25 de abril de 2017

Recursos digitales autónomos mediante realidad aumentada

Recursos digitales autónomos mediante realidad aumentada

Joaquín Cubillo Arribas, Sergio Martín Gutiérrez, Manuel Castro Gil, Antonio Colmenar Santos


Aún existen en la actualidad limitaciones a la hora de enseñar conceptos que requieren la manipulación o visualización de objetos que no están al alcance de todos, bien por su naturaleza abstracta, científica o espacial. La realidad aumentada y los dispositivos móviles son herramientas disponibles hoy en día que permiten solventar estas carencias y ofrecen la posibilidad de interactuar con objetos virtuales en un espacio tridimensional. Para que estas tecnologías formen parte activa en el ámbito educativo es necesario proporcionar herramientas de autor que faciliten la creación de contenidos aumentados autónomos, que expliquen por sí mismos los conceptos que van a ser mostrados, que permitan añadir de una forma sencilla y transparente nuevos recursos virtuales y que puedan ser reutilizados. Este trabajo presenta un entorno de aprendizaje basado en la realidad aumentada que cumple estos objetivos.

Palabras clave

Realidad aumentada; aprendizaje móvil; herramientas de autor; contextualización; preguntas con respuesta múltiple.

Texto completo:



Ally, M. (2009). Mobile Learning: Transforming the Delivery of Education and Training (Au Press), UBC Press.

AndAR (2012). Android Augmented RealityGoogle Project.

Andújar, J. M.; Mejías, A.; Márquez, M. A. (2011). Augmented Reality for the Improvement of Remote Laboratories: An Augmented Remote Laboratory IEEE Transactions on Education, 54 (3), (492-500).

Aumentaty Author (2014). Tool for Augmented Reality.

Azuma, R. (1997). A Survey of Augmented Reality. Teleoperators and Virtual Environments, (355-385).

Azuma, R.; Baillot, Y.; Behringer, R.; Feiner, S.; Julier, S.; MacIntyre, B. (2001). Recent Advances in Augmented Reality. Computer Graphics and Applications, IEEE, 21, (34-47).

Billinghurst, M.; Kato, H.; Poupyrev, I. (2001). The Magic Book-Moving Seamlessly between Reality and Virtuality. IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications, (1-4). Billinghurst, M.; Kato, H. (2002). Collaborative augmented reality. Communications of the ACM, 45 (7), (64-70).

Bower, G. H.; Clark, M. C. (1969). Narrative stories as mediators for serial learning. Psychonomic Science.

Bridgeman, B. (1992). A Comparison of Quantitative Questions in Open-Ended and Multiple‐Choice Formats. Journal of Educational Measurement, 29 (3), (253-271).

Bujak, K. R.; Radu, I.; Catrambone, R.; MacIntyre, B.; Zheng, R.; Golubski, G. (2013). A psychological perspective on augmented reality in the mathematics classroom. Computers & Education.

Cameron, L.; Tanti, M. (2011). Students as learning designers: Using social media to scaffold the experience | eLearning. Catholic University, 27. Faculty of Education, Australian.

Carmigniani, J.; Furht, B.; Anisetti, M.; Ceravolo, P.; Damiani, E.; Ivkovic, M. (2010). Augmented reality technologies, systems and applications. Multimedia Tools and Applications, 51 (1), (341-377).

Cubillo, J.; Martin, S.; Castro, M.; Meier, R. (2012). Control of a remote laboratory by augmented reality. Teaching, Assessment and Learning for Engineering (TALE), 2012 IEEE International Conference on, W2B-11-W2B-15.

Cuendet, S.; Bonnard, Q.; Do-Lenh, S.; Dillenbourg, P. (2013). Designing augmented reality for the classroom. Computers & Education.

Chen, C.; Tsai, Y. (2012). Interactive augmented reality system for enhancing library instruction in elementary schools. Computers & Education, 59 (2), (638- 652).

Dettori, G.; Giannetti, T.; Paiva, A. (2006). Technology-mediated narrative environments for learning. Sense publishers.

Dettori, G.; Paiva, A. (2009). Narrative learning in technology-enhanced environments. In: Anonymous Technology-Enhanced Learning (55- 69). Springer.

Dickey, M. D. (2006). Ninja Looting for instructional design: the design challenges of creating a game-based learning environment. ACM SIGGRAPH 2006 Educators program (17).

Dieterle, E.; Dede, C. (2006). Building university faculty and student capacity to use wireless handheld devices for learning. Ubiquitous computing in education: Invisible technology, visible impact, (303-328).

Dörner, R.; Geiger, C.; Haller, M.; Paelke, V. (2003). Authoring mixed reality—a component and frameworkbased approach. In: Anonymous Entertainment Computing (05-413). Springer.

Doswell, J.; Blake, M.; Butcher-Green, J. (2006). 2006 Fourth IEEE International Workshop on Wireless, Mobile and Ubiquitous Technology in Education (WMTE’06); Mobile Augmented Reality System Architecture for Ubiquitous e-Learning, (121-123).

Ebner, M.; Holzinger, A.; Maurer - Chapter, H. (2007). Universal Access in HumanComputer Interaction. Applications and Services; Web 2.0 Technology: Future Interfaces for Technology Enhanced Learning? 4556, (559 -568).

Esteban, P.; Restrepo, J.; Trefftz, H.; Jaramillo, J. E.; Alvarez, N. (2006). Augmented Reality for Teaching MultiVariate Calculus. The Fifth IASTED International Conference on web-based education, Puerto Ballarta, México.

Facer, K.; Joiner, R.; Stanton, D.; Reid, J.; Hull, R.; Kirk, D. (2004). Savannah: mobile gaming and learning? Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 20 (6), (399-409).

Feiner, S.; Macintyre, B.; Seligmann, D. (1993). Knowledge-based augmented reality. Communications of the ACM, 36 (7), (53-62).

Freitas, R.; Campos, P. (2008). SMART: a System of Augmented Reality for Teaching 2nd grade students. 22nd British HCI Group Annual Conference on People and Computers: Culture, Creativity, Interaction-Volume 2 (27- 30). Gartner (2012). Technology Research Gartner Inc.

Gibbs, G.; Simpson, C. (2004). Conditions under which assessment supports students’ learning. Learning and teaching in higher education, 1 (1), (3- 31). Goodson, I. F.; Biesta, G.; Tedder, M.; Adair, N. (2010). Narrative learning.

Routledge. Govindasamy, T. (2001). Successful implementation of e-Learning: Pedagogical considerations. The Internet and Higher Education, 4 (3-4), (287- 299). Grifantini, K. (2009). Faster Maintenance with Augmented Reality. Technology Review, MIT.

Grimm, P.; Haller, M.; Paelke, V.; Reinhold, S.; Reimann, C.; Zauner, R. (2002). AMIRE-authoring mixed reality. Augmented Reality Toolkit, The First IEEE International Workshop (2).

Hampshire, A.; Seichter, H.; Grasset, R.; Billinghurst, M. (2006). Augmented reality authoring: generic context from programmer to designer. 18th Australia conference on Computer-Human Interaction: Design: Activities, Artefacts and Environments, (409-412).

Hornecker, E.; Dunser, A. (2007). Supporting Early Literacy with Augmented BooksExperiences with an Exploratory Study. German Society of Informatics Annual conference (GI- Jahrestagung).

Hsiao, K.; Rashvand, H. F. (2011). Body Language and Augmented Reality Learning Environment. 2011 Fifth FTRA International Conference on Multimedia and Ubiquitous Engineering. (246-250).

Huang, F.; Zhou, Y.; Yu, Y.; Wang, Z.; Du, S. (2011). Piano AR: A Markerless Augmented Reality Based Piano Teaching System. 2011 Third International Conference on Intelligent HumanMachine Systems and Cybernetics, (47- 52).

Johnson, L.; Smith, R.; Willis, H.; Levine, A.; Haywood, K. (2011). The 2011 Horizon Report. Austin, Texas: The New Media Consortium.

Johnson, L.; Levine, A.; Smith, R. (2009). Horizon Report 2009. Texas: The New Media Consortium.

Johnson, L. F.; Levine, A.; Smith, R.; Stone, S. (2010). The Horizon report: 2010 edition. Texas: The New Media Consortium.

Juan, C.; Beatrice, F.; Cano, J. (2008). An Augmented Reality System for Learning the Interior of the Human Body. IEEE Computer Society Eighth IEEE International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies, (186-189).

Kalawsky, R. S.; Hill, K.; Stedmon, A.W.; Cook, C. A.; Young, A. (2000). Experimental research into human cognitive. Processing in an augmented reality environment for embedded training systems. Virtual Reality, 5 (3), (9-46).

Kamarainen, A. M.; Metcalf, S.; Grotzer, T.; Browne, A.; Mazzuca, D.; Tutwiler, M. S.; Dede, C. (2013). EcoMOBILE: Integrating augmented reality and probe ware with environmental education field trips. Computers & Education.

Kaufmann, H. (2004). Geometry Education with Augmented Reality. Vienna University of Technology.

Kaufmann, H.; Schmalstieg, D. (2003). Mathematics and geometry education with collaborative augmented reality. Computers & Graphics, 27 (3), (339- 345).

Kerawalla, L.; Luckin, R.; Seljeflot, S.; Woolard, A. (2006). Making it real: exploring the potential of augmented reality for teaching primary school science. Virtual Reality, 10 (3-4), (163- 174).

Klopfer, E.; Perry, J.; Squire, K.; MingFong, J. (2005). Collaborative Learning through Augmented Reality Role Playing. International Society of the Learning Sciences, (311-316).

Klopfer, E.; Squire, K. (2007). Environmental Detectives—the development of an augmented reality platform for environmental simulations Educational Technology Research and Development, 56 (2), (203 -228).

Lampe, M.; Hinske, S. (2007). Integrating interactive learning experiences into augmented toy environments. Pervasive Learning Workshop at the Pervasive Conference, May.

