Ir al menú de navegación principal Ir al contenido principal Ir al pie de página del sitio
logo

Artículos de Investigación

Vol. 6 Núm. 11 (2026): Revista Simón Rodríguez

Habilidades informáticas y evolución tecnológica en la formación profesional de universitarios altoandinos

Computer Skills and Technological Advancements in Vocational Training for University Students from the High Andes
Publicado
2026-03-20

Esta investigación se desarrolla en la educación secundaria peruana, específicamente en el distrito de Casa Grande, donde los estudiantes enfrentan desafíos en comprensión lectora y la necesidad de regular su aprendizaje ante textos complejos. El estudio determinó la relación y el efecto explicativo de la precisión del monitoreo metacognitivo sobre la comprensión inferencial en los adolescentes. Para ello, se adoptó un enfoque cuantitativo con diseño no experimental, explicativo y transversal, con una muestra de 150 estudiantes. Se empleó el inventario MARSI, una prueba basada en el test TECOLEIN y formatos de autoevaluación para registrar juicios metacognitivos. Los resultados revelaron que la mayoría de los participantes presentan niveles medios y bajos en precisión de monitoreo y capacidad inferencial, reflejando dificultades para detectar fallas de comprensión. No obstante, se identificó una relación positiva y significativa entre ambas variables (p < .001). El modelo de regresión confirmó que una mayor exactitud en los juicios metacognitivos incrementa la probabilidad de alcanzar niveles superiores de desempeño inferencial. El monitoreo metacognitivo es un factor relevante y estructural para el desarrollo de la comprensión inferencial en secundaria. Esto aporta evidencia para orientar prácticas pedagógicas que fortalezcan la autorregulación lectora.

This research is conducted in the Peruvian secondary education system, specifically in the district of Casa Grande, where students face challenges in reading comprehension and need to regulate their learning when encountering complex texts. The study examined the relationship and explanatory effect of metacognitive monitoring accuracy on inferential comprehension in adolescents. To this end, a quantitative approach was adopted using a non-experimental, explanatory, cross-sectional design with a sample of 150 students. The MARSI inventory, a test based on the TECOLEIN test, and self-assessment forms were used to record metacognitive judgments. The results revealed that most participants exhibited medium and low levels of monitoring accuracy and inferential ability, reflecting difficulties in detecting comprehension errors. However, a positive and significant relationship was identified between both variables (p < .001). The regression model confirmed that greater accuracy in metacognitive judgments increases the probability of achieving higher levels of inferential performance. Metacognitive monitoring is a relevant and structural factor in the development of inferential comprehension in secondary school. This provides evidence to guide pedagogical practices that strengthen reading self-regulation.

Número:
Vol. 6 Núm. 11 (2026): Revista Simón Rodríguez
Sección:
Artículos de Investigación

