1. Introduction
Currently, universities have seen the need to update their educational models and offer the population a student-centered education. This update is mainly due to the experiences left by the pandemic caused by the Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID 19) [
1]. During the pandemic, the different governments established long quarantines and isolation to avoid a higher rate of contagion [
2,
3]. Therefore, during isolation, universities adopted information and communication technologies (ICT) as a channel to continue their academic activities [
4]. Even though universities have presented a high percentage of integration with ICT since before the pandemic, this has not been enough to guarantee learning with its application in the classroom. The best example is online education, having academic models with a high index in the use of ICT, since they base their development on methods and techniques based on ICT to generate knowledge. However, this educational model is among those with a higher percentage of student dropout [
5,
6].
Based on these experiences, universities consider the use of ICT in an integral way throughout the academic process, which includes a commitment from the technological, administrative, academic, and student areas for its proper functioning. Several reviewed works consider that the integration of ICT in the classroom should generate an enriching experience for students where learning is guaranteed with the use of techniques and tools aligned to the new challenges of society. These works identify the variables that affect learning and limit its proper development in certain sectors of society [
7,
8]. At the university level, they establish that the new needs of students are not contemplated in a traditional study model, where learning focuses on the teacher and it is he or she who establishes the learning method, what to learn and how the students should do it.
To identify the needs of students, a group of works has focused on data collection through surveys related to factors such as the academic environment, the economy, the psychological environment, etc. These works seek to obtain the greatest amount of information from the students and subject the data to analysis which allows them to establish which are the factors that have the most incidence in the development of learning [
9]. Generally, in these works the identification of the degree of incidence of the factors is carried out by applying statistical models, such as factor analysis. Factor analysis, even though it is a basic statistical model, is widely used due to its effectiveness and the amount of information it generates in a survey. One of its main characteristics is that by means of the Kaiser, Meyer, and Olkin (KMO) calculations and Bartlett’s sphericity test, it is possible to identify if the factorial model is adequate and define the validity of the survey to respond to the phenomenon of study [
10]. In addition, in the reduction of dimensions it is possible to identify the degree of incidence of each question in the discovery of the feelings of the surveyed population [
11].
Another group of works focuses on discovering the needs of the students through the analysis of data on the students’ qualifications. To do so, they make use of business intelligence (BI) architectures with the application of data mining algorithms or Big data architectures [
12]. Among the main advantages of the application of these architectures is that they can identify patterns in the data and generate knowledge about them [
13,
14]. In addition, these architectures can extract data from a wide variety of sources and manage large volumes of data. By identifying existing patterns in the data, these can be classified to determine the state of student learning and the impact that each academic activity has on their performance. Data analysis architectures are more robust and can solve various problems of an institution. However, for their applications, it is necessary to have greater economic, technological, and technical resources.
The reviewed works seek to resolve the identification of needs quickly, in such a way that their results contribute to decision-making effectively and efficiently. The methods developed in these works allow identification of the current needs of the students [
15,
16]. In addition, it is important to consider that after the pandemic and isolation the needs of students have changed. A common example of this is that the pandemic critically affected the economy of several households, which has affected the continuity of the studies of several people or limited the resources available for their learning. Another important factor to establish is the existing motivation by students to use ICT in education [
17]. By having this information, universities can establish models of active education, where ICT is considered in the classroom to improve student learning in an interactive environment with technologies [
18].
This work took as a source the methods used in the revised works and proposes a data analysis architecture that allow identification of the new needs of students after the pandemic, and, for which purposes, we worked with instruments such as surveys that allowed us to establish the problems and concerns of students in the use of ICT in the classroom [
19]. With this information, a data extraction process was applied from the academic sources of the students to later be processed and analyzed through data mining algorithm techniques. The main objective of the analysis was the data of the activities developed in the first quarter of the period 2019 to 2022. These data corresponded to students of a private University in Ecuador and referred to the first part of an educational model where ICTs were applied in the classroom. The results allow the gradual integration of ICT in all university careers and facets and transform its traditional educational model into a model that is aligned with active learning.
