Plan CEIBAL and the Incorporation of Digital Tools and Platforms in the Teaching of Mathematics According to the Teachers’ Perceptions

Denise Vaillant; Eduardo Rodríguez Zidán; Gustavo Bentancor-Biagas

doi:10.29333/ejmste/11307

Full Text (PDF)

Denise Vaillant ¹, Eduardo Rodríguez Zidán ¹, Gustavo Bentancor-Biagas ¹ ^*

More Detail

¹ Universidad ORT Uruguay, URUGUAY^* Corresponding Author

Abstract

This article is based on research in which the three authors participated. The main objective is to identify, describe and analyze the practices of using digital tools and platforms for teaching mathematics in lower secondary education. Framed within a set of ICT policies promoted since 2007 by Plan CEIBAL in Uruguay, a mixed study was conducted, 176 teachers participated in a digital survey, and 15 of the participants were interviewed. Among the study’s main results, it is worth mentioning that mathematics teachers reported a low-frequency use of digital tools and platforms, and mainly an instrumental use of digital technology. It is necessary to foster and boost the development of best practices on the use of digital tools with pedagogical meaning in the context of teacher education degree courses through more prescriptive proposals that give meaning to innovation.

Keywords

digital platforms
teaching of mathematics
secondary education
teachers’ perceptions

License

This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Article Type: Research Article

EURASIA J Math Sci Tech Ed, Volume 17, Issue 12, December 2021, Article No: em2037

https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/11307

Publication date: 03 Nov 2021

Article Views: 3132

Article Downloads: 1029

Open Access Disclosures References How to cite this article

Disclosure

Declaration of Conflict of Interest: No conflict of interest is declared by author(s).

Data sharing statement: Data supporting the findings and conclusions are available upon request from the corresponding author(s).

