Ir al menú de navegación principal Ir al contenido principal Ir al pie de página del sitio

The relation between the implementation of learning objects and listening skills

The relation between the implementation of learning objects and listening skills

Abrir | Descargar

Cómo citar
Royer David, & Iranys Urbina. (2017). The relation between the implementation of learning objects and listening skills. Avances En Educación Y Humanidades, 2(2), 59-70.



Los objetos virtuales de aprendizaje (OVAS) son unidades digitales auto-contenibles que pueden ser combinadas para crear una variedad de experiencias de aprendizaje. Sin embargo, pocas instituciones de nivel superior en Colombia están utilizando OVAS para su enseñanza. La Universidad Popular del Cesar es una de estas instituciones de nivel superior donde los OVAS habían sido implementados sin conocer que tan útil o inadecuado era su uso. Consecuentemente, este artículo resalta la relación entre la implementación de los OVAS y el desarrollo de la habilidad de escucha en un grupo de estudiantes en esta universidad. Los resultados de esta investigación revelan que la adecuada mediación del docente fue fundamental para que el grupo de estudiantes se beneficiara del uso de los OVAS.

Palabras claves: Implementación, mediación del profesor.



Learning objects (LOs) are material digital instructional units that can be combined to create a variety of learning experiences. However, few Higher education institutions in Colombia are using LOs for teaching purposes. Universidad Popular del Cesar is one of those educational institutions where LOs had been implemented without knowing how meaningful or inadequate its use was. Hence, this article underlines the relation between the implementation of LOs and the development of listening skills in a group of students at this university. The research results reveal that since teacher mediation was accurate to the target lesson, the chosen group of students derived benefit from using LOs.

Keywords: Implementation, teacher mediation

Visitas del artículo 818 | Visitas PDF


Los datos de descarga todavía no están disponibles.
  1. Akpinar, Y., &Simsek, H. (2007). Should K-12 teachers develop learning objects? Evidence
  2. from thefield with K12 students. International Journal of Instructional Technology and
  3. Distance Learning, 4(3), 31-44.
  4. ASTD and Smartforce. (2002). A field guide to learning objects.
  5. Retrieved May 12, 2009, from
  6. c658e3224c300556c1256ae90036d38e/30AE7A876BD011A7C1256E59003A4943/$file/
  7. smartforce.pdf
  8. Atkins, D. E., Brown, J. S., &Hammond, A. L. (2007). A review of the open educational resources
  9. (OER) movement: Achievements, challenges, and new opportunities (Report to the William
  10. and Flora Hewlett Foundation). p. 4. Retrieved from
  11. uploads/2007/03/a-review-of-the-open-educational-resources-oer-movement_final.pdf
  12. Brown, S. (2006). Teaching Listening. New York: Cambridge University Press.
  13. Burge, E., Campbell Gibson, C., &Gibson, T. (Eds.). (2011). Flexible pedagogy, flexible practice:
  14. Notes from the trenches of distance education. Athabasca: Athabasca University Press.
  15. Burns, A., and Hood, S. (1995). Teachers’ Voices: Exploring course design in a changing curriculum.
  16. Sydney: Natural Center for English Language Teaching and Research.
  17. Caws, C. (2008). Development and implementation of a learning object repository for French teaching
  18. and learning: Issues and promises. CALICO Journal. 26(1), 123-141.
  19. Cramer, S.R. (2007). Update your classroom with learning objects and twenty-first century skills. The
  20. Clearing House, 80(3), 126-132.
  21. Creswell, J. W (2007). Qualitative Inquiry & Research Design: Choosing among five approaches
  22. (2nd edition). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  23. De Salas, K. & Ellis, L. (2006). The development and implementation of learning objects in a higher
  24. education setting[Electronic version]. Interdisciplinary Journal of Knowledge and Learning
  25. Objects, 2, 1-22.
  26. Feagin, J., Orum, A., & Sjoberg, G. (Eds.). (1991). A case for case study. Chapel Hill, NC: University
  27. of North Carolina Press.
  28. Field, J. (2002). The changing face of listening. In J. Richards & W. Renandya(Eds.), Methodology
  29. in language teaching: An anthology of current practice(pp. 242–247). New York: Cambridge
  30. University press.
  31. Freeman, D. (1998). Doing Teacher Research: From Inquiry to Understanding. Boston, MA:
  32. Heinle&Heinle Publishers.
  33. Govindasamy, T. (2001). Successful implementation of e-learning: pedagogical considerations.
  34. TheInternet and Higher Education, 4(3–4), 287–299.
  35. Hernandez Sampieri, R., Fernandez Collado, C., & Baptista Lucio, P. (2010). Metodologia de la
  36. Investigación. Mexico: McGraw Hill.
  37. Hoey, M. (2001). Textual interaction: an introduction to written discourse analysis. New York:
  38. Routledge.
  39. Kay, R., & Knaack, L. (2007). Evaluating the learning in learning objects. Open Learning: The Journal
  40. of Open and Distance Learning, 22(1), 5–28. Philadelphia, PA: Johan Benjamins Publishing
  41. Company.
  42. Li, J. Z., Nesbit, J. C., & Richards, G. (2006). Evaluating learning objects across boundaries: The semantics of localization. Journal of Distance Education Technologies, 4(1), 17-30.
  43. Leon, O., & Montero , I. (2003). Métodos de Investigación en Psicología y Educación. Madrid:
  44. McGraw Hill.
  45. Lodico, M., Spaulding, D., and Voegtle, K. (2010). Methods in Educational Research. San Francisco,
  46. CA: Jossey Bass.
  47. McGreal, R. (2004). Learning objects: A practical definition. International Journal of Instructional
  48. Technology and Distance Learning, 1(9). Retrieved May 15, 2010, from
  49. Sep_04/index.htm
  50. Ministerio de Educación Nacional. (2006b).¿Qué es un Objeto Virtual de Aprendizaje? Recuperadoel
  51. de septiembre de 2011, de Colombia Aprende - Docentes de Superior - Objetos Virtuales
  52. de Aprendizaje e Informativos:
  53. article-172369.html
  54. Morley, J. (2001). Aural comprehension instruction: Principles and practices. In M. Celce-Murcia
  55. (Ed.), Teaching English as a second or foreign language(pp. 69-85).Boston: Heinle&Heinle
  56. Publishers.
  57. QSR International Pty Ltd . (2007, August 15). What is Qualitative Research? Retrieved October 26,
  58. , from
  59. Young, M. Y. C. (1997). A serial ordering of listening comprehension strategies used by advanced
  60. ESL learners in Hong Kong. Asian Journal of English Language Teaching, 1, 35-53.
  61. Stake, R. (1995). The art of case study research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  62. Tellis, W. (1997). Application of a case study methodology . The Qualitative Report, 3(3). Retrieved
  63. from
  64. UNESCO OER platform to be tested at celebrations of world press freedom day in windhoek.(2011,
  65. May 02). African Press Organisation.Database of Press Releases Related to Africa. p. 1.
  66. Retrieved from
  67. Vandergrift, L. (2003). Orchestrating strategy use: toward a model ofThe skilled second language
  68. listener. Language Learning,53(3), 463-496. DOI: 10.1111/1467-9922.00232
  69. Yin, R. K. (1994). Case study research: Design and methods (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
  70. Publishing.

Sistema OJS - Metabiblioteca |