Mendive. Journal on Education, july-september 2022; 20(3): 878-891
Translated from the original in Spanish
Characterization of the evaluation process of Professional Improvement in the English Language
Caracterización del proceso de evaluación de la Superación Profesional en Idioma Inglés
Caracterização do processo de avaliação de Aperfeiçoamento Profissional em Língua Inglesa
Aniuska Berdayes Vives1http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2877-481X
Mayenny Linares Río1http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8331-060X
Idania Díaz Cabeza1http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8424-5205
1Faculty of Medical Sciences "Ernesto Guevara de la Serna". Pinar del Río. Cuba. email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com
Received: March 10th, 2022.
Accepted: May 22nd, 2022.
Assessment is an invaluable source of necessary and reliable information to determine those elements of the teaching practice that may affect the teaching learning process, so as adjust it, in a way that favors the learning self-regulation of the medical professionals about a language they need to complement their professional training from the academic and scientific view points. So, the objective of this article is to characterize the process of evaluation of the professional training in English, so as to verify the present limitation and thus direct the researching process towards its solution. A study supported by the dialectical materialist method was conducted. Theoretical methods such as: (logical historical analysis, inductive-deductive; modelling and others, and empirical methods, such as (documentary analysis, observation, and surveys) were used to determine the essence of the object and organize the research results. Theoretical elements of the professional training assessment process were systematized for its conceptualization and determination of its four dimensions from which indicators the empiric instruments were elaborated and which results allowed to determine the strengths and weaknesses of the object of study; difficulties in the process of assessment of the professional training in English that limit the adjustment and quality of the English professional training process and the idiomatic training of the medical professionals were evident.
Keywords: profiling; evaluation process; professional training in English; regulation; self-regulation of learning.
La evaluación en la superación profesional del idioma inglés constituye una fuente invaluable de información oportuna para determinar los elementos de la práctica docente que pueden afectar el proceso de enseñanza-aprendizaje, de modo que dicho proceso conduzca a la regulación y posibilite la autorregulación del aprendizaje de un idioma que los profesionales de la medicina necesitan para cumplimentar su preparación profesional integral; sin embargo, existen limitaciones en este proceso que interfieren en logro de estos propósitos. El objetivo de este artículo es el de caracterizar el proceso de evaluación de la Superación Profesional en Idioma Inglés para los profesionales de la medicina, a fin de constatar las limitaciones existentes y encaminar el proceso investigativo hacia la solución de las mismas. El estudio realizado se basa en el enfoque dialéctico. Desde este punto de vista se utilizaron los métodos del nivel teórico como el análisis histórico-lógico, el inductivo-deductivo, la modelación, entre otros; del nivel empírico: el análisis documental, la observación, las encuestas; así como los matemáticos-estadísticos. Se sistematizaron aspectos teóricos del proceso de evaluación de la Superación Profesional en Idioma Inglés para su conceptualización y la determinación de sus dimensiones, a partir de cuyos indicadores se elaboraron los instrumentos empíricos, los que permitieron determinar las fortalezas y debilidades del objeto de estudio. Se evidenciaron dificultades en el proceso de evaluación de la Superación Profesional en Idioma Inglés que limitan la regulación y calidad del proceso de Superación Profesional en Idioma Inglés y la formación idiomática de los profesionales de la medicina.
Palabras clave: caracterización; proceso de evaluación; Superación Profesional en Idioma Inglés; regulación; autorregulación del aprendizaje.
