroom. Educators in Reno, Nevada reported good findings on an evaluation system identified as "professional conversation," educators recognize that this type of conversation promotes reflection through dialogue. (Charlotte, D. 2001), allows for professional growth, and becomes an opportunity to expand and improve pedagogical or research aspects; (Rueda, M.,2018; Charlotte, D. 2002). Likewise, the evaluation by teaching peers involves the participation of teachers, who assume a similar educational context, so they can understand and support the practices of their colleagues. On the other hand, and it should be emphasized that the evaluation by academic peers should be governed by premises such as respect, trust and collective work (Chirivella, 2007: De Diego M.; Rueda, M. 2012). Similarly, being clear that it is evaluated to generate reflection on the processes themselves and on the peers (Niño, L., 2017). When teachers seek a common goal aimed at the development of education, and the foundation of collaborative work prevails, a pleasant environment arises, where values, respect and dialogue come together to share knowledge and experiences.
Heteroevaluación.
La heteroevaluación es un instrumento que hace parte de la evaluación; bien diseñada y ejecutada, fomenta el avance en las Instituciones Educativas. Un desafío es lograr dar a interiorizar los propósitos de la evaluación, en el que se deriven la retroalimentación al desempeño docente y se precise el papel de los directivos, docentes y estudiantes (Rueda, Mario. 2018); y en el que la comunicación sea el alma de cualquier organización (Charlotte, D. 2016). La heteroevaluación desde la visión del directivo-evaluador, debe fomentar el trabajo colaborativo entre docentes (Rodríguez, F., Ossa, C., 2014) brindares espacios para la relación entre maestros, y el aprendizaje mutuo a través de la comunicación profesional (Charlotte, D 2016, 2002). Del mismo modo, es relevante un ambiente de confianza, en el que los maestros se sientan seguros en la postura de los evaluadores, demostrando que están bien informados y sus recomendaciones se basan en la comprensión profesional; en otras palabras, los maestros necesitan confiar en que los administradores saben de lo que están hablando (Charlotte, D. 2012). La heteroevaluación desde la dirección o área administrativa, sin ejercer presión de control o poder; por el contrario, desde un ambiente de familiaridad, dialogo, reflexión y aprendizaje.
Heteroevaluation.
Heteroevaluation is an instrument that is part of the evaluation; well designed and executed, it promotes progress in educational institutions. A challenge is to internalize the purposes of the evaluation, in which feedback is derived to the teaching performance and the role of managers, teachers and students is specified (Rueda, Mario. 2018); and in which communication is the soul of any organization (Charlotte, D. 2016). The heteroevaluation from the vision of the manager-evaluator, should encourage collaborative work among teachers (Rodríguez, F., Ossa, C., 2014) providing spaces for the relationship between teachers, and mutual learning through professional communication (Charlotte, D 2016, 2002). Similarly, an environment of trust is relevant, in which teachers feel confident in the evaluators' position, demonstrating that they are well informed and their recommendations are based on professional understanding; in other words, teachers need to trust that administrators know what they are talking about (Charlotte, D. 2012). Heteroevaluation from the management or administrative area, without exerting control pressure or power; on the contrary, from an environment of familiarity, dialogue, reflection and learning.
METODOLOGY
The type of research of the project is based on the qualitative approach. This activity was carried out under ethical guidelines of integrity, authenticity and reliability in the information obtained through the application instruments in the project, with a willingness to obtain a response to the problem. With this type of research, it was intended to respond to the characteristics of feeling, thinking, from reflection and action, through the description, understanding, interpretation and analysis of information (Monje, C. 2011). The descriptive research is a study that allowed to achieve project achievements, because it described the perceptions of the participating teachers about teacher evaluation and the relationship with the theoretical foundations that support it, as well as the perception about the implementation of an evaluation system based on theoretical characteristics, therefore, the researcher does not influence it in any way. This study is characterized by the description of conditions or events; it is fundamentally based on describing, not on demonstrating solutions, nor on testing hypotheses (Monje, C. 2011).
The selected population are the teachers of the Language Center of Tolima University official institution, it provides education in face-to-face and distance modality, it has several offices in different regions of the country for its second modality. Within the university there are several academic units such as the Language Center, which is located at the headquarters of the University of Tolima, offers programs in English, French, Portuguese, German and Italian.
