Evaluación del aprendizaje de Ciencias Naturales en la Básica Superior: una perspectiva teórica
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.64736/ueplc.2025.v8.n1.9Palabras clave:
evaluación del estudiante, capacidad, enseñanza de ciencias fundamentales, retroinformación (aprendizaje)Resumen
Este artículo teórico examina la evaluación del aprendizaje de Ciencias Naturales en la básica superior ecuatoriana desde un enfoque formativo y competencial, articulando aportes de la literatura especializada y del Marco curricular competencial de aprendizajes. Se analiza la transición desde modelos sumativos centrados en la memorización hacia perspectivas que conciben la evaluación como un proceso regulador del aprendizaje, apoyado en evidencias, retroalimentación descriptiva, diálogo pedagógico y participación activa del estudiantado. Asimismo, se aborda la evaluación de competencias científicas entendidas como la capacidad de investigar, interpretar datos, argumentar con base en evidencia y tomar decisiones fundamentadas en contextos reales, lo que exige tareas auténticas, criterios explícitos y descriptores de desempeño coherentes. La revisión de investigaciones recientes muestra que prácticas como la coevaluación, la autoevaluación, el uso de rúbricas y la retroalimentación mediada por tecnología inciden tanto en el aprendizaje conceptual como en la motivación y la autorregulación. También se identifican tensiones entre el discurso competencial del currículo y las prácticas evaluativas tradicionales, condicionadas por pruebas estandarizadas, formación docente limitada y brechas digitales. El análisis argumenta que integrar evaluación formativa y evaluación por competencias implica transformar la cultura evaluativa del aula, replantear el rol del docente y diseñar dispositivos que observen procesos, razonamientos y desempeños científicos contextualizados. El artículo ofrece un marco conceptual destinado a orientar a docentes y formadores en la construcción de prácticas evaluativas coherentes con la alfabetización científica y las demandas pedagógicas de la básica superior en Ecuador.
Descargas
Referencias
AlAli, R., & Al-Barakat, A. (2025). Enhancing young children’s science learning through science teachers’ formative assessment practices. Frontiers in Education, 10, Article 1503088. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2025.1503088
Almeida, A., Rosistolato, R., & Cerdeira, D. (2022). Conceptions and assessment practices in Rio de Janeiro municipal schools. Ensaio: Avaliação e Políticas Públicas em Educação, 30(117), 920–941. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0104-40362022003003593
Atasoy, V. E., & Kaya, G. (2022). Formative assessment practices in science education: A meta-synthesis study. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 75, 101186. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2022.101186
Attiogbe, E., Oheneba-Sakyi, Y., Kwapong, O., & Boateng, J. (2025). Assessing the relationship between feedback strategies and learning improvement from a distance learning perspective. Journal of Research in Innovative Teaching & Learning, 18(1), 165–186. https://doi.org/10.1108/JRIT-10-2022-0061
Bárcena, A., & Martínez-Aznar, M. (2022). Indagar sobre las reacciones químicas y desarrollo de la competencia científica. Enseñanza de las Ciencias. Revista de Investigación y Experiencias Didácticas, 40(2), 5–23. https://doi.org/10.5565/rev/ensciencias.3409
Bell, B., & Cowie, B. (2002). Formative assessment and science education. Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Bennett, R. E. (2011). Formative assessment: a critical review. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 18(1), 5–25. https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2010.513678
Biggs, J. (1996). Enhancing teaching through constructive alignment. Higher Education, 32, 347–364. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00138871
Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Assessment and Classroom Learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 5(1), 7–74. https://doi.org/10.1080/0969595980050102
Brandmo, C., & Gamlem, S. M. (2025). Students’ perceptions and outcome of teacher feedback: A systematic review. Frontiers in Education, 10, Article 1572950. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2025.1572950
Brookhart, S. M. (2011). Educational assessment knowledge and skills for teachers. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 30(1), 3–12. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-3992.2010.00195.x
Consoli, T., Schmitz, M.-L., Antonietti, C., Gonon, P., Cattaneo, A., & Petko, D. (2025). Quality of technology integration matters: Positive associations with students’ behavioral engagement and digital competencies for learning. Education and Information Technologies, 30, 7719–7752. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-024-13118-8
Cooper, H. (2017). Research synthesis and meta-analysis: A step-by-step approach (5th ed.). SAGE.
