Nivel de uso de herramientas de Google en la práctica docente universitaria: estudio descriptivo transversal

Level of use of Google tools in university teaching practice: a cross-sectional descriptive study

Contenido principal del artículo

Autores/as

Introducción: Las herramientas digitales de Google forman parte de las actividades académicas universitarias y ofrecen diversas posibilidades para facilitar la gestión de información, la colaboración y la producción de contenidos. Sin embargo, su disponibilidad no garantiza una integración pedagógica efectiva, por lo que resulta necesario conocer el nivel y las formas de utilización por parte del profesorado universitario. Objetivo: Determinar el nivel de uso de las herramientas de Google en la práctica docente universitaria de la Universidad Nacional Daniel Alcides Carrión, Perú. Metodología: Se desarrolló una investigación con enfoque cuantitativo, alcance descriptivo y diseño no experimental de corte transversal. La muestra estuvo conformada por 228 docentes, quienes respondieron un cuestionario orientado a valorar el uso de las principales herramientas de Google y sus dimensiones de aplicación en la práctica docente. Resultados: El promedio global de uso fue de 3,16, correspondiente a un nivel medio, en el que se ubicaron 131 docentes (57,46 %). Google Drive obtuvo el mayor promedio (3,53), seguido de Google Docs (3,45), lo que evidencia un mayor dominio de funciones relacionadas con el almacenamiento, gestión y edición de documentos. En contraste, la dimensión de integración pedagógica presentó el promedio más bajo (3,08), evidenciando que el empleo de estas herramientas se orienta principalmente hacia funciones operativas y administrativas, antes que hacía estrategias didácticas. Conclusiones: El nivel de uso de las herramientas de Google en la práctica docente universitaria es predominantemente medio. Aunque existe un manejo favorable de recursos para almacenamiento y edición de contenidos, persisten limitaciones en su integración pedagógica. Se requiere fortalecer la formación docente para promover un uso didáctico, estratégico y orientado al aprendizaje de estas herramientas digitales.
Introduction: Google digital tools are increasingly integrated into university academic activities and offer various possibilities for facilitating information management, collaboration, and content production. However, their availability does not guarantee effective pedagogical integration; therefore, it is necessary to understand the level and patterns of use among university faculty. Objective: To determine the level of use of Google tools in university teaching practice at Universidad Nacional Daniel Alcides Carrión, Peru. Methodology: A quantitative study with a descriptive scope and a non-experimental, cross-sectional design was conducted. The sample consisted of 228 faculty members who completed a questionnaire designed to assess the use of major Google tools and their dimensions of application in teaching practice. Results: The overall mean level of use was 3.16, corresponding to a medium level, which included 131 faculty members (57.46%). Google Drive obtained the highest mean score (3.53), followed by Google Docs (3.45), indicating greater proficiency in functions related to storage, information management, and document editing. In contrast, the pedagogical integration dimension presented the lowest mean score (3.08), showing that these tools are used primarily for operational and administrative purposes rather than for instructional strategies. Conclusions: The level of use of Google tools in university teaching practice is predominantly moderate. Although faculty members demonstrate favorable proficiency in resources for content storage and editing, limitations persist in their pedagogical integration. Teacher training should therefore be strengthened to promote the didactic, strategic, and learning-oriented use of these digital tools.

Detalles del artículo

Cómo citar
Gamarra Rojas, S., Álvarez López, J. R., & Carbajal Mayhua, J. A. (2026). Nivel de uso de herramientas de Google en la práctica docente universitaria: estudio descriptivo transversal. Revista Tribunal, 6(17), 1-15. https://doi.org/10.59659/revistatribunal.v6i17.581
Sección
Artículos de Investigación

Cómo citar

Gamarra Rojas, S., Álvarez López, J. R., & Carbajal Mayhua, J. A. (2026). Nivel de uso de herramientas de Google en la práctica docente universitaria: estudio descriptivo transversal. Revista Tribunal, 6(17), 1-15. https://doi.org/10.59659/revistatribunal.v6i17.581

Referencias

Alotumi, M. (2022). Factors influencing graduate students' behavioral intention to use Google Classroom: Case study-mixed methods research. Education and Information Technologies, 27(7), 10035-10063. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-11051-2
DOIGoogle Scholar

Alsahil, A. (2025). Exploring students' perceptions and affordances of Google Docs-supported collaborative writing. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 19(1), 64-82. https://doi.org/10.1080/17501229.2024.2326030
DOIGoogle Scholar