Lang, U.; Wössner, U. (2004). Virtual and Augmented Reality Developments for Engineering Applications. European Congress on Computational Methods in Applied Sciences and Engineering, ECCOMAS 2004, Jyväskylä.

Liarokapis, F.; Anderson, E. (2010). Using Augmented Reality as a Medium to Assist Teaching in Higher Education. Proc of the 31st Annual Conference of the European Association for Computer Graphics (Eurographics 2010), Education Program, Norrkoping, Sweden.

Liarokapis, F.; Mourkoussis, N.; White, M.; Darcy, J.; Sifniotis, M.; Petridis, P. (2004). Web3D and augmented reality to support engineering education. World Transactions on Engineering and Technology Education, 3 (1).

Lin, T.; Duh, H.B.; Li, N.; Wang, H.; Tsai, C. (2013). An investigation of learners’ collaborative knowledge construction performances and behavior patterns in an augmented reality simulation system. Computers & Education, 68, (314 -321).

Luckin, R.; Plowman, L.; Laurillard, D.; Stratfold, M.; Taylor, J.; Corben, S. (2001). Narrative evolution: learning from students’ talk about species variation. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 12, (100-123).

MacIntyre, B.; Gandy, M.; Dow, S.; Bolter, J. D. (2004). DART: a toolkit for rapid design exploration of augmented reality experiences. 17th annual ACM symposium on User interface software and technology (197-206).

MacIntyre, B.; Bolter, J.D.; Moreno, E.; Hannigan, B. (2001). Augmented reality as a new media experience. Augmented Reality. IEEE and ACM International Symposium on, (197-206).

Martín, S.; Diaz, G.; Sancristobal, E.; Gil, R.; Castro, M.; Peire, J. (2009). Supporting m-learning: The location challenge. IADIS Mobile Learning Conference.

Martin, S.; Lorenzo, E. J.; Rodriguez-Artacho, M.; Ros, S.; Hernandez, R.; Castro, M. (2012). Ubiquitous anotation and a collaborative open mobile augmented reality. IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference (EDUCON); (1 -5).

Matt Dunleavy, C. D.; Mitchell, R. (2012). Affordances and Limitations of Immersive Participatory. Augmented Reality Simulations for Teaching and Learning, 18 (1), (7-22).

Metaio Augmented Reality Products & Solutions (2011). Metaio-SDKAugmented Reality 3D.

Miglino, O.; Walker, R. (2010). Teaching to teach with technology-a project to encourage take-up of advanced technology in education. ProcediaSocial and Behavioral Sciences, 2 (2), (2492 -2496).

Milgram, P.; Takemura, H.; Utsumi, A.; Kishino, F. (1994). Augmented Reality: A class of displays on the reality-virtuality continuum. Telemanipulator and Telepresence Technologies, 2351, 11.

Papagiannakis, G.; Singh, G.; MagnenatThalmann, N. (2008). A survey of mobile and wireless technologies for augmented reality systems. Computer Animation and Virtual Worlds, 19 (1), (3 -22).

Pemberton, L.; Winter, M. (2009). Collaborative Augmented Reality in Schools. The International Society of the Learning Sciences, 2, (109-111).

Roblyer, M. D.; Edwards, J.; Havriluk, M. A. (2006). Integrating educational technology into teaching. Pearson/ Merrill Prentice Hall.

Rohaya, D.; Rambli, A.; Matcha, W.; Sulaiman, S.; Nayan, M. Y. (2012). Design and Development of an Interactive Augmented Reality Edutainment Storybook for Preschool IERI Procedia, 2, (802 -807).

Santos, I. M.; Ali, N. (2011). Exploring the uses of mobile phones to support informal learning. Education and Information Technologies, 17 (2), (187 -203).

Seichter, H.; Looser, J.; Billinghurst, M. (2008). ComposAR: An intuitive tool for authoring AR applications, (177-178).

Shelton, B. E. (2002). Augmented reality and education: Current projects and the potential for classroom learning. New Horizons for Learning, 9 (1).

Shelton, B. E.; Hedley, N. R. (2002). Using augmented reality for teaching EarthSun relationships to undergraduate geography students. Augmented Reality Toolkit, The First IEEE International Workshop, (8).

Stewart Smith, H. (2012). Education with Augmented Reality: AR textbooks released in Japan (video) | ZDNet.

Szalavári, Z.; Schmalstieg, D.; Fuhrmann, A.; Gervautz, M. (1998). Studierstube: An environment for collaboration in augmented reality. Virtual Reality, 3 (1), (37-48).

Van Der Vleuten, C. P. M. (1996). The assessment of professional competence: developments, research and practical implications. Advances in Health Sciences Education, 1 (1), (41-67).

Van’t Hooft, M.; Swan, K. (2007). Ubiquitous computing in education: Invisible technology, visible impact. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.

Virvou, M.; Alepis, E. (2005). Mobile educational features in authoring tools for personalised tutoring. Computers & Education, 44 (1), (53-68).

Williams, M.; Jones, O.; Fleuriot, C.; Wood, L. (2005). Children and emerging wireless technologies. Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems-CHI ‘05, (819).

Wojciechowski, R.; Cellary, W. (2013). Evaluation of learners’ attitude toward learning in ARIES augmented reality environments. Computers & Education.

Wu, H.; Lee, S.W.; Chang, H.; Liang, J. (2013). Current status, opportunities and challenges of augmented reality in education. Computers & Education, 62, (41 -49).

Ying, L. (2010). Augmented Reality for remote education. Advanced Computer Theory and Engineering (ICACTE), 2010 3rd International Conference on Advanced Computer Theory and Engineering, 3 (3), (187-191).

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5944/ried.17.2.12686

24 de abril de 2017

A educação a distância como oportunidade de formação profissional e tecnológica

A educação a distância como oportunidade de formação profissional e tecnológica

Cinara Ourique do Nascimento, Sheyla Costa Rodrigues


A inquietação em torno da oferta da Educação Profissional e Tecnológica a distância moveu-nos a refletir sobre essa realidade de ensino técnico. Traçamos nossa investigação em torno dos polos de apoio presencial, solicitando às professoras coordenadoras que respondessem algumas questões sobre o programa Rede e-Tec Brasil e os cursos técnicos a distancia ofertados pelo IFSul/CaVG. Através da metodologia do Discurso do Sujeito Coletivo, foi possível conhecer o discurso dessa coletividade propiciando uma interlocução entre as vozes das coordenadoras e as dos teóricos que fundamentaram o estudo. O discurso coletivo destaca a importância da qualificação profissional para a melhoria de vida e para o desenvolvimento econômico e social dos municípios, bem como, a aceitação da educação a distancia como oportunidade de acesso àqueles que se encontram distanciados dos bancos escolares regulares.

Palabras clave

Educação a distância; educação profissional e tecnológica; política pública.

Texto completo:



Almeida, M. E. B. Educação à distância no Brasil: diretrizes políticas, fundamentos e práticas. Belo Horizonte, MG [em línea] Disponível em http://www.ich. pucminas.br/pged/interact/viewfile. php/1/file/17/51/PDF.pdf (consulta 2013, 10 de março).

Antunes, J. L. (1996). CAVG – História de um patronato. Pelotas, RS: UFPEL.

Brasil. (2005). Presidência da Republica. Decreto 5.622. Brasília: Casa Civil [em línea] Disponível em: http://www. planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/_Ato2004- 2006/2005/decreto/D5622.htm (consulta 2013, 10 de março).

Brasil. (2007). Presidência da Republica. Decreto 6.301. Brasília: Casa Civil [em línea] Disponível em: http://www. planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/_Ato2007- 010/2007/Decreto/D6301impressao. htm (consulta 2013, 10 de março).

Brasil. (2009). Ministério da Educação. Centenário da Rede Federal de Educação Profissional e Tecnológica. [em línea] Disponível em: http://portal. mec.gov.br/setec/arquivos/centenario/ historico_educacao_profissional.pdf (consulta 2013, 05 de abril).

Brasil. (2011). Presidência da Republica. Decreto 7.589. Brasília: Casa Civil. [em línea] Disponível em: http://www. planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/_Ato2011- 2014/2011/Decreto/D7589.htm (consulta 2013, 16 de abril).

Brasil. (2012). Ministério da Educação. Parecer CNE/CEB n 11. [em línea] Disponível em: http://portal.mec. gov.br/index.php?option=com_ content&id=17576&Itemid=866 (consulta 2013, 16 de abril).

Belloni, M. L. (2008). Educação a Distância. Campinas, SP: Autores Associados.

Castells, M. (2002). Sociedade em Rede. São Paulo: Paz e Terra.

Capra, F. (1989). O ponto de Mutação. São Paulo: Pensamento-Cultrix.

Gil, A. C. (1996). Como Elaborar Projetos de Pesquisa. São Paulo: Atlas. IFSUL. Regimento Interno Campus Pelotas Visconde da Graça. [em línea] Disponível em: http://www.ifsul.edu.br/index. php?option=com_docman&Itemid=38 (consulta 2013, 02 de maio).

Lakatos, E. M.; Marconi, M. A. (1991). Fundamentos de Metodologia Científica. São Paulo: Atlas.

Lefevre, F.; Lefevre, A. M. (2012). Pesquisa de Representação Social – um enfoque qualitativo. Brasília, DF: Liber Livro Editora.

Lefevre, F.; Lefevre, A. M. (2005). O Discurso do Sujeito Coletivo – Um novo enfoque em pesquisa qualitativa (Desdobramentos). Caxias do Sul, RS: Educs.

Martins, G. A. (2002). Manual para elaboração de monografia e dissertações. São Paulo: Atlas.

Mattar, João. (2012). Tutoria e Interação em Educação a Distância. São Paulo: Cengage Learning.

Maturana, H. R. (1997). A Ontologia da Realidade. Belo Horizonte: UFMG.

Maturana, H. R. (1999). Transformación – En la convivência. Santiago: Dolmen.

