Estrategias de retroalimentación docente y autorregulación del aprendizaje en estudiantes del segundo ciclo de educación básica

Juan Carlos Cárdenas Valverde; Irina Giovanna Flores-Poma; Susan Fabiola Cárdenas Valverde; Kimberly Johana Cárdenas-Flores; Jean Edward Cárdenas-Flores; Wilfredo César Salazar Mucha

doi:10.61286/e-rms.v4i.531

Autores/as

Juan Carlos Cárdenas Valverde Universidad Nacional Autónoma Altoandina de Tarma (UNAAT), Tarma, Perú. https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1744-5746
Irina Giovanna Flores-Poma Universidad para el Desarrollo Andino (UDEA), Lircay-Huancavelica, Perú https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8563-6758
Susan Fabiola Cárdenas Valverde Dirección Regional de Salud Junín, Perú https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1222-6747
Kimberly Johana Cárdenas-Flores Universidad Tecnológica Baden Powell (UTBP), México https://orcid.org/0009-0005-1850-528X
Jean Edward Cárdenas-Flores Universidad Tecnológica Baden Powell (UTBP), México https://orcid.org/0009-0008-2888-5660
Wilfredo César Salazar Mucha Instituto de Educación Superior Pedagógico Público José Crespo y Castillo, Aucayacu, Leoncio Prado, Huánuco, Perú https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2961-5303

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.61286/e-rms.v4i.531

Palabras clave:

retroalimentación, evaluación del alumno, rendimiento escolar, métodos de enseñanza, aprendizaje autónomo

Resumen

La retroalimentación docente puede limitarse a señalar aciertos y errores sin orientar la mejora, lo que restringe su aporte a la autorregulación del aprendizaje. El objetivo fue determinar la relación entre las estrategias de retroalimentación percibidas (incorrecta, elemental, descriptiva, por descubrimiento y formativa), la autorregulación del aprendizaje y el rendimiento académico en estudiantes del segundo ciclo de educación básica durante el año lectivo 2025. Se desarrolló un estudio cuantitativo, no experimental, transversal y correlacional-explicativo, con una población de 349 estudiantes y una muestra probabilística estratificada de 184, calculada con la fórmula para poblaciones finitas. Se aplicaron un cuestionario de 25 ítems (CER-5), validado mediante juicio de expertos, análisis factorial exploratorio y coeficientes de confiabilidad, una escala de autorregulación y el promedio anual de calificaciones. El análisis incluyó estadística descriptiva, correlaciones de Pearson con intervalos de confianza del 95 %, comparaciones por grado (ANOVA) y regresión lineal múltiple, con nivel de significación de 0,05 y tamaños de efecto. Los resultados mostraron que la retroalimentación formativa y la descriptiva se asociaron positivamente con la autorregulación (r = 0,68; p < 0,001 y r = 0,45; p < 0,001, respectivamente), mientras que la incorrecta mostró una asociación negativa (r = −0,26; p < 0,001); el modelo de regresión lineal múltiple explicó el 48,7 % de la varianza ajustada (R² ajustado = 0,487). Se concluye que resulta necesario fortalecer las competencias metodológicas docentes para ofrecer retroalimentación específica, oportuna y accionable, reconociendo que el diseño transversal permite hablar de asociación y no de causalidad.

Descargas

Los datos de descargas todavía no están disponibles.

Citas

Brummer, L., de Boer, H., Mouw, J. M., & Strijbos, J. W. (2024). A meta-analysis of the effects of context, content, and task factors of digitally delivered instructional feedback on learning performance. Learning Environments Research, 27, 453–476. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10984-024-09501-4

Butler, R. (1988). Enhancing and undermining intrinsic motivation: The effects of task-involving and ego-involving evaluation on interest and performance. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 58(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8279.1988.tb00874.x

Cai, Z., Gui, Y., Mao, P., Wang, Z., Hao, X., Fan, X., & Tai, R. H. (2023). The effect of feedback on academic achievement in technology-rich learning environments (TREs): A meta-analytic review. Educational Research Review, 39, 100521. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2023.100521

Chua, H. L., Lee, S. H., & Fulmer, G. W. (2017). Action research on the effect of descriptive and evaluative feedback order on student learning in a specialized mathematics and science secondary school. Asia-Pacific Science Education, 3, 4. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41029-017-0015-y

Eskreis-Winkler, L., & Fishbach, A. (2019). Not learning from failure—the greatest failure of all. Psychological Science, 30(12), 1733–1744. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797619881133

Granberg, C., Palm, T., & Palmberg, B. (2021). A case study of a formative assessment practice and the effects on students' self-regulated learning. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 68, Article 100955. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2020.100955