Duschl, R. A., & Gitomer, D. H. (1997). Strategies and challenges to changing the focus of assessment and instruction in science classrooms. Educational Assessment, 4(1), 37-73. https://tinyurl.com/5cpmprf8
Fuentes-Cimma, J., Sluijsmans, D., Riquelme, A., Villagran, I., Isbej, L., Olivares-Labbe, M. T., & Heeneman, S. (2024). Designing feedback processes in the workplace-based learning of undergraduate health professions education: A scoping review. BMC Medical Education, 24, 440. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-024-05439-6
Gao, X., & Brown, G. T. L. (2023). The relation of students’ conceptions of feedback to motivational beliefs and achievement goals: Comparing Chinese international students to New Zealand domestic students in higher education. Education Sciences, 13(11), 1090. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13111090
Govaerts, M. J. B., van der Vleuten, C. P. M., & Holmboe, E. S. (2019). Managing tensions in assessment: Moving beyond either–or thinking. Medical Education, 53(1), 64–75. https://doi.org/10.1111/medu.13656
Grant, M. J., & Booth, A. (2009, June). A typology of reviews: An analysis of 14 review types and associated methodologies. Health Information & Libraries Journal, 26(2), 91–108. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-1842.2009.00848.x
Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The Power of Feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81-112. https://doi.org/10.3102/003465430298487
Holbrook, J., & Rannikmae, M. (2009). The meaning of scientific literacy. International Journal of Environmental & Science Education, 4(3), 275–288. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ884397.pdf
Kácovský, P., Snětinová, M., Chvál, M., Houfková, J., & Koupilová, Z. (2023). Predictors of students’ intrinsic motivation during practical work in physics. International Journal of Science Education, 45(10), 806–826. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2023.2175626
Kitchenham, B., Pretorius, R., Budgen, D., Brereton, O., Turner, M., Niazi, M., & Linkman, S. (2010, August). Systematic literature reviews in software engineering–A tertiary study. Information and Software Technology, 52(8), 792–805. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infsof.2010.03.006
Kusuma, M., Wilujeng, I., & Susongko, P. (2024). Challenges for middle school science teachers in assessing scientific inquiry skills: A thematic analysis. International Journal of STEM Education for Sustainability, 4(1), 97–109. https://doi.org/10.53889/ijses.v4i1.33297
Kusuma, M., Wilujeng, I., Susongko, P., Retnawati, H., Santoso, P. H., Yuenyong, C., & Ariyatun, A. (2025). Capturing random-effect meta-analysis toward scientific inquiry learning approach in science education. Jurnal Ilmiah Ilmu Terapan Universitas Jambi, 9(3), 909–923. https://doi.org/10.22437/jiituj.v9i3.35600
Levy-Feldman, I. (2025). The Role of Assessment in Improving Education and Promoting Educational Equity. Education Sciences, 15(2), 224. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci15020224
Levy-Feldman, I., & Fresko, B. (2025). School assessment culture and the formative assessment of teachers. Teacher Development, 29(5), 947–965. https://doi.org/10.1080/13664530.2025.2477250
Ministerio de Educación del Ecuador. (2023, noviembre). Marco curricular competencial de aprendizajes – Educación General Básica y Bachillerato. Ministerio de Educación del Ecuador. https://tinyurl.com/y86v6kju
Molin, F., Haelermans, C., Cabus, S., & Groot, W. (2020, July). The effect of feedback on metacognition: A randomized experiment using polling technology. Computers & Education, 152, 103885. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2020.103885
Molin, F., Haelermans, C., Cabus, S., & Groot, W. (2021, December). Do feedback strategies improve students’ learning gain? Results of a randomized experiment using polling technology in physics classrooms. Computers & Education, 175, 104339. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2021.104339
Molloy, E., Ajjawi, R., Bearman, M., Noble, C., Rudland, J., & Ryan, A. (2020). Challenging feedback myths: Values, learner involvement and promoting effects beyond the immediate task. Medical education, 54(1), 33–39. https://doi.org/10.1111/medu.13802
Nachtigall, V., Shaffer, D. W., & Rummel, N. (2024). The authenticity dilemma: Towards a theory on the conditions and effects of authentic learning. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 39, 3483–3509. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10212-024-00861-1
National Research Council. (2012). A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/13165