A avaliação no aperfeiçoamento profissional da língua inglesa constitui uma fonte inestimável de informação oportuna para determinar os elementos da prática docente que podem afetar o processo de ensino-aprendizagem, de modo que este processo conduza à regulação e possibilite a autorregulação do processo de ensino-aprendizagem. aprendizagem de um idioma que os profissionais médicos precisam para completar sua preparação profissional abrangente; entretanto, existem limitações nesse processo que interferem na consecução desses propósitos. O objetivo deste artigo é caracterizar o processo de avaliação de Aperfeiçoamento Profissional em Língua Inglesa para profissionais médicos, a fim de verificar as limitações existentes e direcionar o processo investigativo para sua solução. O estudo realizado baseia-se na abordagem dialética. Sob esse ponto de vista, foram utilizados métodos de nível teórico, como análise histórico-lógica, indutivo-dedutivo, modelagem, entre outros; do nível empírico: análise documental, observação, levantamentos; bem como os matemáticos-estatísticos. Aspectos teóricos do processo de avaliação do Aperfeiçoamento Profissional em Língua Inglesa foram sistematizados para sua conceituação e determinação de suas dimensões, a partir de cujos indicadores foram elaborados os instrumentos empíricos, que permitiram determinar os pontos fortes e fracos do objeto de estudo. Foram encontradas dificuldades no processo de avaliação do Desenvolvimento Profissional em Língua Inglesa que limitam a regulamentação e a qualidade do processo de Desenvolvimento Profissional em Língua Inglesa e a formação linguística dos profissionais médicos.
Palavras-chave: caracterização; Processo de avaliação; Aperfeiçoamento Profissional em Língua Inglesa; regulamento; autorregulação da aprendizagem.
Postgraduate education, as the highest level of the education system, guarantees the permanent improvement of university graduates, which allows them to respond with higher quality to social demands. (Regulation of Postgraduate Education of la República Cuba. RESOLUTION No. 132/2004).
Currently, guaranteeing the continuous language preparation of health professionals is one of the priorities in professional improvement in la Educación MédicaSuperior (EMS), since the training of a professional with a communicative preparation in the English language is demanded, which allows them to perform their functions in professional, social exchange and academic settings (Public Health Law. Law No. 41, 1983).
The teaching-learning processes of the Professional Development in English Language (SPII) courses have not been exempting from limitations that have prevented their development, which has been confirmed by research carried out in this regard, despite not being very diverse, by authors such as Hierrezuelo (2021); Texidor (2019).
The insufficiencies of this process have been manifested, in a general way, in such fundamental elements as: the development of communicative skills in the English language and its interrelation with professional skills, the development of communicative tasks, among others; and, in particular, in its evaluation process, whose analysis and study has been relegated and priority has been given to the difficulties in the elements of the process mentioned above.
The evaluation constitutes an essential component within the teaching-learning process, which allows establishing relationships of interdependence between the components of this process, by offering opportunities for the evaluation of the effectiveness of its components for learning and for the regulation of the teaching process. -learning itself, in order to improve its quality and as a means of stimulating self-learning.
Within the evaluation of learning, formative evaluation is the type of evaluation that, due to its characteristics and contributions to the regulation of the teaching-learning process, allows obtaining pertinent and valid information about said process. It is the model that provides more and better data to deepen the understanding of training processes. It is also a type of evaluation focused on assessing the teaching-learning process, taking into account the educational needs of the students, involving their active participation (Chen, 2021; Asiú & Barboza; 2021; Herrero, 2021).
Thus, the evaluation la SPII constitutes an essential tool for the planning and regulation of the learning of the medical professional, in pursuit of pertinent language training.
Based on the experience of the authors as teachers of la SPII, and the evidence collected empirically, it was possible to verify the persistence of limitations related to a structuralism evaluation process, fundamentally aimed at measuring the linguistic domain of the professional; the lack of consensus among teachers when evaluating, due to the lack of descriptors contextualized to the communication of the professional la Medicine and the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR) and the low participation of the student in the process, are aspects that go to the detriment of the quality of the professional training of medical professionals. Studies such as those carried out by Ronda (2016) and Mayedo, Rodríguez and Núñez (2018 and 2021) support the findings found.
The exploratory study carried out on the Evaluation Process of Professional Improvement in the English Language (PESPII)during the 2018-2019 academic year , in la University of Medical Sciences of Pinar del Río, together with the experience of the authors, allowed to define the limitations in said process that affect the regulation and quality of the process of Professional Improvement in English Language and, therefore, the language training that medical professionals need to perform their functions.
