Use of digital rubrics in Master's programs in Education. A qualitative study in Higher Education
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
This article analyzes the alignment between digital rubrics and academic performance in Master's programs in Education with a qualitative approach in Higher Education, in order to propose an institutional improvement system for their management. The research was conducted under the interpretive paradigm. A qualitative approach was adopted to carry out a case study. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with teachers, program coordinators, and the quality assurance manager related to the master's degree program. The inductive method was used to analyze the information. ATLAS.ti software facilitated the processing of emerging categories and subcategories. The findings show an alignment between digital rubrics and learning outcomes, but also gaps in the application of the former to assess academic performance in the aforementioned master's degree program. There is a perceived tendency to bureaucratize and limit the use of data generated by digital rubrics to evaluate study programs and guide institutional decision-making as part of quality processes. Therefore, it is concluded that in order to improve assessment through the use of digital rubrics, coordinated institutional management is important to enhance design aspects, the proposed application of pedagogical approaches, and analytical utilization. In this regard, improvement strategies are suggested based on technical design, teacher training, inter-rater calibration, and the strategic use of data.
Keywords: digital rubrics, master's degree, higher education, learning assessment, academic performance.
Downloads
Article Details
Section
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish in this journal agree to the following terms: Authors retain the copyright and guarantee the journal the right to be the first publication of the work, as well as, licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others share the work with an acknowledgment of the authorship of the work and the initial publication in this journal. Authors may separately establish additional agreements for the non-exclusive distribution of the version of the work published in the journal (for example, placing it in an institutional repository or publishing it in a book), with acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal. Authors are allowed and encouraged to disseminate their work electronically (for example, in institutional repositories or on their own website) before and during the submission process, as it may lead to productive exchanges as well as further citation earliest and oldest of published works.
How to Cite
References
Astigarraga, E., Mongelos, A., y Carrera, X. (2020). Evaluación basada en los Resultados de Aprendizaje: Una Experiencia en la Universidad. Revista Iberoamericana De Evaluación Educativa, 13(2), 27-48. https://doi.org/10.15366/riee2020.13.2.002
Borjas García, J. E. (2020). Validez y confiabilidad en la recolección y análisis de datos bajo un enfoque cualitativo. Trascender, contabilidad y gestión, 5(15), 79-97. https://doi.org/10.36791/tcg.v0i15.90
Brennan, R. L. (2001). Generalizability theory. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4757-3456-0
CACES. (2023). Modelo de evaluación externa con fines de acreditación para el aseguramiento de la calidad de las universidades y escuelas politécnicas (UEP). Quito: Consejo de Aseguramiento de la Calidad de la Educación Superior. https://www.caces.gob.ec/wp-content/uploads/2023/12/Modelo-de-Evaluacio%CC
CACES. (2024a). Modelo de evaluación externa 2024 con fines de acreditación para los institutos superiores técnicos y tecnológicos (ISTT). Quito: Consejo de Aseguramiento de la Calidad de la Educación Superior. https://www.caces.gob.ec/wp-content/uploads/Documents/
CACES. (2024b). Guía del modelo de evaluación externa 2024 con fines de acreditación para los institutos superiores técnicos y tecnológicos. Quito: Consejo de Aseguramiento de la Calidad de la Educación Superior. https://www.caces.gob.ec/wp-content/uploads/downloads/gaceta/
Consejo de Educación Superior (CES). (2024). Plan de Desarrollo del Sistema de Educación Superior 2022–2026. Quito: CES. https://www.ces.gob.ec/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/Plan-de-Desarrollo-SES-2022-2026-12-08-2024.pdf
Córdoba Peralta, A. L., & Lanuza Saavedra, E. M. (2021). Breve revisión conceptual sobre la evaluación de los resultados académicos en el sistema educativo. Revista Científica Estelí, 36–48. https://doi.org/10.5377/farem.v0i0.11606
Creswell, J. W., and Plano Clark, V. L. (2018). Designing and conducting mixed methods research (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications.
