The impact of platforms on teaching modalities in the digital transformation in education paradigm

Elsa Gabriel Morgado; Levi Leonido; Antonino Pereira; Luís Borges Gouveia

doi:10.31637/epsir-2026-2494

Autori

Elsa Gabriel Morgado Center for Studies in Education and Innovation (CI&DEI), Polytechnic Institute of Viseu, Portugal. Polytechnic Institute of Bragança, Portugal. https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3653-7876
Levi Leonido University of Trás-os-Montes e Alto Douro, School of Human and Social Sciences, Portugal. Catholic University - Center for Research in Arts Sciences and Technologies, Portugal. https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6603-034X
Antonino Pereira Polytechnic Institute of Viseu https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3088-8413
Luís Borges Gouveia Fernando Pessoa University https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2079-3234

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.31637/epsir-2026-2494

Parole chiave:

education, teaching modalities, digital transformation, learning platforms, technology, digital pedagogy, online learning, educational innovation

Abstract

Introduction: This study examines the transformation of education driven by digitalization, highlighting the impact of digital platforms on teaching and learning dynamics. Digitalization has fostered new forms of access to knowledge, with platforms playing a central role in implementing modalities such as e-learning, b-learning, and m-learning. These tools not only facilitate access to educational content but also encourage interaction and collaboration between students and teachers, adapting to individual learners’ needs and promoting more personalized and flexible learning experiences. Methodology: The research is based on a qualitative, hermeneutic-interpretive methodology, aimed at understanding the meanings and interpretations expressed in texts and documents. This approach enables the analysis of the complexity of the educational phenomenon and the interpretation of how different actors construct meanings regarding the use of digital technologies in pedagogical practices. Results and Discussion: The analysis reveals both potentialities and challenges of teaching modalities mediated by digital platforms, emphasizing their impact on pedagogical practices, interaction dynamics, and the changes in teaching and learning processes. Conclusions: It is concluded that digital platforms act as transformative agents in education, fostering new pedagogical paradigms within the broader context of digital transformation.

Downloads

I dati di download non sono ancora disponibili.

Biografie autore

Elsa Gabriel Morgado, Center for Studies in Education and Innovation (CI&DEI), Polytechnic Institute of Viseu, Portugal. Polytechnic Institute of Bragança, Portugal.

PhD in Educational Sciences. Postdoctoral researcher in e-Learning. Adjunct Professor (Visiting) at the School of Education, Polytechnic Institute of Bragança. She is an integrated researcher at the Center for Studies in Education and Innovation (CI&DEI), Polytechnic Institute of Viseu, Viseu, Portugal. Her professional activity highlights include participation in teacher and educator training courses.

Levi Leonido, University of Trás-os-Montes e Alto Douro, School of Human and Social Sciences, Portugal. Catholic University - Center for Research in Arts Sciences and Technologies, Portugal.

Aggregation academic title in Information technologies. PhD in Education. He holds a postdoctoral degree from the University of Minho and the University of Santiago de Compostela. He is an Associate Professor at the School of Human and Social Sciences, University of Trás-os-Montes and Alto Douro. He is a researcher at CITAR – Research Centre for Science and Technology of the Arts, Catholic University of Portugal. His professional activity focuses on the training of teachers, educators, and actors.

Antonino Pereira, Polytechnic Institute of Viseu

Full Professor at the Polytechnic Institute of Viseu. Aggregation academic title in Sport Science at Faculty of Sport of the University of Porto. PhD in Sports Science - Faculty of Sports Sciences and Physical Education - University of Porto. Master in Training of the Young Athlete - Faculty of Human Motricity - Technical University of Lisbon. Graduated in Physical Education (1989) - Higher Institute of Physical Education - Technical University of Lisbon.

Luís Borges Gouveia, Fernando Pessoa University

Full Professor at Fernando Pessoa University. PhD in Computer Science from the University of Lancaster, United Kingdom, and MSc in Electronic and Computer Engineering from the Faculty of Engineering, University of Porto. Diploma in Computer Science, Applied Mathematics from the University Portucalense. He also has a habilitation in Industrial Engineering and Management from the University of Aveiro, and a postdoctorate in information Science from UP. Researcher at the Information, Communication and Digital Culture Group, CITCEM, UP, and collaborator within the Artificial Intelligence and Computer Science Laboratory, LIACC, UP. His interests are the digital and how to explore its potential to improve human activity. Currently working on the use and exploration of artificial intelligence's impact on ongoing digital transformation both for individuals and organizations. In 2021 receive an Honorary Doctor in Educational Technologies (Honoris Causa) by the Emil Brunner World University: Miami, Florida, US.

