Mostrar el registro sencillo del ítem

Providing blended feedback on writing to fulfill secondary students’ cognitive and Affective learning needs

dc.contributor.advisorAnderson, Carl Edlund
dc.contributor.authorKrystyna Slawinska, Magdalena
dc.date.accessioned2021-02-26T20:16:24Z
dc.date.available2021-02-26T20:16:24Z
dc.date.issued2021-02-08
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10818/46999
dc.description84 páginases_CO
dc.description.abstractThe study purpose was to test secondary students’ preference for different types of feedback on their writing and the underlying reasons for their choice to determine what kind of feedback should be given on written tasks to high school EFL students. The participants were 192 high school students between 13 and 17 years old from a private school in Bogota, Colombia. This study is an exploratory action research framed upon a mixed-method design, which collects quantitative and qualitative data within one study. To obtain the results, the teacher-researcher used two questionnaires and a short written task. Following the grounded theory, all participants’ answers were analyzed and coded to provide the teacher-researcher with a core category. During the investigation, it has been concluded that students should not receive only one type of feedback on their writing but a combination of feedback that fulfills their cognitive and affective learning needs. Keywords: blended feedback; cognitive and affective characteristics; feedback on writing; secondary EFL students.es_CO
dc.description.abstractEl propósito de este estudio fue el de evaluar la preferencia de los estudiantes de secundaria por distintos tipos de retroalimentación acerca de sus habilidades de escritura y las razones subyacentes de su elección para determinar qué tipo de retroalimentación es la más adecuada para los estudiantes de inglés como lengua extranjera. Los participantes fueron 192 estudiantes de secundaria, entre los 13 y 17 años, de un colegio privado en Bogotá, Colombia. Este estudio es una investigación de acción exploratoria enmarcada en un diseño de método mixto, que recopila datos cuantitativos y cualitativos. Para obtener los resultados, el docente-investigador utilizó dos cuestionarios y una breve tarea escrita.spa
dc.formatapplication/pdfes_CO
dc.language.isoenges_CO
dc.publisherUniversidad de La Sabanaes_CO
dc.rightsAttribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International*
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/*
dc.sourceinstname:Universidad de La Sabanaes_CO
dc.sourcereponame:Intellectum Repositorio Universidad de La Sabanaes_CO
dc.titleProviding blended feedback on writing to fulfill secondary students’ cognitive and Affective learning needses_CO
dc.typemasterThesises_CO
dc.identifier.local280884
dc.identifier.localTE11166
dc.type.hasVersionpublishedVersiones_CO
dc.rights.accessRightsrestrictedAccesses_CO
dc.subject.armarcEducación secundariaspa
dc.subject.armarcAprendizajespa
dc.subject.armarcCogniciónspa
dc.subject.armarcRetroalimentaciónspa
dc.subject.armarcEscrituraspa
dcterms.referencesAl-Yaaquubi, A., & Al-Mahrooqi, R. I. (2012). How does reading for pleasure affect EFL learners? Asian EFL Journal, 72, 20–46.en
dcterms.referencesAli, A. D. (2016). Effectiveness of using screencast feedback on EFL students’ writing and perception. English Language Teaching, 9(8), 106–121. https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v9n8p106en
dcterms.referencesAlvira, R. (2016). The impact of oral and written feedback on EFL writers with the use of screencasts. Profile Issues in Teachers’ Professional Development, 18(2), 79–92. https://doi.org/10.15446/profile.v18n2.53397en
dcterms.referencesArgüelles, L., Méndez, E., & Escudero, M. (2019). EFL teachers’ attitudes towards oral corrective feedback: A case study. Profile: Issues in Teachers’ Professional Development, 21(1), 107–120en
dcterms.referencesBadger, R., & White, G. (2000). A process genre approach to teaching writing. ELT Journal, 54(2), 153–160. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/54.2.153en
dcterms.referencesBaghzou, S. (2015). The effects of content feedback on students’ writing. Ankara Üniversitesi Dil ve Tarih-Coğrafya Fakültesi Dergisi, 51(2), 169–180. https://doi.org/10.1501/dtcfder_0000001275en