3. Results
For the presentation of results, the method was applied in a case study to determine the feeling of the students regarding the use of ICT in their learning environment. To do so, a survey was designed, and the results were analyzed to determine the validity of the instrument and the incidence value of each question in relation to the study phenomenon. The results obtained on the experience and use of technological resources identified the acceptance and motivation present in the students before the migration from a traditional educational model to an educational model integrated by ICT. In the second stage of the case study, the analysis of the educational data of a faculty that had integrated ICT as a main component in learning was conducted and the results reflected as part of an educational model aligned to active learning was carried out.
3.2. Survey Preparation
For the preparation of the survey, the researchers generally aligned all the questions with a dimension or study variable. For example, if you want to capture people’s trends in the use of public transport, the questions must be objectively and clearly aligned to this topic. There are surveys that seek to solve two dimensions, for example, the use of public transport and citizen security. These surveys must be carried out very precisely, since, when developing the questions, they lose objectivity or can confuse the respondents by generating false information. For the development of this case, we worked with a single dimension, which was the use of ICT in education and the questions that were presented to the students were based on this. The guideline to be followed in the design was that a maximum of ten multiple-choice questions be on the topic and a maximum of three general questions provided basic information about the respondent.
Next, three general questions were presented for the identification of the population. These questions could contain answer types Yes/No or multiple choice:
Gender
Career
Age
For the acquisition of information of the study dimension, the following questions were presented:
The Internet has become a tool that allows access to an infinity of information. How often do you use the Internet appropriately for your learning?
In what percentage do you consider the influence of ICT favorable in your learning?
What is the mastery of skills you have in handling ICT?
Do you consider that the use of ICT in class is:
Indicate which of the following activities you carry out with the information you obtain with the use of ICT?
Which of the following options do you consider to be a problem with the use of information technology in education?
Which of the following activities do you enjoy the most with information technology?
Which of the following options do you consider to be a problem with the use of information technology in education?
How effective has the learning been with the education tools?
How do you consider doing homework digitally?
Once the survey had been designed with the corresponding questions, it was necessary to identify the execution method. Due to the characteristics and infrastructure available in the university that participated in the study, the implementation was carried out directly in the LMS. This enabled only the faculty of administrative sciences. The student entered the LMS, and it generated a validation. If the student took the survey, they were redirected to the main classroom page. If the student did not take the survey, it redirected him or her to the survey to press for answers. The time for the survey to be developed was a period of seven days.
3.4. Survey Analysis Process
The validation analysis of the survey was carried out using SPSS, where the reduction of dimensions was applied through the factor. To determine the validity of the survey as an instrument, the analysis focused on the KMO matrix and Bartlett’s test. The results obtained from
Table 7 determined that the KMO value was very low. However, the sphericity test indicated that, if Sig. (
p-value) < 0.05, we accepted H0 (null hypothesis), and, therefore, factor analysis could be applied.
The following analysis was the one generated in the anti-image matrix of
Table 8 that calculated the covariance and correlation to define the relationship between the questions of the survey. When reviewing the diagonals of the covariance, it was expected that the values would be close to 1. In the calculation of the correlation the values of the diagonal must be as close as possible to the resulting KMO, which was 0.5. This condition was met in most of the questions and those that did not reach this value, such as Q4, Q5, Q10 and Q11, were kept under observation in the analysis.
Table 9 shows the total explained variance. According to the results obtained, the survey could respond to the study phenomenon in six components with an accumulated percentage of 58,263%. This result allowed defining that the tool was fully valid, and that the data collected could respond to the phenomenon. Therefore, it was possible to analyze the data to identify the influence of each question in relation to the problem posed.
To identify the degree of influence of each question, the matrix of rotated components was generated.