The limitations are related to the insufficient homogeneity in the evaluation process, as there are no specific indicators for the evaluations, which are governed by the CEFR standards; It is evaluated according to the level and criteria of each teacher, which gives subjectivity to the evaluation. The insufficient ability of professionals to make adequate assessments in relation to their progress in learning the language, as well as the predominance of the instructive nature of the evaluation focused on checking linguistic knowledge and not integrated knowledge, are a function of their professional profile and towards the solution of professional problems.
These limitations allow the identification of the existence of a contradiction between reality, reflected in the limitations of a theoretical-practical type, which affect the evaluation process of Professional Improvement in the English Language on the one hand; and, on the other hand, the need for a formative and contextualized evaluation process that improves the PSPII and contributes to the training of a professional with a language preparation in English, which allows them to make real use of said language to carry out their functions in professional, academic and communication settings. The declared contradiction allows us to pose as a scientific problem: how to improve the evaluation process of the Professional Development in English Language of la University of Medical Sciences of Pinar del Río?
Due to the above, the objective of this scientific article has been to characterize the evaluation process of Professional Improvement in English Language for Medicine professionals, in order to verify the existing limitations and direct the investigative process towards their solution and contribute to the improvement of said process.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
The research is based on the dialectical approach. From this approach, methods, procedures and research techniques were used, theoretical and empirical, as well as mathematical-statistical and descriptive statistics, to process the data obtained from the application of diagnostic instruments.
The elaboration of this characterization was based on the triangulation of the results obtained with the implementation of theoretical methods such as: historical-logical analysis, inductive-deductive, modeling, among others, for the conceptual systematization of the evaluation process of Professional Improvement in the English Language, its definition as a research variable and its operationalization, the elaboration of instruments and the characterization in the study context.
Likewise, methods of the empirical level were used, such as documentary analysis to: exams, resolutions, improvement course programs; the direct observation of evaluations at different evaluative moments and the surveys carried out on professors with experience in Professional Development in the English Language and medical professionals who receive these Professional Development in English Language courses , with the aim of determining strengths and weaknesses that characterize the process, based on which it is proposed, the solution to the scientific problem posed for its transformation.
The study was carried out in the Faculty of Medical Sciences "Dr. Ernesto Che Guevara de la Serna" of la University of Medical Sciences of Pinar del Río, specifically with medical professionals who attend the Professional Development courses in English. From an intentional sampling, we worked with a sample of 18 teachers, who work directly with professional improvement, which constitute 54.5% of the total of 35 teachers of the English department, who constitute the study population; of them: 10 assistants, six assistants and two regulars. On the other hand, of all the Medicine (350) professionals who attended the Professional Improvement courses in the English Language, between the years 2019 and 2020, 245 were selected as a sample for the study, for 70.0% of the total. The sample was selected from a simple random sampling.
The investigative inquiry starts from the documentary analysis of normative documents that govern the postgraduate course, to know how the evaluation process of the Professional Improvement in the English Language is conceived; as well as the review of a total of 20 exams applied in these years during the evaluation process; and the programs of the improvement courses. Subsequently, the survey was applied to professors and medical professionals, to find out their opinion about the current situation of the evaluation process of the Professional Improvement in English Language. Similarly, and with the aim of identifying the causes of the results obtained in the applied instruments and to corroborate these elements, scientific observation was carried out on 20 evaluative activities. The qualitative and quantitative analysis of the applied instruments allowed to obtain criteria on the evaluation process of Professional Improvement in the English Language and to determine its strengths and weaknesses.
The results of the theoretical systematization carried out made it possible to determine essential features that characterize the evaluation process of Professional Improvement in the English Language and to consider it as the only variable in this research. This is defined as the succession of phases interrelated with each other, which give it a procedural quality and dynamizes its relationship with the rest of the components of the process of Professional Improvement in the English Language, which due to its formative and contextualized nature, taking into account the CEFR standards, facilitates the development of professional communication skills from the solution of professional problems; at the same time, it allows the most objective assessment of results and decision-making to guide and regulate the continuous teaching of the English language, by having the indicators for its assessment.
