Abstract

At present, it is necessary to strengthen the competences in educational agents, from a know how to be, know how to do, know how to act and know how to live together, and enhance autonomous learning in students and teachers. The objective of this paper was to analyze the conceptual, methodological contributions and instruments used in autonomous learning within the educational context from 2017 to 2020. This is a documentary review done in databases such as Scopus, Ebsco, Academic One File and Proquest. The Prism diagram was used to define the inclusion and exclusion criteria taking into consideration authors, date of publication, definition, approach, type and design, instrument and conceptual contributions; exclusion criteria were duplication, publication date, language, title and abstract and full text. The population was 1001 documents; and the sample selected for the research, 25 scientific articles. Most authors agree on the conceptualization of autonomous learning. The qualitative approach, with non-experimental, cross-sectional and descriptive designs, is predominant; and the documentary guide and questionnaires are the most frequently used instruments. Autonomous learning is the student´s ability to be the main character of his (her) own action; to achieve it, he (she) has to comply with internal and external demands, and its development will depend on the attitude and commitment of the educational agents.

Keywords

Self-Learning, Self-Education, Teaching Method; Self-Regulation, Self-Taught

Introduction

The Peruvian State expects from teachers a quality performance, developed with ethical, reflexive, critical and autonomous action [1]. Autonomy, as a means and final goal, allows them to improve themselves and their pedagogical practice, surpassing traditional initial training. Autonomous learning allows them to reflect on the social and ethical implications of their pedagogical procedue, to problematize the contents, purposes and strategies of their work, and to redefine them and improve his(her) work accordingly [2]. The effective teacher generates meaningful learning, closes learning gaps and impacts the student´s future; particularly in remote learning demanded by Covid-19. Consequently, autonomous teachers must be aware of the learning process, and be able to propose viable goals and strategies for action and self-regulation to achieve those goals. The definition of learning has gone through different stages; at the beginning it was considered as the acquisition or increase of knowledge, its foundation being based on memorization. It was more repetitive than comprehensive and less applied to various situations. [3,4]. It is also the faculty that a person has to direct, control, regulate and evaluate, consciously and intentionally, his way of learning [5].

Autonomy to learn dates back to Confucius (551-479 BC), who considered that children and young people should be formed from the beginning to face life by themselves [6]. Specifically, the concept of autonomous learning, is based on several sources, for example: behaviorism, constructivism and historical, socio cultural approach [7].

Etymologically, the word professor comes from Latin professor and the participle profiterol, from pro and fateri; and according to article 56 of the Peruvian General Law of Education, the teacher's mission is to contribute effectively to the integral formation of students [8] likewise, article 4 prescribes that his (her) service concretizes the right of students and “the community to an education of quality, equity and relevance [9]. Consequently, the teacher, as a reflective subject, is able, or at least should be, to build his (her) learning on his (her) pedagogical work wherever it is performed, through the use of cognitive, motor and social tools. That is, the teacher, as part of an educational community, takes deep thought on his (her) pedagogical work, which allows him (her) to transform teaching practice [10].

It is necessary to ensure that students achieve the development of competences [11]. In autonomous learning, the teacher has the willingness to act and to take charge of his (her) own learning [12], which is framed in processes, domains and levels, and is reached throughout life [13].

At the beginning, as in any process, he (she) needs support, guidance [14], of mediating actions and then becomes the author of his (her) self-learning to be applied on his daily work. Hence, it is up to the teacher to build his (her) autonomous learning, which means being reflexive on his (her) own teaching practice and build knowledge with critical foundations [15].

The objective was to analyze the conceptual, methodological contribution and the instruments used in autonomous learning within the educational context during the period 2017 to 2020.

Material and Methods

This is a documentary review [16], of a simple, comparative and retrospective descriptive design [17,18], due to the use of records made without the participation of the researcher. The technique of documentary analysis was also used, where each article was reviewed in order to identify the amount of existing information about the autonomous learning variable, delimit the type of articles, the search engines used, and verify if the documents were in the search date range; select the descriptor words from the information systems [19] of the European Thesaurus of Education: self-learning, self-education, teaching method, self-regulation and self-teaching.

In order to facilitate the searching process in the selected databases, to ensure the quality of the information and avoid bias in the results, bibliographic databases that provide reliable information were used: Scopus, EBSCO, Academis OneFile, Proquest. For the search of the scientific articles, the Boolean operator "AND" was used, whose function is to show only results that contain the search terms indicated; it was used to reduce the number of articles obtained in the search of each of the selected bases.