Table 10 presents the results obtained from the analysis, where it was expected that there would be only one dimension, since all the questions evaluated a single phenomenon. The generated matrix was composed of six components or factors, where it was observed that only one had three questions, (Q7, Q12 and Q13). For a factor to be given as valid, it had to influence at least three questions, so, in this case, we had other dimensions that did not meet this condition. To improve the existing relationship, the questions that uniquely fed the different factors could be separated.
In
Table 11, the results are presented separating five questions. These were Q2, Q4, Q8, Q10 and Q13. When separating them from the analysis, two factors with greater incidence were obtained, where the questions that had the greatest influence re:
Factor 1 = ICT in the classroom
Q7: Do you consider that the use of ICT in class is:
Q9: Which of the following options do you consider to be a problem with the use of information technology in education?
Q11: Which of the following options do you consider to be a problem with the use of information technologies in education?
Q12: How effective has the learning been with the education tools?
Factor 2 = skills in the use of ICT
Q3: Age
Q5: In what percentage do you consider that the influence of ICT is favorable in your learning?
Q6: What is the domain of skills you have in handling ICT
The questions that have been separated from the analysis have less influence according to the feelings of the students, therefore, these questions should focus on defining a specific factor, such as, for example, development of activities with ICT. Factor analysis allows these relationships to be established and the questions of each survey to be improved to determine the needs of the target population.
For this work, the survey was considered adequate as an instrument for data acquisition and the raw results could be presented and related in each sector identified in the survey. For example, the survey was undertaken by 2260 students, of which 953 people were men and there were 1307 women.
Table 12 shows the breakdown of students by major and by gender. In addition, the age ranges of the students are included. These data correspond to the general questions and in this way, it was possible to establish what the feeling of the students regarding the integration of ICT in their education was.
The advantage of the survey results is that they can be presented by question and segmented by age or gender, and everything depends on the objective outlined in the study. The information that was considered relevant in this work corresponded to the questions identified with the greatest influence in the study. With this review,
Table 13 presents the results of question 12. The results were not as expected, considering that in 2020 and 2021 ICT was used as a channel to continue education. Therefore, the expected results focused on greater acceptance in the use of ICT. However, if the answers were slightly or moderately then it had not been effective. 929 respondents did not yet accept ICT in education. These results will be contrasted with the analysis of academic data in the following sections.
Q12 = How effective has learning been with ICT in education?
3.6. Information Analysis and Presentation Process
The analysis process seeks to identify the learning level of each group of students. To do so, the average of the activities in the classroom, the average of the activities at home, the partial evaluation, etc. are considered.
Table 14 presents the results obtained in 2019. In the first column, the evaluation of learning is presented with the four criteria (insufficient, regular, good, very good). Within each learning category, the range of pass or fail is included, in the second column the number of students is counted for each record evaluated.
As mentioned in previous sections, the evaluation period corresponded to the first partial. This condition is important because, even when the results obtained appear in the condition of passing or failing, this is not necessarily maintained until the end, since the average of the second part has not been evaluated. Therefore, it was found that 46 students passed the midterm by obtaining an effective average grade equal to or greater than 6/10. An unexpected result was that the grades were the factor that determined the approval of a partial and later the approval of a subject. However, this did not imply that the student necessarily learnt a subject. As shown by the results, where, of the 14 students who had reflected insufficient learning, eight passed the midterm with an average grade of 6.7 and only 6 students failed the midterm. All categories had students who passed and failed, with the total number of failed students being 29. When reviewing the very good learning status, it was found that 8 students failed even though their learning level was the highest. The total average of the group in its effectiveness was 6.1, a value that, according to previous analyses and the experience of the academic quality departments, is a normal value in partial 1 in a residential model.
In
Figure 2 the data of the previous table is presented graphically. In this it is clearly observed that the categories with the highest incidence in learning were regular with 13 students and very good with 14 students. One of the factors that most influenced student performance was evaluation; this activity was not averaged with another activity and the weight given by the university was 40%. In-class and autonomous activities, in addition to having a lower weight (25% and 35% respectively), were the average of 7 activities in each category.