In the development of the research, the population are those directly involved and immersed in the object of the project; in this case the teachers of the Language Center; to whom the related instruments were applied in the project for the collection of necessary. The selection of the sample consisted of 24 teachers from the Language Center, who willingly decided to participate in the development of the research. Their collaboration was associated during the project process, with the participation before and after the teacher evaluation system, designed as a result and final proposal of the study. The implementation of questionnaires, field notes, focus group and semi-structured interview, are instruments applied to the participating teachers, who share similar contexts from the area of their English language profession, and are part of the university teaching staff of the Language Center.
RESULTS AND DISCUSION
Analysis of teachers' perceptions of teacher evaluation: Coordinators and teachers are focused on teacher evaluation to the teacher's professional development as stated by Rueda, M.; Sánchez, M (2018), Olarte; Y. Madiedo; C.; Pinilla, A (2019). It is evident the lack of knowledge of the scope of teacher evaluation in most of the participating teachers, since they do not respond to teacher evaluation as a research mechanism, however, the perspectives of teachers and coordinators are not against the theoretical support of teacher evaluation, in which reflection, analysis, self-criticism for the development of their work, plays a fundamental role (Rueda, M., 2008; De Diego, M.; Rueda, M. 2012). The coordinators of the Language Center of the University of Tolima do not focus their teaching evaluation practices on controlling and supervising teaching performance, although some professors, due to experiences in other educational institutions, perceive evaluation as a control of their teaching performance. However, the Language Center appropriates teaching evaluation techniques in which the evaluated teacher is excluded, and in which spaces for reflection and feedback are not generated, to discuss weaknesses, strengths, experiences, concerns; transcending the error as an opportunity (García, L.; Meza, G., 2016; De la Torre, S. 2004). Coordinators and teachers focus on self-evaluation as a way for reflection and strengthening of the teaching work. In which components such as self-regulation, self-determination and self-criticism. Teachers use self-evaluation to improve their classes, and although educational institutions have not strengthened this type of evaluation, teachers are no strangers to these evaluative practices and integrate dialogue with students or evaluate their practices through students' learning results for self-reflection, and thus generate alternatives for transformation and significance in their teaching. The majority of the teachers are not unaware of receiving advice to strengthen their teaching practices; on the contrary, they show willingness to receive and contribute to their own and their colleagues' progress in their profession. However, it is latent the spaces that strengthen this type of professional dialogue in a formal way, since most of the teachers seek to interact about their experiences with colleagues who feel affinity. Likewise, the evaluator raises a behavior for the development of the teaching staff and shows an open posture to communication channels to enrich pedagogical knowledge. Análisis de las Percepciones de los Docentes sobre un Sistema de Evaluación Docente Innovador.
The teacher evaluation system called "Coffee Time Reflection", from the coordinator's point of view, promoted space for interaction, reflection, feedback, in which there was evidence of exchange of experiences, mutual learning, collaborative work and group construction. However, the coordinator mentions the importance of time, because teachers work in different educational institutions or institutes, so they do not have the same schedule available for the development of the evaluation, however, it seemed useful and feasible, since in some circumstances it is difficult to reach some teachers and make them see the shortcomings in the development of their classes, so this type of evaluation ensures the coordinator, generates a more reliable environment, through dialogue and reflection by which you can easily approach such cases. From the teachers' point of view, the evaluation system called "Coffee Time Reflection" leads to a formative and constructive evaluation for teachers in their work. The evaluation system does not generate pressure on the achievement of results and responds to the direction of development in their profession. The teachers lend themselves to receive feedback from their colleagues, in an atmosphere of respect and cordiality, in which dialogue was the conduit for sharing experiences and reflections, as well as suggestions for expanding strategies. Likewise, the feedback from the coordinator's position and teaching experience, generated proposals for future teaching strategies, which resulted with empathy in recommendations from other work groups; it encouraged conversation, without signaling or generating certain stigmatization, on the contrary, creating possibilities for learning and growth in professional development from their knowledge and practice as teachers.