Maturana, H. R.; Zoller, G. V. (2004). Amar e Brincar – Fundamentos esquecidos do Humano. São Paulo: Palas Athena.

Maturana, H. R. (2006). Cognição, Ciência e Vida Cotidiana. Belo Horizonte: UFMG.

Mizukami, M. G. N. (2004). Aprendizagem da docência: algumas contribuições de L. S. Shulman. Revista Educação, 2 (29), (33- 49). [em línea] Disponível em: HTTP:// www.ufsm.br/ce/revista (consulta 2013, 02 Junho).

Moore, M.; Kearsley, G. (2008). Educação a Distância – uma visão integrada. São Paulo: Cengage Learning.

Nascimento, C. O.; Moreira, I. G.; Cancela, M. P. N.; Sainz, R. L. (2011). O Desenho Organizacional da EaD: a experiência no âmbito do NETTAD. Anais. UFMG. Ouro Preto. VIII Congresso Brasileiro de Ensino Superior a Distância.

Silva, C. J. R. (2009). Institutos Federais lei 11.892, de 29/11/2008: comentários e reflexões. Natal: IFRN. [em línea] Disponível em: http://portal.mec.gov. br/index.php?option=com_content& view=article&id=12503&Itemid=841 (consulta 2013, 14 de Maio).

Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those Who Understand: Knowledge Growth in Teaching. Educational Researcher, 2 (15), (4-14). [em línea] Disponível em: http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0013- 189X%28198602%2915%3A2%3C4%3A TWUKGI%3E2.0.CO%3B2-X (consulta 2013, 02 de Junho).

Pacheco, E. M.; Pereira, L. A. C.; Sobrinho, M. D. (2010). Institutos Federais de Educação, Ciência e Tecnologia: Limites e Possibilidades. Linhas Críticas, 30 (16), (71-88). [em línea] Disponível em: http://seer.bce.unb.br/index.php/ linhascriticas/article/view/1429/1065 (consulta 2013, 10 de março).

Pacheco, E. M. (2010). Os Institutos Federais - Uma Revolução na Educação Profissional e Tecnológica. Brasília: MEC [em línea] Disponível em: http://portal. mec.gov.br/index.php?option=com_co ntent&view=article&id=12503&Item id=841 (consulta 2013, 05 de março).

Rodrigues, S. C.; Brod, F. A.; Nascimento, C. O. (2013). A Mediação Pedagógica na Educação Profissional a Distância, Ribeiro e Henning, Diálogos na Educação em Ciências. Rio Grande: Editora da FURG, (41-50).

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5944/ried.17.2.12682

21 de abril de 2017

As dimensões da avaliação em cursos online: reflexões e importância

As dimensões da avaliação em cursos online: reflexões e importância

Adriana Aparecida de Lima Terçariol, Elisangela Aparecida Bulla Ikeshoji, Jeong Cir Deborah Zaduski, Ana Lucia Farão Carneiro Siqueira, Fernanda Sutkus de Oliveira Mello


Os cursos desenvolvidos na modalidade a distância, via Internet, pelo seu caráter diferenciado e pelos desafios que enfrentam, devem ser acompanhados e avaliados em todos os seus aspectos, de forma sistemática, contínua e abrangente. Uma avaliação constante desses cursos se torna útil e necessária para o seu aprimoramento constante e sua continuidade. Este artigo apresenta como principal finalidade descrever e analisar as dimensões da avaliação em cursos online, especialmente, implementados no Ensino Superior. A metodologia escolhida para desenvolver este estudo se pautou em estudos de revisão bibliográfica sistemática, na base de dados Scielo, contou também com apoio de trabalhos realizados por estudiosos sobre o tema e as experiências vivenciadas no cotidiano de trabalho das pesquisadoras. Como principais resultados, o estudo aponta que é fundamental que se perceba que os cursos a distância que se desenvolvem de forma exclusivamente online, apresentam um caráter diferenciado e pelos desafios que enfrentam, devem ser acompanhados e avaliados em todos os seus aspectos, de forma sistemática, contínua e abrangente. Uma avaliação constante desses cursos auxilia em sua continuidade, pois dela emergem as deficiências e as possíveis ações no sentido de aprimoramento do processo. Nesse sentido, o processo de avaliação nesse contexto deve contemplar minimamente quatro dimensões: a avaliação da aprendizagem, a avaliação do material didático, a avaliação da infraestrutura tecnológica e a avaliação institucional.

Palabras clave

Educação a Distância; Avaliação; Ensino Superior.


Abreu-e-Lima, D. M de, Alves, M. N. (2011). O feedback e sua importância no processo de tutoria a distância. Pro-Posições, Campinas, v. 22, n. 2, p. 189-205, Ago. 2011. Recuperado de: .
Brasil. Ministério da Educação e Cultura. (2004). Lei 10.861 de 14 de abril de 2004. Recuperado de: .
Fernandez, C. T. (2009). Os métodos de preparação de material impresso para EaD. In: Litto, F. M., Formiga, M. (Orgs.). Educação a distância: o estado da arte. São Paulo: Pearson Education do Brasil, p. 395 – 402.
Funo, L. B. A., Elstermann, Anna-Katharina, Souza, M. G. de. (2015). Fóruns no ambiente Teleduc: reflexões sobre o papel dos mediadores e estratégias de gerenciamento de debates. Rev. bras. linguist. apl., Belo Horizonte, v. 15, n. 1, p. 31-59, Mar. 2015. Recuperado de: .
Hoffmann, J. (1993). Avaliação mediadora: uma prática em construção da pré-escola à universidade. Porto Alegre: Mediação.
Inep. Instituto Nacional de Estudos e Pesquisas Educacionais Anísio Teixeira (2015). Recuperado de: .
Laguardia, J., Casanova, A., Machado, R. (2010). A experiência de aprendizagem on-line em um curso de qualificação profissional em saúde. Trab. educ. saúde, Rio de Janeiro, v. 8, n. 1, p. 97-122, June 2010. Recuperado de: .
Libâneo, J. C. (1991). Didática. São Paulo: Cortez.
Luckesi, C. C. (2002). Avaliação da aprendizagem escolar: estudos e proposições. São Paulo: Cortez.
Luckesi, C. C. (2008). Avaliação da aprendizagem escolar: estudos e proposições. São Paulo: Cortez.
Miranda, F. D. S. S. (2014). Integração das tecnologias digitais da informação e comunicação em contextos educacionais: análise de três momentos de um curso oficial de formação de professores. Trab. linguist. apl., Campinas, v. 53, n. 1, p. 55-77, Jun. 2014. Recuperado de: .
Moura, M. L. S. de, Ferreira, M. C., Paine, P. A. (1998). Manual de elaboração de projetos de pesquisa. Rio de Janeiro: EDUERJ.
Neves, C. M. C. (2003). Referenciais de Qualidade para Cursos a Distância. Brasília: Ministério da Educação, Secretaria de Educação a Distância.
Oliveira, G. P. de. Estratégias multidimensionais para a avaliação da aprendizagem em cursos on-line. Ensaio: aval. pol. públ. Educ., Rio de Janeiro, v. 18, n. 66, p. 105-138, Mar. 2010. Recuperado de: .
Rozenfeld, C. C. F. (2013). Planejamento de cursos online para professores de alemão: parâmetros em mapa conceitual. Pandaemonium ger., São Paulo, v. 16, n. 22, p. 279-303, Dez. 2013. Recuperado de: .
Santos, A. N., Mercado, L. P. L. (2010). Arquivamento e comunicação de imagens radiológicas na formação médica online. Rev. bras. educ. med., Rio de Janeiro, v. 34, n. 4, p. 525-534, Dez. 2010. Recuperado de: .
Teixeira, D. E. et al . (2015). Avaliação institucional em Ciências Biológicas nas modalidades presencial e a distância: percepção dos egressos. Ensaio: aval. pol. públ .Educ., Rio de Janeiro, = v. 23, n. 86, p. 159-180, Fev. 2015. Recuperado de: .

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5944/ried.19.2.14753

19 de abril de 2017

Emergent leadership: is e-leadership importance in the quality of virtual education? / Liderazgos emergentes: ¿es importante el e-liderazgo en la calidad de la educación virtual?

Emergent leadership: is e-leadership importance in the quality of virtual education? / Liderazgos emergentes: ¿es importante el e-liderazgo en la calidad de la educación virtual?

Ingrid Garcia


In the last years, the school management systems have become an important tool for the efficacy of the e-leader. These systems emphasize an information and e-communication flow between all organization departments. The aim of this study is to emphasize how the new technologies can help the teachers. Also, the use of the information and communication in schools and the future of the teaching regarding to the new functions and roles of the teachers in the next stage of distance education is analyzed. The e-leader or e-mentor is specifically studied. This paper defines and analyzes a new emergent paradigm of leadership. The leadership that has arisen more than one decade ago. Special attention to the next topics is paid: The first section is a wide review of the theoretical framework in order to understand this new way of work related to the tutors and the leader in the virtual environment, also, the literature to construct a global comprehension of what constitutes the e-leadership in the organizations is reviewed. The second section analyzes the main strengths and skills of the e-leader and his importance in the distance education management. We focus on the delimitation of dimensions to characterize the different types of virtual teams. Finally, the general question which guides this research is: Will the virtual leadership bring along with it a real progress for the e-education? We live in the e-generation.
En últimos años, los sistemas de gestión de las escuelas se han convertido en una herramienta importante para la eficacia de e-líder. Estos sistemas enfatizan un flujo de información y la e-comunicación entre todos los departamentos de las organizaciones. El propósito de este estudio es el de enfatizar cómo las nuevas tecnologías pueden ayudar a los maestros(as). Se examinan también el uso de la información y la comunicación, en los centros educativos, el futuro de la enseñanza con respecto a las nuevas funciones y roles de los maestros(as) en los próximos escenarios de la educación a distancia. Se estudia específicamente el e-líder o e-mentor. El artículo define y analiza un nuevo paradigma emergente de liderazgo, el e-liderazgo, que ha surgido hace más de una década. Se presta una especial atención a los siguientes temas: La primera sección es una extensa revisión del marco teórico, con el fin de comprender esta nueva forma de trabajo relacionado con los tutores y el líder en el entorno virtual; también revisamos la literatura para construir una comprensión global de lo que constituye el e-liderazgo en las organizaciones. La segunda sección analiza las principales fortalezas y habilidades del e-líder y su importancia en la gestión de la educación a distancia. Nos centramos en la delimitación de las dimensiones para caracterizar los diferentes tipos de equipos virtuales. Por último, la pregunta general que orienta esta investigación es si: ¿El liderazgo virtual traerá consigo un progreso real para la e-educación? Vivimos en la e-generación.

