Teaching Innovation in the Development of Professional Practices: Use of the Collaborative Blog

education sciences Article Teaching Innovation in the Development of Professional Practices: Use of the Collaborative Blog Carmen Corujo-Vélez 1, Raquel Barragán-Sánchez 2,* , Carlos Hervás-Gómez 2 and Antonio Palacios-Rodríguez 2   Citation: Corujo-Vélez, C.; Barragán-Sánchez, R.; Hervás-Gómez, C.; Palacios-Rodríguez, A. Teaching Innovation in the Development of Professional Practices: Use of the Collaborative Blog. Educ. Sci. 2021, 11, 390. https://doi.org/10.3390/ educsci11080390 Academic Editor: Neil Gordon Received: 22 June 2021 Accepted: 26 July 2021 Published: 29 July 2021 Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. Copyright: © 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https:// creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ 4.0/). 1Department of Research and Diagnostic Methods in Education, University of Seville, 41013 Seville, Spain; [email protected] 2Department of Teaching and Educational Organization, University of Seville, 41013 Seville, Spain; [email protected] (C.H.-G.); [email protected] (A.P.-R.) *Correspondence: [email protected] Abstract: The development of professional practices during the university stage is a fundamental factor for quality skills development. For many students, it is the first real experience in a professional context, so continuous monitoring by teachers is necessary. This article presents an innovative proposal to develop the follow-up of the professional practices of the degree in Primary Education, and two Masters’ in Psychopedagogy and Special Educational Needs using a learning management system (LMS) (Blackboard). The experience was developed by a team of teachers from the departments of Didactics and Educational Organization and Research Methods and Educational Diagnosis of the University of Seville (Spain). The aspects to be studied are the development of communication, reflection, and collaborative learning processes during the internship period. After an explicit agreement, 24 students (10 from the course “Professional Practices I” in undergraduate students; and the others from the Master’s) committed to periodically using the blog designed ad hoc for this experience. A content analysis of the speeches posted on the blog was carried out, examining the changes, the advantages, and the disadvantages that this model entailed. It allowed observing similarities and differences between both groups of students. As the main conclusion, there were some differences between the two groups of students, regarding the number, type, and contents of interventions; there were no differences in the assessment of the methodology, all the students thought that it was a very positive assessment of the experience for generating information exchange networks among colleagues and teachers. Finally, the relevance of constant monitoring of the academic tutor was highlighted. Keywords: technology-enhanced learning; computer-mediated learning; innovation; external practices 1. Introduction The integration of information and communication technologies (ICTs) in higher education and its impact on pedagogical methods is one of the emerging themes in international research on ICT [ 1 ]. At the same time, [ 2 ] ICTs facilitate a certain way of working, allow other training scenarios and a new system of practical learning in the training of future professionals who will join the world of work from university classrooms. Training through external practices developed in professional contexts (practices) leads to a training activity at the university as a period of curricular training physically outside the institution [ 3 , 4 ]. During the professional practices, ICT not only contributes to the digital literacy of future teachers, but also favors a more efficient development of work during the process of immersion in the professional context [ 5 ]. For this reason, they become an essential vehicle for communication in the participation of practical experiences from a collaborative point of view [ 6 ]. In addition, they are shown as resources that offer instrumental, relational, documentary, institutional, and didactic support in the observation, collaboration, and intervention phases [7]. Educ. Sci. 2021,11, 390. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11080390 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/education Educ. Sci. 2021,11, 390 2 of 18 The professional practices become a privileged space and an ideal opportunity expressly designed for students to investigate, reflect, and build their practical thinking from the interactions that can be established between the theoretical approaches and the experiences that are lived in the different professional contexts [ 8 ]. The didactic integration of collaborative work tools during the internship process [ 9 ] generates important repercussions to help in both the selection of activities or cognitive challenges and the stimulation of the intrinsic motivation of the students [ 10 ], as well as in the incorporation and development of collaborative work strategies [11]. In the educational experience presented, future teachers experienced the experiences in their practice centers feeling at all times accompanied and valued by their own classmates [ 9 , 12 ]. The objective was to achieve the activation of professional action competencies. The proposed methodology was constructive and based on learning projects that are incorporated into the learning ecosystem [ 13 ]. On the other hand, it was also based on the socio-cognitive scaffolding. This facilitates students learning collaboratively and its effectiveness in university contexts is demonstrated in numerous studies [ 14 – 18 ]. In this experience, the training process was reinforced with a blog so that, in addition to sharing their dilemmas and feelings [ 19 ], students also carried out interdisciplinary work [ 20 ] with the help of academic tutors specialized in different academic disciplines [ 21 ], establishing a cooperation between centers and the faculty [ 22 ]. In different universities, the digital portfolio has been used as a means to facilitate the connection between the teaching staff and the student body [ 2 , 23 , 24 ]. It has also been used to assess the potential of this resource to promote dialogic communication between students and teachers [ 25 ], in addition to facilitating the supervision of practices. This question is also supported by [ 26 ], since it allows, in addition to monitoring, to redirect unwanted situations in practice centers from a distance. On the other hand, students also find advantages in its use since it allows them to integrate knowledge and reflect on their learning process [ 27 ]. However, in the research, a different model is proposed through a discussion forum. This allows, in addition to the reflection and construction of individual knowledge, the joint reflection and construction of all the students in practices, mediated by the teachers. It is more similar to the blog format, which allows to open and expose, if desired, the didactic interaction that teacher and student have maintained in classic spaces such as tutoring [ 28 ]. In the university where this research is carried out, experiments in this sense have also been carried out; authors such as [ 29 , 30 ] have opted for the blog format to monitor and evaluate internship students, progressively increasing the use of technologies for tutoring external internships, but focusing mainly on the practices of different degrees. Unlike these investigations, this study includes the use of the blog and its analysis for the professional practices of different Masters’ Degree of specialization in the educational field. This implies a different form of use with respect to undergraduate students. To understand the context of the study, the organization of professional practices in the curricula of the Faculty of Education of a Spanish university is briefly described. The practical credits are organized differently in the Bachelor’s and Master’s degrees. While in the Grade of Primary Education (3rd year), Professional Practices I has a duration of 300 h, is carried out in the 2nd semester, and is compulsory. In the Master’s, Professional Practices has a duration of 60 h and is carried out in the middle of the training period. It is also compulsory in the University Master’s degree in special educational needs and attention to diversity at school, but optional in the Master’s degree in psychopedagogy. The aims or objectives of the professional practices at a general level are to: 1. Contribute to the comprehensive training of students by completing their theoretical and practical learning. 2. Facilitate knowledge of the work methodology appropriate to the professional reality in which the students will have to operate, contrasting and applying the knowledge acquired. 3. Encourage the development of technical, methodological, personal, and participatory skills. Educ. Sci. 2021,11, 390 3 of 18 4. Obtain practical experience that facilitates insertion into the job market and improves your future employability. 5. Favor the values of innovation, creativity, and entrepreneurship. To develop these objectives, it is understood that professional practices are a set of actions that make up the daily work of teachers, exercised through subjective interrelationships with students, based on certain training purposes [ 31 – 34 ]; a new methodology is articulated for the accompaniment of students in their internship period. Previous experience has shown that although the meetings held on this reflective need have been insisted on, it has not been enough. In fact, waiting until the end to assess this period usually left students unhappy with the results. In most cases, they focused on writing in a descriptive way what happened in each school day without critical contributions, proposals for improvement, or theoretical reflections. For this reason, an evaluation was chosen in the interactive phase [32,35], since it really facilitates learning. In addition, personal motivation as innovative teachers, whose objective is the inclusion of technologies in the training process [36], encouraged making this proposal. In the first meeting, students were informed of the possibility of keeping track of the practices, in addition to the traditional way (with meetings and emails), through the “Coursesites” platform, through a discussion forum. After receiving consent, a short user guide was provided on the platform with simple instructions. As necessary requirements to opt for this internship-monitoring model, it was proposed that students make at least one entry weekly. This should refer to the topic or question proposed. It was also encouraged to answer any questions that may arise among students. In the degree in primary education, the debates were structured around different weekly themes. They set an objective and a brief description of what they should include. Next, Table 1shows the timing and the proposed objectives. Table 1. Distribution of fora in the degree in primary education. Timing Objectives First week from 4 to 10 March 2019 Describe the center context. Second week from 11 to 17 March 2019 Describe the classroom context. Third week from 18 to 24 March 2019 Identify characteristics of the students. Fourth week from 25 to 31 March 2019 Identify methodologies used by teachers. Fifth week from 1 to 7 April 2019 Identify strategies of attention to diversity used by teachers. Sixth week from 8 to 14 April 2019 Identify evaluation methods/instruments/types. Seventh week from 22 to 28 April 2019 Prepare didactic proposal. Eighth week from 29 April to 5 May 2019 Develop didactic proposal. Ninth week from 6 to 12 May 2019 Prepare didactic proposal. Tenth week from 13 to 19 May 2019 Develop didactic proposal. Eleventh week from 20 to 26 May 2019 Evaluate the practices carried out. Source: made by the authors. These objectives are linked to those of the practice report that they had to carry out as an assessment document for the practices. In the case of the Master’s students, having more experience and a shorter duration of their internships, only an open forum was established and the instructions given to the students were to write observations about the context, the professionals of the centers, the climate of the centers, the activities carried out, doubts, reflections, proposals for improvement, etc. The teachers’ interventions are not specified here because the objectives of the article are focused on identifying the vision of the students. However, the teaching staff participated by initiating discussions, asking questions and clarifying certain topics, resolving doubts, and motivating the students when they expressed difficulties in their practice centers or explaining what was done in them. It also included specific information on certain theoretical topics to facilitate reflection between the theory and the practice of the students. Educ. Sci. 2021,11, 390 4 of 18 The proposed research objectives were: 1. Identify the level of participation according to the degrees (O1). 