The operator "OR" was also used to obtain results containing at least one of the terms, these commands favored the search and extraction of accurate and reliable information [20,21]. The quality standards of the PRISMA flowchart was considered as an important tool to support researchers in systematic reviews, whose purpose is to ensure the quality of information and clarify the publication of systematic reviews [22-24].

The inclusion criteria were: scientific articles published between the years 2017-2020, written in Spanish, were considered, which contained in their title the terms autonomous learning, self-learning, self-regulation, self-training; studies that developed the definition, characteristics, and contribution of each author of the indexed articles considered as a sample of the research; in addition, the population, statistical analysis, [25,26] methodology and instruments used were considered. The exclusion criteria included duplicated articles in databases that are not scientific, books and web pages in a language other than Spanish.

Results

The results of the study sample of 25 scientific articles are presented in the tables and graphs described below:

According to the analysis of Table 1, through the advanced search in the Scopus [25] database, 9 scientific articles of the autonomous [27,28] learning variable were obtained, representing a percentage of 0.9%; the result in the EBSCO database was 144 articles, which means a percentage of 14.39%; similarly, in the Academic OneFile database, 14 articles were obtained, meaning a percentage of 1.4%; and, finally, in Proquest, [29,30] the advanced search outcome was 834 articles, representing a percentage of 83.32%. The overall result obtained in the general search was 60,427 articles; while, in the advanced search, 1001 articles were obtained, representing 1.66%.

The Prism diagram shows that from the advanced search in databases such as Scopus, Ebsco, Academis One File and Proquest, a total of 1,001 scientific articles were obtained, of which 15 papers were eliminated because they were duplicated. Next, 960 investigations were excluded by evaluation of title and abstract, getting a partial total of 26 articles evaluated in full text for eligibility [31-36]. One article was excluded at this stage, so, finally, a total of 25 articles were selected as the sample for the systematic review (Figure 1).

Figure 1.Prism diagram.

According to Table 2, from the 25 articles reviewed, learning may be defined as responsible for the students´ own action; meaning they must appropriate their context to a degree of intervention in the establishment of their own objectives, procedures, resources, evaluation and learning moments; applying cognitive, metacognitive and support strategies; likewise, teachers and students are governed in their own actions without depending on their peers [37-42].

According to Table 3, 94% of the articles considered in the sample are of a qualitative nature; they used a non-experimental cross-sectional design because no changes or experiments were made in their studies and they collected the information in a single moment; as a

Study population they considered teachers and students, who represented the source of the information for the studies. Regarding the study population, in all cases, students, teachers or directors of basic or university education centers were considered [43-46].

In Table 4, the authors believe that autonomy requires self-discovery by learners and their own training needs. The current demand for education requires the development of critical, reflective social thinking in future professionals capable of working independently; likewise, the researchers used interviews, documentary guide questionnaires, focus groupsError! Not a valid bookmark self-reference., validated numerical characteristics.

Discussion

The study aimed to analyze the progress of scientific production on autonomous learning in the educational context during the period 2017 to 2020; for this purpose, the systematic review of different indexed articles was carried out. The scientific literature reviewed corresponds to databases (Table 1).

Table 1 As a result, 9 scientific articles about autonomous learning were obtained from Scopus; an advanced search was achieved, obtaining 144 articles from EBSCO database; 14 articles were obtained from Academic One File database; and, finally, 834 articles were found in ProQuest. In this regard points out that it is necessary to have knowledge of search criteria, supported by Boolean operators; in addition, the prism flowchart was used to carry out selection processes (Figure 1), which served as a guiding instrument in the systematic review in order to take the right aspects into consideration when making decisions. Regarding conceptualization, it was determined that from the 25 authors consulted, it is feasible to affirm that autonomous learning refers to the degree of students intervention in the establishment of their objectives, procedures, resources, evaluation and learning moments [47].

In addition, it is a process that stimulates students to be the authors of their own development and build their knowledge [48]. It is worth mentioning that autonomous learning is the effective conduit for acquiring and developing skills that lead to the development of competences; on this account, the apprentice must take his(her) own initiatives [49]. It should also be mentioned that university students have deficiencies in autonomy and independence because in their period of basic and secondary education, they did not learn strategies that help them in their cognitive scaffolding [50]. Therefore, students can exercise their autonomous behaviors to a lesser or greater extent due to the influence of external factors, such as the norms established by teachers or institutions [51]. Self-learning is achieved through the development of skills and responsibilities as a means to potentiate learning and skills [52]; also autonomy, as the capacity for self- determination in their practice of everyday life.

