Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online 2018-10
Teaching-learning methods and their effect on professional development and the development of graduates’ competencies / Métodos de enseñanza-aprendizaje y su efecto en el desarrollo profesional y competencial de los egresados
This article analyses the effect of the teaching-learning methods used in Spanish universities on three measures of educational output: average mark, graduates’ assessment of their professional performance in different dimensions, and their assessment of the acquisition of professional competencies and skills. Multi-level models were used in which graduates (first level) are grouped by field of study (second level). The Class attendance and Written work methods have the most influence on the average mark but influence the graduates’ working future the least, as measured with assessments of professional aspects or competencies. In contrast, Problem-based learning, In-company internships and Practical and methodological knowledge are the methods that bear the most influence on the graduates’ professional careers and their development of specific professional competencies.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
ANECA. (2007). Informe ejecutivo. El profesional flexible en la sociedad del conocimiento. Madrid: ANECA.
2.
BaroneC.OrtizL. (2011). Overeducation among european university graduates: A comparative analysis of its incidence and the importance of higher education differentiation. Higher Education, 61, 325–337.
3.
BarrowL.RouseC. E. (2004). Using market valuation to assess public school spending. Journal of Public Economics, 88, 1747–1769.
4.
BeattieK.JamesR. (1997). Flexible coursework delivery to Australian postgraduates: How effective is the teaching and learning?Higher Education, 33, 177–194.
5.
BelfieldC. R.BullockA. D.FieldingA. (1999). Graduates’ view on the contribution of their higher education to their general development: A retrospective evaluation for the United Kingdom. Research in Higher Education, 40, 409–438.
6.
BenarrochA.NúñezG. (2015). Aprendizaje de competencias científicas versus aprendizaje de contenidos específicos. Una propuesta de evaluación. Enseñanza de las Ciencias, 33(2), 9–27.
7.
BrykA. S.RaudenbushS. W. (1992). Hierarchical linear models: Applications and data analysis methods. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
8.
De LeeuwJ.KreftI. G. G. (1986). Random coefficient models for multilevel analysis. Journal of Educational Statistics, 11, 57–85.
9.
DoltonP.MakepeaceG. M. (1990). Graduate earnings after six years: Who are the winners?Studies in Higher Education, 15, 31–55.
10.
DoltonP.MarcenaroO. D.NavarroL. (2003). The effective use of student time: A stochastic frontier production function case study. Economics of Education Review, 22, 547–560.
11.
Escolano-PérezE. (2014). Cognitive-motivational variables of beginner university students in the first year of adaptation to the European higher education area. Cultura y Educación, 26, 417–447.
12.
Franco-MariscalA. J. (2015). Competencias científicas en la enseñanza y el aprendizaje por investigación. Un estudio de caso sobre corrosión de metales en secundaria. Enseñanza de las Ciencias, 33(2), 231–252.
13.
FreemanS.EddyS. L.McDonoughM.SmithM. K.OkoroaforN.JordtH.WenderothM. P. (2014). Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering and mathematics. PNAS, 111, 8410–8415.
14.
JamesE.AlsalamN.ConatyJ. C.ToD. L. (1989). College quality and future earnings: Where should you send your child to college?American Economic Review, 79, 247–252. Retrieved fromhttp://www.jstor.org/stable/1827765
15.
KoenenA.-K.DochyF.BerghmansI. (2015). A phenomenographic analysis of the implementation of competence-based education in higher education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 50, 1–12.
16.
KruegerA. B. (2003). Economic considerations and class size. The Economic Journal, 113, F34–F63.
17.
KucelA.RóbertP.BuilM.MasferrerN. (2016). Entrepreneurial skills and education-job matching of higher education graduates. European Journal of Education, 51, 73–89.
18.
KucelA.Vilalta BufíM. (2013). Job satisfaction of university graduates. Revista de Economía Aplicada, 61(XXI), 29–55.
19.
LongfordN. T. (1993). Random coefficient models. Oxford, UK: Clarendon Press.
20.
McGuinnessS.WhelanA.BerginA. (2016). Is there a role for higher Eeducation institutions in improving the quality of first employment?B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, 16(4), 1–15.
21.
MengC.HeijkeH. (2005). Student time allocation, the learning environment, and the acquisition of competencies (ROA Research Memorandum ROA-RM2005/1E). Maastricht: Maastricht University.
22.
Moreno-FernándezO.Moreno-CrespoP. (2015). From research question to scientific publication: Educational innovation with university students. Cultura y Educación, 27, 899–928.
23.
Murillo TorrecillaF. J. (2008). Los modelos multinivel como herramienta para la investigación educativa. Magis, Revista Internacional de Investigación en Educación, 1, 45–62.
24.
PardoA.RuízM. A.San MartínR. (2007). Cómo ajustar e interpretar modelos multinivel con SPSS. Psicothema, 19, 308–321.
25.
PescarellaE. T.SmartJ. C.SmylieM. A. (1992). College tuition costs and early career socio-economic achievement: Do you get what you pay for?Higher Education, 24, 275–290.
26.
PischkeJ. (2007). The impact of length of school year on student performance and earnings: Evidence from the German short school years. The Economic Journal, 117, 1216–1242.
27.
RivkinS. G.HanushekE. A.KainJ. F. (2005). Teachers, schools, and academic achievement. Econometrica, 73, 417–458.
28.
RouseC. E.KruegerA. B. (2004). Putting computerized instruction to the test: A randomized evaluation of a ‘scientifically-based’ reading program. Economics of Education Review, 23, 323–338.
29.
Salas-VelascoM. (2014). Do higher education institutions make a difference in competence development? A model of competence production at university. Higher Education, 68, 503–523.
30.
StorenL. A.AamodtP. O. (2010). The quality of higher education and employability of graduates. Quality in Higher Education, 16, 297–313.
31.
StruyvenK.De MeystM. (2010). Competence-based teacher education: Illusion or reality? An assessment of the implementation status in Flanders from teachers’ and students’ points of view. Teaching and Teacher Education, 26, 1495–1510.
32.
SulemanA. (2016). A fuzy clustering approach to evaluate individual competencies from REFLEX data. Journal of Applied Statistics, 1–21. doi:10.1080/02664763.2016.1257589
33.
SweetmanR.HovdhaugenE.KarlsenH. (2014). Learning outcomes across disciplinary divides and contrasting national higher education traditions. Tertiary Education and Management, 20, 179–192.
34.
TeixeiraP.TeixeiraP. N.CardosoS.RosaM. J.MagalhãesA. (2016). Graduates’ perceptions about labour market competencies: Does the type of institution and programme make a difference?Higher Education Policy, 29, 109–129.
35.
ToddP. E.WolpinD. I. (2003). On the specification and estimation of the production function for cognitive achievement. The Economic Journal, 113, F3–F33.
36.
VaastraR.De VriesR. (2007). The effect of the learning environment on competences and training for the workplace according to graduates. Higher Education, 53, 335–357.
37.
Van der VeldenR. (2013). Measuring competences in higher education. What next? In Sigrid BlömekeS.Zlatkin-TroitschanskaiaO.KuhnC.FegeJ. (Eds), Modeling and measuring competencies in higher education: Tasks and challenges (pp. 207–217). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.
38.
VilaL. E.DávilaC. D.MoraJ. G. (2010). Competencias para la innovación en las universidades de América Latina: un análisis empírico. Revista Iberoamericana de Educación Superior, 1(1), 5–23.