Grundmann, F., Scheibe, S., & Epstude, K. (2021). When ignoring negative feedback is functional: Presenting a model of motivated feedback disengagement. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 30(1), 3–10. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721420969386

He, J., Liu, Y., Zhao, W., Xie, K., & Zhang, D. (2026). The impact of social-affective support feedback on students' science inquiry learning. Learning and Motivation, 94, 102270. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lmot.2026.102270

He, J., Liu, Y., Zhao, W., Xie, K., & Zhang, D. (2026). The impact of social-affective support feedback on students’ science inquiry learning. Learning And Motivation, 94, 102270. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lmot.2026.102270

Hernández Rivero, V. M., Santana Bonilla, P. J., & Sosa Alonso, J. J. (2021). Feedback y autorregulación del aprendizaje en educación superior. Revista de Investigación Educativa, 39(1), 227–248. https://doi.org/10.6018/rie.423341

Huang, CQ., Lu, LN., Huang, QH. et al. Effects of Artificial Intelligence Feedback on Students’ Self-Regulated Learning in Higher Education: A Three-Level Meta-Analysis. Educ Psychol Rev 38, 64 (2026). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-026-10166-z

Irawati, I., Raja, P., & Nainggolan, F. (2020). Teacher's corrective feedback within discovery learning strategy to enhance students' writing accuracy. U-JET, 9(1).

Leung, A., Fine, P., Blizard, R., Tonni, I., & Louca, C. (2021). Teacher feedback and student learning: A quantitative study. European Journal of Dental Education, 25(3), 600–606. https://doi.org/10.1111/eje.12637

Lindner, C., Grund, A., & Schmid, S. (2015). Assessing self-regulated learning: Validation of the Spanish SRLIS adaptation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 107(2), 430–442.

Mak, P. (2019). From traditional to alternative feedback: What do L2 elementary students think? International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 29(1), 109–129. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijal.12250

Mercer, M., & Gulseren, D. B. (2024). When negative feedback harms: A systematic review of the unintended consequences of negative feedback on psychological, attitudinal, and behavioral responses. Studies in Higher Education, 49(4), 654–669. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2023.2248490

Mercer, M., & Gulseren, D. B. (2024). When negative feedback harms: a systematic review of the unintended consequences of negative feedback on psychological, attitudinal, and behavioral responses. Studies in Higher Education, 49(4), 654–669. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2023.2248490

Merrick, M., & Fyfe, E. R. (2024). Right or wrong? How feedback content and source influence children's mathematics performance and persistence. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 241, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2024.105865

Merrick, M., & Fyfe, E. R. (2024). Right or wrong? How feedback content and source influence children’s mathematics performance and persistence. Journal Of Experimental Child Psychology, 241, 105865. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2024.105865

Mertens, U. and Lindner, M.A. (2025), Computer-Based Answer-Until-Correct and Elaborated Feedback: Effects on Affective-Motivational and Performance Outcomes. J Comput Assist Learn, 41: e13112. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.13112

Mertens, U., & Lindner, M. A. (2025). Computer-based answer-until-correct and elaborated feedback: Effects on affective-motivational and performance outcomes. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 41(2), e13112. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.13112

Narumi, S., & Kartono, K. (2020). The application of fast feedback in discovery learning on the achievement of critical thinking ability reviewed from adversity quotient. Unnes Journal of Mathematics Education, 9(3), 166–175. https://doi.org/10.15294/ujme.v9i3.41862

Rodgers, C. R. (2006). Attending to student voice: The impact of descriptive feedback on learning and teaching. Curriculum Inquiry, 36(2), 209–237. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-873X.2006.00353.x

Tunstall, P., & Gipps, C. (1996). Teacher feedback to young children in formative assessment: A typology. British Educational Research Journal, 22(4), 389–404. https://doi.org/10.1080/0141192960220402

Wang, Z., Gong, S.-Y., Xu, S., & Hu, X.-E. (2019). Elaborated feedback and learning: Examining cognitive and motivational influences. Computers & Education, 136, 130–140. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.04.003

Xiao, Y., & Yang, M. (2019). Formative assessment and self-regulated learning: How formative assessment supports students' self-regulation in English language learning. System, 81, 39–49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2019.01.004

Zimmerman, B. J., & Martinez-Pons, M. (1986). Development of a structured interview for assessing student use of self-regulated learning strategies. American Educational Research Journal, 23(4), 614–628.

Zulfa, A., Kartono, K., & Cahyono, A. N. (2021). Mathematical communication skills in terms of self efficacy through guided discovery learning assisted immediate feedback. Unnes Journal of Mathematics Education Research, 10(Special Issue A), 75–82.