Ir al menú de navegación principal Ir al contenido principal Ir al pie de página del sitio

Artículos originales

Vol. 6 Núm. 15 (2026): Simbiosis, Revista de Educación y Psicología

Implementación de EquiLAB como herramienta didáctica para el aprendizaje de sistemas en equilibrio y movimiento

Implementation of EquiLAB as an instructional tool for learning systems in equilibrium and motion
Publicado
2026-08-14

La enseñanza de la física universitaria requiere recursos didácticos que reduzcan la abstracción y relacionen la teoría con la práctica. Es por ello, el presente estudio tuvo como objetivo evaluar el efecto de la implementación de EquiLAB como herramienta didáctica para el fortalecimiento de las competencias de análisis y comprensión de sistemas en equilibrio y movimiento en estudiantes de la cátedra de Estática de la Universidad Técnica de Cotopaxi Extensión Pujilí, Ecuador. El estudio cuantitativo preexperimental contó con una muestra de 22 estudiantes y empleó un cuestionario. Los resultados mostraron un incremento del nivel de logro del 13.64 % al 100 %, una media que ascendió de 8.27 a 9.60 y una prueba de Wilcoxon con p<.001 y r=.62, lo que confirma diferencias significativas con un tamaño de efecto grande. Se concluye que, EquiLAB constituye una herramienta eficaz que reduce las barreras de abstracción y potencia el dominio conceptual.

University-level physics education requires instructional resources that minimize abstraction and bridge the gap between theory and practice. Consequently, this study aimed to evaluate the impact of implementing EquiLAB as a teaching tool to enhance competencies in the analysis and understanding of systems in equilibrium and motion among students in the Statics course at the Technical University of Cotopaxi, Pujilí Campus, Ecuador. This quantitative, pre-experimental study involved a sample of 22 students and utilized a questionnaire for data collection. The results indicated an increase in achievement levels from 13.64% to 100%, with the mean score rising from 8.27 to 9.60. Furthermore, a Wilcoxon test yielded p < .001 and r = .62, confirming significant differences with a large effect size. The study concludes that EquiLAB is an effective tool that lowers abstraction barriers and strengthens conceptual mastery.