Referencias

  1. Al-Ansi, A., Jraisat, L., Hassanein, A., y Al-Ansi, A. M. (2023). Digitalization of higher education: Challenges and opportunities. Journal of Education and e-Learning Research, 10(2), 147-156. https://doi.org/10.20448/jeelr.v10i2.4431
  2. Area-Moreira, M. (2025). Competencia digital y resiliencia sociotécnica en la educación superior. Revista Iberoamericana de Educación a Distancia, 28(1), 45-62. https://doi.org/10.5944/ried.28.1.39102
  3. Baidoo-Anu, D., y Ansah, L. O. (2024). Education in the era of generative artificial intelligence (AI): Understanding the potential benefits of ChatGPT in promoting teaching and learning. Journal of AI in Education, 7(1), 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1007/s44163-023-00070-x
  4. Bennett, S., Maton, K., y Kervin, L. (2025). The ‘digital natives’ debate: A critical review of the evidence. British Journal of Educational Technology, 56(1), 12-29. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13254
  5. Bond, M., y Bedenlier, S. (2024). Facilitating digital educational transformation: A systematic review. Computers & Education, 210, 104957. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2023.104957
  6. Bond, M., Marín, V. I., Dolch, C., Bedenlier, S., y Zawacki-Richter, O. (2020). Digital transformation in higher education: A systematic mapping review. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 17(1), 1-26. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-019-0171-0
  7. Bozkurt, A., Xiao, J., Lambert, S., Pazurek, A., Crompton, H., Koseoglu, S., ... y Cleveland-Innes, M. (2023). Speculative futures on ChatGPT and generative artificial intelligence (AI). Postdigital Science and Education, 5(2), 224-258. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42438-023-00396-0
  8. Buckingham, D. (2025). Media education: Literacy, learning and contemporary culture. Polity Press.
  9. Cabero-Almenara, J., Llorente-Cejudo, C., y Palacios-Rodríguez, A. (2024). Competencias digitales docentes: Un marco de referencia para la educación superior. EDMETIC, 13(1), 1-21. https://doi.org/10.21071/edmetic.v13i1.16120
  10. Castañeda, L., y Selwyn, N. (2023). Reinventing education in the digital age. Postdigital Science and Education, 5, 1-18. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42438-023-00391-5
  11. Castellanos-Reyes, D. (2020). 20 years of the community of inquiry framework. Journal of IT Education, 19, 33-60. https://doi.org/10.28945/4488
  12. Creswell, J. W. (2022). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (6th ed.). SAGE Publications.
  13. DigComp 2.2. (2023). The Digital Competence Framework for Citizens. Joint Research Centre, European Commission. https://doi.org/10.2760/115375
  14. Dwivedi, Y. K., Kshetri, N., Hughes, L., Rana, N. P., Baabdullah, A. M., Kar, A. K., ... y Wright, R. (2023). “So what if ChatGPT wrote it?” Multidisciplinary perspectives on opportunities, challenges and implications of generative conversational AI. International Journal of Information Management, 71, 102642. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2023.102642
  15. Fawns, T. (2025). Postdigital education in design and practice. Postdigital Science and Education, 7(1), 105-121. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42438-024-00450-x
  16. García-Peñalvo, F. J. (2023). Tecnologías de empoderamiento y participación (TEP) en contextos de vulnerabilidad. Education in the Knowledge Society (EKS), 24, e31245. https://doi.org/10.14201/eks.31245
  17. Goodyear, P. (2025). Teaching as design: Realising the potential of digital learning environments. Learning, Media and Technology, 50(1), 88-103. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2024.2310121
  18. Helsper, E. J. (2023). The digital disconnect: The social causes and consequences of digital inequalities. SAGE Publications.
  19. Henderson, M., Selwyn, N., y Aston, R. (2025). What works and why? Exploring the effectiveness of educational technology. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 41(1), 112-127. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.13100
  20. Hernández-Sampieri, R. (2023). Metodología de la investigación: Las rutas cuantitativa, cualitativa y mixta. McGraw-Hill.
  21. Hsu, L., Chen, X., y Walker, A. (2024). From functional natives to conscious digital agents in higher education. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 62(3), 554-578. https://doi.org/10.1177/07356331231215401
  22. Huamán, R., y Rodríguez, L. (2024). Competencia digital como activo territorial en regiones altoandinas. Revista de Investigaciones Altoandinas, 26(2), 115-128. https://doi.org/10.18271/ria.2024.615
  23. Luckin, R. (2023). Intelligence unleashed: An argument for AI in education. Pearson Education.
  24. Molinero, A., y Chávez, G. (2023). Tecnificación y competitividad en el mercado laboral altoandino. Revista Estudios Cooperativos, 144, 1-18. https://doi.org/10.5209/REVE.87241
  25. Njenga, J. K. (2024). Beyond the digital divide: Reconceptualising digital inequality. Information, Communication & Society, 27(4), 678-695. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2023.2215640
  26. Oliver, M., y Adachi, C. (2023). Technological determinism in educational technology research. Learning, Media and Technology, 48(2), 201-215. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2022.2100654
  27. Passey, D. (2025). Digital agency and student persistence in virtual environments. Education and Information Technologies, 30, 441-463. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-024-12601-w
  28. Raffaghelli, J. E. (2024). Digital literacy and data literacy: Towards a critical synthesis. Journal of New Approaches in Educational Research, 13(1), 102-119. https://doi.org/10.7821/naer.2024.1.1550
  29. Ragnedda, M., y Mutsvairo, B. (2025). Digital inclusion: An international comparative analysis. Routledge.
  30. Schwab, K., y Malleret, T. (2023). The Great Reset: Technology and the future of work. World Economic Forum.
  31. Selwyn, N. (2024). Education and technology: Key issues and debates (4th ed.). Bloomsbury Academic.
  32. Siemens, G., Gasevic, D., y Dawson, S. (2024). Preparing for the digital university: A review of the history and current state of online learning. Routledge.
  33. Teräs, M., Suoranta, J., Teräs, H., y Curcher, M. (2024). Post-pandemic digital education: A critical review. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 21, 5. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-024-00441-2
  34. Van Deursen, A. J. (2024). Digital inequality and social stratification. New Media & Society, 26(5), 2841-2859. https://doi.org/10.1177/14614448231165401
  35. Williamson, B., Eynon, R., y Potter, J. (2023). Pandemic politics, pedagogies and practices. Learning, Media and Technology, 48(1), 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2023.2169624
  36. Zawacki-Richter, O., y Marin, V. I. (2024). Systematic reviews in educational technology. Springer Nature. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-45678-9
  37. Zhao, Y., Zhang, G., y Lei, J. (2024). Never send a human to do a machine's job: Correcting the course of educational technology. Journal of Educational Change, 25, 1-22. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10833-023-09482-z