CONCLUSIONS
The importance of teacher participation in teacher evaluation is fundamental for the achievement of the objectives set by educational institutions, aimed at offering alternatives to strengthen education. Likewise, the scope of teacher evaluation is a system that seeks to respond to the learning needs of students, involving the teacher as a source of achievement of these objectives. The guidelines of a transparent and guided teacher evaluation to improve the pedagogical work of the teachers of the Language Center of the University of Tolima, is focused as supported by theoretical sources. In the first instance, the participation of teachers (Rueda, M., 2018). In second instance, self-evaluation as a mechanism of self-regulation and self-determination (García, L.; Meza, G., 2016) on the teachers' own experiences. In third instance, professional conversation among peers (Charlotte, D., 2002); responding to seek options or solutions to the different aspects or needs faced in the classroom (Niño, L. & Gama, A. 2013). Finally, an environment of reflection in which the evaluator's vision is not focused on numerical or ranking results (Charlotte, D. 2016), on the contrary, as a leader conceive spaces open to dialogue, generating reflection and feedback (García, L.; Meza, G.; 2016) in the teacher, likewise generating proposals from their experience and vision.
The teacher evaluation system called "Coffee Time Reflection" is a mechanism that brings together the different theoretical underpinnings that nurture teacher evaluation from the component of self-evaluation, co-evaluation and heteroevaluation. This research, due to its innovative nature, fosters research opportunities for different questions that arise from it.
REFERENCE LIST
Álvarez, A. et al., (2015). Balance general sobre las experiencias nacionales e internacionales aplicadas a la evaluación docente con énfasis en propuesta de formación. Convenio Interadministrativo 1253 de 2015-MEN-UPN.
Álvarez, C. (2017). Evaluación en la Educación Superior: Un estudio de caso Corporación Universitaria UNITEC. (Tesis Magister) Facultad de Educación y Humanidades: Universidad Militar Nueva Granada, Bogotá.ce
Arbesú, I; Díaz Barriga, F; Elizalde, L; Luna, E; Rigo, M. A.; Rueda, M; Torquemada, A. D.; (2006). Perspectiva Educacional, Formación de Profesores. 27-58. Disponible en: http://www.redalyc.org/pdf/3333/333328829002. pdf
Arias, F. (2007). Educación en la globalización: un cambio en la perspectiva. Revista Latinoamericana de Ciencias Sociales, Niñez y Juventud, 5 (1), pp. 57-80.
Badillo, M.; Ramírez, E.; Torres, A & Valentin, O. (2014). Las competencias docentes:el desafio de la educación superior. Innovación educativa, 14 (66), pp. 129-146.
Behar, D. (2008). Metodología de la Investigación. Editorial Sharom.
Bejarano, O; Cardoso, L.; Niño, L. & Tamayo, L. (1996). ¿Hacia donde va la evaluación? Aportes conceptuales para pensar y transformar las prácticas de evaluación. Instituto para la Investigación Educativa y el Desarrollo Pedagógico, IDEP. Bogotá D.C.
Benavides & Gómez (2005). Métodos en investigación cualitativa: triangulación. Revista Colombiana de Psiquiatría, Vol XXXIV (1), pp. 118-124
Bueno, G; Calderon, N; Medina, F & Vera, J. (2018). Model for self-evaluation and hetero-evaluation of teaching practice in Normal Schools. Educação e Pesquisa, 44, e170360. Epub June 25, 2018.https://dx.doi.org/10.1590/s1678-4634201844170360
Cano, M; Pons, L & Molins, L (2018). Análisis de Experiencias de Innovación Docente Universitaria sobre Evaluación. Revista de Currículum y Formación del Profesorado, 22 (4). Disponible en: https://recyt.fecyt.es/index.php/profesorado/article/view/69408
Capllonch & Buscà (2012). La evaluación formativa como innovación. Experiencias en una Facultad de Formación del Profesorado. Psychology, Society, & Education, Vol 4, No 1, pp. 45-58.
Chacón, M. (2006). La reflexión y la crítica en la formación docente. Educere, 10 (33), pp. 335-342. Disponible en: http://ve.scielo.org/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1316-
Charlotte, D. (2013). It all Comes Back to Instruction. Educational Leadership, pp. 16.
Charlotte, D. (2016). Creating Communities of Practice. Educational Leadership ASCD (Association for Supervision & Curriculum Development), 19-23.
Charlotte, D. (2015). Framing Discussions about Teaching. Educational Leadership ASCD (Association for Supervision & Curriculum Development), 38-41.
Charlotte, D. (2012). It’s your Evaluation- Collaborating to Improve Teacher Practice. Education Digest pp. 22-27.