The operationalization of the variable allowed the definition of its dimensions, taking into account the conceptual nuclei within it. Thus, four dimensions were established to take into account when characterizing the process; Dimension 1: formative nature of the evaluation process, Dimension 2: the didactics of evaluation and Dimension 3: guiding and regulating nature of the evaluation, which have several indicators within them that allow their elucidation and provide a more specific approach to the reality of the process under investigation.
In Dimension 1, the formative nature of the evaluation as a process allows the teacher to know the level reached in the educational process, to reflect on the strategies applied, making improvements in its mediation and pedagogical facilitation; likewise, it allows the student to put into practice their learning and the recognition of their achievements and their difficulties. It is focused on assessing the learning process continuously, taking into account the educational needs of students and involving the active participation of students, so that self-regulation of learners is achieved.
In Dimension 2: didactics of the evaluation, the latter is understood as a process inherent to the process of professional improvement of the English language, hence aspects related to the didactic organization of the evaluation process, its components and relations.
And in Dimension 3: the regulatory and guiding nature of the evaluation takes into account how the teacher and the student use the results obtained from the evaluation to regulate teaching, make decisions for its reorientation based on the needs that arise and the self learning
It is from these dimensions and their corresponding indicators that the empirical instruments were developed, which allowed the gathering of information from different sources and its triangulation.
The analysis of the information obtained and the scientific discussion of the results, by dimensions of the empirical instruments developed such as the survey of professors and medical professionals, allowed us to know in the study of Dimension 1: Formative character of the evaluation, that the 83.3% (15) agree that the PESPII is characterized by not being continuous, not paying much attention to the evaluation of the process as such, which shows the insufficient recognition of the evaluation as a training process. Similarly, 88.8% (16) of the teachers agree that the learning needs of the students are not diagnosed for the orientation and planning of the evaluation and that this diagnosis is aimed, fundamentally, at the linguistic domain of the students for their location by levels. 77.7% (14) of the professors admit that they do not facilitate the participation of the students in the planning of the evaluation, considering that the students do not have to do it; 61.1 % (11) acknowledge not using hetero evaluation; 55.5% (10) use self-assessment sometimes; meanwhile, 77.7% (14) acknowledge not using co-assessment in their evaluative moments, considering that students are not capable of providing an accurate evaluation of their progress, which shows the low participation of professionals in their evaluation process . Findings are corroborated by what was expressed by the professionals surveyed, who in 99.6% (244) agree that teachers do not take their opinion into account for the planning and execution of the evaluation and that, despite the fact that they do inform the evaluation objectives, they did not agree with them neither the contents, nor the objectives, nor the criteria of success and failure. In this same order, 50.1% of the students state that they have not used different types of assessment in English classes, such as co-assessment, self-assessment and hetero-assessment; Among the most frequent causes, they explain that teachers do not like the grades they give, considering them inadequate, in addition to not feeling capable of self-evaluation or incorrectly evaluating their classmates, as they do not have clear criteria that allow them to carry out said evaluation.
In relation to la Dimensión2: evaluation didactics, 83.3% (15) of the teachers and 95.9% (235) of the professionals agree that there is no correspondence between the evaluation, the objectives and the typology of examination responding to the different contexts of the doctor's actions, and from professional problems, so the evaluation does not offer an evident assessment of the real state of the students at the end of the courses for the use of English as an instrument of study and professional work In relation to the diversification of instruments (evaluation tasks), forms of teaching , evaluation moments, 100% of teachers and professionals agree that there is no variety of forms, techniques or evaluation instruments that foster the development of critical thinking and reflective of the students . However, 100% agree that the evaluative moments are specified, although each one plans it according to their particular criteria, since there is no regulation that establishes it. 66.6% (12) state that, on occasions, they are forced to carry out evaluations or partial cuts at the request of the postgraduate management at different instances, outside of what was planned in the course program. These mostly respond to requests or demands for collaboration at different levels.