2. Distinguish the type of participation of the students according to the degrees (O2). 3. Explore the content of the students’ contributions to the fora (O3). 4. Know the students’ assessment of the follow-up of the professional practices with this methodology (O4). 2. Methods To carry out this research, a mixed methodology was developed, which combined the study of quantitative variables (participation analysis, averages of publications, and written words made by students in the fora) and qualitative, through documentary analysis (Figure 1). Educ. Sci. 2021, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 4 of 19 The teachers’ interventions are not specified here because the objectives of the article are focused on identifying the vision of the students. However, the teaching staff participated by initiating discussions, asking questions and clarifying certain topics, resolving doubts, and motivating the students when they expressed difficulties in their practice centers or explaining what was done in them. It also included specific information on certain theoretical topics to facilitate reflection between the theory and the practice of the students. The proposed research objectives were: 1. Identify the level of participation according to the degrees (O1). 2. Distinguish the type of participation of the students according to the degrees (O2). 3. Explore the content of the students’ contributions to the fora (O3). 4. Know the students’ assessment of the follow-up of the professional practices with this methodology (O4). 2. Methods To carry out this research, a mixed methodology was developed, which combined the study of quantitative variables (participation analysis, averages of publications, and written words made by students in the fora) and qualitative, through documentary analysis (Figure 1). Figure 1. Data collection and analysis procedure in relation to the objectives of the study. The Atlas-ti program was used to establish the categories, by agreement between researchers, of the content of the fora. The sampling method was incidental, since it dealt with the students (sample) available in the time or research period that was assigned to the teaching staff. The selection of students was carried out by the faculty, so that each teacher was assigned a variable number of students, regardless of the internship center where they were assigned. The sample of 24 students was obtained over four courses in different degrees and postgraduate degrees. Specifically, it had 10 third-year students of the degree in primary education (2018–2019 academic year), 5 students of the Master’s Phase 4 Organization of content in categories and subcategories Qualitative data: Objective 4 Phase 3 Identification of categories of the students' speeches Qualitative data: Objective 3 Phase 2 Classification and counting of the percentage of Entries (E) and Comments (C) Quantitative data: Objective 2 Phase 1 Count of the interventions of each student in each forum Quantitative data: Objective 1 Figure 1. Data collection and analysis procedure in relation to the objectives of the study. The Atlas-ti program was used to establish the categories, by agreement between researchers, of the content of the fora. The sampling method was incidental, since it dealt with the students (sample) available in the time or research period that was assigned to the teaching staff. The selection of students was carried out by the faculty, so that each teacher was assigned a variable number of students, regardless of the internship center where they were assigned. The sample of 24 students was obtained over four courses in different degrees and postgraduate degrees. Specifically, it had 10 third-year students of the degree in primary education (2018–2019 academic year), 5 students of the Master’s degree in psychopedagogy (2019–2020 academic year), and 4 students of the Master’s degree in educational needs and attention to diversity in school (ENADS, hereinafter) and 5 of the Master’s in psychopedagogy, both in the 2020–2021 academic year. They were all women, except for one ENADS Master’s student. The centers where they carried out the internships are public, concerted nature, and private: the public centers were 10 early childhood and primary education schools, 2 secondary education institutes, and 2 educational guidance teams; the concerted nature centers were 2 schools of early childhood, primary, and secondary education; and the private cen- Educ. Sci. 2021,11, 390 5 of 18 ters were 4 non-profit educational associations (psychosanitary or socio-educational), 1 educational cabinet, and 2 equestrian therapeutic rehabilitation centers. The procedure followed to identify the quantitative data consisted of carrying out a manual count of the data provided by the platform used, taking averages of the interventions of each student in each of the fora. In the case of the Bachelor’s students, each week a new topic and objective was introduced, so in reality, 11 fora were developed. To facilitate the comparison with the data from the Master’s students, the average of all the fora was calculated. For qualitative analysis, an inductive and emergent process was followed in the creation and application of the categories of discourse analysis. The constant comparison and cross-checking method was used. Cohen’s kappa coefficient for coding reliability yielded an index of 0.89. This implies an excellent coding reliability index [ 36 , 37 ]. The kappa index (K) is used to check the concordance of the measurement instrument category systems whose result is categorical (2 or more categories). It represents the proportion of matches observed beyond chance. The established categories can be seen in Table 2. Table 2. System of categories of the contributions to the fora. Contributions to Fora (Categories) 1-Descriptions: they explain the physical, social, and functional characteristics of the practice centers and the geographical area where they are located. 2-Feelings: evolution and changes in emotions and feelings experienced throughout the internship period. 3-Reflections: relationships between theories and practices, as well as personal ones in different areas of practice. 4-Supports: types of help and collaboration students provided each other during the learning process. 