In
Table 15, the total values of the averages of the activities and the total number of students who passed the first part are presented, being the 36 approved and 39 students failed students. This number of students in the failed category rose to 52%, which represented a high value compared to the 2019 period. The average effectiveness dropped two points, standing at 5.9, and the activities that it involved lost between 2 and 4 points. On the other hand, among the expected results, it was found that the number of students who presented a learning between sufficient and regular was 38, of which 20 failed the partial 1. A figure contrary to what happened in the previous year.
In
Figure 3, the data of the students in the year 2020 is presented. It was in this period that the pandemic began, and the educational modality went from face-to-face to remote. The first striking feature in the figure is that learning decreased drastically. Only the category having regular and very good levels of learning exceeded the number of approved students. In the analysis it was also found that there was a certain relationship between the activities developed in class with the autonomous ones and evaluation remained the factor with the greatest weight in academic effectiveness.
In
Table 16, the information corresponding to 2021 is presented. In the results it was identified that there were 29 students with an insufficient and regular level of learning. In this period remote communication was maintained. However, the universities began to modify the educational model, focusing it on the needs of students with an adequate use of ICT. In the same way, the number of failed this year began to decrease with 24 students, which was especially important because the activities in class and autonomous activities had improved the average. Therefore, the students in this period found these activities to be important for the highest score, which improved academic effectiveness. In this period, an unexpected result was obtained in the evaluation average, which was higher in the 2020 period, which opens the possibility of generating an analysis model that determines the causes of this change.
Figure 4 graphically presents the results found in the 2021 period. In the good and very good learning category, learning was high, and the evaluation punished students who failed. Another important factor to highlight in the results is that there was a certain relationship between classroom and autonomous activities in all learning categories.
Table 17 presents the results for the 2022 period, in which the universities returned to attendance. The university that participated in this study in this period integrated ICT directly into its educational model. The activities that they developed in classroom environments and autonomously were the main ones in which ICTs were integrated. According to the results in this period, 63 students passed and 12 failed. The general average of each component was higher than that of the previous periods. In addition, 23 students were categorized with insufficient and regular learning.
Figure 5 presents the results for the 2022 period, in which it was observed that the growth trend in learning that began in the previous period was accentuated in the current one. In the very good learning category, there were 26 students, something that had not been seen even in the 2019 period, where a face-to-face model was implemented.
Figure 6 presents the comparison of all the factors included in the analysis throughout the four periods evaluated. The trend lines represent academic effectiveness versus learning. The trend line was stable over time, there were no sharp falls or rises, which was mainly because the students of the 2019 and 2020 periods supported their affectivity in the evaluation considering that it had a weight of 40% of the total. On the other hand, in the period 2021 and 2022 the effectiveness of the students focused with greater emphasis on the development of activities in class and autonomously, these having an additional factor and that is that in these periods the institution focused on the use of ICT in the classroom.
The trend line corresponding to learning was not stable and varied with time. In 2019, learning was low, within a face-to-face modality with a traditional method, that is, learning depending expressly on the teacher. In 2020, learning was even lower than in the previous year, which was specifically due to the beginning of the use of ICT, but in a remote model, marked by the start of the pandemic and in isolation from society. In 2021, the trend began to make positive leaps, considering that there were fewer students with insufficient and regular learning. The learning level with the highest number of students was focused on the “good” learning category and was even higher than the students who managed to obtain “very good” learning. This period had the characteristic that the use of ICT was already a factor in which students and teachers had already acquired experience and proper use, which improved the level of learning. In the evaluated period of 2022, students with “insufficient” learning decreased considerably and the trend rose to the point that the greatest number of students were at a good and very good level of learning. In this period, learning techniques based on the use of ICT had been applied, where the importance of motivation, research and innovation in the proposed activities was determined. These parameters had even lowered the percentage of interest of students in obtaining higher grades in the evaluation, as their success was focused on the development of classroom and autonomous activities that had been aligned to the use of ICT.