dcterms.referencesBastable, S. B., & Dart, M. A. (2011). Developmental stages of the learner. In S. B. Bastable, P. Gramet, K. Jacobs, & D. L. Sobczyk (Eds.), Health professional as educator: Principles of teaching and learning (pp. 151–198). Jones & Bartlett Learning.en
dcterms.referencesBean, J. C. (1996). Engaging ideas: The professor’s guide to integrating writing, critical thinking, and active learning in the classroom. Jossey-Bass.en
dcterms.referencesBerggren, J. (2015). Learning from giving feedback: A study of secondary-level students. ELT Journal, 69(1), 58–70. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccu036en
dcterms.referencesBitchener, J., & Knoch, U. (2010). The contribution of written corrective feedback to language development: A ten month investigation. Applied Linguistics, 31(2), 193–214. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amp016en
dcterms.referencesBitchener, J., & Storch, N. (2012). Written corrective feedback for L2 development. Multilingual Matters.en
dcterms.referencesBitchener, John, Young, S., & Cameron, D. (2005). The effect of different types of corrective feedback on ESL student writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 14(3), 191–205. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2005.08.001en
dcterms.referencesBoudersa, N. (2016). The importance of teachers’ training programs and professional development in the Algerian educational context: Toward informed and effective teaching practices. Expériences Pédagogiques, 1, 2–15.en
dcterms.referencesBrighton, K. L. (2007). Coming of age: The education and development of young adolescents. National Middle School Associationen
dcterms.referencesCaskey, M. M., & Ruben, B. (2007). Under construction: The young adolescent brain. In S. B. Mertens, J. V. A. Anfara, & M. M. Caskey (Eds.), The young adolescent and the middle school (pp. 47–72). Information Ageen
dcterms.referencesChen, Y. S., & Su, S. W. (2012). A genre-based approach to teaching EFL summary writing. ELT Journal, 66(2), 184–192. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccr061en
dcterms.referencesCheng, A. (2008). Analyzing genre exemplars in preparation for writing: The case of an L2 graduate student in the ESP genre-based instructional framework of academic literacy. Applied Linguistics, 29, 50–71.en
dcterms.referencesChristie, C., & McKay, S. (2003). Teaching English as an International Language: Rethinking goals and approaches. TESOL Quarterly, 37(2), 363. https://doi.org/10.2307/3588516en
dcterms.referencesClark, C., & Rumbold, K. (2006). Reading for pleasure: A research overview. National Literacy Trust.en
dcterms.referencesCohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2007). Research methods in education. Routledgeen
dcterms.referencesCollinson, V., & Cook, T. (2000). “I don’t have enough time” ‐ Teachers’ interpretations of time as a key to learning and school change. Journal of Educational Administration, 39, 266– 281. https://doi.org/10.1108/09578230110392884en
dcterms.referencesCorbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2008). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory (3rd ed.). SAGEen
dcterms.referencesCreswell, J. W. (2012). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research (4th ed.). Pearsonen
dcterms.referencesCullen, R. (2007). Teaching grammar as a liberating force. ELT Journal, 62(3), 221–230. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccm042en
dcterms.referencesCunningham, M. A. (2015). Using audio screencast for feedback on short written essays [Doctoral dissertation, Southern Illinois University]. https://opensiuc.lib.siu.edu/dissertations/1059/en
dcterms.referencesDavis, K. (2012). Adolescent learners’ characteristics. In N. M. Seel (Ed.), Encyclopedia of the Sciences of Learning (pp. 134–136). Springer.en
dcterms.referencesDe Maeyer, S., Quintelier, A., & Vanhoof, J. (2018). Understanding the influence of teachers’ cognitive and affective responses upon school inspection feedback acceptance. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 30(4), 399–431. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11092-018-9286-4en
