Design and content validity of a socioformative rubric to evaluate investigative skills in postgraduate
Descripción del Articulo
In the present investigation, an instrument for evaluating postgraduate research competencies was designed and validated in content. For its design, aspects evidenced in the development of the thesis work were integrated. The instrument was reviewed by four experts for the facie validity analysis an...
Autores: | , , |
---|---|
Formato: | artículo |
Fecha de Publicación: | 2021 |
Institución: | Universidad Peruana Unión |
Repositorio: | Revista UPEU - Revista de Investigación Apuntes Universitarios |
Lenguaje: | español |
OAI Identifier: | oai:ojs2.apuntesuniversitarios.upeu.edu.pe:article/632 |
Enlace del recurso: | https://apuntesuniversitarios.upeu.edu.pe/index.php/revapuntes/article/view/632 |
Nivel de acceso: | acceso abierto |
Materia: | Socioformative rubric investigative competencies validity reliability expert judgment Rúbrica socioformativa competencias investigativas validez confiabilidad juicio de expertos |
id |
2304-0335_7685c034211e4a666dd605504c02d1d0 |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:ojs2.apuntesuniversitarios.upeu.edu.pe:article/632 |
network_acronym_str |
2304-0335 |
repository_id_str |
. |
network_name_str |
Revista UPEU - Revista de Investigación Apuntes Universitarios |
spelling |
Design and content validity of a socioformative rubric to evaluate investigative skills in postgraduateDiseño y validez de contenido de una rúbrica analítica socioformativa para evaluar competencias investigativas en posgradoAliaga Pacora, Alicia AgromelisJuárez Hernández, Luis GibranHerrera Meza, RaúlSocioformative rubricinvestigative competenciesvalidityreliabilityexpert judgmentRúbrica socioformativacompetencias investigativasvalidezconfiabilidadjuicio de expertosIn the present investigation, an instrument for evaluating postgraduate research competencies was designed and validated in content. For its design, aspects evidenced in the development of the thesis work were integrated. The instrument was reviewed by four experts for the facie validity analysis and an expert judgment was made for the content validity analysis. At the end of these phases, an instrument was piloted with 38 advisers to assess the degree of understanding of instructions and items, as well as the reliability of the instrument. The instrument was designed as a socio-formative analytical rubric integrating five aspects of the development of the thesis work through 11 items and for each of them five levels of performance with their own descriptor. The experts expressed writing suggestions to optimize the rubric. The expert judges validated the items in content (Aiken's V> 0.80; LV CI 95%>0.75). The piloting showed a good degree of understanding of the instructions and items and relevance of the questions and it was determined that the instrument has reliability (Cronbach's Alpha: 0.832). A valid content instrument is presented; however, it is necessary to continue with the analysis of its psychometric properties (construct validity and reliability)En la presente investigación, se diseñó y validó en contenido un instrumento para evaluar competencias investigativas en posgrado. Para su diseño se integraron aspectos evidenciados en el desarrollo del trabajo de tesis. El instrumento fue revisado por cuatro expertos para el análisis de validez de facie y para el análisis de validez de contenido se efectuó un juicio de expertos. Concluidas estas fases se realizó un pilotaje del instrumento con 38 asesores para evaluar el grado de comprensión de instrucciones e ítems, así como la confiabilidad del instrumento. El instrumento se diseñó como rúbrica analítica socioformativa integrando cinco aspectos del desarrollo del trabajo de tesis a través de 11 ítems y para cada uno de ellos cinco niveles de desempeño con un descriptor propio. Los expertos expresaron sugerencias de redacción para optimizar la rúbrica. Los jueces expertos validaron en contenido los ítems (V de Aiken>0.80; VI del IC al 95%>0.75). El pilotaje mostró un buen grado de comprensión de las instrucciones e ítems y relevancia de las preguntas y se determinó que el instrumento posee confiabilidad (Alfa de Cronbach: 0.832). Se presenta un instrumento válido en contenido, sin embargo, se requiere proseguir con el análisis de sus propiedades psicométricas (validez de constructo y confiabilidad).Universidad Peruana Unión2021-01-23info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionArtículo revisado por paresapplication/pdftext/htmlhttps://apuntesuniversitarios.upeu.edu.pe/index.php/revapuntes/article/view/63210.17162/au.v11i2.632Apuntes Universitarios; Vol. 11 Núm. 2 (2021): Revista de Investigación Apuntes Universitarios; 62 - 822304-03352225-713610.17162/au.v11i2reponame:Revista UPEU - Revista de Investigación Apuntes Universitariosinstname:Universidad Peruana Unióninstacron:UPEUspahttps://apuntesuniversitarios.upeu.edu.pe/index.php/revapuntes/article/view/632/719https://apuntesuniversitarios.upeu.edu.pe/index.php/revapuntes/article/view/632/731Derechos de autor 2021 Alicia Agromelis Aliaga Pacora, Luis Gibran Juárez Hernández, Raúl Herrera Mezahttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess2021-05-30T16:15:26Zmail@mail.com - |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Design and content validity of a socioformative rubric to evaluate investigative skills in postgraduate Diseño y validez de contenido de una rúbrica analítica socioformativa para evaluar competencias investigativas en posgrado |
title |
Design and content validity of a socioformative rubric to evaluate investigative skills in postgraduate |
spellingShingle |
Design and content validity of a socioformative rubric to evaluate investigative skills in postgraduate Aliaga Pacora, Alicia Agromelis Socioformative rubric investigative competencies validity reliability expert judgment Rúbrica socioformativa competencias investigativas validez confiabilidad juicio de expertos |
title_short |
Design and content validity of a socioformative rubric to evaluate investigative skills in postgraduate |
title_full |
Design and content validity of a socioformative rubric to evaluate investigative skills in postgraduate |
title_fullStr |
Design and content validity of a socioformative rubric to evaluate investigative skills in postgraduate |
title_full_unstemmed |
Design and content validity of a socioformative rubric to evaluate investigative skills in postgraduate |
title_sort |
Design and content validity of a socioformative rubric to evaluate investigative skills in postgraduate |
dc.creator.none.fl_str_mv |
Aliaga Pacora, Alicia Agromelis Juárez Hernández, Luis Gibran Herrera Meza, Raúl |
author |
Aliaga Pacora, Alicia Agromelis |
author_facet |
Aliaga Pacora, Alicia Agromelis Juárez Hernández, Luis Gibran Herrera Meza, Raúl |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Juárez Hernández, Luis Gibran Herrera Meza, Raúl |
author2_role |
author author |
dc.subject.none.fl_str_mv |
Socioformative rubric investigative competencies validity reliability expert judgment Rúbrica socioformativa competencias investigativas validez confiabilidad juicio de expertos |
topic |
Socioformative rubric investigative competencies validity reliability expert judgment Rúbrica socioformativa competencias investigativas validez confiabilidad juicio de expertos |
dc.description.none.fl_txt_mv |
In the present investigation, an instrument for evaluating postgraduate research competencies was designed and validated in content. For its design, aspects evidenced in the development of the thesis work were integrated. The instrument was reviewed by four experts for the facie validity analysis and an expert judgment was made for the content validity analysis. At the end of these phases, an instrument was piloted with 38 advisers to assess the degree of understanding of instructions and items, as well as the reliability of the instrument. The instrument was designed as a socio-formative analytical rubric integrating five aspects of the development of the thesis work through 11 items and for each of them five levels of performance with their own descriptor. The experts expressed writing suggestions to optimize the rubric. The expert judges validated the items in content (Aiken's V> 0.80; LV CI 95%>0.75). The piloting showed a good degree of understanding of the instructions and items and relevance of the questions and it was determined that the instrument has reliability (Cronbach's Alpha: 0.832). A valid content instrument is presented; however, it is necessary to continue with the analysis of its psychometric properties (construct validity and reliability) En la presente investigación, se diseñó y validó en contenido un instrumento para evaluar competencias investigativas en posgrado. Para su diseño se integraron aspectos evidenciados en el desarrollo del trabajo de tesis. El instrumento fue revisado por cuatro expertos para el análisis de validez de facie y para el análisis de validez de contenido se efectuó un juicio de expertos. Concluidas estas fases se realizó un pilotaje del instrumento con 38 asesores para evaluar el grado de comprensión de instrucciones e ítems, así como la confiabilidad del instrumento. El instrumento se diseñó como rúbrica analítica socioformativa integrando cinco aspectos del desarrollo del trabajo de tesis a través de 11 ítems y para cada uno de ellos cinco niveles de desempeño con un descriptor propio. Los expertos expresaron sugerencias de redacción para optimizar la rúbrica. Los jueces expertos validaron en contenido los ítems (V de Aiken>0.80; VI del IC al 95%>0.75). El pilotaje mostró un buen grado de comprensión de las instrucciones e ítems y relevancia de las preguntas y se determinó que el instrumento posee confiabilidad (Alfa de Cronbach: 0.832). Se presenta un instrumento válido en contenido, sin embargo, se requiere proseguir con el análisis de sus propiedades psicométricas (validez de constructo y confiabilidad). |