Espinoza Mosquera, J. S., Sánchez Morales, E. A., Macias Jama, J. D., Preciado Sandoval, L. L., y Tapia Soria, J. A. (2024). E-Rubrics como Estrategia de Evaluación en el Proceso Enseñanza en Educación Superior. Ciencia Latina Revista Científica Multidisciplinar, 8(6), 684-705. https://doi.org/10.37811/cl_rcm.v8i6.14748
García Hevia, S., Lozano Numerable, E. G., y Lozano Numerable, J. L. (2025). Integración de rúbricas digitales en la evaluación académica: Un Enfoque para optimizar la calidad educativa en instituciones técnicas. MQRInvestigar, 9(2), e501. https://doi.org/10.56048/MQR20225.9.2.2025.e501
Gil Lazala, R. M. (2025). Uso de herramientas digitales en la evaluación educativa: experiencias y desafíos en América Latina. Pedagogical Constellations, 4(1), 262-279. https://doi.org/10.69821/constellations.v4i1.97
Hernández Sampieri, R. y Mendoza, C (2018). Metodología de la investigación. Las rutas cuantitativa, cualitativa y mixta. Ciudad de México, México: Editorial Mc Graw Hill Education.
Jonsson, A., and Svingby, G. (2007). The use of scoring rubrics: Reliability, validity and educational consequences. Educational Research Review, 2(2), 130-144. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2007.05.002
Kane, M. T. (2013). Validating the interpretations and uses of test scores. Journal of Educational Measurement, 50(1), 1–73. https://doi.org/10.1111/jedm.12000
Kvale, S., and Brinkmann, S. (2014). InterViews: Learning the craft of qualitative research interviewing (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications.
Lincoln, Y. S. and Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic Inquiry. SAGE. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0147-1767(85)90062-8
Martínez-Miguélez, M. (2004). Ciencia y arte en la metodología cualitativa. México: Trillas.
Messick, S. (1995). Validity of psychological assessment: Validation of inferences from persons’ responses and performances as scientific inquiry. American Psychologist, 50(9), 741–749. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.50.9.741
Millán Franco, M. y Domínguez de la Rosa, L. (2024). La revisión bibliográfica sistemática y la investigación cualitativa: Manual para las ciencias sociales (Parte 1/2). En S. Escobar Fuentes y F. M. Montalbán Peregrín (Dirs.). La práctica de la metodología cualitativa (pp. 45-54). Dykinson. https://www.dykinson.com/libros/la-practica-de-la-metodologia-cualitativa/9788410707276/
Nowell, L. S., Norris, J. M., White, D. E., and Moules, N. J. (2017). Thematic analysis: Striving to meet the trustworthiness criteria. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 16(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406917733847
Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). (2024). Education at a Glance 2024: OECD indicators. Paris: OECD Publishing. https://www.oecd.org/content/dam/oecd/en/publications/reports/2024/09/education-at-a-glance-2024_5ea68448/c00cad36-en.pdf
Panadero, E., Jonsson, A., Pinedo, L., y Fernández-Castilla, B. (2023). Effects of rubrics on academic performance, self-regulated learning, and self-efficacy: A meta-analytic review. Educational Psychology Review, 35, 113. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10648-023-09823-4
Paula Veloz, N. (2025). Asistente de Inteligencia Artificial para la creación de rúbricas para educación superior. Other. https://hdl.handle.net/10115/84778
Pérez Ripossio, R. (2023). Validez y confiabilidad en la investigación cualitativa: una propuesta de interpretación teórica-empírica. En Actas. Red Latinoamericana de Metodología de las Ciencias Sociales. http://www.memoria.fahce.unlp.edu.ar/trab_eventos/ev.17283/ev.17283.pdf
Saldana, J. (2021). The Coding Manual for Qualitative Researchers. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications Limited.
SENESCYT (Secretaría de Educación Superior, Ciencia, Tecnología e Innovación). (2022). Plan Estratégico Institucional 2021–2025. Quito: SENESCYT. https://www.educacionsuperior.gob.ec/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/Plan-Estrate%CC%81gico-Institucional-2021-2025-Senescyt.pdf
UNEMI. Vicerrectorado Académico de Formación de Grado. (2024). Temarios. Admisión Grado. UNEMI. https://admisiongrado.unemi.edu.ec/files/TEMARIOS_1S_2024.pdf
UNESCO. (2023). Global Education Monitoring Report 2023: Technology in education – A tool on whose terms? Paris: UNESCO. https://www.hapsc.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/2023-Global-Education-Monitoring-Report.pdf
Vlachopoulos, D., y Makri, A. (2024). A systematic literature review on authentic assessment in higher education: Best practices for the development of 21st-century skills, and policy considerations. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 83, 101425. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0191491X24001044