Likewise, 100% (18) of the teachers surveyed agree in giving importance to methodological work for planning the evaluation and feedback of the teaching-learning process, but this is almost null and is not carried out at any level. Similarly, 100% of teachers and professionals agree that there are no clearly established indicators for evaluations, which are governed by the parameters established in the CEFR, so it is evaluated according to the level and criteria of each teacher; In the same way, they coincide in pointing out that a real integration of communication skills with professional ones is not always done. Regarding the existence of a resolution or VADI that regulates the evaluation for PESPII, 100% state that they are unaware of the existence of any resolution, only what is stipulated in postgraduate resolutions, which are general for all Higher Education. When delving into the elements that support the answer, it has been known that 72.2% of the interviewees recognize as the only legal document la Instrucción3/2015 that regulates the evaluation for Medical Sciences, which they considered not very applicable to the evaluation in SPII, due to the particularities of the teaching of the English language, which coincides with the studies carried out by Mayedo, Rodríguez and Núñez (2018).
In relation to la Dimensión3: regulation and guidance, 33.3% of the teachers surveyed recognized that they never stop to carry out an in-depth analysis of the difficulties detected in the exams, both oral and written, nor do they draw up a corrective plan in this regard, often ignoring the work with the individual differences of the professionals and how this feedback can influence the improvement of the PSPII. Among the arguments for this, are the large number of students in classes, which is in contradiction with one of the principles of language teaching, where the ideal is to work with 15 students and the lack of time for professionals to dedicate to the educational and remedial consultations, due to the assistance load that the professionals have. In relation to the readjustment of the activities, topics or contents to reorient the PSPII, 72.2% (13) of the professors propose to make these readjustments sometimes, fundamentally due to the instability of the students, which coincides with what was indicated by 90.2% (221) that they do so only sometimes. 100% (18) of the teachers surveyed, and 98.3% (241) of the professionals, state that they do not consider that students make adequate assessments of their development and argue that, while some underestimate themselves, others overestimate their progress, which does not allow them to make an adequate reorientation of their action based on their limitations; Among the reasons for this, 87.5% admit that this is due to the lack of indicators that allow them to make an adequate assessment of their learning, by visualizing the criteria of success and failure.
In the documentary analysis of the programs of the postgraduate courses, it was verified that each professor prepares the program of the course to be taught taking into account the level of output to which he responds and the contents that he is going to teach. These, for the most part, do not have a structure that reflects their most important characteristics, as they lack pedagogical, psychological and didactic foundations. In relation to the evaluation, it is described in a general way, without specifying the guidelines and norms for the planning and elaboration of the evaluation instruments, nor considering indicators for the evaluation.
In relation to the analysis of exams, it was possible to corroborate that these coincided in their structure and level with those applied in the undergraduate. The keys written for the oral and written part are not very precise and clear, which leaves a wide margin for the subjectivity of the evaluation and favors a heterogeneous evaluation that is not based on the CEFR standards. These findings coincide with what was stated by Mayedo, Rodríguez and Núñez (2021), who highlight in their study that the 14 specialists interviewed (100%), agree in considering it not very applicable to evaluation in IFE, precisely due to the characteristics of the didactics of the English language. These authors highlight in their study that their results, which corroborate the findings of other authors such as Ronda (2016) and point out that said author, recognizes that there are inaccuracies in the guidelines on the development of evaluation instruments and in the way in which these will be evaluated, as they do not have indicators or descriptors for this purpose.
In the observation of the evaluation activities, it was found that each teacher evaluated according to their level of preparation and that they did not have indicators that would serve as a guide and support for the evaluation. In addition, the coincidence with the evaluative forms of the undergraduate was confirmed, as well as the lack of variety in them. It was also possible to verify the insufficient participation of the professional in the evaluation process, since self-assessment, co-assessment or hetero-assessment was not used.
In this order of ideas, the strengths of the evaluation process of Professional Improvement in the English Language are delimited: the recognition of the need to improve the evaluation process for the regulation of the PSPII and, therefore, to complete the profile of the professional; the recognition that formative evaluation can contribute to the improvement of the PSPII and the existence of a faculty with the potential to carry out strategic actions to implement a new evaluation model.
In this sense, the following are identified as its main limitations:
Continuous postgraduate education or professional development is intended to keep professionals updated, not only in the field of their profession, but also in the area of general performance where they perform their duties. That is why, in order to transform it, evaluation processes must be achieved that correspond to a culture of quality, that contribute to the educational innovation inherent to postgraduate studies and consider the student as an adult with experiences and professional experiences that serve as the basis for their development. (Morffi, 2019).