National Research Council. (2014). Developing assessments for the Next Generation Science Standards. The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/18409
Nicol, D. (2020). The power of internal feedback: exploiting natural comparison processes. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 46(5), 756–778. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2020.1823314
OECD. (2016). PISA 2015 assessment and analytical framework: Science, reading, mathematics and financial literacy. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264255425-en
OECD. (2023, 31 de agosto). PISA 2022 assessment and analytical framework. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/dfe0bf9c-en
Okoli, C. (2015). A guide to conducting a standalone systematic literature review. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 37, 879–910. https://doi.org/10.17705/1CAIS.03743
Ortega-Ruipérez, B., & Correa-Gorospe, J. M. (2024). Peer assessment to promote self-regulated learning with technology in higher education: Systematic review for improving course design. Frontiers in Education, 9, 1415680. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2024.1415680
Panadero, E. (2017). A review of self-regulated learning: Six models and four directions for research. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 422. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00422
Parmigiani, D., Nicchia, E., Pario, M., Murgia, E., Silvaggio, C., Ambrosini, A., Pedevilla, A., Sardi, I., & Ingersoll, M. (2025). Formative Assessment in Upper Secondary Schools: Ideas, Concepts, and Strategies. Education Sciences, 15(4), 438. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci15040438
Pellegrino, J. W., Chudowsky, N., & Glaser, R. (Eds.). (2001). Knowing what students know: The science and design of educational assessment. National Academy Press. https://nap.nationalacademies.org/read/10019/chapter/1
Poerwanti, J., Marmoah, S., Supianto, Sukarno, Mahfud, H., & Istiyati, S. (2024). Formative assessment on science learning to improve the quality of learning in Curriculum Merdeka. Jurnal Penelitian Pendidikan IPA, 10(10), 9029. https://doi.org/10.29303/jppipa.v10i10.9029
Popham, W. J. (2008). Transformative assessment. ASCD. https://tinyurl.com/ycx8nfme
Power, J. R., & Tanner, D. (2023). Peer assessment, self-assessment, and resultant feedback: An examination of feasibility and reliability. European Journal of Engineering Education, 48(4), 615–628. https://doi.org/10.1080/03043797.2023.2185769
Radović, S., & Seidel, N. (2025). Introduction to the SRL-S rubric for evaluation of innovative higher educational technology for self-regulated learning. Innovative Higher Education, 50, 1169–1202. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10755-024-09771-z
Ravi, M., & Besharat, M. (2025). A holistic consideration of authentic assessments: student perception of assessment design, delivery, flexibility and creativity. European Journal of Engineering Education, 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/03043797.2025.2480116
Rodríguez, S. (2026). Formative assessment for learning achievement: A systematic review. Revista InveCom, 6(1), 1–10. https://zenodo.org/records/15620782
Ruiz-Primo, M. A., & Furtak, E. M. (2007). Exploring Teachers’ Informal Formative Assessment Practices and Students’ Understanding in the Context of Scientific Inquiry. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(1), 57–84. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20163
Sadler, D. R. (1989). Formative assessment and the design of instructional systems. Instructional Science, 18(2), 119-144. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00117714
Salama, A. M., & Holgate, P. (2025). Where Critical Inquiry, Empirical Making, and Experiential Learning Shape Architectural Pedagogy. Encyclopedia, 5(3), 129. https://doi.org/10.3390/encyclopedia5030129
Salgado, P. (2025). Desigualdad educativa en zonas rurales y urbanas del Ecuador. Perspectivas Sociales y Administrativas, 3(1), 5–16. https://doi.org/10.61347/psa.v3i1.73
Sanmartí, N. (2007, enero). 10 Ideas Clave: Evaluar para aprender. Editorial Graó. https://tinyurl.com/bdzm6r5u
Schoenherr, J. (2024, June). Personalizing real-world problems: Posing own problems increases self-efficacy expectations, intrinsic value, attainment value, and utility value. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 94(2), 407-424. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjep.12653
Scriven, M. (1967). The methodology of evaluation. En R. Tyler, R. Gagné & M. Scriven (Eds.), Perspectives of Curriculum Evaluation (pp. 39-83). Rand McNally.
