Search

Tutoring is one of the methodological resources which has undoubtedly experienced a deepest evolution since the implantation of the European Higher Education Area (EHEA). Tutorial conception as a merely legal obligation to address students' doubts has given rise to the use of tutorials as one of the most useful methods to develop certain skills and competences, in addition to its contribution to the learning of the subject in which they are inserted. This paper analyzes, from the perspective of developed innovative teaching experiences, the evolution of traditional mentoring until the current use that can be made of them as an interactive forum of equals, and, moreover, suggesting a classification. Finally, this paper shows a new breakthrough in the role of tutoring supported on new technologies as a suitable means of contrasting opinions, encouraging critical thinking and building student's autonomous thought. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Throughout the last decades of the twentieth century and the beginning of the twenty-first, the teaching of English for specific and/or professional and academic purposes has probably constituted one of the most innovative areas in the Spanish University. With the advent of the Bologna reform, the theory and praxis of this dynamic field of knowledge has enhanced its range of activity, so as to include not only students, but also lecturers, whithin its concerns. The result can be measured by the innumerable variety of CLIL (Content Language Integrated Learning) teacher training experiences carried out along the Spanish Tertiary Education geography. This paper has two main purposes: on one hand, to give the account of the CLIL teacher training at the UPCT (included in the larger frame of teaching innovation programs), under its corresponding theoretical approach and bearing in mind the particular circumstances of the institution. On the other hand, to pose questions about the future perspectives of similar experiences in a teaching context that is becoming more and more complex and 'hybrid' from its very foundations. The partial conclusions of this study depict a global teaching/professional scenario that is both challenging and appealing, which must be seriously dealt with from the Universities and our common European administrative framework alike. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The process of building the European Higher Education Area (EHEA) has not been without controversy and different levels of interpretation in its creation, foundation and development. The aim of this paper is to portray the situation and go beyond the theoretical study, based on official documents which have accompanied and complemented meetings of European ministers responsible for higher education. From these deep interviews, in semi-structured format, we found interesting to capture the views, expectations and perceptions of responsible and active actors in the process of building the EHEA: Guy Haug, Domenico Lenarduzzi, Marius Rubiralta, Eric Froment, Josep M. Bricall and Jorge Fernández Díaz. All of them with political and university relevance have been implicated from different institutions: European Conference of Rectors, European University Association, Department of Education of the European Commission and various Ministries of Higher Education. Their contributions have provided knowledge to contrast and offer a better understanding of EHEA display. Based on the triangulation of the contributions of the interviewees and the review of official documents and statements the study concludes that the university (together with the research - European Research Area and lifelong learning - European Lifelong Learning Area) is the fundamental hinge for society development and European seal. But it needs to adapt to changing times and to be linked to competitiveness and efficiency. It also needs to provide more and better cooperation and proximity to encourage mobility and mutual recognition. Besides, the creation of EHEA corresponds to a power struggle between the University autonomy rights, the legislative right of state governments and the European Commission's recommendations. However, all of them agree to raise a self-critical reflection as regards the diffusion of information so as to avoid possible misinterpretation or misunderstanding and enable more and better ways of participation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Evaluation is a process whose results can be used to make improvements in the teaching‐learning process. From this view, evaluation is largely used within the bound which is maintained with the students, but its contributions to teachers’ learning can be wasted. Also, the information obtained from evaluation makes it possible to regulate the factors involved in teaching. To that end, we must pay attention to all the agents (teachers, students, contents, the classroom and the academic environment) and collect data in natural contexts. Evaluation does not close the circle; this is supplemented by the adjustments which are introduced into the process using the results obtained. In a sense, the adjustment phase is turned by natural evolution into the framework of conditions for the planning phase of the next stage, and so the circle begins again (Zabalza, 2009). In this paper, in the first place, we present the students’ evaluation as a process that regulates the teacher’s practice, that is, as an instrument to analyze the teaching‐learning process. Secondly, we describe the results obtained by conducting a survey. The analysis of the information collected through that instrument was carried out on the basis proposed by Grounded Theory, a qualitative methodology developed by Strauss and Corbin (1998) that can lead to a new theoretical framework based on the collection and systematic analysis of data. Furthermore, the resulting data have been linked with other quantitative data shown in another context (Daura y Amarante, 2011). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]