Alturki, U., y Aldraiweesh, A. (2022). Adoption of Google Meet by postgraduate students: The role of task technology fit and the TAM model. Sustainability, 14(23), 15765. https://doi.org/10.3390/su142315765
DOIGoogle Scholar

Ayanwale, M. A., Molefi, R. R., y Liapeng, S. (2024). Unlocking educational frontiers: Exploring higher educators' adoption of Google Workspace technology tools for teaching and assessment in Lesotho dynamic landscape. Heliyon, 10(9), e30049. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e30049
DOIGoogle Scholar

Basilotta, V., Matarranz, M., Casado, L. A., y Otto, A. (2022). Teachers' digital competencies in higher education: A systematic literature review. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 19(1), 8. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-021-00312-8
DOIGoogle Scholar

Cabero, J., Gutiérrez, J. J., Barroso, J., y Rodríguez, A. (2023). Digital teaching competence according to the DigCompEdu framework: Comparative study in different Latin American universities. Journal of New Approaches in Educational Research, 12(2), 276-291. https://doi.org/10.7821/naer.2023.7.1452
DOIGoogle Scholar

Colina, F., Pantigoso, N., Abad, I., Calla, K., Chávez, S., Sanabria, F., y Soto, C. (2024). Implementation of hybrid education in Peruvian public universities: The challenges. Education Sciences, 14(4), 419. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci14040419
DOIGoogle Scholar

Dehghanzadeh, H., Soltani, S., Noroozi, O., y Banihashem, S. K. (2025). Google Docs for improving students' collaborative scientific writing. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 62(6), 1799-1812. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2024.2438345
DOIGoogle Scholar

Ersoy, H., Baskici, C., Aytar, A., Strods, R., Jansone, N., Lopes, A. M., Neves, H., Blaževičienė, A., Vaškelytė, A., Wikström, C., Paakkonen, H., Söderlund, A., Fritz, J., y Kav, S. (2024). Digital competence of faculty members in health sciences measured via self-reflection: Current status and contextual aspects. PeerJ, 12, e18456. https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.18456
DOIGoogle Scholar

Estévez, I., Souto, A., y Jorrín, I. (2023). Creencias e integración de recursos digitales: un estudio con docentes universitarios de Ciencias de la Salud. RIED. Revista Iberoamericana de Educación a Distancia, 26(1), 121-139. https://doi.org/10.5944/ried.26.1.34035
DOIGoogle Scholar

Fernández, C., López, B. C., Casal, L., y Mareque, F. (2023). Teachers' digital competence: The case of the university system of Galicia. Journal of New Approaches in Educational Research, 12(1), 62-76. https://doi.org/10.7821/naer.2023.1.1139
DOIGoogle Scholar

Godoy, Y. R., Guerrero, F. A. E., Cortez, M. G., Godoy, A. F., y Ormeño, D. R. (2025). Tecnologías de información y comunicación y competencias digitales en docentes universitarios de Ica, Perú. Horizontes Revista de Investigación en Ciencias de la Educación, 9(39), 2491-2505. https://doi.org/10.33996/revistahorizontes.v9i39.1065
DOIGoogle Scholar

Huerta, R. M., Guzman, M., Flores, J. I., y Tomas, S. J. (2022). Competencias digitales de los profesores universitarios durante la pandemia por covid-19 en el Perú. Revista Electrónica Interuniversitaria de Formación del Profesorado, 25(1), 49-60. https://doi.org/10.6018/reifop.500481
DOIGoogle Scholar

Inamorato, A., Chinkes, E., Carvalho, M. A. G., Solórzano, C. M. V., y Marroni, L. S. (2023). The digital competence of academics in higher education: Is the glass half empty or half full? International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 20(1), 9. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-022-00376-0
DOIGoogle Scholar

Martín, L., Llorente, C., y Barroso, J. (2022). Validation of the DigCompEdu Check-in questionnaire through structural equations: A study at a university in Peru. Education Sciences, 12(8), 574. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci12080574
DOIGoogle Scholar

Martín, L., Llorente, C., y Barroso, J. (2023). Self-perception of digital competence in university lecturers: A comparative study between universities in Spain and Peru according to the DigCompEdu model. Societies, 13(6), 142. https://doi.org/10.3390/soc13060142
DOIGoogle Scholar