5-Doubts and answers: messages from students in which doubts or queries are raised and answers are provided for their resolution. Source: Made by the authors. 3. Results The results obtained based on the proposed objectives are described below. 3.1. Participation According to the Different Degrees To identify the level of participation according to the degrees (O1), it can be verified (Table 3) that, in all the courses, all the students participated in the debates. Table 3. Average participation in fora by specialty. Specialty/Course Active Students No. of Debates Average Posts Per Student Average Word Count Average Debate Rating Primary Education (2018–2019) 10 11 1.26 510.29 100% Master’s in Psychopedagogy (2019–2020) 5 1 2.4 385.25 100% Master’s in ENADS (2020–2021) 4 1 14.75 728.7 100% Master’s in Psychopedagogy (2020–2021) 4 1 8 612.61 100% Source: made by the authors. Average posts per student is the percentage of interventions in the forum of each student; average word count is the total percentage of words written by each student; and average debate rating indicates the percentage of students who participated in the debates. The most participatory students in terms of number of publications were those of the Master’s in ENADS, followed by those of the Master’s in Psychopedagogy of the 2020–2021 academic year, and those who participated less were those of the degree in primary education. Educ. Sci. 2021,11, 390 6 of 18 With reference to the Masters’, differences were also observed between them, the contributions of the students of the Master’s in psychopedagogy being very different in the two courses (2.4 publications on average in the 2019–2020 academic year and 8 in the next). This difference has a clear explanation and it is the interruption of the practices due to the lockdown caused by COVID-19, which forced the students to end the practices abruptly, preventing the collection of new data to contribute to the forum. Subsequent communications were made by email. 3.2. Type of Participation According to the Different Degrees Next, Table 4shows the type of student participation according to the degrees (O2), grouped into two blocks. On the one hand, the entries (E) were counted, which were defined as the interventions initiated by each student in which they responded to the content of the debate or to the question posed by the teacher; on the other hand, comments (C) were counted, which included questions and/or answers to the entries made by other colleagues. This made it possible to identify the type of interaction that occurred in the different fora, responding to the second objective. Table 4. Type of participation depending on the degree. Specialty/ Course Education Primary (2018–2019) Master’s Degree Psychopedagogy (2019–2020) Master’s Degree ENADS (2020–2021) Master’s Degree Psychopedagogy (2020–2021) Student No. E C E C E C E C 1 9 5 1 3 3 17 7 20 2 10 3 1 2 4 14 6 9 3 11 0 1 1 4 17 7 7 4 10 1 1 1 4 13 5 7 5 11 2 1 0 6 5 6 9 7 7 10 1 8 9 3 9 11 1 10 11 0 TOTALS 101 23 5 7 15 61 31 48 GROUPED TOTALS Grade Master’s Degree 101 23 51 100 Source: made by the authors. Legend: E = entries, C = comments. Taking into account the number of interactions, it was observed that the students of the Master’s in ENADS responded the most and questioned and encouraged their classmates, with 61 comments, followed by students of the Master’s in psychopedagogy (2020–2021 academic year) with 48 comments. On the other hand, those of the Master’s in psychopedagogy of the 2019–2020 academic year, despite their low participation, maintained a greater balance between entries and comments. In the case of primary education students, they practically limited themselves to writing about the proposed topics, albeit abundantly, with 101 entries, but they interacted very little with each other (23 comments), being reinforced, challenged, or fundamentally questioned by the teaching staff. Of these comments, none were made between students, but they were answers to questions or clarifications proposed by the teaching staff. 3.3. Analysis of the Content Provided in the Fora Before responding to Objective 3, to identify the contributions of each student, respecting their identity, the following abbreviations are used: Educ. Sci. 2021,11, 390 7 of 18 EP = primary education MP = Master’s degree psychopedagogy (MP21 is the course) MN = Master’s degree ENADS AA = Student (woman) AO = Student (man) and the number that follows each of them corresponds to those of each student, which appears in Table 4. To answer O3, we began from the content analysis and the categories described (Table 2), identifying if there were differences between the groups of students. Category 1—Descriptions: In the descriptions, those referring to the practice centers were observed, which included physical characteristics, decorative aspects, and the use of the spaces, as well as the number of professionals in the spaces and their functions. In general, they included many details and the total number of students adding photos and plans to these descriptions, thus facilitating the approach to their reality: “The main building is in the shape of a U and contains the children’s facilities to the north, one floor; the primary facilities to the south, with two floors; and the offices (secretariat, management, teachers’ room, Association of Mothers and Fathers of Students (A.M.P.A.), etc.) to the west, which unite infant and primary school and occupy one floor, also connected to other independent facilities ”(EPPAA2); “The center is made up of a staff of 39 teachers; dividing seven teachers in Early Childhood Education and nineteen teachers in Primary Education, in relation to the specialties we find a support teacher for children, two teachers of Religion; a Special Education instructor, a primary school support teacher, a music teacher, two Physical Education teacher, three English teachers, two French teachers, an Audition and Language teacher, two pedagogues (Therapeutic Pedagogy). In addition, the center has a Counselor from the Educational Guidance Team (E.O.E.) who attends once a week” (EPAA3). They also included data on the area and its socio-economic and cultural characteristics: “Its location is in the northern part of the town in a middle-class neighborhood, which is why most of its students come from stable family backgrounds, with an average family economy predominating; speaking of the family, it has a great participation in the center. Approximately 2% of the students come from immigrant families, most of