dcterms.referencesDenzin, N. K. (1978). Sociological methods. McGraw-Hill.en
dcterms.referencesDeWalt, K. M., & DeWalt, B. R. (1998). Participant observation. In H. R. Bernard (Ed.), Handbook of methods in cultural anthropology (pp. 259–300). AltaMira Pressen
dcterms.referencesDeWalt, K. M., & DeWalt, B. R. (2002). Participant observation: A guide for fieldworkers. Rowman AltaMira.en
dcterms.referencesDheram, P. K. (1995). Feedback as a two-bullock cart: A case study of teaching writing. ELT Journal, 49(2), 160–168. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/49.2.160en
dcterms.referencesDíaz, C., Jorquera, O., & Mendoza, J. (2017). High school students’ affective reaction to English speaking activities. How, 24(2), 102–121. https://doi.org/10.19183/how.24.2.346en
dcterms.referencesDohrer, G. (1991). Do teachers’ comments on students’ papers help? College Teaching, 39(2), 48–54. https://doi.org/10.1080/87567555.1991.9925485en
dcterms.referencesDoody, O., & Doody, C. M. (2015). Conducting a pilot study: Case study of a novice researcher. British Journal of Nursing, 24(21), 1074–1078. https://doi.org/10.12968/bjon.2015.24.21.1074en
dcterms.referencesDornyei, Z. (2003). Questionnaires in second language research: Construction, administration, and processing. Lawrence Erlbaum Associatesen
dcterms.referencesDrachsler, H., & Kirschner, P. A. (2012). Learner characteristics. In N. M. Seel (Ed.), Encyclopedia of the sciences of learning (pp. 1743–1745). Springer US. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-1428-6_347en
dcterms.referencesEllis, R., Sheen, Y., Murakamid, M., & Takashimae, H. (2008). The effects of focused and unfocused written corrective feedback in an English as a foreign language context. System, 36(3), 353–371. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2008.02.001en
dcterms.referencesFerris, D. R. (1999). The case for grammar correction in L2 writing classes: A response to Truscott (1996). Journal of Second Language Writing, 8(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1060-3743(99)80110-6en
dcterms.referencesFerris, D. R. (2001). Error feedback in L2 writing classes: How explicit does it need to be? Journal of Second Language Writing, 10(3), 161–184.en
dcterms.referencesFerris, D. R. (2003). Response to student writing: Implications for second language students. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781410607201en
dcterms.referencesFirkins, A., Forey, G., & Sengupta, S. (2007). Teaching writing to low proficiency EFL students. ELT Journal, 61(4), 341–352. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccm052en
dcterms.referencesFlower, L., & Hayes, J. R. (1981). A cognitive process theory of writing. College Composition and Communication, 32(4), 365–387. https://doi.org/10.2307/356600en
dcterms.referencesFrear, D. (2015). The effect of focused and unfocused direct written corrective feedback on a new piece of writing. System, 53, 24–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2015.06.006en
dcterms.referencesFried, C. B. (2008). In-class laptop use and its effects on student learning. Computers & Education, 50(3), 906–914. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2006.09.006en
dcterms.referencesGerngross, G., Puchta, H., & Thornbury, S. (2007). Teaching grammar creatively. ELT Journal, 62(4), 424–427. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccn046en
dcterms.referencesGrabe, W. (2012). Reading in a second language: Moving from theory to practice. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139150484.007en
dcterms.referencesGrami, M. (2005). The effect of teachers’ written feedback on ESL students’ perception: A study in a Saudi ESL university-level context. Annual Review of Education, Communication and Language Sciences, 2, 1–12.en
dcterms.referencesGu, P. Y. (2016). Questionnaires in language teaching research. Language Teaching Research, 20(5), 567–570.en
dcterms.referencesGurban, A. S. (2018). Teaching writing to the second language students. Web of Scholar, 6(24), 22–26. https://doi.org/10.31435/rsglobal_wos/12062018/5791en