In relation to the analysis of the population, type and design of the articles Table 3, the research that has been carried out is of a qualitative and quantitative nature, non-experimental design and cross-sectional because authors did not make changes or experiments in their studies and collected the information at a given time, considering the teachers themselves and also the students, who are the source of the information, as the study population. Investigations of a non-experimental approach collect data without making alterations in the research process [53,54]. Various instruments were used (Table 4): surveys, questionnaires of autonomous work strategies, focus groups as instruments to assess the level of competence of autonomous learning

In Table 4, the authors believe that autonomy requires self-discovery by learners and their own training needs. The current demand for education requires the development of critical, reflective social thinking in future professionals capable of working independently; likewise, the researchers used interviews, documentary guide questionnaires, focus groups instruments to assess the level of competence of autonomous learning

Table 4[55] aimed at measuring the opinion and level of satisfaction of the respondents. Questionnaires collect relevant information to obtain a result that attributes to different aspects [56-61]; in this way it is relevant not only for its theoretical approach but it is feasible in the operationalization of the items as a source of analysis of results.

Conclusion

The search of the scientific literature was carried out in 4 databases, making combinations of two or more terms using boolean operators, in such a way that the largest number of articles on autonomous learning in the educational context could be obtained. Using the prism diagram, the different articles found in the databases were filtered, taking into account inclusion and exclusion criteria in order to legitimize the selection processes of the variable under study. The conceptualization of the different investigations led to conclude that autonomous learning in the educational context is a process that allows students to be the protagonists of their own knowledge construction from internal and external factors, which leads to the self-management of their own skills and responsibilities as a resource to potentiate their self-learning. It can be said that the sample of 25 scientific articles had different types of population and research designs; most of them being cross-sectional, quantitative, qualitative experimental and descriptive studies. In the collection of information, questionnaires and documentary guides were used, tools that allowed to produce a large amount of data supported by open, closed dichotomous or closed questions of multiple alternatives; all this in relation to the research variable; in this way the instruments used served as guide to the teacher. As for autonomous learning, it is a priority to consider reflective spaces to be potentiated in regular basic education; teaching practice is strengthened to mediate and self-regulated learning through the design of strategies that lead to identifying strengths and weaknesses are used in different contexts.

Acknowledgements

Because the systematic review was completed according to objectives, theoretical and practical principles related to technological tools, we are grateful to Marco Francisco Becerra Cotrina: editorial assistant, and Doris Delgado Hernández, technical assistant.

Conflict of Interest

The authors state that they had no conflict of interest.

Featured

Due to the learners´ interaction with the social environment, it is important to build new cognitive schemes so that, in conjugation with their environment, they will be able to integrate knowledge and produce new knowledge. Mediator actions also help to strengthen life skills, leaving behind traditional paradigms focused on the memorization of certain contents. And to be successful, unlearning to relearn must be considered facing challenges and new ways of mediating learning, hence the importance of the master tutor, even without connectivity, assuming his role as a companion, guiding the search for the realization and achievement of autonomous competences, articulating programs of different modalities and educational levels should be highlighted.

