Promuovere l’innovazione didattica nella complessità delle transizioni: esiti della fase quantitativa di una ricerca-formazione in università

Titolo Rivista CADMO
Autori/Curatori Aurora Ricci, Elena Luppi, Flavio Brescianini
Anno di pubblicazione 2026 Fascicolo 2026/1
Lingua Italiano Numero pagine 17 P. 86-102 Dimensione file 0 KB
DOI 10.3280/cad2026oa23298
Il DOI è il codice a barre della proprietà intellettuale: per saperne di più clicca qui

Vedi l'articolo Scarica l'articolo open access

FrancoAngeli è membro della Publishers International Linking Association, Inc (PILA), associazione indipendente e non profit per facilitare (attraverso i servizi tecnologici implementati da CrossRef.org) l’accesso degli studiosi ai contenuti digitali nelle pubblicazioni professionali e scientifiche.

Widening participation is reshaping higher education, making teaching innovation a strategic priority. Adopting a sequential exploratory mixedmethods design, this study reports the quantitative phase of a Researchbased Teacher Professional Development project at the Department of Agricultural and Food Sciences, University of Bologna. Two online questionnaires were administered to 102 teachers and 318 students, addressing selfefficacy, engagement, motivation, collaboration, and employability. Teachers’ satisfaction with student engagement was predicted by selfefficacy in engaging them and by teaching engagement, whereas active methods reflected their ability to foster metacognitive skills. Among students, engagement and extrinsic motivation predicted degree commitment; selfefficacy and collaborative behaviour predicted teamwork ability; and engagement, motivation, and employability predicted learning transfer. Findings inform formative, datadriven faculty development.

Parole chiave:Researchbased teacher professional development; evaluation research; mixed methods research; teaching innovation; higher education.

