Challenges in Training and Educational Innovation: An Evaluative Perspective of the Digital Teaching Competence in the Context of a Pandemic

Abstract

This article analyzes the assessment of the four development levels of the Digital Teaching Competence (DTC) to recognize the needs and formulation of challenges in training and educational innovation required in the pedagogical practices of university professors under the current context of the Covid-19 pandemic. The study used an empirical-analytical methodology with a non-experimental, transactional, descriptive design. The sample design was probabilistic, estimated with 95% confidence and 5% error among 252 teachers from various faculties of the University of La Guajira. The selected instrument corresponded to the rubric's application to evaluate the university professor's digital teaching competence in Latin America. Among the study's significant results, we highlight that the rubric presented a high Cronbach's alpha reliability (α: 0.947). In the general assessment of DTC development, it was estimated that 78.2% of teachers are in the first two levels of DTC development assessment (Beginning and Middle). The evaluation rubric allows identifying challenges and opportunities that teacher training must address to advance the professional development of professors.

Assessing Digital Teaching Competence: An Approach for International Chinese Teachers Based on Deep Learning Algorithms

“…Due to advancements in information technology and the penetration of artificial intelligence research, online teaching has become one of the most important pedagogical methods for international Chinese language education [51,19]. In the context of language education, digital teaching competence (DTC) has emerged as a crucial competency for teachers to acquire, emphasizing the need for effective methods to develop digital competence globally [37]. Assessment, as the primary method of evaluating teachers' competency, helps Chinese as foreign language (CFL) teachers improve their DTC and teaching effectiveness [61].…”