References

1. Ministry of Education PERU. Manual of good teaching performance. 2012; pp: 1–60.
2. Education curriculum program. minister education perú. 2016; pp: 1–256.
3. Peña-García SN. The conception of learning and evaluation in primary school students. Panorama. 2020; 14(27): 109–130.
4. National curriculum PERU. Nat´l Curriculum. 2016; 224.
5. Gonzales V. Digital technology: pedagogical and socio-cultural reflections. Rev Electrónica Actualidades Investiga en Education. 2005; 5(1).
6. Amaya G. Autonomous learning and skills. 2008.
7. Garcia I, Bustos RB. Development of autonomy and self-regulation in university students: an experience of research and mediation. 2020; 55: 1108.
8. Law No. 28044. General Education Law. Peru. 2003; pp: 1–36.
9. Law No. 29944. Law of Teacher Reform. Peru. 2018.
10. Lam RM. Writing a scientific paper. Revista Cubana de Hematología, Inmunol y Hemoterapia. 2016; 32(1): 57-69.
11. Llantén N, Carrasco P, Manghi D, Díaz F. A look at educational spaces beyond the classroom in two Chilean public schools from the perspective of spatial justice. Perspect Educ. 2020; 59(3): 70–91.
12. Moreno R, Martinez RJ. Autonomous learning: Developing a definition acta comportamentalia: Revista latina de análisis de comportamiento. México. 2007; 15(1).
13. Chica FA. Factors of teaching that favor the autonomous learning around learning activities. Reflexiones tecnológicas. Colombia. 2010; pp: 167-195.
14. Garrote D, Garrote C, Jiménez S. Influential factors in motivation and learning strategies in undergraduate students. REICE Rev Iberoam on Quality, Efic and Change in Education. 2016; 14(2).
15. Vargas A, Villalobos G. Teaching strategies for the promotion of autonomous learning in university students using LMS platforms. Rev Electrónica Calid at Education Super. 2019; 10(2): 215–246.
16. Hernández R, Fernández C, Baptista M. Research methodology. 6th ed. Mc Graw Hill Education. Mexico: McGraw-Hill/Interamericama Editores, SA. 2014; 6: 600.
17. Vara A. From idea to support: 7 steps to a successful thesis. 2010. Inst Investiga la Fac Ciencias Adm y Recur Humanos Universidad San Martín Porres. Lima. 2012; 634.
18. Supo F, Cavero H. Theoretical and procedural foundations of scientific research in social sciences: How to design and formulate master's and doctoral theses. Lima. 2014; 474.
19. Codina L, Pedraza R. Tesauros and ontologies in documentary information systems. Prof la Information. 2011; 20(5): 555–563.
20. Avelar D, Toro E. PubMed: Clinical Queries, MeSH Terminology and Boolean Operators. Rev Medical Clinical. 2018; 2(3): 96–100.
21. Ronconi R. Process of searching, retrieving and evaluating information. 2020; 0–20.
22. Urrútia G, Bonfilll X. The prism statement: A step forward in improving the publications of the Spanish journal of public health. Rev Esp Public Health. 2013; 87(2): 99–102.
23. Bravo G del R, Loor-Rivadeneira MR, Saldarriaga Zambrano PJ. The psychological bases for the development of autonomous learning. Master of Science. 2017; 3: 32–45.
24. Canova C, Pecker L. Characteristics of autonomous learning in Kinesiology students of a higher education institution in Buenos Aires. Image and Development. 2019. 21(2).
25. Rabbit C, Sanchez JL, Mahecha J. A praxeological look at the self-regulation of learning. Rev Cuba Education Super. 2020; 39(3).
26. Andreucci P, Eisendecher E. The autonomy of the teacher in training: An analysis from the relational perspective in the context of pedagogical supervision. Perspect Education. 2020; 59(3): 4–23.
27. Daura FT. Self-regulated learning and teaching interventions at the university. Rev Education. 2017; 41(2): 1.
28. Torrano F, Soria M. Gender differences and self-regulated learning: The effect of previous academic performance. Rev Complut Education. 2017; 28(4): 1027–1042.
29. Ferreira M, Olcina G, Reis J. Teachers as cognitive mediators and promoters of meaningful learning. Rev Educ. 2019; 43(2): 19.
30. Fraile J, Gil F, Zamorano S, Sanchéz I. Self-regulation of learning and formative evaluation processes in group work. 2020; 26: 1–15.
31. Gomez A. A Proposal for the teaching of derivative based on autonomous learning. Rev Ing Mathematics and Science the Information. 2017; 4(8): 19–27.
32. Gómez Esteban E, Castro GW. Autonomy and ICT in Young and Adults’ learning. Socio critical pedagogy through scratch workshops. Prax Education. 2018; 22(3): 71–82.
33. González Y, González SN, Guerrero D, Gavilanes FR, Balseca JE, et al., Autonomous learning. Their role in the development of specific competencies in higher education. J Bus Ethics. 2018; 14(3): 37–45.