Riferimenti bibliografici

Ally, M. (Ed.). (2009). Mobile learning: Transforming the delivery of education and training. Athabasca University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.15215/aupress/9781897425435.01

Anderson, T. (2008). The theory and practice of online learning. Athabasca University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.15215/aupress/9781897425084.01

Anderson, T., & Dron, J. (2011). Three generations of distance education pedagogy. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 12(3), 80-97. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v12i3.890 DOI: https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v12i3.890

Barnard, M. A. D., & Sedio, M. Z. (2025). Examining the grade 12 life science educators’ integration of technology for teaching grade 12 life science curriculum: A case study. Edelweiss Applied Science and Technology, 9(9), 16-26.

https://doi.org/10.55214/2576-8484.v9i9.9766 DOI: https://doi.org/10.55214/2576-8484.v9i9.9766

Barrett, B. (2024). Rob Moore, social realism, and the sociology of education and knowledge. In E. Rata (Ed.), Research handbook in curriculum and education (pp. 79-87). Edward Elgar Publishing. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4337/9781802208542.00011

Bates, A. W. (2019). Teaching in a digital age: Guidelines for designing teaching and learning. BCcampus Open Textbook.

Bates, A. W. (2015). Teaching in a digital age: Guidelines for designing teaching and learning. BCcampus.

Bates, T. (2018). The 2017 national survey of online learning in Canadian post-secondary education: Methodology and results. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 15, 29. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-018-0112-3 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-018-0112-3

Baturay, M. H. (2015). Exploring the relationship between digital literacy and academic performance: The case of Turkey. Computers in Human Behavior, 48, 39-49.

Behrens, M. A. (2024). Tecnologias digitais na educação: Desafios e oportunidades para a aprendizagem. Editora Penso.

Bogdan, R. C., & Biklen, S. K. (1994). Investigação qualitativa em educação: Uma introdução à teoria e aos métodos. Porto Editora.

Bond, M., Marín, V. I., Dolch, C., Bedenlier, S., & Zawacki-Richter, O. (2018). Digital transformation in German higher education: Student and teacher perceptions and usage of digital media. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 15(1), 48. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-018-0130-1 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-018-0130-1

Bonk, C. J., & Graham, C. R. (Eds.). (2012). The handbook of blended learning: Global perspectives, local designs. Wiley.

Borges Gouveia, L. (2011). Social media in education: Enhancing learning environments with social networking tools. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Education and New Learning Technologies (EDULEARN11) (pp. 4634–4640). IATED.

Borges Gouveia, L. (2016). Smart learning environments: Challenges and opportunities. In Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Cognition and Exploratory Learning in Digital Age (CELDA 2016) (pp. 35-42). IADIS Press.

Borges Gouveia, L., & Moreira, F. (2009). Learning 2.0: Collaborative learning environments and the use of social networks and Web 2.0 tools in higher education. In Proceedings of the IADIS International Conference on Cognition and Exploratory Learning in the Digital Age (CELDA 2009) (pp. 287-290). IADIS Press.

Crato, N. (Ed.) (2021). Improving a country’s education: PISA 2018 results in 10 countries. Springer Nature. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-59031-4 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-59031-4

Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2018). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (4th ed.). SAGE Publications.

Crompton, H. (2013). A historical overview of mobile learning: Toward learner-centered education. In Z. L. Berge & L. Y. Muilenburg (Eds.), Handbook of mobile learning (pp. 3-14). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203118764 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203118764

Cuban, L. (2001). Oversold and underused: Computers in the classroom. Harvard University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4159/9780674030107

Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (Eds.). (2018). The SAGE handbook of qualitative research (5th ed.). SAGE Publications. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctvk12qnw DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctvk12qnw

Dias Sobrinho, J. (2015). Universidade fraturada: Reflexões sobre conhecimento e responsabilidade social. Avaliação, 20(3), 581-601.

https://doi.org/10.1590/S1414-40772015000300002 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1590/S1414-40772015000300002

Dias Sobrinho, J. (2018). Universidade em tempos de precarização e incertezas. Avaliação, 23(3), 736-753. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1414-40772018000300010 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1590/s1414-40772018000300010

Dron, J., & Anderson, T. (2014). Teaching crowds: Learning and social media. Athabasca University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.15215/aupress/9781927356807.01

Estrela, M. (2014). Velhas e novas profissionalidades, velhos e novos profissionalismos: Tensões, paradoxos, progressos e retrocessos. Investigar em Educação, II(2), 5-30. https://doi.org/10.34626/srs35a73

Falloon, G. (2020). From digital literacy to digital competence: The teacher digital competency (TDC) framework. Education and Information Technologies, 25(2), 567-585. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-019-09997-4

Ferrari, A. (2013). DIGCOMP: A framework for developing and understanding digital competence in Europe. Publications Office of the European Union. https://doi.org/10.2788/52966

Flick, U. (2018). An introduction to qualitative research (6th ed.). SAGE Publications.