Palabras clave

Distance education, leadership, virtual environments, web based instruction / Educación a distancia; liderazgo; entornos virtuales; instrucción basada en la web.

Texto completo:



Anderson, A., McEwan, R., Bal, J., & Carletta, J. (2007). Virtual team meetings: An analysis of communication and context. Computers in Human Behavior, 23(5), 2558-2580.
Clark, R. (2000). Evaluating distance education: Strategies and cautions. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 1(1), 3-16.
Carreno, I. (2008). E-mentoring and e-leadership importance in the quality of distance and virtual education Century XXI. Paper from m-ICTE 2009: Research, Reflections and Innovations in Integrating ICT in Education. Retrieved from http://www.formatex.org/micte2009/book/728-732.pdf.
Carreno, I. (2009 August) E-tutor and Distance University of XXI Century. In Seminario Internacional RED-U 2-08: “La acción tutorial en la Universidad del siglo XXI”.
Carreno, I. (2011). Management in educational networks: the importance of virtual leader. RELADA-Revista Electrónica de ADA-Madrid, 5(2).
Collaborative, T.S.S.A. (2001). Technology standards for school administrators.
Darabi, A., & Sikorski, E. (2006). 14 Validated Competencies for Distance Teaching. Distance Education, 27(1), 105-122(18) Publisher: Routledge, part of the Taylor & Francis Group.
Dexter, S. (2008). Leadership for IT in schools. In International handbook of information technology in primary and secondary education, pp. 543-554. Springer US.
Dias, S., Diniz, J., & Hadjileontiadis, L. (2014). E-Learning Exequibility in the Information and Knowledge Society. In Towards an Intelligent Learning Management System Under Blended Learning, Springer International Publishing, pp. 3-19.
García Aretio, L. (2003). Comunidades de aprendizaje en entornos virtuales: La comunidad iberoamericana de la CUED. In M. Barajas (Coord.). La tecnología educativa en la educación superior, (pp. 171-199). Madrid: McGraw-Hill.
Hallinger, P. (2006). Leading educational change: Reflections on the practice of instructional and transformational leadership. Cambridge Journal of Education, 33(3), 329-352.
Hallinger, P., & Snidvongs, K. (2005). Adding value to school leadership and management. A review of trends in the development of managers in the education and business sectors. Nottingham, England: National College for School Leadership. Retrieved from http://www.ncsl.org.uk/media/1CA/77/ adding-value-to-school-leadership-andmanagement.pdf
Johnson, P., Heimann, V., & O’Neill, K. (2001). The “wonderland” of virtual teams. Journal of Workplace Learning, 13(1), 24–30.
Lu, M., Watson-Manheim, M., Chudoba, K., & Wynn, E. (2005). Virtuality and Team Performance: Understanding the Impact of Variety of Practices. Journal of Global Information Technology Management, 9(1). McFarlane, D. A. (2011). The leadership roles of distance learning administrators (DLAs) in increasing educational value and quality perceptions. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, 14(4).
Malvey, D., & Hamby, E. (2004). E-Leadership: An Investigational Study of a New 21 st Century Leadership Phenomenon-Organizational Strategies for Transitioning to E-Leadership Systems.
Association on Employment Practices and Principles, 169. Mladenova, M. & Kirkova, D. (2014). Role of Student Interaction Interface in WebBased Distance Learning. In ACHI 2014, The Seventh International Conference on Advances in Computer-Human Interactions, pp. 307-312.
Moyle, K. (2006). Leadership and learning with ICT: Voices from the profession. Teaching Australia-Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership.
Peters, L., & Manz, C. (2007). Identifying antecedents of virtual team collaboration. Team Performance Management, 13(3/4), 117-129.
Silvio, J. (2004). Towards the articulation of learning and non-virtual. Conference offered at the 3rd International Congress on University Teaching and Innovation. June 30 to July 2, 2004. Gerona, Spain.
Richey, R., Fields, D., & Foxon, M. (2001). Instructional design competencies: The standards (No. IR-111). Syracuse, NY: ERIC Clearinghouse on Information & Technology.
Sun, P., Tsai, R., Finger, G., Chen, Y., & Yeh, D. (2008). What drives a successful e-Learning? An empirical investigation of the critical factors influencing learner satisfaction. Computers & Education, 50(4), 1183-1202.
Zenun, M., Loureiro, G., & Araujo, C. (2007). The Effects of Teams’ Co-location on Project Performance. In Complex Systems Concurrent Engineering, London: Springer, 717-726.

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5944/ried.18.1.13798

18 de abril de 2017

How millennials are changing the way we learn: the state of the art of ict integration in education / Cómo los millennials están cambiando el modo de aprender: estado del arte de la integración de las TIC en educación

How millennials are changing the way we learn: the state of the art of ict integration in education / Cómo los millennials están cambiando el modo de aprender: estado del arte de la integración de las TIC en educación

Ingrid Noguera Fructuoso


The Millennials generation is changing the way to learn, promoting that educational institutions try to better adapt to the young's needs through the incorporation of educational technologies. Based on this premise, we have reviewed prominent reports about the integration of TIC on education in order to demonstrate how the education is changing and is going to change, to satisfy the needs of the Millennials with the support of the TIC. We conclude that the most of the investments have resulted in an increase of computers and internet access, with teachers that reproduce tradicional approaches of education and and where the virtual learning is seen as a complement of the face-to-face training. Although it seems that the use of TIC is not revolutionizing the learning, the personalization, collaborations and ubiquity of learning are being easier.
La generación de los Millennials está cambiando la forma de aprender, promoviendo que las instituciones educativas traten de adaptarse mejor a las necesidades de los jóvenes mediante la incorporación de las tecnologías en educación. Partiendo de esta premisa, hemos revisado los informes prominentes sobre la integración de las TIC en la educación, con el objetivo de evidenciar cómo la educación está cambiando y va a cambiar, para satisfacer las necesidades de los Millennials con apoyo de las TIC. Llegamos a la conclusión que la mayor parte de las inversiones han dado lugar a un aumento de ordenadores y de acceso a Internet, con profesores que reproducen enfoques tradicionales de educación y en el que la enseñanza virtual está vista como un complemento a la formación presencial. Si bien parece que el uso de las TIC no está revolucionando el aprendizaje, se está facilitando la personalización, la colaboración y la ubicuidad del aprendizaje.

Palabras clave

learning; teaching and training; information and communication technology; technological change; social chang / Aprendizaje; enseñanza y formación; TIC; cambio tecnológico; cambio social; enseñanza a distancia.

Texto completo:



Ala-Mutka, K. (2011). Mapping Digital Competence: Towards a Conceptual Understanding. Seville: Institute for Prospective Technological Studies. Retrieved from http://ftp.jrc.es/ EURdoc/JRC67075_TN.pdf.
Ala-Mutka, K., Bacigalupo, M., Kluzer, S., Pascu, C., Punie, Y., & Redecker, C. (2009). Learning 2.0: The impact of web 2.0 innovations on education and training in Europe, Final report. Seville: Institute for Prospective Technological Studies. Retrieved from http://ftp.jrc. es/EURdoc/JRC55629.pdf.
Ala-Mutka, K., Redecker, C., Punie, Y., Ferrari, A., Cachia, R., & Centeno, C. (2010). The future of learning: European teachers’ visions report on a foresight consultation at the 2010 eTwinning conference, Seville 5-7 February. JRC Technical Notes. Retrieved from http:// ftp.jrc.es/EURdoc/JRC59775_TN.pdf
Allen, I. E., & Seaman, J., (2013). Changing course: Ten years of tracking online education in the United States. Newburyport, MA.
Balanskat, A. (2009). Study of the impact of technology in primary schools: Synthesis Report. European Commission. Retrieved from http://insight.eun.org/ ww/en/pub/insight/minisites/steps. htm.
Balanskat, A., Blamire, R., & Kefala, S. (2006). The ICT Impact Report: A Review of Studies of ICT Impact on Schools in Europe. European Schoolnet. Retrieved from http://insight.eun.org/ shared/data/pdf/impact_study.pdf
BECTA. (2006). Emerging technologies for learning. BECTA. Retrieved from http:// dera.ioe.ac.uk/1501/1/becta_2006_ emergingtechnologies_vol1_report.pdf
BECTA. (2007). Emerging technologies for learning. BECTA. Retrieved from http:// dera.ioe.ac.uk/1502/2/becta_2007_ emergingtechnologies_vol2_report.pdf
BECTA. (2008). Emerging technologies for learning. BECTA. Retrieved from http:// www.mmiweb.org.uk/publications/ict/ emerging_tech03.pdf Brown, J. S. (2000). Growing up digitally: How the web changes work, education and the ways people learn, Change, 32(2), 10-20.
Condie, R., & Munro, B. (2007). British Educational Communications and Technology Agency (BECTA), corp creator, The impact of ICT in schools: Landscape review. BECTA Research. Retrieved from http:// dera.ioe.ac.uk/1627/1/becta_2007_ landscapeimpactreview_report.pdf.
Conole, G., De Laat, M., Dillon, T., & Darby, J. (2006). JISC LXP: Student experiences of technologies, Final report of the JISC-funded LXP project. Southampton, University of Southampton. Retrieved from www.jisc. ac.uk/elp_learneroutcomes.html.
Davidson, C., & Goldberg, D. (2010). The Future of Thinking: Learning Institutions in a Digital Age. Chicago: The John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation. Retrieved from http://goo. gl/jVC7n.
European Commission. (2006). Special Eurobarometer 249: E-communications Household Survey. Brussels: European Commission. Retrieved from http:// ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/archives/ ebs/ebs_249_en.pdf.
European Commission. (2007). Special Eurobarometer 274: E-communications Household Survey. Brussels: European Commission. Retrieved from http:// ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/archives/ ebs/ebs_274_en.pdf.
European Commission. (2008a). Special Eurobarometer 293: E-communications Household Survey. Brussels: European Commission. Retrieved from http:// ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/archives/ ebs/ebs_293_full_en.pdf.
European Commission. (2008b). Commission Staff Working Document. The use of ICT to support innovation and lifelong learning for all–A report on progress, SEC (2008) 2629 final. Retrieved from http://goo.gl/O0gSf.
European Commission. (2010). Special Eurobarometer 335: E-communications Household Survey. Brussels: European Commission. Retrieved from http:// ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/archives/ ebs/ebs_335_en.pdf.
European Commission. (2011). Special Eurobarometer 362: E-communications Household Survey. Brussels: European Commission. Retrieved from http:// ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/archives/ ebs/ebs_362_en.pdf.
European Commission. (2012). Special Eurobarometer 381: E-communications Household Survey. Brussels: European Commission. Retrieved from http:// ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/archives/ ebs/ebs_381_en.pdf.
Eurydice. (2011). Key Data on Learning and Innovation through ICT at School in Europe 2011. Brussels: EACEA P9 Eurydice. Retrieved from http://eacea. ec.europa.eu/education/eurydice/ documents/key_data_series/129en.pdf
Eynon, R. (2009). Mapping young people’s uses of technology in their own contexts–A nationally representative survey. Coventry, Becta. Retrieved from http://dera.ioe.ac.uk/1528/
Fundación Telefónica (2012). Aprender con tecnología Investigación internacional sobre modelos educativos de futuro. Madrid, Barcelona: Fundación Telefónica, Ariel. Retrieved from http:// goo.gl/Cz73H.
García, I., Peña-López, I., Johnson, L., Smith, R., Levine, A., & Haywood, K. (2010). Horizon Report: 2010 Iberoamerican Edition. Austin, Texas: The New Media Consortium and the Universitat Oberta de Catalunya. Retrieved from http:// www.nmc.org/pdf/2010-HorizonReport-ib.pdf.
Glenn, M. (2008). The future of higher education: How technology will shape learning. Economist Intelligence Unit, New Media Consortium. Retrieved from http://graphics.eiu.com/upload/ The%20Future%20of%20Universities. pdf.
Hofstetter, F. (2000). Multimedia Literacy Textbook. New York: McGraw-Hill Education.
Horrigan, J. B. (2007). A Typology of Information and Communication Technology Users. Washington, DC, Pew Internet & American Life Project. Retrieved from http://www.pewinternet. org/pdfs/PIP_ICT_Typology.pdf.
Ipsos MORI on behalf of JISC (2008). Great Expectations of ICT: How Higher Education Institutions are measuring up. London, Ipsos MORI. Retrieved from http://goo.gl/wkAfl.
Johnson, L. (2004). The 2004 Horizon Report. Austin, Texas: The New Media Consortium. Retrieved from http:// www.fdi.vt.edu/online-resources/2004- Horizon-Report.pdf.
Johnson, L., Adams, S., & Cummins, M. (2012). The NMC Horizon Report: 2012 Higher Education Edition. Austin, Texas: The New Media Consortium. Retrieved from http://www.fdi.vt.edu/ online-resources/2012-Horizon-Report. pdf.
Johnson, L., Levine, A., & Smith, R. (2007). The 2007 Horizon Report. Austin, Texas: The New Media Consortium. Retrieved from http://www.fdi.vt.edu/onlineresources/2007-Horizon-Report.pdf.
Johnson, L., Levine, A., & Smith, R. (2008). The 2008 Horizon Report. Austin, Texas: The New Media Consortium. Retrieved from http://www.fdi.vt.edu/onlineresources/2008-Horizon-Report.pdf.
Johnson, L., Levine, A., & Smith, R. (2008). The Horizon Report: 2008 AustraliaNew Zealand Edition. Austin, Texas: The New Media Consortium. Retrieved from http://www.nmc.org/pdf/2008- Horizon-Report-ANZ.pdf.
Johnson, L., Levine, A., & Smith, R. (2009). The 2009 Horizon Report. Austin, Texas: The New Media Consortium. Retrieved from http://www.fdi.vt.edu/ online-resources/2009-Horizon-Report. pdf.
Johnson, L., Levine, A., Smith, R., Smythe, T., & Stone, S. (2009). The Horizon Report: 2009 Australia-New Zealand Edition. Austin, Texas: The New Media Consortium. Retrieved from http:// www.nmc.org/pdf/2009-HorizonReport-ANZ-Edition.pdf.
Johnson, L., Levine, A., Smith, R., & Stone, S. (2010). The 2010 Horizon Report. Austin, Texas: The New Media Consortium. Retrieved from http:// www.fdi.vt.edu/online-resources/2010- Horizon-Report.pdf.
Johnson, L., & Smith, R. (2005). The 2005 Horizon Report. Austin, Texas: The New Media Consortium. Retrieved from http://www.fdi.vt.edu/onlineresources/2005-Horizon-Report.pdf.
Johnson, L., & Smith, R. (2006). The 2006 Horizon Report. Austin, Texas: The New Media Consortium. Retrieved from http://www.fdi.vt.edu/onlineresources/2006-Horizon-Report.pdf.
Johnson, L., Smith, R., Levine, A., & Haywood, K. (2010). The 2010 Horizon Report: Australia-New Zealand Edition. Austin, Texas: The New Media Consortium. Retrieved from http://www.nmc.org/ pdf/2010-Horizon-Report-ANZ.pdf. Johnson, L., Smith, R., Willis, H.,
Levine, A., & Haywood, K. (2011). The 2011 Horizon Report. Austin, Texas: The New Media Consortium. Retrieved from http:// www.fdi.vt.edu/online-resources/2011- Horizon-Report.pdf.
Jones, S., & Fox, S. (2009). Generations Online in 2009. Washington, DC, Pew Internet & American Life Project. Retrieved from http://www.pewinternet. org/Reports/2009/Generations-Onlinein-2009.aspx.
Kozma, R. (2003). ICT and educational change. A global phenomenon. In R. Kozma, (Ed.). Technology, innovation, and educational change: A global perspective. Eugene, OR, International Society for Educational Technology.
Lenhart, A., Purcell, K., Smith, A., & Zickuhr, K. (2010). Social media & mobile internet use among teens and young adults, Pew Internet & American Life Project, 1-51. Retrieved from http://goo.gl/GQvO3.
Means, B., Toyama, Y., Murphy, R., Bakia, M., & Jones, K. (2010). Evaluation of evidence-based practices in online learning: A meta-analysis and review of online learning. Center for Technology in Learning, U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved from http://www. ed.gov/about/offices/list/opepd/ppss/ reports.html.
OECD. (2005). E- learning in Tertiary Education: Where Do We Stand? Paris, France: OECD Publishing. Retrieved from http://www.oecd.org/ dataoecd/27/35/35991871.pdf.
OECD. (2010). Are the New Milleninium Learners Making the Grade? Technology use and education performance in PISA. Centre for Educacional Research and Innovation.
Pedró, F. (2006). The New Millenium Learners: Challenging our Views on ICT and Learning. France, OECD. Retrieved from http://www.oecd.org/edu/nml/.
Pedró, F. (2011). Tecnología y escuela: lo que funciona y por qué. Fundación Santillana. Retrieved from http://goo. gl/U5aui.
Pew Research Center. (2010). Millennials: A Portrait of Generation Next. Retrieved from http://goo.gl/iqIqy.
Pls Ramboll Management. (2004). Studies in the context of de e-learning initiative: virtual models of European Universities. EU Commission, DG Education &. Culture. Retrieved from http://goo.gl/ QQ0Xn.
Punie, Y., &Cabrera, M. (2005). The Future of ICT and Learning in the Knowledge Society -Report on a Joint DG JRC-. DG EAC Workshop held in Seville, 20–21 October. Seville, European Commission Directorate–General Joint Research Centre.
Punie, Y., Zinnbauer, D., & Cabrera, M. (2006). A review of the Impact of ICT on Learning. Working paper prepared for DG EAC. Institute for Prospective Technological Studies (IPTS), JRC, European Commission. Retrieved from http://ipts.jrc.ec.europa.eu/ publications/pub.cfm?id=1746.
Purcell, K., Heaps, A., Buchanan, J., & Friedrich, L. (2013). How Teachers Are Using Technology at Home and in Their Classrooms. Pew Research Center. Retrieved from http://pewinternet. org/Reports/2013/Teachers-andtechnology.
Redecker, C. (2009). Review of Learning 2.0 Practices: Study on the Impact of Web 2.0 Innovations on Education and Training in Europe, JRC Scientific and Technical Report, EUR 23664 EN. Retrieved from ftp://ftp.jrc.es/pub/ EURdoc/JRC49108.pdf.
Redecker, C., Ala-Mutka, K., & Punie, Y. (2010). Learning 2.0–The Impact of Social Media on Learning in Europe. Seville, IPTS. Retrieved from http://ftp. jrc.es/EURdoc/JRC56958.pdf.
Redecker, C., Leis, M., Leendertse, M. Gijsbers, G., Punie, Y., Kirschner, P., Stoyanov, S., & Hoogveld, B. (2010). The Future of Learning: New Ways to Learn New Skills for Future Jobs. Results from an online expert consultation. Retrieved from http://ipts.jrc.ec.europa.eu/ publications/pub.cfm?id=3659.
Redecker, C., Leis, M., Leendertse, M., Punie, Y., Gijsbers, G., Kirschner, P., Stoyanov, S., & Hoogveld, B. (2011). The Future of Learning: Preparing for Change. Seville, Spain, Institute for Prospective Technological Studies, JRC, European Commission. Retrieved from http://ftp. jrc.es/EURdoc/JRC66836.pdf.
Sharples, M., McAndrew, P., Weller, M., Ferguson, R., Fitzgerald, E., Hirst, T., Mor, Y., Gaved, M., & Whitelock, D. (2012). Innovating Pedagogy 2012: Open University Innovation Report 1. Milton Keynes, The Open University.
Smith, A., Rainie, L., & Zickuhr, K. (2011). College students and technology. Pew Internet Research Group. Retrieved from http://goo.gl/G1pFm.
Sola, M., & Murillo, J. F. (Coords.). (2011). Las TIC en la Educación: Realidad y Expectativas. Informe anual 2011. Madrid: Fundación Telefónica, Ariel, Colección Fundación Telefónica. Tapscott, D. (1999). Educating the Net Generation, Educational Leadership, 56(6).
Taylor, P., Parker, K., Lenhart, A., & Patten, E. (2011). The Digital Revolution and Higher Education. Washington DC, Pew Research Center. Retrieved from http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/ files/2011/08/online-learning.pdf.
Underwood, J., Baguley, T., Banyard, P., Dillon, G., Farrington-Flint, L., Hayes, M., Le Geyt, G., Murphy, J., & Selwood, I. (2010). Understanding the Impact of Technology: Learner and School level factors. Coventry, Becta. Retrieved from http://dera.ioe.ac.uk/1434/.
Valiente, O. (2010). 1-1 in Education: Current Practice, International Comparative Research Evidence and Policy Implications, OECD Education Working Papers, 44. Retrieved from http:// dx.doi.org/10.1787/5kmjzwfl9vr2-en.
Zickuhr, K. (2010). Generations 2010. Pew Internet & American Life Survey 2009- 2010. Retrieved from http://goo.gl/ KSM7v.
Zickhur, K. (2011). Generations and their gadgets. Pew Internet & American Life Survey 2010. Retrieved from http:// www.libraryworks.com/bynumbers/ pip_generations_and_gadgets.pdf.
Zickhur, K., & Smith, A., (2012). Digital differences. Pew Internet & American Life Project. Pew Research Center. Retrieved from http://goo.gl/aJ4Yh

