Personalización del aprendizaje: un factor clave para la calidad

Mary Elizabeth Morocho Quezada; Martha Albania  Camacho Condo; José Gerardo Moreno Salinas

doi:10.15332/25005421.11126

Vol. 18 No. 2 (2025)

Published 2025-06-28

license

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Los autores mantienen los derechos sobre los artículos y por tanto son libres de compartir, copiar, distribuir, ejecutar y comunicar públicamente la obra bajo las condiciones siguientes:

Reconocer los créditos de la obra de la manera especificada por el autor o el licenciante (pero no de una manera que sugiera que tiene su apoyo o que apoyan el uso que hace de su obra).

RIIEP está bajo una licencia Creative Commons Atribución-NoComercial-CompartirIgual 4.0 Internacional (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0)

La Universidad Santo Tomás conserva los derechos patrimoniales de las obras publicadas, y favorece y permite la reutilización de las mismas bajo la licencia anteriormente mencionada.

ARTÍCULOS DE REFLEXIÓN

Personalization of learning: a key factor for quality

DOI: https://doi.org/10.15332/25005421.11126

Mary Elizabeth Morocho Quezada Universidad Técnica Particular de Loja

Martha Albania Camacho Condo Universidad Técnica Particular de Loja

José Gerardo Moreno Salinas Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México

PDF (Spanish)

Abstract
References

This approach adapts the content, methods and pace of teaching to the unique characteristics of each student, breaking with the traditional, standardized model that has prevailed for decades. Personalization has become a key concept in education due to its potential to improve academic outcomes and student satisfaction, particularly in distance and online education contexts, where interactions are virtual and students require tailored support to progress effectively (Anderson & Dron, 2011, pp.80-97). In this context, personalization contributes not only to academic success, but also to student retention and skill development, fundamental aspects of educational quality. The present research explores the personalization of learning as a key factor for educational quality, analyzing its theoretical bases, technological tools and the role of the teacher in its implementation. In addition, the benefits and challenges of this practice in different educational contexts will be discussed, providing a comprehensive perspective on its impact on the improvement of education.

keywords: learning, personalization, learning styles, motivation, feedback

Anderson, T., & Dron, J. (2011). Three generations of distance education pedagogy. International Review of Research on Distance and Open Learning, 12(3), 80-97. http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/ article/view/890/1826.

Ausubel, D. P. (1968). Educational psychology: A cognitive view. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.

Anderson, T., & Dron, J. (2011). Three generations of distance education pedagogy. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 12(3), 80-97.

Brusilovsky, P., & Millán, E. (2007). User models for adaptive hypermedia and adaptive educational systems. In The adaptive web (pp. 3-53). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.

Cabero-Almenara, J., Marín-Díaz, V., & Sampedro-Requena, B. E. (2018). Aceptación del Modelo Tecnológico en la enseñanza superior. Revista de investigación educativa, 36(2), 435-453.

García Martínez, I., Higueras Rodríguez, M. L., & Martínez Valdivia, E. (2018). Hacia la implantación de comunidades profesionales de aprendizaje mediante un liderazgo distribuido. Una revisión sistemática.

Goleman, D. (1995). Emotional Intelligence: Why It Can Matter More Than IQ. Bantam Books.

Hattie, J. (2009). Visible Learning: A Synthesis of Over 800 Meta-Analyses Relating to Achievement. Routledge.

Hernández-Ramos, J. P., De-Los-Santos, S. B., & Barba-Martín, R. A. (2020). Aprendizaje personalizado y tecnología digital: Una revisión sistemática. Comunicar, 63, 45-56.

Johnson, L., Adams Becker, S., Cummins, M., Estrada, V., Freeman, A., & Hall, C. (2016). NMC Horizon Report: 2016 Higher Education Edition. Austin, Texas: The New Media Consortium.

Macfadyen, L. P., Lockyer, L., & Rienties, B. (2020). Learning design and learning analytics: Snapshot 2020. Journal of Learning Analytics, 7(3), 6-12.

Moreno-Salinas, J. G., (2023). Modelo de administración del conocimiento en la gestión de programas de modalidad a distancia en instituciones de educación superior [Disertación de doctorado, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México]. https://tinyurl.com/DoctoradoJGMS.

Piaget, J. (1971). The Theory of Stages in Cognitive Development. In D. Green, M. Ford, & G. Flamer (Eds.), Measurement and Piaget. McGraw-Hill.

Rose, D. H., & Meyer, A. (2002). Teaching Every Student in the Digital Age: Universal Design for Learning. ASCD.

Selwyn, N. (2016). Education and Technology: Key Issues and Debates. Bloomsbury Publishing.

Tsai, Y. S., & Gasevic, D. (2017). Learning analytics in higher education – challenges and policies: A review of eight learning analytics policies. Proceedings of the Seventh International Learning Analytics & Knowledge Conference, 243-252.

Valverde-Berrocoso, J., Garrido-Arroyo, M. C., & Burgos-Videla, C. (2019). Desafíos y tendencias en la educación personalizada: Un estudio bibliométrico en la Web of Science. Revista de Educación, 382, 135-159.

Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes. Harvard University Press.

license

How to Cite

Morocho Quezada, M. E., Camacho Condo, M. A. ., & Moreno Salinas, J. G. (2025). Personalization of learning: a key factor for quality. Revista Interamericana De Investigación Educación Y Pedagogía RIIEP, 18(2), 265-286. https://doi.org/10.15332/25005421.11126

Download Citation

Almétricas

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...