Fullan, M., & Langworthy, M. (2014). A rich seam: How new pedagogies find deep learning. Pearson.

Gadamer, H.-G. (1975). Truth and method (2nd rev. ed.). Continuum.

Garrison, D. R., & Anderson, T. (2003). E-learning in the 21st century: A framework for research and practice. RoutledgeFalmer. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203166093

Garrison, D. R., & Vaughan, N. D. (2008). Blended learning in higher education: Framework, principles, and guidelines. Jossey-Bass. https://doi.org/10.1007/10.1002/9781118269558 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118269558

Grinspun, M. P. S. Z. (Org.). (1999). Educação tecnológica: Desafios e perspectiva. Cortez.

Heitink, M. C., Voogt, J. M., Verplanken, L., van Braak, J., & Fisser, P. (2017). Teachers’ professional reasoning about their pedagogical use of technology. Computers & Education, 114, 125-140. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2017.06.017

Hirsch, E. D. (2016). Why knowledge matters: Rescuing our children from failed educational theories. Harvard Education Press.

Horizon Report. (2018). The New Media Consortium Horizon Report: 2018 Higher Education Edition. EDUCAUSE.

Horizon Report. (2020). 2020 EDUCAUSE Horizon Report: Teaching and learning edition. EDUCAUSE

Howard, S. K., Tondeur, J., Ma, J., & Yang, J. (2021). What to teach? Strategies for developing digital competency in preservice teacher training. Computers & Education, 165, 104149. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2021.104149 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2021.104149

Hrastinski, S. (2019). What do we mean by blended learning? TechTrends, 63(5), 564-569. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-019-00375-5 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-019-00375-5

Hughson, T. A., & Wood, B. E. (2022). The OECD Learning Compass 2030 and the future of disciplinary learning: A Bernsteinian critique. Journal of Education Policy, 37(4), 634–654. https://doi.org/10.1080/02680939.2020.1865573 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/02680939.2020.1865573

Janssen, J., Stoyanov, S., Ferrari, A., Punie, Y., Pannekket, K., & Sloep, P. (2013). Experts’ views on digital competence: Commonalities and differences. Computers & Education, 68, 473-481. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2013.06.008 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2013.06.008

Johnson, L., Johnson, L., Adams Becker, S., Estrada, V., & Freeman, A. (2015). NMC horizon report: 2015 higher education edition. The New Media Consortium.

Kirkwood, A., & Price, L. (2014). Technology-enhanced learning and teaching in higher education: What is 'enhanced' and how do we know? Learning, Media and Technology, 39(1), 6-36. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2013.770404 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2013.770404

Lacerda, F. C. B., & Santos, L. M. (2018). Integralidade na formação do ensino superior: Metodologias ativas de aprendizagem. Avaliação, 23, 611-627. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1414-40772018000300003 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1590/s1414-40772018000300003

Laurillard, D. (2012). Teaching as a design science: Building pedagogical patterns for learning and technology. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203125083 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203125083

Law, N., Woo, D., de la Torre, J., & Wong, G. (2018). A global framework of reference on digital literacy skills for indicator 4.4.2 (UIS/2018/ICT/IP/51). UNESCO Institute for Statistics.

Liyanagunawardena, T. R., Adams, A. A., & Williams, S. A. (2013). MOOCs: A systematic study of the published literature 2008-2012. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 14(3), 202-227. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v14i3.1455 DOI: https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v14i3.1455

Luckin, R., Holmes, W., Griffiths, M., & Forcier, L. B. (2016). Intelligence unleashed: An argument for AI in education. Pearson.

Moore, M. G., & Kearsley, G. (2011). Distance education: A systems view of online learning. Cengage Learning.

Morgado, E. G., Rodrigues, J. B., & Leonido, L. (2024a). Rethinking teacher training from an inclusive and community dialogical perspective. Journal of Education and E-Learning Research, 11(1), 219-228. https://doi.org/10.20448/jeelr.v11i1.5430 DOI: https://doi.org/10.20448/jeelr.v11i1.5430

Morgado, E. M. G. (2014). O universo da supervisão: Uma abordagem inclusiva nos domínios da habilitação para a docência e da inserção profissional [Tese de Doutoramento, Universidade de Trás-os-Montes e Alto Douro].