them of Maghreb origin. Most families define themselves with a Christian religious ideology” (EPAA10); resorting, in many cases to Internet data to provide maps and geographic references: “It is located at an altitude of 76 m above sea level, and 45 km from the capital of the province, Seville. Its geographical coordinates are 36◦590N, 5◦560W “(EPPA4). The students of the degree in primary education made more precise and objective descriptions than those of the Masters’ degrees, who gave more general descriptions: “... located in Seville, specifically in the La Rosaleda neighborhood whose socio-economic level is medium” (MP21AA2), or focused on aspects that caught their attention; that is, they were more selective in their descriptions, and also included opinions: “In this way, taking into account the size of the center, more than a thousand students, it is not surprising that the orientation team consists of four professionals”(MPAA1); “It is quite small, since it consists of one line per course and is very familiar, so families are involved in the education of their children and can access and participate with the center whenever they wish” (MPAA4). Category 2—Feelings: The feelings changed throughout the internship period, both in undergraduate and Master’s students. At the beginning, they were expectant, nervous, and with doubts regarding their functions in the internship centers: “at the beginning as in everything I was a little scared, but from the first day I have been welcomed as one more by both the students themselves and the teachers at the center (EPAA3); “I have to admit that the range of emotions that I experienced was quite wide, I was super excited since I missed working, but I also had a bit of anxiety about all the new things that I am facing, since I have always worked as an educator in childish or supportive . . . in fact I felt very comfortable right away ”(MP21AA3); “ . . . The first days I felt a bit lost in high school, I could not quite understand what the guidance counselor’s functions were and what she could contribute, and the Educ. Sci. 2021,11, 390 8 of 18 truth is that I was overwhelmed by thinking that I was going to have that feeling until the internship was over. (MP21AA4); “You can imagine the level of stress and frustration that I had the first days. I felt useless and very clumsy since everything I did was not sure that it was done well and I constantly had to ask him for help” (MP21AA4). Most reflected this type of feeling except for one student who maintained positive previous expectations: “From the moment I arrived I had very good feelings because they treated me like one more . . . ” (MP21AA1). Although these sensations appeared only in the first week, or even in the first days, they improved rapidly because they found meaning in it and they clarified their functions in the centers: “For now, my feelings in the center are positive . . . it is giving me the possibility to experience how problems are approached from different perspectives. Therefore, I see in these practices a great opportunity to learn everything I can” (MPAA1); “In general, I am really enjoying the experience because I see the reality of different centers and I can observe the different needs that students may present, how to determine them and the resources that are offered to them for adequate school development” (MPAA2); “I really liked being able to learn about High Abilities, mainly because of the willingness that my tutor has when teaching me, I have felt very welcome in this center, which has different support materials, the which have been made available to me” (MPAA3); “I am quite happy. In general I am very happy with the experience I am having” (MPAA5); “I also commented that after these first weeks of class I feel better than I expected” (EPAA3); “ . . . I am still quite happy and every day I am more eager to learn new things” (MPAA4); “In general I am very happy with the course of the internships and I think it is being a unique learning opportunity” (MPAA1). Depending on the results obtained and the treatment received, there were emotional ups and downs in the students, and mixed feelings. For example, students valued that they trusted them, asked for their opinion, or involved them in specific tasks: “in this center they are giving me all possible facilities and they are taking my opinion into account at all times, in addition to taking me as one more and fully trusting in my abilities, something that does not always happen . . . , I am very excited that two cases have been entrusted to me ”(MPAA4); “Regarding the climate with my tutor, I feel very welcome and integrated, we maintain a relationship of respect and cordiality, and we support each other in the teaching process” (EPAA10); “I have been especially excited that my tutor treats me like another teacher and counts on me for everything. On one of the occasions, she told me: How well it works with your help! With this comment I felt quite grateful” (EPAA8). In this category, we did not find differences between Bachelor’s and Master’s students. We exemplify the opposite case with these entries “ . . . but today I had a somewhat stressful morning and I got a bit frustrated . . . until the moment when he pulled my hair; I became very angry and told him not to do that again and not to talk to me anymore until the return. When commenting to the coordinator, one of the association’s workers, she did not do or comment anything about it, she only said that he was a complicated child due to his circumstances; I felt very frustrated and speaking with her I commented that I thought that this child was allowed a lot because of her ‘circumstances’ and that it did not help him. But she continued without saying anything about it” (MP21AA1); “... which has sometimes frustrated me since some content was not mastered” (MPS21AA2). Feelings related to COVID-19 were also collected: “It is very sad to observe the differences with respect to normality, when you could physically and calmly access the center, but anyway I notice how the I.E.S. he is doing the impossible” (MP21AA3). Category 3—Reflections: In the theoretical reflections, concepts from the didactic field were collected, such as traditional methodology, problem-based learning (PBL), flipped classroom, ABN method in mathematics; types of evaluation; strategies for attention to diversity (flexible groupings, curricular adaptations, early stimulation), names of tests and tests (Merrill–Palmer-R (MPR) Development