| (Meeting 1) It is observed that there is knowledge of the objectives on the part of the students and that they work based on them, both those of the session and those of the course previously proposed in the virtual classroom. It is also perceived that there is recognition of the materials to be used, the development of the session is appropriate based on what was previously planned. (Meeting 2) There is a constant in the work under the objectives that characterizes the whole encounter, in terms of the use of materials there is variation in the work from the students who charge a more relevant role. (Meeting 3) The use of the objectives as the orientation of the face-to-face meeting is properly observed. (Meeting 4) The development of precise tutoring of the objectives without being very clear about the developments that are reached. |
(Meeting 1) The support of virtual resources is not evident, although they are manifested in virtual classrooms, there is no appropriation of them in the meeting, without there being a transcendence in the learning process. (Meeting 2) The non-observance of multimedia resources remains, he has them, but the integration of them in the class process is unclear, unclear. (Meeting 3) The tutoring does not require the integration between the multimedia resources with which it counts and the explanations given to the students, they have a passive attitude towards these resources. (Meeting 4) The use of transmisionist methods in tutoring prevails without the virtual resources being a significant support |
(Meeting 1) It is evident that the classroom has instructional material that contributes to the student, however, it is scarce the way in which you can delve into topics worked thanks to that material. In addition, it is not evident that this material generates new ways of learning. (Meeting 2) In this meeting it is observed that the virtual components are used, but it is also not evident how they contribute directly to learning. (Meeting 3) It is not perceived that there is a direct integration of the virtuality components with the process. (Meeting 4) More sharply this meeting does not allow to visualize the articulation of the virtuality component to the students' learning. |
There is very little interaction between students and professors through the virtual classroom to enable the development of communication as a support to the virtuality process. This observation was made in a general way on the virtual platform during a space of fifteen days, it was also observed that interaction between the students themselves is not generated as a possibility of knowledge. Although there are spaces for communication over time that face-to-face meetings do not take place, their use is limited and is not evidence of effective communication to support learning. |