Shepard, L. A. (2000, October). The role of assessment in a learning culture. Educational Researcher, 29(7), 4-14. https://www.colorado.edu/education/media/318
Shumaker, M., Rivers, M., & Tauber, S. (2025). Point Values on Scoring Rubrics Influence Self-Regulated Learning for STEM Material. Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland), 15(4), 532. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs15040532
Simonsmeier, B., Peiffer, H., Flaig, M., & Schneider, M. (2020). Peer feedback improves students’ academic self-concept in higher education. Research in Higher Education, 61, 706–724. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-020-09591-y
Škrinjarić, B. (2022). Competence-based approaches in organizational and individual context. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 9(28). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-022-01047-1
Snyder, H. (2019, November). Literature review as a research methodology: An overview and guidelines. Journal of Business Research, 104, 333–339. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.07.039
Soyka, C., & Schaper, N. (2024). Analyzing student response processes to refine and validate a competency model and competency-based assessment task types. Frontiers in Education, 9, 1397027. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2024.1397027
Suri, H. (2014). Towards methodologically inclusive research syntheses: Expanding possibilities. Routledge.
To, J., Aluquin, D., & Tan, K. (2025). Making student voice heard in dialogic feedback: Feedback design matters. Frontiers in Education, 10, Article 1550328. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2025.1550328
Vasileiadou, D., & Karadimitriou, K. (2021). Examining the impact of self-assessment with the use of rubrics on primary school students’ performance. International Journal of Educational Research Open, 2, 100031. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijedro.2021.100031
Vattøy, K. D., & Gamlem, S. M. (2023). Students’ experiences of peer feedback practices as related to awareness raising of learning goals, self-monitoring, self-efficacy, anxiety, and enjoyment in teaching EFL and mathematics. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 68(5), 904–918. https://doi.org/10.1080/00313831.2023.2192772
Webster, J., & Watson, R. T. (2002, June). Analyzing the past to prepare for the future: Writing a literature review. MIS Quarterly, 26(2), 13–23. https://www.jstor.org/stable/4132319
White, B. Y., & Frederiksen, J. R. (1998). Inquiry, Modeling, and Metacognition: Making Science Accessible to All Students. Cognition and Instruction, 16(1), 3–118. https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532690xci1601_2
Wiggins, G. (1990). The case for authentic assessment. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 2(2). https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED328611.pdf
Willison, J., Draper, C., Fornarino, L., Li, M., Sabri, T., Shi, Y., & Zhao, X. (2023). Metacognitively ALERT in science: literature synthesis of a hierarchical framework for metacognition and preliminary evidence of its viability. Studies in Science Education, 60(2), 153–189. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057267.2023.2207147
Yang, P., Chen, S., Zhang, W., & Chen, J. (2025). The impact of project-based learning on EFL learners’ learning motivation and academic performance: An empirical study in a Chinese rural school. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 12, 1132. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-025-05519-y
Žerovnik, A. (2024). Technology-Enhanced Feedback System Usability in the Context of Self-Regulation Promotion. Education Sciences, 14(9), 948. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci14090948
Zompero, A., Parga, D., Werner da Rosa, C., & Vildósola, X. (2022). Competencias científicas en los currículos de Ciencias Naturales: Estudio comparativo entre Brasil, Chile y Colombia. Praxis & Saber, 13(34), 22–38. https://doi.org/10.19053/22160159.v13.n34.2022.13401
Descargas
Publicado
Número
Sección
Licencia
Derechos de autor 2025 Ramón Bolívar Casquete Muñoz
Esta obra está bajo una licencia internacional Creative Commons Atribución-NoComercial 4.0.
Los autores de las contribuciones que sean seleccionadas para su publicación la revista científica multidisciplinaria Un Espacio para la Ciencia, conservan sus derechos de autor, sin embargo a través de la publicación, permiten la difusión del contenido de los trabajos que envían a la editorial bajo la licencia Creative Commons 4.0.