dcterms.referencesHelmke, A. (1989). Affective student characteristics and cognitive development: Problems, pitfalls, perspectives. International Journal of Educational Research, 13(8), 915–932. https://doi.org/10.1016/0883-0355(89)90073-6en
dcterms.referencesHeron, G. (2011). Examining principles of formative and summative feedback. British Journal of Social Work, 41(2), 276–295. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjsw/bcq049en
dcterms.referencesHsu, W.-C., & Liu, G.-Z. (2018). Genre-based writing instruction blended with an online writing tutorial system for the development of academic writing. Digital Scholarship in the Humanities, 34(1), 100–123. https://doi.org/10.1093/llc/fqy021en
dcterms.referencesHyland, K., & Hyland, F. (2006). Feedback on second language students’ writing. Language Teaching, 39(2), 77–95. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444806003399en
dcterms.referencesHyon, S. (2002). Genre and ESL reading: A classroom study. In A. M. Johns (Ed.), Genre in the classroom: Multiple perspectives (pp. 121–141). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.en
dcterms.referencesIvankowa, N. (2014). Applying mixed methods in action research. In Mixed methods applications in action research: From methods to community action (pp. 50–83). SAGEen
dcterms.referencesIvankowa, N., & Wingo, N. (2018). Applying mixed methods in action research: Methodological potentials and advantages. American Behavioral Scientist, 62(7), 978–997. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764218772673en
dcterms.referencesJean, G., & Simard, D. (2011). Grammar learning in English and French L2: Students’ and teachers’ beliefs and perceptions. Foreign Language Annals, 44(4), 465–492.en
dcterms.referencesJohns, A. M. (1997). Text, role and context: Developing academic literacies. Cambridge University Pressen
dcterms.referencesKellough, R. D., & Kellough, N. G. (2008). Teaching young adolescents: Methods and resources for middle grades teaching (5th ed.). Pearson Merrill Prentice Hall.en
dcterms.referencesKrashen, S. D. (1982). Principles and practice in second language acquisition. Pergamon Press.en
dcterms.referencesLandrum, M. S. (2017). Identifying student cognitive and affective needs. In R. D. Eckert & J. H. Robins (Eds.), Designing services and programs for high-ability learners: A guidebook for gifted education (pp. 1–14). SAGE. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781483329307.n1en
dcterms.referencesLarsen-Freeman, D. (2015). Research into practice: Grammar learning and teaching. Language Teaching, 48(2), 263–280. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444814000408en
dcterms.referencesLee, I. (2004). Error correction in L2 secondary writing classrooms: The case of Hong Kong. Journal of Second Language Writing, 13(4), 285–312. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2004.08.001en
dcterms.referencesLee, I. (2005). Error correction in the L2 writing classroom: What do students think? TESL Canada Journal, 22(2), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.18806/tesl.v22i2.84en
dcterms.referencesLeki, I. (1991). The preferences of ESL students for error correction in college‐level writing classes. Foreign Language Annals, 24(3), 203–218. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1944- 9720.1991.tb00464.xen
dcterms.referencesLujan, H. L., & DiCarlo, S. E. (2006). Too much teaching, not enough learning: What is the solution? Advances in Physiology Education, 33(4), 17–22.en
dcterms.referencesLyster, R., Lightbown, P., & Spada, N. (1999). A response to Truscott’s “What’s wrong with oral grammar correction.” Canadian Modern Language Review, 55(4), 457–467. https://doi.org/10.3138/cmlr.55.4.457en
dcterms.referencesMalm, B. (2009). Towards a new professionalism: Enhancing personal and professional development in teacher education. Journal of Education for Teaching, 35(1), 77–91. https://doi.org/10.1080/02607470802587160en
dcterms.referencesMercedes, N., & Galvis, D. (2010). Peer editing: A strategic source in EFL students’ writing process. Colombian Applied Linguistics Journal, 12(12), 85–98.en
dcterms.referencesMiles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. SAGE.en