Charlotte, D. (2011). Evaluations that help teachers learn. Educational Leadership ASCD (Association for Supervision & Curriculum Development), pp.35-39.
Charlotte, D. (2001). New trends in Teacher Evaluation. Educational Leadership. EBSCO Publishing pp. 12-15.
Cruz, F & Quiñonez, A. (2012). Importancia de la evaluación y autoevaluación en el rendimiento académico. Revista del Instituto de Estudios en Educación Universidad del Norte. Disponible en: https://www.redalyc.org/pdf/853/85323935009.pdf
Cuesta, M. y Zamora, R. (2016). La Evaluación Pedagógica en el Desarrollo del Proceso Docente Educativo. Santiago 139, vol. 1, enero-abril.
De Chaparro, G.; Romero, L.; Rincón, E; Jaime, L. (2008). Evaluación de desempeño docente. Cuadernos de Lingüística Hispánica, núm. 11, enero-junio, 2008, pp. 167-178. Disponible en: http://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=322227496013
De Correa, M. y Rueda, M. (2012). La evaluación docente en la educación superior: Uso de instrumentos de autoevaluación, planeación y evaluación por pares. Voces y Silencios: Revista Latinoamericana de Educación, 3 (2), 59-76.
Decreto 1278 de 2002. Estatuto de Profesionalización Docente. Junio 19 de 2002. https://www.mineducacion.gov.co/1621/articles-86102_archivo_pdf.pdf
De la Torre, S. (2004). Aprender de los errores: El tratamiento didáctico de los errores como estrategía de innovación. (1ª ed) Buenos Aires Argentina: Editoral Megisterio del Rio de Plata.
Diaz, A (2017). De la evaluación individual a una evaluación social-integrada: La institución educativa, su unidad. Instituto e investigaciones sobre la universidad y la educación, iisue-unam, México, pp. 327-364.
Díaz, F. y Barriga, A (2002). Estrategia Docentes para un Aprendizaje Significativo: una interpretación constructivista. México: McGraw Hill.
Flores, E.; Garcia, M.; Calsina, W; Yapuchura, A. (2016). Las habilidades sociales y la comunicación interpersonal de los estudiantes de la universidad Nacional del Altiplano – puno. Comuni@ccion: Revista de Investigación en Comunicación y Desarrollo, 7(2), pp. 5-14.
Fuentes, M.; & Herrero, J. (1999). Evaluación docente: Hacia una fundamentación de la autoevaluación. Revista Electrónica Interuniversitaria de Formación del Profesorado, 2(1).
García, L. y Meza, G.(2016). Resignificando la Evaluación y la Autoevaluación de los estudiantes. Editorial Kinesis.
Garcia, L. (2005). La Resignificación de la Profesión Docente a partir de los procesos integrados de formación permanente y la evaluación pedagógica. Lúdica Pedagógica, 2 (10), 99-103.
Gonzalez, L. y R. (2014). Evaluación de pares y coevaluación en estudiantes y docentes universitarios: Una experiencia formativa para impulsar el modelo educativo. Universidad Autonóma de Chiapas, México.
Guerrero, G. (2004). La educación en el contexto de la globalización. Rhela Vol. 6, pp. 342-354.
Hamui, A. & Varela, M (2013). La técnica de grupos focales. Investigación en Educación Médica, 2 (5), pp. 55-60.
Herrera, S. & Tobón, S (2017). El director escolar desde el enfoque socioformativo. Estudio documental mediante la cartografía conceptual. Revista de pedagogía, 38 (102), pp. 164-194.
Lavilla, L. (2011). La Evaluación. Pedagogía Magna, pp. 3030-310. Disponible en: www.pedagogiamagna.com
Luna, E. y Rueda, M. (2008). La evaluación de los profesores como recurso para mejorar su práctica S.A. de CV. Plaza y Valdés, S.A. de C.V pp. 59-71
McCann, T.; Johannessen, Larry. & Spangle, S. (2012). Mentoring Matters. English Journal, 99.(5), pp. 100-102.
Mohd, R. (2013). Teacher Trainees’ self evaluation during teaching practicum. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences 102, 195-203.