  1. Asquini, G. (Eds) (2018), La RicercaFormazione. Temi, esperienze, prospettive. Milano: FrancoAngeli.
  2. Aydin, O. T. (2014), “Current Developments and Trends in Higher Education”, Journal of Business, Economics & Finance, 3 (4), pp. 471489.
  3. Balzaretti, N., Luppi, E., Guglielmi, D., Vannini, I. (2018), “Analizzare i processi di apprendimento degli studenti per innovare la didattica universitaria. Il modello di Formative Educational Evaluation dell’Università di Bologna”, Education Sciences & Society, 2, pp. 5882.
  4. Balzaretti, N., Vannini, I. (2018), “Promuovere la qualità della didattica universitaria. La Formative Educational Evaluation in uno studio pilota dell’Ateneo bolognese”, ECPS – Educational Cultural and Psychological Studies, 18, pp. 187213.
  5. Bandura, A. (1997), Selfefficacy: The Exercise of Control. New York: W. H. Freeman. Bandura, A. (2001), “Social Cognitive Theory: An Agentic Perspective”, Annual Review of Psychology, 52, pp. 126.
  6. Biasi, V., Domenici, G., Capobianco, R., Patrizi, N. (2014), “Teacher SelfEfficacy Scale (Scala sull’AutoEfficacia del Docente – SAED): Adattamento e validazione in Italia”, ECPS – Educational, Cultural and Psychological Studies, 10, pp. 485509. Biggs, J., Tang, C. (2011), Teaching for Quality Learning at University. Maidenhe ad: McGrawHill.
  7. Chen, G., Gully, S. M., Eden, D. (2001), “Validation of a New General SelfEfficacy Scale”, Organizational Research Methods, 4 (1), pp. 6283.
  8. CorneliusWhite, J. (2007), “LearnerCentered TeacherStudent Relationships Are Effective: A MetaAnalysis”, Review of Educational Research, 77 (1), pp. 113143.
  9. Creswell, J. W., Plano Clark, V. L. (2018), Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods Research. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
  10. Dodman, M., Cardarello, R., Damiani, V., Ciani, A. (Eds) (2025), La RicercaFormazione. Impatti, strumenti, fattori. Milano: FrancoAngeli.
  11. Dweck, C. S. (2000), Selftheories: Their Role in Motivation, Personality, and Development. New York: Psychology Press.
  12. Fredricks, J. A., Blumenfeld, P. C., Paris, A. H. (2004), “School Engagement: Potential of the Concept, State of the Evidence”, Review of Educational Research, 74 (1), pp. 59109.
  13. Freeman, S., Eddy, S. L., McDonough, M., Smith, M. K., Okoroafor, N., Jordt, H., Wenderoth, M. P. (2014), “Active Learning Increases Student Performance in Science, Engineering, and Mathematics”, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111 (23), pp. 84108415.
  14. Gegenfurtner, A. (2013), “Dimensions of Motivation to Transfer: A Longitudinal Analysis of Their Influence on Retention, Transfer, and Attitude Change”, Vocations and Learning, 6, pp. 187205.
  15. Guglielmi, D., Luppi, E., Neri, B., Salomoni, P., Vannini, I. (2020), La ricerca formazione per l’innovazione della didattica universitaria. In A. Lotti, P. A. Lampugnani (Eds), Faculty Development in Italia. Valorizzazione delle competenze didattiche dei docenti universitari. Genova: Genova University Press, pp. 133148. Hoidn, S., Klemenčič, M. (Eds) (2021), The Routledge International Handbook of StudentCentered Learning and Teaching in Higher Education. Abingdon:Routledge.
  16. Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T. (2009), “An Educational Psychology Success Story: Social Interdependence Theory and Cooperative Learning”, Educational Researcher, 38 (5), pp. 365379.
  17. Kellaghan, T., Stufflebeam, D. L. (Eds) (2003), International Handbook of Educational Evaluation. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
  18. Kember, D., Leung, D. Y. P., Jones, A., Loke Yuen, J. T. A., McKay, J., Sinclair, K., Tse, H., Webb, C., Wong, K. Y., Wong, M., Yeung, W. E. (2000), “Development of a Questionnaire to Measure the Level of Reflective Thinking”, Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 25 (4), pp. 381395.
  19. Kyndt, E., Baert, H. (2015), “Entrepreneurial Competencies: Assessment and Predictive Value for Entrepreneurship”, Journal of Vocational Behavior, 90, pp. 1325. Luppi, E. (2018), La RicercaFormazione in una prospettiva pedagogica. In G. Asquini (Ed.), La RicercaFormazione. Temi, esperienze, prospettive. Milano: FrancoAngeli, pp. 204209.
  20. Luppi, E., Freo, M., Ricci, A., Gueglio, N. (2020), “L’innovazione della didattica all’Università di Bologna durante la pandemia: un percorso basato sulla ricerca valutativa”, Lifelong Lifewide Learning, 17 (36), pp. 4457.
  21. Nunnally, J. C., Bernstein, I. H. (1994), Psychometric Theory. New York: McGrawHill, 3rd ed.
  22. Perla, L. (2022), Innovazione e professionalità docente nel contesto dell’Higher Education. In L. Perla, V. Vinci (Eds), Didattica, riconoscimento professionale e innovazione in Università. Milano: FrancoAngeli, pp. 1742.