The empirical study carried out, as well as the systematization of the theory about formative evaluation, its principles, functions and advantages in favor of the regulation of the teaching-learning processes, has allowed laying the foundations for the recognition of the need for this type development. Although any type of evaluation provides information on the learning process developed, formative evaluation is the call to achieve the development of self-regulation processes of evaluation for the evaluation process of the projected professional of student learning, which will directly affect the quality of professional training.
The study carried out by Bastidas & Guale (2019) confirms these statements. Undoubtedly, the formative evaluation will promote the elucidation of the learning that has to be achieved, which implies establishing learning goals and success criteria, obtaining evidence from various sources based on the goals and previous criteria; the interpretation of said evidence, that is, elucidating together with the students the meaning of the information collected to determine where they place their learning with respect to the expected goals and criteria and acting on the basis of the evidence, that is, feedback the process and decide the next steps, in order to advance in learning, taking into account difficulties, interests and preferences of each student.
In this order of ideas, Texidor (2019) highlights that the evaluation process in Higher Education, in general and in the Medical Higher Education, in particular, must have the evaluation of learning as a way for the student to analyze how his or her life has passed. be able to make the necessary changes in their strategies and learning styles, so that they can achieve the learning objectives that have been proposed.
Studies on the subject at the international level, in line with what was previously stated and in contrast to the limitations found in the current process of evaluating Professional Improvement in the English Language, advocate an evaluation that serves as a strategy to improve learning, which supposes the modification of the passive relationship of the student, granting him more space in making decisions about his learning process and involving him more personally in the evaluation process (Galarza-Salazar, 2021; Cosí, 2020). This translates into greater student participation in the evaluation process.
This article coincides with Cunill and Curbelo (2021), who emphasize that it is precisely from the formative evaluation that the teacher can guide the process towards learning, through the promotion of self-regulated actions in any of the fundamental organizational forms of teaching work in higher education.
In formative assessment, the role of the teacher goes from being the entity that unilaterally issues value judgments to become the one, with the knowledge and ability to help to develop the student's ability to recognize and close gaps; In this way, self-assessment, co-assessment and hetero-assessment as types of assessment acquire an essential character, since it implies a responsible commitment to their own learning. It is necessary that the student, before making his value judgments, has a real understanding of the learning objectives, as well as the evaluation criteria, to have the opportunity to reflect on his work.
An evaluation criterion is the principle, norm or idea of valuation in relation to which an evaluative judgment is issued on the object evaluated; this systematically entails a value judgment on the object evaluated and the lack of these leads to insufficiencies in the evaluation process such as those present in the evaluation process of the Professional Development in English Language, in which the heterogeneity and the level of subjectivity directly affect the quality of the teaching-learning process.
This is where the rubrics as an evaluation instrument play their fundamental role, since they include, in a series of criteria, a measurement scale and descriptions of the characteristics of each score. Well-developed rubrics communicate the important dimensions or elements of quality that a given product or performance should have and guide the teacher in evaluating student work. This coincides with the findings of Martínez, Flores and Paz (2018), which carried out a study on the use of the rubric in the process of evaluating the oral expression of English and conclude that the evaluation reflects the development of student learning allowing the improvement of professional practices and highlight that:
The use of rubrics as a methodological resource in the process of evaluating oral expression, its ductility, ubiquity and wide field of action, enhances the possibilities of executing comprehensive, formative evaluation processes that contribute significantly to the learning and application of the English language. (Conclusions, p. 11).
Likewise, Kweksilber & Trías (2020) present in their study the effective result of this instrument in the processes of met cognition, self-efficacy and self-regulation.