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5944/ried.18.1.13800

17 de abril de 2017

Educating Urban Designers using Augmented Reality and Mobile Learning Technologies / Formación de Urbanistas usando Realidad Aumentada y Tecnologías de Aprendizaje Móvil

Educating Urban Designers using Augmented Reality and Mobile Learning Technologies / Formación de Urbanistas usando Realidad Aumentada y Tecnologías de Aprendizaje Móvil

David Fonseca Escudero, Ernest Redondo, Albert Sánchez, Francesc Valls


El presente artículo describe una experiencia educativa usando Realidad Aumentada (RA) en dispositivos móviles para el aprendizaje de conceptos de diseño urbano en estudiantes del Grado de Arquitectura. A tal efecto, se ha diseñado un ejercicio práctico sobre la casuística de un proyecto real, donde los estudiantes deben diseñar una escultura para una plaza pública en función de los parámetros del entorno, debiendo controlar sus parámetros, la forma, escala, localización, materiales, etc. El ejercicio se visualiza y controla mediante plataformas móviles de RA, lo que permite enfatizar un aprendizaje colaborativo mediante el estudio de las propuestas del resto de estudiantes in situ. Para la evaluación del proceso, tanto a nivel de usabilidad como de mejora del proceso educativo, hemos dividido a los estudiantes en dos grupos: uno primero de control, que cursó un sistema tradicional de la asignatura en base a ejercicios de laboratorio, y un grupo experimental, que utilizó el sistema descrito en la ubicación real del proyecto. Al final del curso, y en base a los resultados obtenidos y discutidos en el presente artículo, el grupo experimental obtuvo mejores notas finales, al mismo tiempo que se constata un incremento en el grado de satisfacción y motivación de los estudiantes que han utilizado la propuesta experimental. Este aspecto nos permite reafirmar la utilidad del método en la mejora educativa en el ámbito donde se circunscribe la experiencia. 

Palabras clave

Visual learning; Architecture; Urban planning; Information technology; Computer-assisted design; urban development

Texto completo:



Adkins, K. (2014) Aesthetics, Authenticity and the Spectacle of the Real: How Do We Educate the Visual World We Live in Today? International Journal of Art & Design Education, 33, 326–334.
Cartes, I. (1997) Art in the urban landscape, Urban Design International, 2 (4), 189-198.
Burton-Chellew, M.N., Mouden, C.E., West, S.A.(2016) Conditional cooperation and confusion in public-goods experiments. PNAS. 113, 1291–1296.
Döllner, J., Baumann, K., Buchholz, H. (2006). Virtual 3D city models as foundation of complex urban information spaces. In 11th International Conference on Urban Planning and Spatial Development in the Information Society; Vienna, Austria, 2006, 107–112.
Dunleavy, M., Dede, C., Mitchell, R. (2008). Affordances and Limitations of Immersive Participatory Augmented Reality Simulations for Teaching and Learning, Journal of Science Education and Technology, 18(1), 7–22.
Erskine, M. A., Gregg, D. G., Karimi, J., Scott, J. E. (2015). Geospatial Reasoning Ability: Definition, Measurement and Validation, International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 31 (6), 402-412.
Fonseca, D., Martí, N., Redondo, E., Navarro, I., & Sánchez, A. (2014). Relationship between student profile, tool use, participation, and academic performance with the use of Augmented Reality technology for visualized architecture models. Computers in Human Behavior, 31, 434-445.
Fonseca, D., Valls, F., Redondo, E., & Villagrasa, S. (2016). Informal interactions in 3D education: Citizenship participation and assessment of virtual urban proposals. Computers in Human Behavior, 55, 504-518.
Giesbers, B., Rienties, B., Tempelaar, D., Gijselaers, W. (2013). Investigating the relations between motivation, tool use, participation, and performance in an e-learning course using web-videoconferencing. Computers in Human Behavior. 29(1). 285-292.
Gruen, A., Behnisch, M., Kohler, N. (2009). Perspectives in the reality-based generation, n D modelling, and operation of buildings and building stocks. Building Research & Information, 37(5-6), 503-519.
Haugstvedt, A. C., Krogstie, J. (2012, November). Mobile augmented reality for cultural heritage: A technology acceptance study. In Mixed and Augmented Reality. 2012 IEEE International Symposium on, 247-255.
Hortet, L., Adrià, M. (1987) VV.AA. Barcelona, espais i escultures (1982-1986) Hortet, L. Y Adriá, M. Eds. Fundació Joan Miró Barcelona.
Kaufmann, H., Schmalstieg, D. (2003) Mathematics and geometry education with collaborative augmented reality, Computers & Graphics, 27(3), 339-345.
Kristoffersen S., Ljungberg, F. (2000) Mobile Informatics. BRAA, K. et al. Planet Internet. Lund, Studentlitteratur.
Kuliga, S.F., Thrash, T., Dalton, R.C., Hölscher, C. (2015) Virtual reality as an empirical research tool — Exploring user experience in a real building and a corresponding virtual model. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems. 54, 363–375.
Leopold, C., Górska, R.A., Sorby, S.A. (2001). International Experiences in Developing the Spatial Visualization Abilities of Engineering Students. Journal for Geometry and Graphics 5(1), 81-91.
Martín-Gutierrez, J., Saorín, J. L., Contero, M., Alcañiz, M., Pérez-López, D. C., Ortega, M. (2010) Design and validation of an augmented book for spatial abilities development in engineering students. Computers & Graphics, 34(1), 77-91.
Mateu, J., Lasala, M. J., Alemán, X. (2014). VirtualTouch: a tool for developing mixed reality educational applications and an example of use for inclusive education. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 30 (10), 815-828.
Matsumoto, T., Hashimoto, S., Okude, N. (2008). The embodied Web: embodied Web‐services interaction with an umbrella for augmented city experiences, Computer Animation and Virtual Worlds, 19(1), 49-66.
Monclús, F. (2010) The Barcelona model: An original formula? From 'reconstruction' to strategic urban projects (1979-2004). Planning Perspectives. Ed. Taylor and Francis.
Müller, P., Zeng, G., Wonka, P., Van Gool, L. (2007, August). Image-based procedural modeling of facades. In ACM Transactions on Graphics, 26(3), 85.
Naismith, L. (2004). Literature review in mobile technologies and learning. NESTA Futurelab series, report 11. Bristol, UK: NESTA Futurelab
Navarro, I., Fonseca, D., Redondo, E., Sánchez, A., Martí, N., Simón, D. (2012) Uso de la realidad aumentada como plataforma educativa en la visualización arquitectónica. En Proc. De 7ª Conferencia Ibérica De Sistemas y Tecnologías De La Información, 685-690.
Navarro, I., De Reina, O., Rodiera, A., Fonseca, D. (2016), Indoor positioning systems: 3D virtual model visualization and design process of their assessment using mixed methods: Case study: World heritatge buildings and spatial skills for architecture students, 11º Conferencia Ibérica de Sistemas y Tecnologías de Información, Gran Canaria (Spain), En Actas CISTI, 136-142
Park, J. Y. (2011) Design Education Online: Learning Delivery and Evaluation. International Journal of Art & Design Education, 30, 176–187.
Payne, R. (2012) Seen, Unseen or Overlooked? How can Visual Perception Develop through a Multimodal Enquiry? International Journal of Art & Design Education, 31, 245–255.
Redondo, E., Fonseca, D., Sánchez, A., Navarro, I. (2012) Augmented Reality in Architecture Degree. New Approaches in Scene Illumination and User Evaluation, Journal of Information Technology and Application in Education, Vol. 1(1), 19-27.
Sadurni, L., Ramujkic, V. (2002) Olimpics Sculpture Guide, E. Tolosa, D. Romaní Eds., Barcelona, Rotor.
Sánchez, A., Redondo, E., & Fonseca, D. (2012, November). Developing an augmented reality application in the framework of architecture degree. In Proceedings of the 2012 ACM workshop on User experience in e-learning and augmented technologies in education, 37-42.
Sánchez, A., Redondo, E., Fonseca, D., Navarro, I. (2014), Academic Performance Assessment using Augmented Reality in Engineering Degree Course, 44th Annual Frontiers in Education Conference, Madrid (Spain), In Proceedings FIE, 1527- 1533.
Semmo, A., Trapp, M., Kyprianidis, J. E., Döllner, J. (2012, June). Interactive Visualization of Generalized Virtual 3D City Models using Level‐of‐Abstraction Transitions. In Computer Graphics Forum. 31(3), 885-894.
Sinker, R., Giannachi, G., Carletti, L. (2013). Art Maps – Mapping the Multiple Meanings of Place, International Journal of Art & Design Education, 32, 362–373.
Sun, J., Hsu, Y. (2013). Effect of interactivity on learner perceptions in Web-based instruction, Computers in Human Behavior, 29(1). 171-184.
Trias, E. (1976) Artista y la ciudad, Ed. Anagrama. Madrid.
Tsvetozar, G., Evgenia, G., Smrikarov, A. (2004). M-learning - A new stage of e-learning. International Conference on Computer Systems and Technologies.
Valls, F., Garcia-Almirall, P., Redondo, E., & Fonseca, D. (2014). From raw data to meaningful information: a representational approach to cadastral databases in relation to urban planning. Future Internet, 6(4), 612-639.
Valls, F., Redondo, E., Fonseca, D. (2015), E-Learning and Serious Games: New trends in Architectural and Urban Design Education, 2nd International Conference on Learning and Collaboration Technologies, Los Angeles, USA, LNCS V. 9192, 632-643.
Wang, T. (2011) Designing for Designing: Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs) and Professional Education, International Journal of Art & Design Education, 30, 188–199.
Zlatanova, S., Itard, L., Kibria, M. S., Van Dorst, M. (2010). A user requirements study of digital 3D models for urban renewal. Open House International, 35(3).