References

Aboal, D., Bauzán, A., Gómez, M., Méndez, I., Perera, M., & Pérez, Y. (2018). Factores asociados al uso de la PAM en primaria: el rol de los docentes y las intervenciones de política [Factors associated with the use of PAM in primary school: the role of teachers and policy interventions]. Centro de Estudios Ceibal. https://digital.fundacionceibal.edu.uy/jspui/handle/123456789/237
ANEP. (2015). Proyecto de presupuesto período 2015-2019 [Budget project for the 2015-2019 period]. Montevideo (Volume I: Statement of reasons).
ANEP. (2017). Monitor educativo Liceal del Consejo de Educación Secundaria [Liceal educational monitor of the Council of Secondary Education]. Montevideo.
Arias, E., & Cristia, J. (2014). El BID y la tecnología para mejorar el aprendizaje: ¿Cómo promover programas efectivos? [The IDB and technology to enhance learning: How to promote effective programs?] Banco Interamericano de Desarrollo, BID, Washington, D.C. 20577, USA. Technical Note No. IDB-TN-670. 72 p. https://publications.iadb.org/publications/spanish/document/El-BID-y-la-tecnolog%C3%ADa-para-mejorar-el-aprendizaje-%C2%BFC%C3%B3mo-promover-programas-efectivos.pdf
Arias, M. (2000). La triangulación metodológica: sus principios, alcances y limitaciones [Methodological triangulation: its principles, scope and limitations]. Investigación y Educación en Enfermería, 18(1), 13-26.
Attad, C. (2015). Introducing iPads into primary mathematics classrooms: teachers’ experiences and pedagogies. In M. Meletiou Mavrotheris, K. Mavrou, & E. Paparistodemou (Eds.), Integrating touch enabled and mobile devices into contemporary mathematics education (p. 197-217). IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-4666-8714-1.ch009
Bansilal, S. (2015). Exploring student teachers’ perceptions of the influence of technology in learning and teaching mathematics. South African Journal of Education, 35(4), 1-8. https://doi.org/10.15700/saje.v35n4a1217
Bentancor Biagas, G. (2017). La matematización: una mirada a las prácticas de enseñanza y evaluación de los docentes del Ciclo Básico de una zona Metropolitana de Montevideo [Mathematization: a look at the teaching and evaluation practices of Basic Cycle teachers in a Metropolitan area of Montevideo] (Master’s degree in education thesis). Universidad ORT Uruguay, Montevideo. http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11968/3557
Cabezas González, M., Casillas Martín, S. (2019). Las educadoras y educadores sociales ante la sociedad red [Educators and social educators before the network society]. Ensaio: Avaliação e Políticas Públicas em Educação, 27(104), 521-542. https://doi.org/10.1590/s0104-40362019002701360
Cabrera Borges, C., Cabrera Borges, A., Carámbula, S., Pérez, A., & Pérez, M. (2018). Tecnologías digitales: análisis de planes de profesorado de Uruguay [Digital technologies: analysis of teaching plans in Uruguay]. Cuadernos de Investigación Educativa, 9(2), 13-32. https://doi.org/10.18861/cied.2018.9.2.2858
Cabrol M., & Székely, M. (2012) Educación para la transformación [Education for transformation]. BID. https://publications.iadb.org/publications/spanish/document/Educaci%C3%B3n-para-la-transformaci%C3%B3n.pdf
Chaia, A., Child, F., Dorn, E., Frank, M., Krawitz, M., & Mourshed, M. (2017). Factores que inciden en el desempeño de los estudiantes: perspectivas de América Latina [Factors influencing student performance: perspectives from Latin America]. McKinsey & Company.
Chauhan, S. (2017). A meta-analysis of the impact of technology on learning effectiveness of elementary students. Computers & Education, 105, 14-30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2016.11.005
Creswell, J., & Plano Clark, V. (2007). Designing and conducting mixed methods research. Sage.
Dussel, I. (Coord). (2014). Incorporación con sentido pedagógico de TIC en la formación docente en los países del Mercosur [Incorporation with a pedagogical sense of ICT in teacher training in the Mercosur countries]. Teseo. http://www.pasem.org/IMG/pdf/-14.pdf
Eudave Muñoz, D., & Carvajal Ciprés, M. (2011). Posibilidades y usos de las TIC en educación básica [Possibilities and uses of ICT in basic education] [Paper presentation]. XI National Congress of Educational Research, Mexico City, Mexico. http://www.comie.org.mx/congreso/memoriaelectronica/v11/docs/area_07/2443.pdf
Furió, D., Juan, M. C., Seguí, I., & Vivó, R. (2015). Mobile learning vs. traditional classroom lessons: a comparative study. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 31(3), 189-201. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12071
Galpering, H. (2013) Los precios de la conectividad en América Latina y el Caribe [The prices of connectivity in Latin America and the Caribbean]. http://live.v1.udesa.edu.ar/files/AdmTecySociedad/15%20Galperin.pdf
García Acosta, G. (2002). Uso y disponibilidad de la tecnología educativa en escuelas de educación básica [Use and availability of educational technology in basic education schools]. http://bibliotecadigital.conevyt.org.mx/colecciones/documentos/somece2002/Grupo1/garcia.pdf
García Perales, R. (2018). Diseño y construcción de un instrumento de evaluación de la competencia matemática: aplicabilidad práctica de un juicio de expertos [Design and construction of a mathematical competence assessment instrument: practical applicability of an expert judgment]. Ensaio: Avaliação e Políticas Públicas em Educação, 26(99), 347-372. https://doi.org/10.1590/s0104-40362018002601263
Glaser, B. & Strauss, A. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory. Aldine Press.
Goehle, G., & Wagaman, J. (2016). The impact of gamification in web based homework. PRIMUS, 26(6), 557-569. https://doi.org/10.1080/10511970.2015.1122690
Heerwegh, D., & Loosveldt, G. (2008). Face-to-face versus web surveying in a high-internet-coverage population: Differences in response quality. Public Opinion Quarterly, 72(5), 836-846. https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfn045
Hernández Sampieri, R., Fernández Collado, C., & Baptista Lucio, P. (2010) Metodología de la investigación [Investigation methodology]. McGraw-Hill.