The idea is that the students are incorporated in the construction of these rubrics as evaluation criteria and quality judgments about them; develop the skills, so that later they converge with those of the teacher, thus achieving a fairer, more equitable and less subjective evaluation from evaluative tasks that guarantee these results; It is at this moment that the first step towards successful learning is taken. For this reason, the evaluation tasks that are planned in the evaluation process of Professional Development in the English Language must be the result of a cohesive and in-depth methodological work; they must be varied, interesting, challenging, allowing the student to rethink and direct effective strategies that lead to self-regulation of their learning. Among them, the mental maps, the portfolio, the seminars, the discussions, the resolution of problematic situations, among others, stand out.
These are ways to grant participation to the student in a learning-oriented teaching-learning and assessment process, since they allow self-management of their learning, reflection on the work done and contribute to the development of met cognitive skills related to self-regulation, by make the student aware of their learning process, their progress, their delays, as well as those strategies that have made them advance in their learning or, on the contrary, those that have not allowed their progress.
For this, it is necessary for the teacher to have a solid preparation in terms of evaluation, according to their new tendencies, and instruct the student in the acquisition of met cognitive skills for self-regulation and self-management of their learning, from providing them with strategies to apply them, in order to develop in the professional, the capacities for quality professional practice in all the contexts in which they work.
Navarro, Falconi and Espinosa (2017), in a study carried out on the importance of feedback; conclude that this is the key to a learning-oriented evaluation. A well-conducted feedback allows to improve the teaching-learning process, in this case that of Professional Improvement in the English Language and its results, making the student a being capable of reflecting and facing a new situation on their own and sharing experiences with others, value what they learn and in what sense what they learn will be of value for their actions as a doctor in scenarios of real use of the English language and to what extent this knowledge will serve to regulate and self-regulate their learning.
The comparative study carried out by Galarza-Salazar (2021) on different investigations about formative evaluation corroborates what was stated above. In this study, the author concludes in favor of the knowledge of all aspects of formative evaluation for an adequate application for the sake of better learning, while the activities of formative evaluation contribute to a greater involvement of students in their learning process.
Formative evaluation, as articulated in the PSPII itself, becomes an important element of its regulation, not only providing data on the progress that professionals are making, but also on the adequacy of the didactic processes, as well as the relevance of the elements that make up the curriculum, its organization and the links that are made with the context.
It is then that we can conclude that the formative evaluation stands as an essential process to guarantee the comprehensive and quality training of the professionals of Medicine, since they are capable of self-assessing their progress in the acquisition of knowledge and skills of the English language, they can self-regulate their learning, thus becoming autonomous learners of a language that they need to complement their professional profile and the consequent professional and scientific development.
Asiú Corrales, L. E., Asiú Corrales, A. M., y Barboza Díaz, O. A. (2021). Evaluación formativa en la práctica pedagógica: una revisión bibliográfica. Revista Conrado, 17(78), 134-139. Disponible en: http://scielo.sld.cu/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1990-86442021000100134&lng=es&tlng=es
Bastidas Martínez, C.J. y Guale Vásquez B. S. (2019). La evaluación formativa como herramienta en el mejoramiento del proceso de enseñanza-aprendizaje. Revista Atlante: Cuadernos de Educación y Desarrollo. Disponible en: https://www.eumed.net/rev/atlante/2019/08/evaluacion-formativa-herramienta.html
Cosí, S., Voltas, N., Lázaro Cantabrana, J. L., Morales, P., Calvo, M., Molina, S., y Quiroga, M.Á. (2020). Formative assessment at university using digital technology tools. Profesorado, 24(1), 164-183. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.30827/profesorado.v24i1.9314