Scales, K-BIT, and ABAS-II, Piers self-concept test–Harris, . . . ), and more psychological terms such as effectance, homnonymia, intrinsic motivation, and theory of Educ. Sci. 2021,11, 390 9 of 18 facial feedback emotion, among others. The fundamental difference observed between Bachelor’s and Master’s students was that the former did not relate the contents to specific subjects of the degree, while the latter made explicit reference to the subjects where they learned these theoretical contents. As an example of this, we show the following quotes: “I thought about making a behavior contract with N., one of the techniques that I have learned in the course of Conduct Disorders in this Master. The purpose of applying it has always been to motivate him and encourage his desire to learn ”(MNAO3); “The strategy used was related to a subject of the master’s degree, specifically with processes in educational guidance and psycho-pedagogical counseling, where in block 1 theoretical foundations of the Golden5 program, we could see that we have to apply attributions of unintentionality and if we use this strategy and behave as they do, we do not expect more benefits, so we have to try to do things differently, with “try” possibilities” (MPAA1). With regard to personal reflections, it was observed that the undergraduate students did not begin to make personal criticisms or comments until the fourth week in the centers, and when they did, they specified that they were their own contributions: “Personally, it seems to me a very successful application and that perfectly fulfills the desired function quickly and easily” (EPAA4). The most forceful reflections referred to the methodology: “from my point of view, the teams were not well balanced, which resulted in various conflicts in some, while others were magnificent” (EPAA6) and to the evaluation: “I think this methodology is very successful for them to develop the ability to seek information and investigate, but above all for them to learn to speak and express themselves in public. Creativity is also encouraged when making the model, so it is a project that, although it is Natural or Social, has a transversal nature with other subjects. However, the evaluation of the contents is still by means of an exam” (EPAA4); “In short, the evaluation methods used are quite limited, the average of the written exams being the majority of the student’s grade, with the completion of activities and notebook review a small percentage of the grade depending on the subject and being able to raise the grade to the student taking into account the attitude ”(EPAA2); “I disagree with the official evaluation, because finally what teachers usually do is the average of the exams and according to some items of each student, they raise the grade a little or not” (EPAA6), although they were not all negative: ”the evaluation I see it as suitable for my teacher since she uses observation a lot”(EPAA1). Master’s students, on the other hand, made criticisms that were less focused on aspects of the curriculum and more global, from a more ecological vision of the reality of the centers, such as the attention to diversity applied by some secondary school teachers and the lack of interest of families and resources: “I have also realized how lost teachers are in the attention to diversity, since most do not apply ordinary measures in the classroom and wait for the psychopedagogical evaluation; the low involvement of families, since in many cases learning or behavior difficulties could be overcome if they became more involved; as well as how difficult, if not impossible, it is to include children with serious disorders, such as ASD or serious conduct disorders, with the scarce resources available to the centers”(MPAA5). Finally, all reflected on their teaching role and their inclusive vision of education: “Our work as teachers is that, in the face of these circumstances of inequalities and the diverse contexts that we find ourselves in, help everyone to move towards the same leadership, leaving no one behind and serving as an example when they need it most ”(EPAA9); “I have realized that the counselor’s job requires a lot of paperwork and on many occasions it is complicated” (MPAA5); “The great difficulties that I have encountered have been the large number of students, a lot of administrative management and a lot of demand from tutors and families to carry out psycho-pedagogical evaluations, which are not really the solution, since important is the educational response ”(MPAA5); “It is essential to deal with the emotions with the students since they influence the whole learning process. Personally, I consider it even more relevant that as teachers we also have the ability to manage our own emotions since it is the basis for emotional learning in our students to be meaningful and, above all, positive for the different situations they may have place in their lives” (MNAA2). Educ. Sci. 2021,11, 390 16 of 18 categories of analysis, and the different results can guide the conduction of new research in this line, offering conclusions to prevent the difficulties encountered. Author Contributions: Conceptualization, C.C.-V. and R.B.-S.; methodology, C.C.-V.; software, A.P.- R.; validation, A.P.-R.; writing—original draft preparation, C.C.-V.; writing—review and editing, C.H.- G.; visualization, C.H.-G.; supervision, R.B.-S.; project administration, R.B.-S.; funding acquisition, R.B.-S. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript. Funding: This research was funded by Faculty of Educational Sciences, University of Seville, grant number “Call 2019-20”, project “Security in virtual space: environmental impact, cyberbullying and technological addiction. Training for teachers and educators through the flipped classroom method”. Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest. References 1. González-Valiente, C.L. Tendencias Emergentes Sobre el Tópico Tecnologías de Información en el Campo de las Ciencias de la Educación: Una Exploración Bibliométrica. Educ. Knowl. Soc. 2015,16, 91. [CrossRef] 2. Díaz, M.D. Supervisión y evaluación del prácticum de pedagogía mediante el uso de la Web 2.0. In Evaluación y Supervisión del Prácticum: El Compromiso con la Calidad de las Prácticas; Raposo-Rivas, E.M., Martínez-Figueira, M.E., Muñoz, P.C., Otero, A.P.Y.J.C., Eds.; Andavira: Santiago de Compostela, Spain, 2011; pp. 641–647. 3. Zabalza, J.M. El Practicum y las Prácticas Externas en la Formación Universitaria. Rev. Pract. 