Educational Innovation and Constructivist Teaching Models

Authors

Keywords:

innovation, constructivism, personalized learning, digital education

Abstract

This article presents a systematic review that examines the convergence between educational innovation, emerging technologies, and constructivist teaching models. In the context of a profound transformation of educational environments driven by the development of digital technologies—such as ICT, augmented reality, artificial intelligence, and adaptive learning platforms—the study seeks to answer how these tools can be effectively integrated into teaching-learning processes while maintaining a strong theoretical and pedagogical foundation. The central axis of the research is the constructivist approach, understood as a strategy that places the student as an active protagonist of their own learning and enables the construction of knowledge through experience, critical reflection, and social interaction.

Based on the PRISMA protocol, 124 initial studies were identified through high-impact academic databases. After a rigorous screening and eligibility evaluation process, eight key studies published between 2020 and 2025 were included, meeting the inclusion criteria: high indexing level, application of emerging technologies, and grounding in active teaching methodologies linked to constructivism. The review results indicate that the implementation of advanced technologies, combined with constructivist pedagogical approaches, generates significant improvements in personalized learning, the development of transversal competencies, students' intrinsic motivation, and the overall quality of educational outcomes.

The discussion incorporates theoretical and empirical contributions from various contemporary authors, who highlight both the potential and the challenges of this educational transformation—particularly in Latin American contexts marked by technological gaps, social inequalities, and a lack of teacher training in digital competencies. Nonetheless, successful experiences of progressive implementation—such as b-learning, project-based learning, or the use of adaptive technologies—are highlighted, reinforcing the feasibility of change when institutional will and contextualized pedagogical strategies are present.

The study concludes that the key to educational innovation does not lie solely in technology, but in its coherent integration into a solid and critical pedagogical model. Constructivism, in dialogue with theories such as Kolb’s experiential learning and Gardner’s multiple intelligences, offers a consistent theoretical framework to guide this process. Therefore, a vision of progressive educational transformation is proposed, centered on strengthening teaching capacity, technological equity, and cultural contextualization as necessary conditions for advancing toward an inclusive, relevant, and sustainable education in the 21st century

References

Abylkasymova, A., Sergey Shishov, y L. Zhumalieva. 2023. “On the Theory of Modernization of Digital Education, Which Forms the Plurality of Identities and the Intellect of Students”. Scientific Research and Development. Socio-Humanitarian Research and Technology 12(3):3–16. doi: 10.12737/2306-1731-2023-12-3-3-16.

Aguirre, Julieta Quilodrán de, y Fátima Juárez Carcaño. 2009. “Las pioneras del cambio reproductivo: un análisis partiendo de sus propios relatos”.

Arcentales-Montalvo, Aura Julissa, Julio Alfonso Murgueytio-Montenegro, y Luís Aldimir Canchingre-Bone. 2020. “Emprendimiento educativo a través de medios digitales en el contexto ecuatoriano”. Praxis Pedagógica 20(27).

Carrión, Karina Maribel Borja, María Gabriela Barrera Rea, Evelyn Geovanna Inca Balseca, y Cristian Luis Inca Balseca. 2024. “Planificación estratégica en instituciones educativas ecuatorianas: un enfoque innovador al modelo educativo tradicional”. Polo del Conocimiento 9(11):1696–1714. doi: 10.23857/pc.v9i11.8415.

Chiliquinga-Amaya, Javier. 2023. “AUTONOMÍA Y CAPACIDAD ESTATAL: APUNTES PARA ESTUDIAR AL ESTADO DESDE LA CORRIENTE NEOWEBERIANA”. Pp. 59–77 en Caminos de la ciencia política: movimientos sociales y estallidos sociales en América Latina. Brasil: ALACIP.

Chiliquinga-Amaya, Javier. 2024a. “Dinámicas de calidad en la Educación Superior: estudio comparativo de la acreditación en el Instituto Tecnológico Cotopaxi y el Instituto Tecnológico Riobamba”. MQRInvestigar 8(4):1080–98. doi: 10.56048/MQR20225.8.4.2024.1080-1098.

Chiliquinga-Amaya, Javier. 2024b. “Grado de ¨weberianismo¨ de la agencia estatal en educación superior IST Riobamba”. Universidad y Sociedad 16(6):21–29.

Comisión Económica para América Latina y el Caribe. 2024. “Capitulo 3. Derechos, necesidades, responsabilidades y demandas de niños, niñas, adolescentes y jóvenes”. Pp. 55–74 en Población, desarrollo y derechos en América Latina y el Caribe: Segundo informe regional sobre la implementación del Consenso de Montevideo sobre Población y Desarrollo. Santiago - Chile: Comisión Económica para América Latina y el Caribe.

Corzo, Carlos Alberto Soto, Carlos Alfredo Ormeño Román, Danny Dominguez Pillaca, Carlos Alberto Soto Corzo, Carlos Alfredo Ormeño Román, y Danny Dominguez Pillaca. 2025. “La Tecnología 4.0 en la gestión de los aprendizajes”. Revista InveCom 5(1). doi: 10.5281/zenodo.11389415.

Espinosa, Santiago Daniel Murillo, María Gabriela Barrera Rea, Evelyn Geovanna Inca Balseca, y Cristian Luis Inca Balseca. 2024. “La Educación y sus Resultados de Aprendizaje: Un Análisis Comparativo entre los Sistemas Educativos de Finlandia y Ecuador”. Polo del Conocimiento 9(11):1681–95. doi: 10.23857/pc.v9i11.8414.