Morgado, E. M. G., Licursi, M. B., & Silva, L. L. F. da. (2024b). The role of the teacher: Function, missions and timeless purposes. Revista de Gestão Social e Ambiental, 18(1), e06475. https://doi.org/10.24857/rgsa.v18n1-174 DOI: https://doi.org/10.24857/rgsa.v18n1-174

Morgado, E., Leonido, L., Pereira, A., & Gouveia, L. B. (2025). Technology-mediated education: Impact of AI on the main distance learning modalities. Educational Process: International Journal, 16, e2025211. https://doi.org/10.22521/edupij.2025.16.211 DOI: https://doi.org/10.22521/edupij.2025.16.211

Nóvoa, A. (2007). O regresso dos professores. In Profissional de professores para a qualidade e para a equidade da aprendizagem ao longo da vida (pp. 21-28). Ministério da Educação / Comissão Europeia.

OECD. (2019). OECD learning compass 2030: A series of concept notes. OECD Publishing.

OECD. (2021). Artificial intelligence in education: Challenges and opportunities. OECD Publishing.

OECD. (2023). PISA 2022 results (Volume I): The state of learning and equity in education, PISA. OECD Publishing. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1787/53f23881-en

Passey, D., & Higgins, S. (2011). Learning platforms and learning outcomes: Insights from research. Learning, Media and Technology, 36(4), 329-347. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2011.613360 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2011.626783

Prensky, M. R. (2010). Teaching digital natives: Partnering for real learning. Corwin Press.

Priestley, M., & Biesta, G. (Eds.). (2013). Reinventing the curriculum: New trends in curriculum policy and practice. Bloomsbury Academic. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5040/9781472553195

Priestley, M., & Sinnema, C. (2014). Downgraded curriculum? An analysis of knowledge in new curricula in Scotland and New Zealand. The Curriculum Journal, 25(1), 50-75. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585176.2013.872047 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09585176.2013.872047

Rata, E. (Ed.). (2024). Research handbook on curriculum and education. Edward Elgar Publishing. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4337/9781802208542

Redecker, C., & Punie, Y. (2017). European framework for the digital competence of educators: DigCompEdu. Publications Office of the European Union. https://doi.org/10.2760/159770

Ricoeur, P. (1976). Interpretation theory: Discourse and the surplus of meaning. Texas Christian University Press.

Salmon, G. (2011). E-moderating: The key to teaching and learning online (3rd ed.). Routledge.

Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (2006). Knowledge building: Theory, pedagogy, and technology. In K. Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 97-118). Cambridge University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511816833.008

Selwyn, N. (2016). Education and technology: Key issues and debates (2nd ed.). Bloomsbury Academic. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5040/9781474235952

Sharples, M., Arnedillo-Sánchez, I., Milrad, M., & Vavoula, G. (2009). Mobile learning: Small devices, big issues. In N. Balacheff, S. Ludvigsen, T. de Jong, A. Lazonder & S. Barnes (Eds.), Technology-enhanced learning (pp. 233-249). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-9827-7_14 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-9827-7_14

Siemens, G. (2005). Connectivism: A learning theory for the digital age. International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning, 2(1), 3-10.

Silva, S., Badasyan, N., & Busby, M. (2018). Diversity and digital divide: Using the National Broadband Map to identify the non-adopters of broadband. Telecommunications Policy, 42(5), 361-373. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.telpol.2018.02.008 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.telpol.2018.02.008

Surma, T., Vanhees, C., Wils, M., Nijlunsing, J., Crato, N., Hattie, J., Muijs, D., Rata, E., Wiliam, D., & Kirschner, P. A. (2025). Developing curriculum for deep thinking: The knowledge revival. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-74661-1 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-74661-1

Timms, M. J. (2016). Letting artificial intelligence in education out of the box: Educational cobots and smart classrooms. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 26(2), 701-712. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40593-016-0095-y DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40593-016-0095-y

Traxler, J. (2007). Defining, discussing, and evaluating mobile learning: The moving finger writes and having writ... The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 8(2), 1-12. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v8i2.346 DOI: https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v8i2.346

UNESCO (2022). Artificial Intelligence and Education: Guidance for Policymakers. Paris, UNESCO.

Veletsianos, G., & Moe, R. (2017, April 10). The rise of educational technology as a sociocultural and ideological phenomenon. EDUCAUSE Review.

Wheelahan, L. (2010). Why knowledge matters in curriculum: A social realist argument. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203860236 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203860236

Young, M. F. D. (2007). Bringing knowledge back in: From social constructivism to social realism in the sociology of education. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203073667 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203073667