2016,1, 1–23. 4. Amorós-Poveda, L. Competencia Digital Docente en Prácticum Desde la Autoevaluación. Rev. Pract. 2020,5, 30–46. 5. Fernández-Muñoz, R.; Gértrudix-Bariio, F.; Cisneros de Britto, J.C.; de Rodríguez-Torres, J.; Rivas Rebaque, B. La Formación del Profesorado en Tecnología Educativa: Prácticas Profesionales. Rev. Latinoam. Tecnol. Educ. 2015,14, 115–132. [CrossRef] 6. Fernández, R. Las tecnologías de la información y la comunicación aplicadas al prácticum de los futuros educadores en la universidad de castilla-la mancha. In El Prácticum Como Experiencia de Aprendizaje en Educación Social: Propuestas Para su Desarrollo: Planificación, Tutoría Docente y Proyección Social; Morales, E.S., Ed.; Universitas: Madrid, Spain, 2013; pp. 117–148. 7. Raposo-Rivas, M. Herramientas y recursos para el desarrollo del prácticum. In El Prácticum en Educación Infantil, Primaria y Máster de Secundaria; Ramírez, E.S., Sánchez, C., Latorre, A.G.Y.M.J., Eds.; EOS: Madrid, Spain, 2011; pp. 31–50. 8. Mayorga Fernández, M.J.; Sepúlveda Ruiz, M.P.; Madrid Vivar, D.; Gallardo Gil, M. Grado de Satisfacción y Utilidad Profesional de las Prácticas Externas del Alumnado de la Facultad de Ciencias de la Educación de la Universidad de Málaga (España). Perf. Educ. 2017,39, 140–159. [CrossRef] 9. Ballesteros-Regana, C.; Siles-Rojas, C.; Hervás-Gómez, C.; Diaz-Noguera, M.D. Improving the Quality of Teaching Internships with the Help of the Platforms. Eur. J. Educ. Res. 2019,8, 1101–1112. [CrossRef] 10. Pintrich, P.R. The Role of Motivation in Promoting and Sustaining Self-Regulated Learning. Int. J. Educ. Res. 1999 ,31, 459–470. [CrossRef] 11. Waugh, M.; Su-Searle, J. Successful online students’ perceptions of the value of a collaborative learning community. In Proceedings of the 35th Annual Meeting of the Association for Educational Communications and Technology, Louisville, KY, USA, 2–6 November 2012; pp. 416–424. 12. Darling-Hammond, L.; Adamson, F. Developing Assessments of Deeper Learning: The Costs and Benefits of Using Tests That Help Students Learn; Stanford University, Stanford Center for Opportunity Policy in Education: Stanford, CA, USA, 2013. 13. Riaño-Galán, A.; García-Ruíz, R.; Álvarez-Arregui, E. Calidad de Vida e Inserción Socio-Laboral de Jóvenes con Discapacidad. Electron. J. Educ. Res. Rev. Electron. Investig. Educ. 2016,18, 112–127. 14. De Wever, B.; Hämäläinen, R.; Voet, M.; Gielen, M. A Wiki Task for First-Year University Students: The Effect of Scripting Students’ Collaboration. Internet High. Educ. 2014,25, 37–44. [CrossRef] 15. Fischer, F.; Kollar, I.; Stegmann, K.; Wecker, C.; Fischer, F.; Kollar, I.; Stegmann, K.; Wecker, C. Toward a Script Theory of Guidance in Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning toward a Script Theory of Guidance in Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning. Educ. Psychol. 2013,48, 56–66. [CrossRef] [PubMed] 16. Rau, M.A.; Bowman, H.E.; Moore, J.W. Computers & Education an Adaptive Collaboration Script for Learning with Multiple Visual Representations in Chemistry. Comput. Educ. 2017,109, 38–55. [CrossRef] 17. Vogel, F.; Wecker, C.; Kollar, I. Socio-Cognitive Scaffolding with Computer-Supported Collaboration Scripts: A Meta-Analysis. Educ. Psychol. Rev. 2017,29, 477–511. [CrossRef] 18. Manwaring, K.C.; Larsen, R.; Graham, C.R.; Henrie, C.R.; Halverson, L.R. Investigating Student Engagement in Blended Learning Settings Using Experience Sampling and Structural Equation Modeling. Internet High. Educ. 2017,35, 21–33. [CrossRef] 19. Nilsson, P. From Lesson Plan to New Comprehension: Exploring Student Teachers’ Pedagogical Reasoning in Learning about Teaching. Eur. J. Teach. Educ. 2009,32, 239–258. [CrossRef] 20. Lin, P.C.; Hou, H.T.; Wang, S.M.; Chang, K.E. Analyzing Knowledge Dimensions and Cognitive Process of a Project-Based Online Discussion Instructional Activity Using Facebook in an Adult and Continuing Education Course. Comput. Educ. 2013 ,60, 110–121. [CrossRef] Educ. Sci. 2021,11, 390 17 of 18 21. Aneas, A.; Rubio, M.J.; Vilà, R. Digital Portfolios and Assessment of Transversal Competencies in Internships of the Bachelor’s Degree in Pedagogy at the University of Barcelona. Educar 2018,54, 283–301. [CrossRef] 22. Khalil, S. Improving Practice Teaching in Primary Schools for School Internship Programme. Voices Teach. Teach. Educ. 2020 , 9, 72–84. 23. Gallego Arrufat, M.; Gámiz Sánchez, V.; Pérez García, M.; Romero López, M. Desarrollo de Competencias en el Prácticum con Materiales y Actividades Online. Píxel Bit. Rev. Medios Educ. 2009,34, 135–150. [CrossRef] 24. Cebrián de la Serna, M. Supervisión con E-Portafolios y Su Impacto en las Reflexiones de los Estudiantes en el Practicum. Estudio de Caso. Rev. Educ. 2011,354, 183–208. 25. EsquéBoldú, S.; Gisbert Cervera, M.; Larraz Rada, V. El Uso del E-Portafolios en las Prácticas del Bàtxelor en Enfermería. REDU Rev. Docencia Univ. 2014,12, 399–423. [CrossRef] 26. Palomares, A. El portafolios como metodología activa en el diseño y desarrollo del prácticum. In Proceedings of the IX Symposium Internacional Sobre Practicum y Prácticas en Empresas en la Formación Universitaria, Universidad de Vigo, Poio (Pontevedra), Spain, 27–29 June 2007. 27. Colomo Magaña, E.; Gabarda Méndez, V.; Cívico Ariza, A.; Cuevas Monzonís, N. Percepción de estudiantes sobre el uso del videoblog como recurso digital en educación superior. Píxel Bit. Rev. Medios Educ. 2020,59, 7–25. [CrossRef] 28. Rodríguez-Gallego, M.R.; Ordóñez-Sierra, R. Metodologías Activas Desarrolladas en la Supervisión de las Prácticas Externas del Grado en Pedagogía. Rev. d’Innov. Docent Univ. 2021,13, 1–8. 29. Ríos, M.; Moreno, M.L.; Sánchez, M.C.; Gómez del Castillo, M.T. Tutoría, supervisión y evaluación del prácticum en educación. In El Perfil Profesional del Pedagogo: Experiencias Desde una Visión Práctica; Gutiérrez, E.J.J., Ordóñez, Y.R., Eds.; Universidad de Sevilla, Grupo GID: Sevilla, Spain, 2011. 30. Barrón, C. Concepciones Epistemológicas y Práctica Docente: Una Revisión. REDU Rev. Docencia Univ. 2015,13, 3. [CrossRef] 31. García-Cabrero, B.; Loredo, J.; Carranza, G. Análisis de la Práctica Educativa de los Docentes: Pensamiento, Interacción y Reflexión. REDIE Rev. Electrón. Investig. Educ. 2008,10, 1–10. 32. Martínez-Rizo, F. Procedimientos Para el Estudio Sobre las Prácticas Docentes: Revisión de la Literatura. Relieve Rev. Electrón. Investig. Eval. Educ. 2012,18, 1–22. 33. Del Montes, L.C.; Caballero, T.P.; Miranda, M.L. Análisis de las Prácticas Docentes: Estado del Conocimiento en DOAJ y EBSCO. Rev. Investig. Educ. 2017,25, 198–229. 