dcterms.referencesMiles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldaña, J. (2014). Qualitative data analysis: A method sourcebook (4th ed.). SAGEen
dcterms.referencesMyskow, G., & Gordon, K. (2010). A focus on purpose: Using a genre approach in an EFL writing class. ELT Journal, 64(3), 283–292. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccp057en
dcterms.referencesNunan, D., & Bailey, K. M. (2008). Exploring second language classroom research: A comprehensive guide. Heinle ELT.en
dcterms.referencesNunan, David. (2007). Teaching grammar in context. College Composition and Communication, 47(4), 101–109. https://doi.org/10.2307/358617en
dcterms.referencesO’Rourke, L., Connelly, V., & Barnett, A. (2018). Understanding writing difficulties through a model of the cognitive processes involved in writing. In B. Miller, P. McCardle, & V. Connelly (Eds.), Writing development in struggling learners: Understanding the needs of writers across the lifecourse (pp. 11–28). Brill.en
dcterms.referencesPandey, A. (2012). Rethinking process-based writing approaches in the ESOL middle school classroom: Developing linguistic fluency via hybrid pedagogies. TESOL Journal, 3(4), 659–697. https://doi.org/10.1002/tesj.39en
dcterms.referencesParan, A. (2012). Language skills: Questions for teaching and learning. ELT Journal, 66(4), 450–458. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccs045en
dcterms.referencesPatton, M. Q. (1999). Enhancing the quality and credibility of qualitative analysis. HSR: Health Services Research, 34(5), 1189–1208.en
dcterms.referencesPiaget, J. (1954). The period of formal operations and the transition from the child logic to the adolescent one. Bulletin de Psychologie, 7, 247–253.en
dcterms.referencesRaimes, A. (1983). Techniques in teaching writing. Oxford University Press.en
dcterms.referencesRaimes, A. (1991). Out of the woods: Traditions in the teaching of writing. TESOL Quarterly, 25, 407-430.en
dcterms.referencesRichards, J. C. (2015). The changing face of language learning: Learning beyond the classroom. RELC Journal, 46(1), 5–22. https://doi.org/10.1177/0033688214561621en
dcterms.referencesRichards, J. C., & Rodgers, T. S. (1986). Approaches and methods in language teaching. Cambridge University Press.en
dcterms.referencesRipple, R. E. (1965). Affective factors influence classroom learning. Educational Leadership, 22(7), 476–480en
dcterms.referencesRogers, H. (2004). Writing systems: A linguistic approach. Blackwell.en
dcterms.referencesRollinson, P. (2005). Using peer feedback in the ESL writing class. ELT Journal, 59(1), 23–30. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/cci003en
dcterms.referencesSalkind, N. J. (2010). Triangulation. In Encyclopedia of Research Design. SAGE. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781412961288en
dcterms.referencesSampson, A. (2012). Coded and uncoded error feedback: Effects on error frequencies in adult Colombian EFL learners’ writing. System, 40(4), 494–504. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2012.10.001en
dcterms.referencesSamway, K. D. (2006). When English language learners write: Connecting research to practice, K-8. Heinemann.en
dcterms.referencesShin, S. J. (2003). The reflective L2 writing teacher. ELT Journal, 57(1), 3–10. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/57.1.3en
dcterms.referencesSoori, A., Kafipour, R., & Soury, M. (2011). Effectiveness of different types of direct corrective feedback on correct use of English articles among the Iranian EFL students. European Journal of Social Sciences, 26(4), 494–501.en
dcterms.referencesStevick, E. W. (1989). Success with foreign languages: Seven who achieved it and what worked for them. Prentice Hall International Ltd.en
dcterms.referencesStevick, E. W. (1996). Memory, meaning, and method: Some psychological perspectives on language learning (2nd ed.). Heinle ELT.en
dcterms.referencesStringer, E. T. (2007). Action research (3rd ed.). SAGE.en
dcterms.referencesSwales, J. (1990). Genre analysis: English in academic and research settings. Cambridge University Pressen
dcterms.referencesThompson, G. (2001). Interaction in academic writing: Learning to argue with the reader. Applied Linguistics, 22(1), 58–78. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/22.1.58en