Cunill López, M.E. y Curbelo Alfonso, L. (2021). Una aproximación a la autorregulación del aprendizaje desde la evaluación formativa en la educación médica. Educación Médica Superior, 35(1), e2498. Disponible en: http://www.ems.sld.cu/index.php/ems/article/view
Chen, Z., Jiao, J., y Hu, K. (2021). Formative assessment as an online instruction intervention: Student engagement, outcomes, and perceptions. International Journal of Distance Education Technologies, 19(1), 50-65. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.4018/IJDET.20210101.oa1
Galarza Salazar, F.M. (2021) Evaluación formativa: revisión sistemática, conceptos, autorregulación y educación en línea. Revista Maestro y Sociedad. ISSN 1815-4867, 18(2) 2021, 707-720. Disponible en: https://maestroysociedad.uo.edu.cu/index.php/MyS/article/view/5368
Herrero González, D., Manrique Arribas, J. C., y López-Pastor, V. M. (2021). Incidencia de la Formación Inicial y Permanente del Profesorado en la aplicación de la Evaluación Formativa y Compartida en Educación Física. Retos, (41), 533-543. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.47197/retos.v0i41.86090
Hierrezuelo Rojas, N., Fernández González, P., y Girón Pérez, E. (2021). Satisfacción de médicos especialistas en Medicina General Integral con el curso de superación en inglés. EDUMECENTRO, 13(1), 60-74. Disponible en: http://scielo.sld.cu/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S2077-28742021000100060&lng=es&tlng=pt
Kweksilber, C., y Trías, D. (2020). Rúbrica de evaluación. Usos y aprendizajes en un grupo de docentes universitarios. Páginas de Educación, 13(2), 100-124. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.22235/pe.v13i2.2234
Martínez Loza, R.E., Flores Herrera, M. A. y Paz Alcívar, K. R. (2018). Rúbricas en el proceso de evaluación de la expresión oral del inglés. Revista Atlante: Cuadernos de Educación y Desarrollo. 1-15. Disponible en: https://www.eumed.net/rev/atlante/2018/01/expresion-oral-ingles.html
Mayedo Nuñez, Y., Nuñez Rojas, Y., Moreno Pupo, J., Martínez Lozada, P., y Aguilar Romero, D. (2021). Concepción de evaluación del inglés con fines específicos en la carrera de Estomatología. Correo Científico Médico, 25(4), 1-17. Disponible en: http://revcocmed.sld.cu/index.php/cocmed/article/view/3938
Mayedo Nuñez, Y., Rodríguez Peña, J.C., Nuñez Rojas, Y. (2018). Caracterización de la evaluación en el proceso enseñanza-aprendizaje de Inglés con Fines Específicos en la carrera de Estomatología de Holguín. VII Jornada Científica de la SOCECS. Sociedad Cubana de Educadores en Ciencias de la Salud de Holguín. EDUMED 2019
Ministerio de Salud Pública. Cuba. (1983) Ley 41 de 1983. Ley de Salud Pública. Gaceta Oficial ordinaria No. 61.
Ministerio de Educación Superior. Cuba, (2004). Resolución Ministerial 132/04. Reglamento de Postgrado de la República de Cuba. La Habana: Ministerio de Educación Superior
Morffi Serrano, Y. (2019). Evaluación formativa y sus modelos en la atención de salud. Edumed Holguín 2019, Cuba. Disponible en: http://edumedholguin2019.sld.cu/index.php/2019/2019/paper /viewFile/237/159
Navarro Mosquera, N., Falconí Asanza, G., Vinicio, A., y Espinoza Cordero, J. (2017). El mejoramiento del proceso de evaluación de los estudiantes de la educación básica. Revista Universidad y Sociedad, 9(4), 58-69. Disponible en: http://scielo.sld.cu/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S2218-36202017000400008&lng=es&tlng=es
Ronda Pupo, JC. (2016). La evaluación de las habilidades de expresión oral y escritura en la Práctica Integral de la Lengua Inglesa V. [Tesis en opción al título académico de Doctor en Ciencias Pedagógicas]. Universidad de Ciencias Pedagógicas "Enrique José Varona": La Habana
Texidor Pellón, R., Díaz Valle, R. R., Reyes Miranda, D. y Fernández Campo, R. (2019). Consideraciones sobre calidad del programa del curso de posgrado: "Inglés técnico para profesionales de Estomatología". Educación Médica Superior, 33(1), e1659. Disponible en: http://scielo.sld.cu/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0864-21412019000100009&lng=es&tlng=es
Conflict of interests
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
All authors managed the information, reviewed the writing of the manuscript and approved the version finally submitted.
This work is under a licencia de Creative Commons Reconocimiento-NoComercial 4.0 Internacional
Copyright (c) Aniuska Berdayes Vives, Mayenny Linares Río, Idania Díaz Cabeza