34. Kandil B. The stem of meaningful learning. Middle Eastern Journal of Research in Education and Social Sciences. 2021; 2(3): 15-24.
35. Leal C, Megías A, García JA, Adánez M de G, Díaz JL. Teaching with self-learning methodology in simulated environments (MAES). A qualitative study among teachers and students of degree in nursing education. Medical. 2019; 20: 52–58.
36. Llaven ME, Chuc II. Autonomy and the ability to exercise it in language learning. Nuances in Foreign Languages. 2018; (12).
37. Marcelo C, Rijo D. Self-regulated learning of university students: The uses of digital technologies. Rev Caribeña Investiga Education. 2019; 3(1): 62–81.
38. Masaoay SM, Litao R. Beliefs and practices in the implementation of Performance Tasks (PETAs): Basis for the Development of Enhancement Program. Middle Eastern Journal of Research in Education and Social Sciences. 2021; 2(3): 57-75.
39. Oliva N, López J. Self-learning in small groups for the training of school directors. analysis of a pilot program. REICE Rev Iberoam on Quality, Efic and Change in Educ. 2018; 17(1): 55.
40. Pegalajar MC. Relationship between the academic-personal motivation of the novice student in education and the strategies of autonomous work Form University. 2020; 13(5): 257–268.
41. Pegalajar M del C. Strategies of Autonomous Work in Novice University Students of Education. REICE Rev Iberoam on Quality, Efic and Change in Education. 2020; 18(3): 29–45.
42. Ramirez MME, Alfonso D, Eudave D, Martinez F. Autonomous learning, favoring adaptive experience in students and teachers: Division with decimal numbers. Education Matematica. 2019; 31(1): 38–65.
43. Roque Y, Valdivia P, García S, Zagalaz M. Metacognition and autonomous learning in higher Education, Educación Médica Superior. 2018; 32.
44. Solórzano Y. Autonomous learning and competences. Master of Science. 2017; 3: 241–53.
45. Torrano F, Fuentes JL, Soria M. Self-regulated learning: State of the art and psychopedagogical challenges. Educ Profiles. 2017; 39(156): 160–173.
46. Valencia M. Design of tasks to promote self-regulated learning at the university. Educ and Educ. 2020; 23(2): 267–290.
47. Alsina A, Batllori R, Falgàs M, Vidal I. Self-regulation marks for the construction of the teaching profile during the initial training of teachers. Rev Complut Education. 2019; 30(1): 55–74.
48. Villalta MA, Assael C. Socioeconomic context, pedagogical practice and autonomous learning in the classroom. Estud Pedagog XLIV. 2018; 49–68.
49. Gavilánez S, Cañizares FP, Cleonares AM. Autonomous work as a teaching process aimed at the formation of student independence. Rev Mikarimin Cient Multidiscip. 2016; 2: 23–34.
50. Lopez A, Pérez M. The seminars supported with online training as an autonomous learning strategy in the last Master's courses: practical case at the MUIHMA-UPV. 2019.
51. Canova C, Pecker L. Characteristics of autonomous learning in Kinesiology students of a higher education institution of Buenos Aires. Research in Nursing Image and Development. 2019; 21(2).
52. Rios T. Influence of learning autonomy on the quality of vocational training at unmsm. Management at terc Milen. 2012; 15(29): 89–93.
53. Vargas AL, Villalobos G. Teaching strategies for the promotion of autonomous learning in university students using LMS platforms. Rev Electrónica Calid at Education Super. 2019; 10(2): 215–246.
54. Rosano GE. Resilience and autonomous learning in CONALEP students. Psychomotricity, Movement and Emotion. 2019; 5: 1–22.
55. Artigas W, Robles M. Research methodology: A necessary discussion in Zulian Universities. Rev Digit Univ. 2010; 11(11): 1–17.
56. Valderrama SR. Perception of scientific teaching and knowledge of scientific research methodology in master's students. UCV-Scientia. 2018; 9(2): 65–74.
57. Perez N, Bisquerra R, Filella R, Soldevila A. Construction of the Adult Emotional Development Questionnaire (QDE-A). Revista Espanoia de orientacion and Psicopedagogia. 2010; 21(2): 367–379.
58. Pozuelos FJ, García FJ, Conde S. Evaluate innovative practices in university education. instrument validation. Educ XX1. 2021; 24(1): 69–91.
59. Sánchez R, Costa Ó, Mañoso L, Novillo M, Pericacho F. Origins of connectivism as a new paradigm of learning in the digital age. Education and Humanism. 2019; 21(36): 113–136.
60. Moon YY. Analysis of the pedagogical mediations that favor autonomous learning in vocational middle students for the election and entry to a virtual higher education. Orphanet J Rare Dis. 2020; 21(1):1–9.
61. Leiva KA, Gutierrez AE, Vasquez C del P, Chavez SE, Reynosa E. Online collaborative learning and autonomous learning in distance education. Rev Científica Cult Comun y Desarro. 2020; 5: 95–100.