INEEd (2014) Informe sobre el estado de la educación en Uruguay 2014 [Report on the state of education in Uruguay 2014]. Montevideo. https://www.ineed.edu.uy/images/pdf/informe-educacion-2014.pdf
INEEd, Alonso, C., Bentancor, G., Borba, E., Cuevasanta, D., De Armas, A., Emery, C., González, M., López, R., Lucián, E., Méndez, I., Moreno, L., Núñez, M., Padula, D., Eugenia, M., Panizza, Rajchman, A., & Reigosa, V. (2020). Aristas 2020. Informe de resultados de tercero de Educación Media [Aristas 2020. Third-party results report for Secondary Education]. Montevideo. https://www.ineed.edu.uy/images/Aristas/Publicaciones/Aristas2018/Aristas-2018-Informe-de-resultados.pdf
Jara, I. (2015). Revisión comparativa de iniciativas nacionales de aprendizaje móvil en América Latina. El caso del Plan Ceibal de Uruguay [Comparative review of national mobile learning initiatives in Latin America. The case of Uruguay’s Plan Ceibal]. UNESCO. http://cdi.mecon.gov.ar/bases/docelec/az3186.pdf
Lugo, M. & Delgado, L. (2020). Hacia una nueva agenda digital educativa en América Latina [Towards a new educational digital agenda in Latin America]. CIPPEC (Centro de Implementación de Políticas Públicas para la Equidad y el Crecimiento). Work Document N°187. Buenos Aires. https://www.cippec.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/187-DT-EDU-Hacia-una-nueva-agenda-digital-educativa-en-Am%C3%A9rica-Latina-Lugo-y-Delgado-noviembre-de-2019.pdf
Maxwell, J. (1996) Qualitative research design. An interactive approach. Sage Publications.
Mazzotti, W. (2016) Los iTICnerarios docentes: enseñantes recorriendo territorios tecnológicos [The teaching iTICneraries: teachers traveling through technological territories] (Doctoral dissertation). Universidad ORT Uruguay, Montevideo. https://bibliotecas.ort.edu.uy/bibid/84926/file/3437
Miles, M., & Huberman A. (1984). Qualitative data analysis. A source book of new methods. Sage.
Moreira, M. A., Santos, M. B. S. N., & Mesa, A. L. S. (2018). Las aulas virtuales en la docencia de una universidad presencial: la visión del alumnado [Virtual classrooms in the teaching of a face-to-face university: the vision of the students]. Revista Iberoamericana de Educación a Distancia, 21(2), 179-198. https://doi.org/10.5944/ried.21.2.20666
OCDE (2013) Pisa 2012 Assessment and analytical framework: mathematics, reading, science, problem solving and financial literacy. Paris.
OCDE (2015) Talis: teaching in focus: enseñar con tecnologías [Talis: teaching in focus: teaching with technologies]. Paris.
OCDE (2019). Talis 2018 Docentes y directores de centros educativos como estudiantes de por vida [Teachers and directors of educational centers as lifelong students]. International Study on Teaching and Learning.
Palomo, R., Ruiz, J., & Sánchez, J. (2006). Las TIC como agentes de innovación educativa [ICT as agents of educational innovation]. Junta de Andalucía, Consejería de Educación, Dirección General de Innovación Educativa y Formación del Profesorado.
Plan CEIBAL (2015). Evolución de la brecha de acceso a TIC en Uruguay (2007-2014) y la contribución del Plan Ceibal a disminuir dicha brecha [Evolution of the ICT access gap in Uruguay (2007-2014) and the contribution of Plan Ceibal to reducing this gap]. Departamento de Monitoreo y Evaluación del Plan Ceibal. http://dspace.mides.gub.uy:8080/xmlui/handle/123456789/457
Pons, J., & Cortés, R. (2007). Buenas prácticas con TIC apoyadas en las Políticas Educativas: claves conceptuales y derivaciones para la formación en competencias [Good practices with ICT supported by Educational Policies: conceptual keys and derivations for skills training]. Revista Latinoamericana de Tecnología Educativa-RELATEC, 6(2), 15-28.
Puentedura, R. (2006). Transformation, technology, and education. http://hippasus.com/resources/tte/
Rivera-Vargas, P., & Cobo-Romani, C. (2020). Digital learning: distraction or default for the future. Digital Education Review, (37). https://revistes.ub.edu/index.php/der/article/view/31813
Rodriguez Zidán, E., & Grilli Silva, J. (2019). El b-learning en los cursos semipresenciales y presenciales de la formación inicial de profesores de ciencia en Uruguay [B-learning in the blended and face-to-face courses of the initial training of science teachers in Uruguay]. In Ciencia, Docencia Tecnología. https://doi.org/10.33255/3059/691
Rodríguez Zidán. E., Marcelo, C., Bernasconi, G., Yot, C. & Téliz, F. (2017). Educadores en la era digital: aprender a enseñar con tecnologías en la formación inicial de profesores de educación media en Uruguay [Educators in the digital age: learning to teach with technologies in the initial training of secondary school teachers in Uruguay]. Instituto de Educación, Universidad ORT Uruguay.
Sunkel, G., Trucco, D. & Espejo, A. (2014). La integración de las tecnologías digitales en las escuelas de América Latina y el Caribe Una mirada multidimensional [The integration of digital technologies in schools in Latin America and the Caribbean A multidimensional view]. Comisión Económica para América Latina y el Caribe (CEPAL) Santiago de Chile.
Taylor, J., Sharples, M., O’Malley, C., Vavoula, G., & Waycott, J. (2006). Towards a task model for mobile learning: A dialectical approach. International Journal of Learning Technology, 2(2-3), 138-158. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJLT.2006.010616
UNESCO. (2016). Revisión comparativa de iniciativas nacionales de aprendizaje móvil en América Latina. El caso del Plan Ceibal de Uruguay [Comparative review of national mobile learning initiatives in Latin America. The case of Uruguay’s Plan Ceibal]. Buenos Aires: Unesco.
Vaillant, D., & Bernasconi, G. (2012). El Plan Ceibal y las prácticas de los docentes de Matemática en primer año de liceo [The Ceibal Plan and the practices of mathematics teachers in the first year of high school]. Instituto de Educación, Universidad ORT Uruguay. https://dspace.ort.edu.uy/handle/20.500.11968/4179
Vaillant, D., Rodríguez Zidán, E., & Bentancor Biagas, G. (2020). Uso de plataformas y herramientas digitales para la enseñanza de la Matemática [Use of digital platforms and tools for teaching Mathematics]. Ensaio: Avaliação e Políticas Públicas em Educação, 28(108), 718-740. https://doi.org/10.1590/s0104-40362020002802241