Molina, A. (2018). Psico educación comunitaria. Recuperado en: http://saulmirandaramos.blogspot.com/2018/10/notas-de-campo-como-herramientas-que.html
Monje, C. (2011). Metodología de la investigación cuantitativa y cualitativa. (Año sabatico) Facultad de Ciencias Sociales y Humanidades: Universidad Surocolombiana, Neiva.
Montoya, J. & Ramírez, M. (2013). Modelos de evaluación docente en la universidad: Pasado, presente y futuro. Rhec, 16 (16), 236-700.
Muñoz, A.; Palacio, M. & Escobar, L.(2012). Teachers’ Beliefs about Assessment in an EFL context in Colombia. Profile, 14 (1), pp. 143-158.
Muñoz, J. (2003). Analisis cualitativo de datos textuales con ATLAS/ti. Universitat Autonoma de Barcelona. Pp. 10, 14
Niño, L (2000). La Evaluación de los Docentes en la Educación Básica y Media. Pedagogía y Saberes No. 14. Pp 41-49.
Niño, L. & Gama, A. (2013). Los estándares en el currículo y la evaluación: ¿relaciones de medición, control y homogenización o, posibilidad de formación, diversidad y evaluación crítica?. Revista electrónica interuniversitaria de Formación del Profesorado, 16 (3), 163-176.
Ochoa, L. & Moya, C. (2019). La evaluación docente universitaria: retos y posibilidades. Folios, 49, 41-60. doi: 10.17227/Folios.49-9390.
Okuda, M. & Gomez, C. (2005). Metodos en investigación cualitativa: triangulación. Revista Colombiana de Psiquiatría, 34 (1), pp. 118-124.
Olarte, Y; Madiedo, C & Pinilla, A. (2019). Evaluación docente como factor de desarrollo profesional desde una pedagogía reflexiva. Rev. Fac. Med. 67 (3): 277-85, pp 277-284.
Parra, E & Galindo, D (2016). Transformación de la práctica pedagógica de los docentes seleccionados en el marco de la globalización. (Tesis Magister) Linea de prácticas educativas: Pontificia Universidad Javeriana. Bogotá.
Pérez Gómez & Gimeno Sacristán (1992) Comprender y transformar la enseñanza. Morata, Madrid.
Prieto, D. (2002). La globalización; efectos e el cambio del patrón valorativo de la sociedad y la medicina. Humanidades Médicas, 2 (2). Disponible en: http://scielo.sld.cu/pdf/hmc/v2n2/hmc010202.pdf
Rico-Reintsch, K. (2019). Uso de autoevaluación docente como herramienta innovadora para el mejoramiento de las asignaturas universitarias. Revista CEA 5(10), 69-81. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.22430/24223182.1445
Roselli, N. (2016). El aprendizaje colaborativo: Bases teóricas y estrtegias aplicables en la enseñanza universitaria. Propositos y Respresentaciones, 4 (1), pp. 219-280.
Rueda, M. (2018). Los retos de la evaluación docente en la universidad. Publicaciones, 48 (1),171-192.
Rueda, M. (2008). La evaluación de desempeño docente en la universidad. Revista Electrónica de Investigación Educativa, Especial; pp. 1-15. Disponible en: http://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=15511127002
Rueda, M. & Torquemada, A. D. (2004). Algunas consideraciones para el diseño de un sistema de evaluación de la docencia en la universidad. En M. Rueda (coord.), ¿Es posible evaluar la docencia en la universidad? Experiencias en México, Canadá, Francia, España y Brasil (pp. 29-36). México: ANUIES.
Rueda, M. (2004). Evaluación de la labor docente en el aula universitaria.
Saenz, E. (2019). Reconocer los errores para crecer. Recuperado de: https://lamenteesmaravillosa.com/reconocer-los-errores-para-crecer/.
Santos, M. (2003). Dime cómo evalúas y te diré qué tipo de profesional y de personal eres. Revista Enfoques Educacionales 5 (1), pp. 69-80.
Tonon, G. (2012). Reflexiones Latinoamericanas sobre Investigación Cualitativa. Revista Latinoamericana de Ciencias Sociales, Niñez y Juventud, 8 (1). Disponible en: http://revistaumanizales.cinde.org.co/rlcsnj/index.php/Revista-Latinoamericana/article/view/606
Tursini, U. (2017). Exploring changes in teachers’ Instructional practice through self-evaluation as a meditational activity: A case study. Journal of Language Teaching and Research 8 (3), 556-564.