Our system is currently under heavy load due to increased usage. We're actively working on upgrades to improve performance. Thank you for your patience.
2017
DOI: 10.4067/s0718-07052017000400004
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Evaluación de programas educativos sobre Patrimonio Cultural Inmaterial

Abstract: RESUMEN El artículo ofrece un análisis relacional de los enfoques y categorías de programas educativos generados en torno al patrimonio inmaterial, derivado de un estudio financiado por el Ministerio de Economía y Competitividad y los Fondos Feder (UE) en el marco del proyecto de investigación EDU2015-65716-C2-2-R, y se enmarca en las acciones del Plan Nacional de Educación y Patrimonio. Este análisis se desarrolla dentro de un proceso evaluativo con una muestra de 202 programas educativos, que tiene como fina… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
9
0
4

Year Published

2020
2020
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

1
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 16 publications
(14 citation statements)
references
References 13 publications
1
9
0
4
Order By: Relevance
“…A large proportion of the programs assessed do not achieve the level of quality required in terms of their educational design, or only do so with conditions. The results are an improvement in comparison with other previous studies [48,49,52] and, given that the design of the programs which make up the sample corresponds to the most up-to-date designs, this can be interpreted as a gradual improvement in the conceptualisation of educational proposals. However, aspects such as the overall focus of the heritage [53][54][55] or the internal assessment of the programs continue to be aspects in need of improvement, as has already been shown by previous studies [48,49,52,[56][57][58].…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 44%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…A large proportion of the programs assessed do not achieve the level of quality required in terms of their educational design, or only do so with conditions. The results are an improvement in comparison with other previous studies [48,49,52] and, given that the design of the programs which make up the sample corresponds to the most up-to-date designs, this can be interpreted as a gradual improvement in the conceptualisation of educational proposals. However, aspects such as the overall focus of the heritage [53][54][55] or the internal assessment of the programs continue to be aspects in need of improvement, as has already been shown by previous studies [48,49,52,[56][57][58].…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 44%
“…Rather, it depends on the descriptors of the search which define the sample. With the aim of contrasting these results with previous studies [48,49], a statistical graph was created (see Figure 1) which allows us to obtain the trends for each typology of program. In this case, a slight increase in frequency can be observed in comparison with other studies in the cases of educational resource and educational tool, both of which are teaching aids to facilitate the teaching and learning processes in educational activities and, furthermore, should ensure interaction on the part of the learner [10].…”
Section: Typology Of Programsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Parties are required to develop and implement education and information programmes aimed at reinforcing respect for and attachment to cultural and natural heritage (Article 27) [48] (p. 86) as per the chapter titled Education Programmes. The programmes should also give particular emphasis to natural and cultural assets that are under threat.…”
Section: The 1972 Unesco Conventionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Bajo esta línea de investigación aparecen numerosos trabajos que resaltan el valor educativo y didáctico del patrimonio para generar conocimiento, pero sobre todo valores como la identidad, el respeto o la integración cultural (Ishihara-Brito y Rodríguez, 2012; Gutiérrez, 2012;Catalán, 2013;Fontal, 2016;Pinto y Zarbato, 2017;Domínguez y López, 2017;Borghi, 2017;Fontal y Martínez, 2017;Fontal y Marín-Cepeda, 2018).…”
Section: Educación Patrimonial: Premisa Para Un Turismo Sostenibleunclassified