How to cite this article

APA

Vaillant, D., Rodríguez Zidán, E., & Bentancor-Biagas, G. (2021). Plan CEIBAL and the Incorporation of Digital Tools and Platforms in the Teaching of Mathematics According to the Teachers’ Perceptions. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 17(12), em2037. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/11307

Vancouver

Vaillant D, Rodríguez Zidán E, Bentancor-Biagas G. Plan CEIBAL and the Incorporation of Digital Tools and Platforms in the Teaching of Mathematics According to the Teachers’ Perceptions. EURASIA J Math Sci Tech Ed. 2021;17(12):em2037. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/11307

AMA

Vaillant D, Rodríguez Zidán E, Bentancor-Biagas G. Plan CEIBAL and the Incorporation of Digital Tools and Platforms in the Teaching of Mathematics According to the Teachers’ Perceptions. EURASIA J Math Sci Tech Ed. 2021;17(12), em2037. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/11307

Chicago

Vaillant, Denise, Eduardo Rodríguez Zidán, and Gustavo Bentancor-Biagas. "Plan CEIBAL and the Incorporation of Digital Tools and Platforms in the Teaching of Mathematics According to the Teachers’ Perceptions". Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education 2021 17 no. 12 (2021): em2037. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/11307

Harvard

Vaillant, D., Rodríguez Zidán, E., and Bentancor-Biagas, G. (2021). Plan CEIBAL and the Incorporation of Digital Tools and Platforms in the Teaching of Mathematics According to the Teachers’ Perceptions. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 17(12), em2037. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/11307

MLA

Vaillant, Denise et al. "Plan CEIBAL and the Incorporation of Digital Tools and Platforms in the Teaching of Mathematics According to the Teachers’ Perceptions". Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, vol. 17, no. 12, 2021, em2037. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/11307