dcterms.referencesTootkaboni, A. A., & Khatib, M. (2014). The efficacy of various kinds of error feedback on improving writing accuracy of EFL learners. Bellaterra Journal of Teaching & Learning Language & Literature, 7(3), 30–46.en
dcterms.referencesTreglia, M. O. (2008). Feedback on feedback: Exploring students responses to teachers’ written commentary. Journal of Basic Writing, 27(1), 105–137.en
dcterms.referencesTruscott, J. (1996). The case against grammar correction in L2 writing classes. Language Learning, 46(2), 327–369. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-1770.1996.tb01238.xen
dcterms.referencesTruscott, J. (1999). The case for “The case against correction in L2 writing classes”: A response to Ferris. Journal of Second Language Writing, 8(2), 111–122. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1060-3743(99)80124-6en
dcterms.referencesTruscott, J. (2007). The effect of error correction on learners’ ability to write accurately. Journal of Second Language Writing, 16(4), 255–272. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2007.06.003en
dcterms.referencesUnderwood, P. R. (2017). Challenges and change: Integrating grammar teaching with communicative work in senior high school EFL classes. SAGE Open, 7(3), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244017722185en
dcterms.referencesVan Teijlingen, E. R., & Hundley, V. (2002). The importance of pilot studies. Social Research Update, 16(40), 33–36. https://doi.org/10.7748/ns2002.06.16.40.33.c3214en
dcterms.referencesVanclay, F., Baines, J. T., & Taylor, C. N. (2013). Principles for ethical research involving humans: Ethical professional practice in impact assessment. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, 31(4), 243–253. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/14615517.2013.850307en
dcterms.referencesVermunt, J. D. (1996). Metacognitive, cognitive and affective aspects of learning styles and strategies: A phenomenographic analysis. Higher Education, 31(1), 25–50en
dcterms.referencesWagner, E. (2010). Survey research. In B. Paltridge & A. Phakiti (Eds.), Continuum companion to research methods in applied linguistics (pp. 22–38). Continuumen
dcterms.referencesWeaver, M. R. (2006). Do students value feedback? Student perceptions of tutors’ written responses. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 31(3), 379–394. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/02602930500353061en
dcterms.referencesWieregová, A. (2013). Teacher journal as a research instrument: The first year in the life in primary school through the eyes of novice teachers. Studia Edukacyjne, 27, 237–252.en
dcterms.referencesWitt, P. L. (2015). Pursuing and measuring affective learning objectives. Communication Education, 64(4), 491–515. https://doi.org/10.1080/03634523.2015.1064143en
dcterms.referencesXu, X., & Li, X. (2018). Teaching academic writing through a process-genre approach: A pedagogical exploration of an EAP program in China. The Electronic Journal for English as a Second Language, 22(2), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms1129en
dcterms.referencesYagcioglu, O. (2016). The positive effects of cognitive learning styles in ELT classes. European Journal of English Language Teaching, 1(2), 78–91. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.166311en
dcterms.referencesZhao, H. (2014). Investigating teacher-supported peer assessment for EFL writing. ELT Journal, 68(2), 155–168. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/cct068en
thesis.degree.disciplineFacultad de Educaciónes_CO
thesis.degree.levelMaestría en Didáctica del Inglés para el Aprendizaje Autodirigido (Virtual)es_CO
thesis.degree.nameMagíster en Didáctica del Inglés para el Aprendizaje Autodirigidoes_CO


Ficheros en el ítem

Thumbnail
Nombre:
Thesis Magdalena Krystyna ...
Tamaño:
629.3Kb
Formato:
PDF
Descripción:
Ver documento en PDF
Ver/

Este ítem aparece en la(s) siguiente(s) colección(ones)

Mostrar el registro sencillo del ítem

Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 InternationalExcepto si se señala otra cosa, la licencia del ítem se describe como Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International