Sección:
Artículos originales

Referencias

  1. Abdulla, S., Nafees, M., El-Borgi, S., & Srinivasa, A. (2025). An integrated e-learning approach for teaching statics to undergraduate engineering students. International Journal of Mechanical Engineering Education, 53(1), 83–101. https://doi.org/10.1177/03064190231209332
  2. Addido, J., Burrows, A., & Slater, T. (2022). The effect of the conceptual change model on conceptual understanding of electrostatics. Education Sciences, 12(10), 696. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci12100696
  3. Aguay-Saquicaray, D. C., Aguirre-Ruiz, D. E., Aguay-Saquicaray, D. S., & Ilbay-Telenchano, A. B. (2025). Efectividad de la simulación computacional en la enseñanza de la física en educación superior: Una revisión sistemática. Revista InveCom, 6(2), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.16051280
  4. Álvarez-Siordia, F. M., Merino-Soto, C., Rosas-Meléndez, S. A., Pérez-Díaz, M., & Chans, G. M. (2025). Simulators as an innovative strategy in the teaching of physics in higher education. Education Sciences, 15(2), 131. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci15020131
  5. Bizzio, M. Á., Guirado, A. M., & Maturano-Arrabal, C. I. (2024). Uso de simulaciones científicas interactivas para fortalecer la formación inicial de docentes de Química. Revista Educación, 48(1), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.15517/revedu.v48i1.56052
  6. Céspedes Castillo, L. M., & Méndez Rodríguez, E. (2025). Rendimiento académico en física básica según modalidad, género y docente en educación superior. Revista Multidisciplinaria Voces de América y el Caribe, 2(2), 584–602. https://doi.org/10.69821/REMUVAC.v2i2.261
  7. Cordoba Rivas, J. (2024). Aprendizaje significativo mediante la contextualización de los saberes en el área de matemáticas y física. Ciencia Latina Revista Científica Multidisciplinar, 8(1), 5903–5931. https://doi.org/10.37811/cl_rcm.v8i1.9936
  8. Danielo, B., & Coleoni, E. (2024). Aprendizajes de un profesor de física en formación: Lo didáctico y lo afectivo. Revista de Enseñanza de la Física, 36(1), 67–78. https://doi.org/10.55767/2451.6007.v36.n1.45313
  9. Fukaya, T., Nakamura, D., Kitayama, Y., & Nakagoshi, T. (2024). A systematic review and meta-analysis of intervention studies on mathematics and science pedagogical content knowledge. Frontiers in Education, 9, 1435758. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2024.1435758
  10. Gaurina, M., Alajbeg, A., & Weber, I. (2025). The power of play: Investigating the effects of gamification on motivation and engagement in physics classroom. Education Sciences, 15(1), 104. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci15010104
  11. González-Mena, G., Lozada-Flores, O., Murrieta Caballero, D., Noguez, J., & Escobar-Castillejos, D. (2024). Improving engineering students’ understanding of classical physics through visuo-haptic simulations. Frontiers in Robotics and AI, 11, 1305615. https://doi.org/10.3389/frobt.2024.1305615
  12. Guerra-Reyes, F. E., Guerra-Dávila, E. O., & Díaz-Martínez, E. (2025). Didactic analysis of natural science textbooks in Ecuador: A critical review from a constructivist perspective. Education Sciences, 15(10), 1312. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci15101312
  13. Ješková, Z., Šnajder, Ľ., & Guniš, J. (2024). Active learning in STEM education. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 2715(1), 012019. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/2715/1/012019
  14. Kozhabekova, E., Serikbayeva, F., Yermekova, Z., Nurkasymova, S., & Balta, N. (2025). Pre-service physics teachers’ perceptions of interdisciplinary teaching: Confidence, challenges, and institutional influences. Education Sciences, 15(8), 960. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci15080960
  15. Lichtenberger, A., Hofer, S. I., Stern, E., & Vaterlaus, A. (2025). Enhanced conceptual understanding through formative assessment: Results of a randomized controlled intervention study in physics classes. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 37(1), 5–33. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11092-024-09445-6
  16. Marake, M., Jita, L., & Tsakeni, M. (2026). Exploring science teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge based on instructional approaches used to teach force concepts. European Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 14(1), 68–84. https://doi.org/10.30935/scimath/17624
  17. Muñoz Alvarez, G., Greca, I. M., & Arriassecq, I. (2025). Problem-based learning as a strategy for teaching physics in technical–professional higher education: A case study in Chile. Education Sciences, 15(8), 941. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci15080941
  18. Muñoz, L., Arancibia, P., & Carrasco, L. (2025). Eficacia de las simulaciones PhET en el aprendizaje del electromagnetismo para estudiantes de educación superior: Una herramienta virtual en situación de pandemia. Revista de Enseñanza de la Física, 37(2), 59–73. https://doi.org/10.55767/2451.6007.v37.n2.51175
  19. Mutmainna, M., Istiyono, E., Haryanto, H., Retnawati, H., & Setiawan, C. (2025). Physics teachers’ perceptions about diagnostic assessment of students’ physics misconception: A phenomenological study. The Qualitative Report, 30(11), 4611–4635. https://doi.org/10.46743/2160-3715/2025.6938
  20. Neri, L., Noguez, J., Escobar-Castillejos, D., Robledo-Rella, V., García-Castelán, R. M. G., Gonzalez-Nucamendi, A., Magana, A. J., & Benes, B. (2024). Enhancing buoyant force learning through a visuo-haptic environment: A case study. Frontiers in Robotics and AI, 11, 1276027. https://doi.org/10.3389/frobt.2024.1276027
  21. Ochogboju, A. O., & Díez-Palomar, J. (2025). Modeling concrete and virtual manipulatives for mathematics teacher training: A case study in ICT-enhanced pedagogies. Information, 16(8), 698. https://doi.org/10.3390/info16080698
  22. Okeke, U. K., & Ramaila, S. (2025). Comparative analysis of the impact of instructional models on students’ attitudes towards physics: Exploring the cognitivist and constructivist perspectives. African Journal of Research in Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 29(1), 54–67. https://doi.org/10.1080/18117295.2024.2449299
  23. Ordoñez Celi, J. S., León Bravo, F. E., & Bustamante Bustamante, J. J. (2024). Experiencias docentes en la enseñanza de Física. EDUCARE ET COMUNICARE Revista de investigación de la Facultad de Humanidades, 11(2), 80–90. https://doi.org/10.35383/educare.v11i2.724
  24. Papalazarou, N., Lefkos, I., & Fachantidis, N. (2024). The effect of physical and virtual inquiry-based experiments on students’ attitudes and learning. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 33(3), 349–364. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-023-10088-3
  25. Ramma, Y., Bholoa, A., & Watts, M. (2024). In-service physics teachers’ content knowledge: A critical reflection on the case of the upthrust concept. Education Inquiry, 1–31. https://doi.org/10.1080/20004508.2024.2412878
  26. Salami, I. E., & Perry, L. A. (2025). Challenges in engineering statics: Students’ perceptions of their difficulties. In 2025 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition. https://doi.org/10.18260/1-2--56077
  27. Siller, H. S., & Ahmad, S. (2024). The effect of concrete and virtual manipulative blended instruction on mathematical achievement for elementary school students. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, 24(2), 229–266. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42330-024-00336-y
  28. Singh-Pillay, A. (2024). Exploring science and technology teachers’ experiences with integrating simulation-based learning. Education Sciences, 14(8), 803. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci14080803
  29. Tique Escobar, D. L., & Lugo Lopez, N. D. (2026). Trends in virtual and remote laboratories for physics education: A bibliometric analysis (2014–2024). European Journal of Physics, 47(2), 023001. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/400782896_Trends_in_virtual_and_remote_laboratories_for_physics_education_a_bibliometric_analysis_2014-2024
  30. Trujillo Yaipén, W. M., Curo Maquén, L. A., Paredes López, L. R., & Carbajal Cornejo, K. (2024). Eficiencia de los simuladores virtuales en la competencia de indagación para el aprendizaje de física elemental. Telos: Revista de Estudios Interdisciplinarios en Ciencias Sociales, 25(2), 459–476. https://doi.org/10.36390/telos252.15