The present study seeks to map and visualize up-to-date perspectives of the topic of active learning by analyzing and interpreting the different elements that make up learning ecosystems within the European Higher Education Area. With this aim, scientometric methods were employed to analyze a sample of 474 articles recovered from Web of Science (WoS) during the three-year period between 2018 and 2020. All articles examined the topic of active learning. Keywords (authors’ keywords and ‘keywords plus’) from the manuscripts were examined through co-occurrence analysis in order to establish the conceptual structure of active learning. Among the different trends and emerging topics identified, there is an important presence of topics related to technology applied to the field of education, where digital contexts acquire a preponderant role in current education. These innovative changes focused on the digital updating and exploitation of technology represent a methodological challenge that requires an involvement and commitment to this new space for educational practice by teachers and students.
The aim was to determine the opinions held by a sample of students in relation to homoparenting as a family modality. A cross-sectional study was conducted on a sample of university students specialization: social sciences using the AHFH. It is patent that opinions of students about the three factors (support, rejection and acceptance) that compose the construct of attitudes towards same-sex couples as a family structure, differ greatly depending on the positive or negative nature of these components. In conclusion, in relation to the dimension pertaining to rejection of same-sex couples as a family entity, we derived a configuration determined by 1 of the 4 predictor variables. In this case, gender was the only one of the 4 variables considered to support formation of a profile. This profile was constituted by male students who, independent of their birthplace setting, qualification and whether they personally know any same-sex couples, showed stronger agreement with the dimension describing rejection of same-sex couples as a family structure.
(1) Background: Nomophobia is a recent behavioural addiction phenomenon. The present study proposes the objective of determining levels of nomophobia in students of Education. In addition, it seeks to find evidence regarding whether cross-tabulating variables produces statistically significant differences and to examine whether the contemplated variables, together with nomophobia levels, can be used to generate a student profile. (2) Methods: A total of 510 students (M = 20.69 years) participated in this study. For the collection of information, we developed a Likert-type ad hoc scale of nomophobia. The quantitative data analysis programmes SPSS v.25 (IBM, Armonk, NY, USA), STATA.v.15 (StatCorp, Spring, TX, USA) and jamovi v.1.2 (The jamovi project, Sidney, Australia) were used to analyse information collected by the previously described scale. (3) Results: The study concludes the existence of three main levels of correspondence. The first is formed by students with a low level of nomophobia. It is associated with students undertaking the first year of a Master’s degree who are older than 24, and in this case, gender does not play a discriminating role. The second describes students with moderate nomophobia. It is associated with females, the degree titles of Pedagogy and Primary Education, undertaking the first or second year of degree study and ages of between 21 and 24. Finally, the third level of correspondence is formed by students with high nomophobia. It is related to the same characteristics as those previously mentioned but ages typically ranging between 17 and 20.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.