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5944/ried.20.2.17675

13 de abril de 2017

Revisión de la literatura sobre dispositivos móviles en la universidad española

Revisión de la literatura sobre dispositivos móviles en la universidad española

Julio César Mateus, Sue Aran-Ramspott, Maria-Jose Masanet


Este artículo presenta un análisis sistematizado de la producción científica entre los años 2012 y 2016 sobre el uso y aplicación de dispositivos móviles en el ámbito universitario español. El objetivo es analizar el interés académico por el Aprendizaje Móvil y las características de esta producción. Para ello se seleccionaron 50 artículos de revistas y comunicaciones de actas de congresos internacionales indexados en las bases de datos Web of Science, Scopus y Google Scholar y posteriormente se analizaron en torno a cuatro categorías: información sobre los autores, información bibliográfica de las publicaciones, información sobre las poblaciones estudiadas; e información científico-metodológica. Los resultados indican que se trata de un tema de desarrollo incipiente, dado el limitado número de artículos y comunicaciones halladas, pero esta producción evidencia la importancia de los grupos de investigación y los proyectos financiados, que permiten definir una trayectoria de investigación en varios autores. Asimismo, algunas comunidades autónomas españolas están subrepresentadas, así como algunas disciplinas abordadas en los estudios. En lo que respecta a la metodología, aparece como predominante la cuantitativa y como técnica de investigación más frecuente el cuestionario, aunque también se reconoce un número creciente de diseños experimentales. Las evidencias encontradas proponen un amplio campo para la investigación sobre el potencial pedagógico de los dispositivos móviles en la educación superior y permiten proponer una agenda para futuros estudios. 

Palabras clave

tecnología de la educación; universidad; enseñanza y formación; aprendizaje móvil; dispositivos móviles

Texto completo:



Berge, Z. y L. Muilenburg (Eds.) (2013). Handbook of Mobile Learning. Nueva York: Routledge.
Brazuelo, F., y Gallego, D. J. (2014). Estado del Mobile Learning en España. Educar Em Revista, 4, 99–128. doi: https://doi.org/10.1590/0104-4060.38646
Castañeda, L., y Adell, J. (2013). La anatomía de los PLEs. En L. Castañeda y J. Adell (Eds.), Entornos Personales de Aprendizaje: Claves para el ecosistema educativo en red (11-27). Alcoy: Marfil.
Delgado, E., y Repiso, R. (2013). Comunicar, 21(41), 45–52. doi:https://doi.org/10.3916/C41-2013-04
Durall, E., Gros, B., Maina, M., Johnson, L., y Adams, S. (2012). Perspectivas tecnológicas: educación superior en Iberoamérica 2012-2017. Austin, Texas: The New Media Consortium.
Fundación Telefónica (2011). Universidad 2020: Papel de las TIC en el nuevo entorno socioeconómico. Barcelona: Ariel.
ONTSI (2016). La Sociedad en Red. Informe Anual 2015 (Edición 2016). Madrid: Ministerio de Industria, Energía y Turismo.
Pimmer, C; Mateescu, M. y Gröhbiel, U. (2016) Mobile and Ubiquitous Learning in Higher Education Settings. A Systematic Review of Empirical Studies. Computers in Human Behavior, 63, 490-501. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.05.057.
Píriz, S. (Ed.) (2015). UNIVERSITIC 2015. Análisis de las TIC en las Universidades Españolas. Madrid: Crue Universidades Españolas.
Pisanty, A. (2009) Presentación. Web 2.0: dispositivos móviles y abiertos para el aprendizaje. RIED. Revista Iboeroamericana de Educación a Distancia, 12(2).doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.5944/ried.2.12.898
Siemens, G. (2005). Connectivism: A Learning Theory for the Digital Age. International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning, 2(1), 3-10.
Sung, Y. T., Chang, K. E., & Liu, T. C. (2016). The effects of integrating mobile devices with teaching and learning on students' learning performance: A meta-analysis and research synthesis. Computers&Education, 94, 252-275.doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2015.11.008.
Villalonga, C., Marta-Lazo, D. C., y Es, C. (2015). Modelo de Integración Educomunicativa de “Apps” Móviles para la enseñanza y aprendizaje. Píxel-Bit. Revista de Medios y Educación,46, 137-153 doi: https://doi.org/10.12795/pixelbit.2015.i46.09.

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5944/ried.20.2.17710

12 de abril de 2017

Dispositivos móviles y realidad aumentada en el aprendizaje del alumnado universitario

Dispositivos móviles y realidad aumentada en el aprendizaje del alumnado universitario

Julio Cabero Alemanra, Barbara Fernández Róbles, Verónica Marín Díaz


La Realidad Aumentada es una tecnología emergente que, cada día, tiene una mayor incidencia en la docencia. Tanto la Realidad Aumentada como la tecnología móvil se dibujan Junto a ella, la tecnología móvil se dibuja como uno de los binomios más eficaces para apoyar un aprendizaje significativo y ubicuo. No obstante, para que éste pueda funcionar con validez, el estudiante debe encontrarse motivado para utilizarla durante el proceso formativo. A través de la aplicación del modelo Instructional Material Motivational Survey de Keller (1983), se ha tratado de determinar el grado de motivación que el alumnado de Grado de Pedagogía de la Universidad de Sevilla (N=148) tiene sobre la utilización en el aula de apuntes enriquecidos a través de la Realidad Aumentada y disponibles mediante dispositivos móviles. Mediante una aplicación diseñada para la materia, ha sido valorado de forma positiva por los alumnos participantes en este estudio. Además,, podemos señalar que el principal hallazgo logrado ha sido la alta relación entre la motivación de los alumnos para emplear los apuntes enriquecidos y el rendimiento en la materia que los emplea. Igualmente se ha constatado que la utilización de la Realidad Aumentada beneficia el proceso de aprendizaje. Por tanto, podemos concluir la validez y viabilidad del binomio con respecto a la obtención de una mejora de los resultados de aprendizaje del alumnado.

Palabras clave

tecnologías de la información y la comunicación; método de enseñanza; educación a distancia; telecomunicación.

Texto completo:



Alaminos, A. (2006). El muestreo en la investigación social. En A. Alaminos y J.L. Castejón, Elaboración, análisis e interpretación de encuestas, cuestionarios y escalas de opinión (46-67). Alcoy: Marfil.
Bacca, J., Baldiris, S., Fabregat, R., Graf, S., & Kinshuk, G. (2014): Augmented Reality Trends in Education: A Systematic Review of Research and Applications. Educational Technology y Society, 17(4), 133–149.
Barba, R., Yasaca, S., & Manosalvas, C. (2015). Impacto de la realidad aumentada móvil en el proceso enseñanza-aprendizaje de estudiantes universitarios del área de medicina. Investigar con y para la Sociedad. Cádiz: Bubok Publishing S.L.
Barroso, J, & Cabero, J. (2010). La investigación educativa en TIC. Visiones prácticas. Madrid: Síntesis.
Bolliger, D. U., Supanakorn, S., & Boggs, C. (2010). Impact of podcasting on student motivation in the online learning environment. Computers & Education, 55(2), 714–722. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2010.03.004.
Bongiovani, P. (2013). Realidad aumentada en la escuela: Tecnología, experiencias e ideas. Recuperado de http://www.educacontic.es/blog/realidad
Bressler, D. M., & Bodzin, A. M. (2013). A mixed methods assessment of students' flow experiences during a mobile augmented reality science game. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 29(6), 505-517. doi:10.1111/jcal.12008.
Cabero, J., & Barroso, J. (2016). The educational possibilities of Augmented Reality. NAER. New Approaches in Educational Research, 5(1), 44-50. doi:10.7821/naer.2016.1.140.
Cabero, J., & García, F. (coords.) (2016). Realidad aumentada. Tecnología para la formación. Madrid: Síntesis.
Cabero, J., & Llorente, M.C. (2009). Actitudes, satisfacción, rendimiento académico y comunicación online en procesos de formación universitaria en blended learning”. Revista Electrónica Teoría de la Educación: Educación y Cultura en la Sociedad de la Información. 10(1). Recuperado de .http://www.usal.es/~teoriaeducacion/rev_numero_10_01/n10_01_cabero_llorente.pdf
Cabero, J., & Marín, V. (2013). Valoración del entorno formativo universitario Dipro 2.0. Profesorado. Revista de Curriculum y formación del profesorado, 17(2), 369-383.
Carozza, L., Tingdahi, D., Bosché, F., & Gool, L. (2014). Markerless Vision-Based Augmented Reality for Urban Planning. Computer-Aided Civil and Infrastructure Engineering, 29(1), 2-17. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8667.2012.00798.x.
Castaño, C., Maiz, I., & Garay, U. (2015). Diseño, motivación y rendimiento en un curso MOOC cooperativo. Comunicar 44, 19-26.
Chang, H., Wu, K., & Hsu, Y. (2013). Integrating a mobile augmented reality activity to contextualize student learning of a socioscientific issue. British Journal of Educational Technology, 44(3), E95-E99. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8535.2012.01379.x.
Che, Y. (2012). A study of learning effects on e-learning with interactive thematic video. Journal Educational Computing Research, 47(3), 279-292. doi:10.2190/EC.47.3.
Chen, C.-M., & Tsai, Y. (2012). Interactive augmented reality system for enhancing library instruction in elementary schools. Computers & Education, 59, 638–652. doi:10.1007/s10956-012-9405-9.
Cheng, Y., & Yeh, H. (2009). From concepts of motivation to its application in instructional design: Reconsidering motivation from an instructional design perspective. British Journal of Educational Technology, 40(4), 597–605. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8535.2008.00857.x.
Cózar, R., De Moya, M., Hernández, J., & Hernández, J. (2015). Tecnologías emergentes para la enseñanza de las Ciencias Sociales. Una experiencia con el uso de Realidad Aumentada en la formación inicial de maestros. Digital Education Review, 27, 138-153.
Cubillo, J., Martín, S., Castro, M. y Colmenar, A. (2014). Recursos digitales autónomos mediante realidad aumentada. Revista Iberoamericana de Educación a Distancia, 17, 241-274.
De Pedro Carracedo, J. y Méndez, C. L. M. (2012). Realidad Aumentada: Una Alternativa Metodológica en la Educación Primaria Nicaragüense. IEEE-RITA, 7, 102-108. Recuperado de http://www.redusoi.org/docs/LibroActasCAFVIR2011.pdf#page=300
Di Serio, A., Blanca, M., & Delgado, C. (2013). Impact of an augmented reality system on students’ motivation for a visual art course. Computers & Education, 68, 586–596. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2012.03.002.
Düunser, A., Walker, L., Horner, H., & Bentall, D. (2012). Creating interactive physics education books with augmented reality. En V. Farrell, G. Farrell, C. Chua, W. Huang, R. Vasa & C. Woodward (eds.), OzCHI'12, Proceedings of the 24th Australian Computer Human Interaction Conference (pp.107-114). ACM: New York. doi:10.1145/2414536.2414554
Etxeberria, J., & Tejedor, J. (2005). Análisis descriptivo de datos en educación. Madrid: La Muralla.
Fombona, J., & Vázquez-Cano, E. (en prensa). Posibilidades de utilización de la Geolocalización y Realidad Aumentada en el ámbito educativo. Educación XX1. En prensa. doi 10.5944/educxx1.10852.
Fombona, J., Pascual, M. J., & Madeira, M. F. (2012). Realidad aumentada, una evolución de las aplicaciones de los dispositivos móviles. Píxel-Bit. Revista de Medios y Educación, 41, 197-210.
Fonseca, D., Redondo, E., & Valls, F. (2016). Motivación y mejora académica utilizando realidad aumentada para el estudio de modelos tridimensionales arquitectónicos. Education in the Knowledge Society, EKS, 17(1), 45-64.
Gazcón, N. (2015). Libros Aumentados: Extensión del Concepto, Exploración e Interacciones. Bahía Blanca, Universidad Nacional del Sur, tesis doctoral no publicada.
Han, J., Jo, M., Hyun, E., & So, H. (2015). Examining young children’s perception toward augmented reality-infused dramatic play. Education Technology Research Development, 63, 455–474.
Huang, W., Huang, W., & Tschopp, J. (2010). Sustaining iterative game playing processes in DGBL: The relationship between motivational processing and outcome processing. Computers & Education, 55, 789-797. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2010.03.011.
Jamali, S., Fairuz, M. Wai, K., & Oskam, Ch. (2015): Utilising mobile-augmented reality for learning human anatomy. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 197, 659-668. doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.07.054.
Jeřábek, T., Rambousek, V., & Wildová, R. (2014). Specifics of Visual Perception of The Augmented Reality in The Context of Education. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 159, 598-604. doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.12.432
Johnson, L., Adams, S., Cummins, M., Estrada, V., Freeman, A., & Hall, C. (2016). NMC Horizon Report: 2016 Higher Education Edition. Austin, Texas: The New Media Consortium. Recuperado de http://blog.educalab.es/intef/wp-content/uploads/sites/4/2016/03/Resumen_Horizon_Universidad_2016_INTEF_mayo_2016.pdf
Kamarainen, A., Metcalf, Sh., Grotzer, T., Browne, A., Mazzuca, D., Tutwiler, M., & Dede, Ch. (2013). EcoMOBILE: Integrating augmented reality and probeware with environmental education field trips. Computers y Education, 68, 545-556. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2013.02.018.
Keller, J.M. (1983). Motivational design of instruction. In C.M. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional-design theories and models: An overview of their current status (pp. 386–434). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Keller, J.M. (1987). Strategies for stimulating the motivation to learn. Performance and Instruction, 26(8), 1-7.
Keller, J. M. (2010). Motivational design for learning and performance. New York: Springer Science+Business.
Kim. K., Hwang, J., & Zo, H. (2016): Understanding users’ continuance intention toward smartphone augmented reality applications. Information Development, 32(2), 161-174.
Lin, T., Been-Lirn, H., Li, N., Wang, H., y Tsa, Ch. (2013). An investigation of learners' collaborative knowledge construction performances and behavior patterns in an augmented reality simulation system. Computers & Education, 68, 314-321. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2013.05.011
Loorbach, N., Peters, O., Karreman, J., & Steehouder, M. (2015). Validation of the Instructional Materials Motivation Survey (IMMS) in a self-directed instructional setting aimed at working with technology. British Journal of Educational Technology, 46(1), 204–218. doi:10.1111/bjet.12138.
Lu, J., & Ying-Chieh, L. (2014). Integrating augmented reality technology to enhance children’s learning in marine education. Environmental Education Research,21(4), 525-541. doi: 10.1080/13504622.2014.911247
Lu, S. y Liu, Y-Ch. (2015). Integrating augmented reality technology to enhance children’s learning in marine education. Environmental Education Research, 21, No. 4, 525–541, doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13504622.2014.911247
Marín, V., Cabero, J., & Barroso, J. (2014). Evaluando los entornos formativos online. El caso de DIPRO 2.0. REDU. Revista de docencia universitaria, 12(2), 375-399
Mateo, J. (2004). La investigación ex-post-facto. En R. Bisquerra (coord.), Metodología de la investigación educativa (pp. 195-230). Madrid: La Muralla.
Mehmet, H. (2016). The classification of augmented reality books: a literature review. Proceedings of INTED2016 Conference, (pp. 4110-4118).Valencia: INTED.
Morales, M., Benítez, C., Silva, D., Altamirano, M., & Mendoza, H. M. (2016). Aplicación móvil para el aprendizaje del inglés utilizando realidad aumentada. Revista Iberoamericana de Producción Académica y Gestión Educativa, Recuperado de http://www.pag.org.mx/index.php/PAG/article/viewFile/513/552
O´Dwyer, L. y Bernauer, J. (2014). Quantitative research for the qualitative researcher. California: Sage.
Prendes, C. (2015). Realidad aumentada y educación: análisis de experiencias prácticas. Pixel-Bit. Revista de Medios y Educación, 46, 187-203.doi:10.12795/pixelbit.2015.i46.12.
Proske, A., Roscoe, R., & McNamara, D. (2014). Game-based practice versus traditional practice in computer-based writing strategy training: effects on motivation and achievement. Education Technology Research Development, 62, 481-505. doi:10.1007/s11423-014-9349-2.
Sabariego, M. (2012). El proceso de investigación (parte 2). En Bisquerra, R. (coord.), Metodología de la investigación educativa (pp. 127-163). (3ª. ed.). Madrid: La Muralla.
Santos, M. Wolde, A., Taketomi, T., Yamamoto, G., Rodrigo, M., Sandor, Ch., & Kato, H. (2016). Augmented reality as multimedia: the case for situated vocabulary learning. Research and Practice in Techology Enhanced Learning, 11(4), 1-23.
Sevillano, M.L., & Vázquez, E. (2015). Modelos de investigación en contextos ubicuos y móviles en educación superior. Madrid: McGraw-Hill/Uned.
Tecnológico de Monterrey (2015). Reporte EduTrends. Radar de Innovación Educativa 2015. Monterrey: Tecnológico de Monterrey.
Wei, X., Weng, D., Liu, Y., & Wang, Y. (2015). Teaching based on augmented reality for a technical creative design course. Computers & Education, 81, 221-234. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2014.10.017.
Wojciechowski, R., & Cellary, W. (2013). Evaluation of learners’ attitude toward learning in ARIES augmented reality environments. Computers & Education, 68, 570-585. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2013.02.014.
Wu, H-S., Lee, S., Chang, H-Y., & Liang, J. (2013). Current status, opportunities and challenges of augmented reality in education. Computers & Education, 62, 41-49. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2012.10.024.

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5944/ried.20.2.17245