  23. Pitan, O. S., Muller, C. (2019), “Students’ SelfPerceived Employability (SPE): Main Effects and Interactions of Gender and Field of Study”, Higher Education, Skills and WorkBased Learning, 10 (2), pp. 355368.
  24. Prince, M. J. (2004), “Does Active Learning Work? A Review of the Research”, Journal of Engineering Education, 93 (3), pp. 223231.
  25. Ricci, A. (2021), “L’analisi delle pratiche didattiche dei docenti durante la pandemia. Primi esiti dal modello di Formative Educational Evaluation dell’Università di Bologna”, Lifelong Lifewide Learning, 17 (38), pp. 431448.
  26. Ricci, A. (2023), The Innovation of Learning and Teaching Practices in Higher Education: A Methodological Focus on the University of Bologna’s Model. In B. Kress, H. Kusse (Eds), Enhancing Teaching Practice in Higher Education. International Perspectives on Academic Teaching and Learning. Berlin: Peter Lang, pp. 6176.
  27. Ricci, A., Brescianini, F. (2025), Promuovere l’innovazione didattica universitaria durante la complessità delle transizioni. Gli esiti dal primo studio qualitativo di una RicercaFormazione. In P. Malavasi, M. Parricchi (Eds), Educazione Territori Natura. Formare al tempo della transizione ecologica, digitale e interculturale. Lecce: Pensa Multimedia, pp. 10471052.
  28. Ricci, A., Brescianini, F., Luppi, E. (in corso di stampa), “Promuovere l’innovazione della didattica universitaria attraverso l’approccio della RicercaFormazione: esiti della fase qualitativa di una ricerca empirica con studenti e docenti”, I problemi della Pedagogia.
  29. Ricci, A., Luppi, E. (2022), Facing Adversity at the University. A Case Study to Reflect on Pedagogical Challenges in Times of Pandemic Risk. In S. Gonçalves, S. Majhanovich (Eds), Pandemic, Disruption and Adjustment in Higher Education. Leiden: Brill, pp. 112128.
  30. RomeroDíaz de la Guardia, J. J., GarcíaGarnica, M., ChacónCuberos, R., ExpósitoLópez, J. (2022), “Psychometric Validation of a Teamwork Skills Scale in a Vocational Training Context”, Sage Open, 12 (2), pp. 112.
  31. Rosa, A. (2024), Videoanalisi e qualità della didattica universitaria. Una ricerca sulle potenzialità della videoanalisi come dispositivo per promuovere le competenze dei docenti nella prospettiva del formative assessment. Milano: FrancoAngeli.
  32. Ryan, R. M., Deci, E. L. (2020), “Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation from a selfdetermination theory perspective: Definitions, theory, practices, and future directions”, Contemporary Educational Psychology, 61, Doi: 10.1016/j.cedpsych.2020.101860.
  33. Schaufeli, W. B., Shimazu, A., Hakanen, J., Salanova, M., De Witte, H. (2019), “An UltraShort Measure for Work Engagement: The UWES3 Validation across Five Countries”, European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 35 (4), pp. 577591.
  34. Szafrański, M., Goliński, M., Simi, H. (Eds) (2017), The Acceleration of Development of Transversal Competences. Kokkola: Centria University of Applied Sciences.
  35. Taber, K. S. (2018), “The Use of Cronbach’s Alpha When Developing and Reporting Research Instruments in Science Education”, Research in Science Education, 48, pp. 12731296.
  36. Tessaro, F. (1997), La valutazione dei processi formativi. Per una proposta integrata di Evaluation Research. Roma: Armando.
  37. Tinto, V. (1993), Leaving College: Rethinking the Causes and Cures of Student Attrition. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2nd ed.
  38. Trow, M. (2007), Reflections on the Transition from Elite to Mass to Universal Access: Forms and Phases of Higher Education in Modern Societies since WWII. In
  39. J. J. F. Forest, P. G. Altbach (Eds), International Handbook of Higher Education. Dordrecht: Springer, pp. 243280.
  40. TschannenMoran, M., Woolfolk Hoy, A. (2001), “Teacher Efficacy: Capturing an Elusive Construct”, Teaching and Teacher Education, 17 (7), pp. 783805.
  41. UNESCO (2025), Higher Education: Figures at a Glance. Paris.
  42. Vallerand, R. J., Pelletier, L. G., Blais, M. R., Brière, N. M., Senécal, C., Vallières,
  43. E. F. (1993), “On the Assessment of Intrinsic, Extrinsic, and Amotivation in Education: Evidence on the Concurrent and Construct Validity of the Academic Motivation Scale”, Educational and Psychological Measurement, 53 (1), pp. 159172.
  44. Vertecchi, B. (1976), Valutazione formativa. Torino: Loescher.
  45. Wenger, E., McDermott, R., Snyder, W. M. (2002), Cultivating Communities of Practice: A Guide to Managing Knowledge. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

Aurora Ricci, Elena Luppi, Flavio Brescianini, Promuovere l’innovazione didattica nella complessità delle transizioni: esiti della fase quantitativa di una ricerca-formazione in università in "CADMO" 1/2026, pp 86-102, DOI: 10.3280/cad2026oa23298