Oguguo, B., Ezechukwu, R., Nannim, F., y Offor, K. (2023). Analysis of teachers in the use of digital resources in online teaching and assessment in COVID times. Innoeduca. International Journal of Technology and Educational Innovation, 9(1), 81-96. https://doi.org/10.24310/innoeduca.2023.v9i1.15419
DOIGoogle Scholar

Okoye, K., Hussein, H., Arrona, A., Quintero, H. N., Peña, L. O., Lopez, A., Arias, E., Escamilla, J., y Hosseini, S. (2023). Impact of digital technologies upon teaching and learning in higher education in Latin America: An outlook on the reach, barriers, and bottlenecks. Education and Information Technologies, 28(2), 2291-2360. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-11214-1
DOIGoogle Scholar

Panchbudhe, S., Shaikh, S., Swami, H., Kadam, C. Y., Padalkar, R., Shivkar, R. R., Gulavani, G., Gulajkar, S., Gawade, S., y Mujawar, F. (2024). Efficacy of Google Form-based MCQ tests for formative assessment in medical biochemistry education. Journal of Education and Health Promotion, 13, 92. https://doi.org/10.4103/jehp.jehp_981_23
DOIGoogle Scholar

Røe, Y., Wojniusz, S., y Bjerke, A. H. (2022). The digital transformation of higher education teaching: Four pedagogical prescriptions to move active learning pedagogy forward. Frontiers in Education, 6, 784701. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2021.784701
DOIGoogle Scholar

Rogozin, D., Solodovnikova, O., y Ipatova, A. (2022). How university teachers view the digital transformation of higher education. Voprosy Obrazovaniya, 2022(1), 271-300. https://doi.org/10.17323/1814-9545-2022-1-271-300
DOIGoogle Scholar

Roy, D., Céspedes, C., Chacana, C., y Vera, H. (2025). La competencia digital y la autoeficacia en docentes de educación superior, el rol de las variables de edad y género. European Public & Social Innovation Review, 10, 1-20. https://doi.org/10.31637/epsir-2025-1413
DOIGoogle Scholar

Saidu, M. K., y Al Mamun, M. A. (2022). Exploring the factors affecting behavioural intention to use Google Classroom: University teachers' perspectives in Bangladesh and Nigeria. TechTrends, 66(4), 681-696. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-022-00704-1
DOIGoogle Scholar

Santiago, Y. D., y Garvich, R. M. (2024). Competencias digitales e integración de las TIC en el proceso de enseñanza-aprendizaje. Revista Docentes 2.0, 17(1), 50-65. https://doi.org/10.37843/rted.v17i1.405
DOIGoogle Scholar

Schaal, T. K., Marchwacka, M. A., Tolks, D., y Kugler, J. (2026). Transforming educator expectations in public health, nursing, and medicine: A two-phase survey on digital tools in education. BMC Medical Education, 26(1), 87. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-025-08406-x
DOIGoogle Scholar

Sharov, S., Tereshchuk, S., Filatova, O., Hinkevych, O., y Ksendzenko, O. (2024). Survey analysis of university teachers in Ukraine regarding the use of Google Workspace for Education. TEM Journal, 13(1), 315-325. https://doi.org/10.18421/TEM131-33
DOIGoogle Scholar

Tang, J., Huang, P., y Yan, S. (2025). Digital transformation in higher education: Logical framework, practical dilemmas, and implementation approaches. Frontiers in Psychology, 16, 1565591. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1565591
DOIGoogle Scholar

Vargas, K., Danielli, J. J., Parillo, E., y Reeves, E. S. (2024). La educación virtual universitaria postpandemia: Una revisión sistemática. Revista Koinonía, 9(supl. 1), 62-76. https://doi.org/10.35381/r.k.v9i1.3553
DOIGoogle Scholar

Zagouras, C., Egarchou, D., Skiniotis, P., y Fountana, M. (2022). Face to face or blended learning? A case study: Teacher training in the pedagogical use of ICT. Education and Information Technologies, 27(9), 12939-12967. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-11144-y
DOIGoogle Scholar

Žoncová, M., Vojteková, J., y Tirpáková, A. (2023). Distance learning of geographic information systems using Google Classroom: Students' assessment and perception. The Professional Geographer, 75(5), 763-775. https://doi.org/10.1080/00330124.2022.2148696
DOIGoogle Scholar