Gardner, Howard. 2005. Inteligencias múltiples. Madrid: Planeta.

Karin-Yesset, Flores Pastor, Carmen Elena Carbonell-García, Luis Alberto Sosa-Aparicio, Erica Lucy Millones-Alba, Flores Pastor Karin-Yesset, Carmen Elena Carbonell-García, Luis Alberto Sosa-Aparicio, y Erica Lucy Millones-Alba. 2023. “Cultura emprendedora como eje de una docencia transformadora”. Revista Arbitrada Interdisciplinaria Koinonía 8:541–52. doi: 10.35381/r.k.v8i1.2814.

Kaushik, Pulkit. 2017. “Redefining Learning: Kolb’s Theory of Learning Styles with Gardner’s Multiple Intelligences”. International Journal of Learning and Teaching 9(1):330–39. doi: 10.18844/ijlt.v8i5.1889.

Kian, Neo Tse, y Sahar Sabbaghan. 2012. “The Relationship Between Gardner’s Multiple Intelligence and Kolb’s Learning Style”. International Journal of Knowledge and Systems Science (IJKSS) 3(3):52–59.

Kolb, David A. 2015. Experiential Learning: Experience as the Source of Learning and Development. Pearson Education.

Levin, Ilya, Alexei L. Semenov, y Mikael Gorsky. 2025. “Smart Learning in the 21st Century: Advancing Constructionism Across Three Digital Epochs”. Education Sciences 15(1):45. doi: 10.3390/educsci15010045.

Liu, Zhihe, y Wenwen Jiang. 2024. “Research on the Design of Adaptive Testing Based on Multiple Intelligences Theory and Its Impact on Student Learning Outcomes”. Research and Advances in Education 3(3):21–25.

Marienko, Maiia, Yulia Nosenko, Alisa Sukhikh, Viktor Tataurov, y Mariya Shyshkina. 2020. “Personalization of Learning through Adaptive Technologies in the Context of Sustainable Development of Teachers’ Education”. E3S Web of Conferences 166:10015. doi: 10.1051/e3sconf/202016610015.

Moreno-Pérez, Héctor Tulio, Carmen Elena Carbonell-García, Tania Ruiz-Gómez, Erica Lucy Millones-Alba, Héctor Tulio Moreno-Pérez, Carmen Elena Carbonell-García, Tania Ruiz-Gómez, y Erica Lucy Millones-Alba. 2023. “Capacidades emprendedoras como estrategia para el crecimiento personal en estudiantes de secundaria”. Revista Arbitrada Interdisciplinaria Koinonía 8:651–61. doi: 10.35381/r.k.v8i1.2829.

Moyano-Bazan, Daniela Nicole, Mayra Alejandra Benavides-Loor, Juan Manuel Guaigua-Guaigua, y Dayron Rumbaut-Rangel. 2024. “Metodologías Activas como estrategias didácticas para mejorar el aprendizaje en personas con educación inconclusa”. MQRInvestigar 8(4):7508–33. doi: 10.56048/MQR20225.8.4.2024.7508-7533.

Rodríguez Viteri, Diego Mauricio Calvopiña Andrade, y Ana Rocío Toapanta Toapanta. 2025. “Relación entre el aprendizaje basado en proyectos (ABP) y el desarrollo de competencias de innovación y emprendimiento.” Revista Social Fronteriza 5(1):e-615. doi: 10.59814/resofro.2025.5(1)615.

Ruiz Hidalgo, David, Delfín Ortega-Sánchez, David Ruiz Hidalgo, y Delfín Ortega-Sánchez. 2022. “El aprendizaje basado en proyectos: una revisión sistemática de la literatura (2015-2022)”. Human Review: International Humanities Review / Revista Internacional de Humanidades 14(6). doi: 10.37467/REVHUMAN.V11.4181.

Suparno, Disman Disman, Ari Saptono, y Ratieh Widhiastuti. 2024. “Economic Education, Digital Literacy and Intention to Invest Among Students: The Mediating Role of Financial Attitudes”. International Journal of Instruction 17(1):65–82.

Toribio, Eduardo Gottardo Orosco, Omar Eduardo Orosco León, Ginger Kimberly Salguero Alcala, y Carlos Sixto Vega Vilca. 2023. “Estilos de aprendizaje y rendimiento académico en estudiantes de una universidad nacional peruana”. Horizontes. Revista de Investigación en Ciencias de la Educación 7(31):2231–42. doi: 10.33996/revistahorizontes.v7i31.658.

Vargas-Morúa, Gioconda. 2022. “Educación emprendedora y gamificación como estrategia de aprendizaje”. Revista Espiga 21(43):127–55. doi: 10.22458/re.v21i43.4240.

Zambrano Gallardo, Genny Elizabeth, Rider Eloy Mendoza Saltos, Genny Elizabeth Zambrano Gallardo, y Rider Eloy Mendoza Saltos. 2018. “Influencia del método b-learning en la enseñanza-aprendizaje del inglés en la comunidad educativa de la Universidad Laica Eloy Alfaro de Manabí, extensión Chone”. Revista Universidad y Sociedad 10(1):255–62.

Downloads

Published

2025-03-23

How to Cite

Moposita Poma, M. M., Pozo Villares, F. G., Yunda Cujilema, L. N., & Macías Fernández, K. F. (2025). Educational Innovation and Constructivist Teaching Models. Scientific Connection International Journal, 2(2), 73-88. http://sapiensdiscoveries.com/index.php/CCIJ/article/view/42

Similar Articles

1-10 of 22

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.