34. Jackson, P.W. La Vida en las Aulas; Morata, S.A., Ed.; SlideShare: Madrid, Spain, 2009. 35. Cid Sabucedo, A.; Pérez Abellás, A.; Zabalza Beraza, M.A. Las Prácticas de Enseñanza Realizadas/Observadas de los Mejores Profesores de la Universidad de Vigo. Educ. XX1 2013,16, 265–296. [CrossRef] 36. Fleiss, J.L.; Cohen, J.; Everitt, B.S. Large Sample Satandard Errors of Kappa and Wighted Kappa. Psychol. Bull. 1969 ,72, 323–327. [CrossRef] 37. Gelfand, D.M.; Hartmann, D.P. Child Behavior Analysis and Therapy; New York Press: New York, NY, USA, 1975. 38. Gallego-Arrufat, M.J.; Cebrián de la Serna, M. Contribuciones de las Tecnologías Para la Evaluación Formativa en el Prácticum. Profr. Rev. Curríc. Form. Profr. 2018,22, 139–161. [CrossRef] 39. Zeichner, K. Nuevas Epistemologías en Formación del Profesorado: Repensando las Conexiones Entre las Asignaturas del Campus y las Experiencias de Prácticas en la Formación del Profesorado en la Universidad. Rev. Interuniv. Form. Profr. 2010 , 24, 123–149. 40. Kivunja, C. Embedding Digital Pedagogy in Pre-Service Higher Education to Better Prepare Teachers for the Digital Generation. Int. J. High. Educ. 2013,2, 131–142. [CrossRef] 41. Hu, X.; Yelland, N. An Investigation of Preservice Early Childhood Teachers’ Adoption of ICT in a Teaching Practicum Context in Hong Kong. J. Early Child. Teach. Educ. 2017,38, 259–274. [CrossRef] 42. Ong’ondo, C.O.; Jwan, J.O. Research on Student Teacher Learning, Collaboration and Supervision during the Practicum: A Literature Review. Educ. Res. Rev. 2009,4, 515–524. [CrossRef] 43. Martínez, E.; Raposo, M. Funciones Generales de la Tutoría en el Practicum: Entre la Realidad y el Deseo en el Desempeño de la Acción Tutorial. Rev. Educ. 2011,354, 155–181. 44. Zeichner, K. Rethinking the Connections between Campus Courses and Field Experiences in College and Universi-Ty-Based Teacher Education. Educaçao 2010,3, 479–501. 45. Raposo-Rivas, M.; Martínez-Figueira, M.E. ¿Tecnologías Emergentes o Tecnologías Emergiendo? Un Estudio Contextualizado en la Práctica Preprofesional. Educar 2019,55, 1–20. 46. Gallego-Arrufat, M.J.; Gámiz-Sánchez, V. Un Camino Hacia la Innovación Basada en un Entorno de Aprendizaje Virtual Aplicado a la Inmersión Práctica en los Estudios Universitarios de Educación. Rev. Latinoam. Tecnol. Educ. 2007,6, 13–32. 47. On, C.; Attitude, S. Virtual Learning Environments in Faculties of Education in Spain: Changes on Student Attitude. J. Educ. Teach. Train. 2010,1, 42–50. 48. Cid Sabucedo, A.; Ocampo Gómez, C.I. Funciones Tutoriales en el Prácticum de Psicopedagogía en La Universidad de Vigo: Percepciones de los Estudiantes Actuales. Rev. Educ. 2007,344, 285–307. 49. Sánchez, C.A.; García, A.; Fernández, S.R. La mejora del prácticum a través de la implicación y reflexión de sus agentes: Reflejos de un proceso de investigación-acción. In El Practicum en Educación Infantil: Primaria y Máster de Secundaria; Ramírez, S., Sánchez, C.A., García, A., Latorre, M.J., Eds.; EOS: Madrid, Spain, 2011; pp. 241–278. Educ. Sci. 2021,11, 390 18 of 18 50. Tello Díaz, J. Implicaciones Formativas Del Prácticum de Psicopedagogía En Los Centros de Educación Secundaria. Profr. Rev. Curríc. Form. Profr. 2007,11, 1–16. 51. Gil-Molina, P.; Ibáñez-Etxeberria, A.; Arribas, S.; Jaureguizar, J. El Practicum del Máster de Formación del Profesorado de Secundaria: Valoraciones del Alumnado y del Profesorado-Tutor. Profr. Rev. Curríc. Form. Profr. 2018,22, 1–17. [CrossRef] 52. To, W.M.; Lung, J.W.Y. Factors Influencing Internship Satisfaction among Chinese Students. Educ. Train. 2020 ,62, 543–558. [CrossRef] 53. Zhu, G.; Membiela, P.; Wang, K. Examining Chinese and Spanish preservice teachers’ practicum teaching experiences: A transformative learning perspective. J. Educ. Teach. 2020,46, 124–128. [CrossRef] 54. Craig, C.J.; Zou, Y.; Poimbeauf, R. Journal Writing as a Way to Know Culture: Insights from a Travel Study Abroad Program. Teach. Teach. 2015,21, 472–489. [CrossRef] 55. Ba¸stürk, S. Examining Primary Pre-service Teachers ´ perspectives on teaching practice courses. Acta Didact. Napoc. 2016 ,9, 35–46. 56. Bartolomé-Pina, A.; Gallego-Arrufat, M.J.; Pérez-Galán, R.; Sarmiento-Campos, J.A.; Baelo-Álvarez, R.; Páramo-Iglesias, M.B.; García-Beltrán, A.; Tapia-Fernández, S. Los modelos de uso de las tecnologías para la evaluación de los aprendizajes en el prácticum en las facultades de ciencias de la educación en españa: Encuestando a los gestores. In Documentar y Evaluar la Experiencia de los Estudiantes en las Prácticas; Raposo-Rivas, M., Muñoz Carril, P.C., Zabalza-Cerdeiriña, M., Martínez-Figueira, M.E., Pérez-Abellás, A., Eds.; Andavira: Santiago de Compostela, Poio, Spain, 2015. 57. Filiz, B.; Durnali, M. The views of pre-service teachers at an internship high school on pedagogical formation program in Turkey. Eur. J. Educ. Res. 2019,8, 395–407. [CrossRef] 58. Barragán-Sánchez, R.; Corujo-Vélez, M.C.; Palacios-Rodríguez, A.; Román-Graván, P. Teaching Digital Competence and EcoResponsible Use of Technologies: Development and Validation of a Scale. Sustainability 2020,12, 7721. [CrossRef] 59. Cabero-Almenara, J.; Barroso-Osuna, J.; Gutiérrez-Castillo, J.-J.; Palacios-Rodríguez, A. The Teaching Digital Competence of Health Sciences Teachers. A Study at Andalusian Universities (Spain). Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021 ,18, 2552. [CrossRef] 60. Romero-Tena, R.; Llorente-Cejudo, C.; Puig-Gutiérrez, M.; Barragán-Sánchez, R. The Pandemic and Changes in the Self-Perception of Teacher Digital Competences of Infant Grade Students: A Cross Sectional Study. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021 ,18, 4756. [CrossRef] [PubMed] 61. Infante-Moro, A.; Infante-Moro, J.; Gallardo-Pérez, J. The acquisition of ICT skills at the university level: The case of the Faculty of Business Studies and Tourism of the University of Huelva. Píxel Bit. Rev. Medios Educ. 2021,60, 29–58. [CrossRef] 62. Ordóñez-Olmedo, E.; Vázquez-Cano, E.; Arias-Sánchez, S.; López-Meneses, E. Las Competencias en el uso de las Tecnologías de la Información y la Comunicación en el alumnado universitario. Píxel Bit. Rev. Medios Educ. 2021,60, 153–167. [CrossRef] 63. Sepúlveda-Ruiz, M.P.; Guillén-Gámez, F.D.; García-Vila, E.; Mayorga-Fernández, M.J. Emotional competence of prospective early childhood and primary education teachers: Analyses of significant predictors. Form. Univ. 2021,14, 105–114. [CrossRef]