description |
In the present investigation, an instrument for evaluating postgraduate research competencies was designed and validated in content. For its design, aspects evidenced in the development of the thesis work were integrated. The instrument was reviewed by four experts for the facie validity analysis and an expert judgment was made for the content validity analysis. At the end of these phases, an instrument was piloted with 38 advisers to assess the degree of understanding of instructions and items, as well as the reliability of the instrument. The instrument was designed as a socio-formative analytical rubric integrating five aspects of the development of the thesis work through 11 items and for each of them five levels of performance with their own descriptor. The experts expressed writing suggestions to optimize the rubric. The expert judges validated the items in content (Aiken's V> 0.80; LV CI 95%>0.75). The piloting showed a good degree of understanding of the instructions and items and relevance of the questions and it was determined that the instrument has reliability (Cronbach's Alpha: 0.832). A valid content instrument is presented; however, it is necessary to continue with the analysis of its psychometric properties (construct validity and reliability) |
publishDate |
2021 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2021-01-23 |
dc.type.none.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion Artículo revisado por pares |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.none.fl_str_mv |
https://apuntesuniversitarios.upeu.edu.pe/index.php/revapuntes/article/view/632 10.17162/au.v11i2.632 |
url |
https://apuntesuniversitarios.upeu.edu.pe/index.php/revapuntes/article/view/632 |
identifier_str_mv |
10.17162/au.v11i2.632 |
dc.language.none.fl_str_mv |
spa |
language |
spa |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
https://apuntesuniversitarios.upeu.edu.pe/index.php/revapuntes/article/view/632/719 https://apuntesuniversitarios.upeu.edu.pe/index.php/revapuntes/article/view/632/731 |
dc.rights.none.fl_str_mv |
Derechos de autor 2021 Alicia Agromelis Aliaga Pacora, Luis Gibran Juárez Hernández, Raúl Herrera Meza https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
rights_invalid_str_mv |
Derechos de autor 2021 Alicia Agromelis Aliaga Pacora, Luis Gibran Juárez Hernández, Raúl Herrera Meza https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf text/html |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Universidad Peruana Unión |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Universidad Peruana Unión |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
Apuntes Universitarios; Vol. 11 Núm. 2 (2021): Revista de Investigación Apuntes Universitarios; 62 - 82 2304-0335 2225-7136 10.17162/au.v11i2 reponame:Revista UPEU - Revista de Investigación Apuntes Universitarios instname:Universidad Peruana Unión instacron:UPEU |
reponame_str |
Revista UPEU - Revista de Investigación Apuntes Universitarios |
collection |
Revista UPEU - Revista de Investigación Apuntes Universitarios |
instname_str |
Universidad Peruana Unión |
instacron_str |
UPEU |
institution |
UPEU |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
-
|
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
mail@mail.com |
_version_ |
1701200634381860864 |
score |
13.871978 |
Nota importante:
La información contenida en este registro es de entera responsabilidad de la institución que gestiona el repositorio institucional donde esta contenido este documento o set de datos. El CONCYTEC no se hace responsable por los contenidos (publicaciones y/o datos) accesibles a través del Repositorio Nacional Digital de Ciencia, Tecnología e Innovación de Acceso Abierto (ALICIA).
La información contenida en este registro es de entera responsabilidad de la institución que gestiona el repositorio institucional donde esta contenido este documento o set de datos. El CONCYTEC no se hace responsable por los contenidos (publicaciones y/o datos) accesibles a través del Repositorio Nacional Digital de Ciencia, Tecnología e Innovación de Acceso Abierto (ALICIA).