Sinergia entre Motivación Intrínseca, Retroalimentación Formativa y Metodologías Activas: Impacto en el Rendimiento Académico y la Viabilidad Constructiva en la Enseñanza de Estructuras para Arquitectura
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.69639/arandu.v13i1.2184Palabras clave:
enseñanza de estructuras, motivación intrínseca, retroalimentación formativa, metodologías activas, rendimiento académicoResumen
La enseñanza de estructuras en las facultades de arquitectura enfrenta el reto histórico de integrar el rigor del cálculo matemático con la libertad del diseño creativo. El presente artículo analiza, mediante una revisión sistemática de la literatura de los últimos cinco años (2021-2026), cómo la interacción estratégica entre la motivación intrínseca, la retroalimentación formativa y las metodologías activas transforma el aprendizaje de esta disciplina. Los hallazgos revelan que el uso de modelos como el Flipped Classroom, el Aprendizaje Basado en Problemas (ABP) y las simulaciones interactivas reduce significativamente la ansiedad matemática y aumenta el compromiso del estudiante. Se evidencia que la retroalimentación continua actúa como un puente cognitivo que permite a los alumnos transitar de la teoría técnica a la aplicación práctica, percibiendo la estructura no como una carga punitiva, sino como un recurso de diseño esencial. La conclusión principal destaca una correlación positiva entre esta sinergia pedagógica y un incremento en el rendimiento académico, manifestado en proyectos con una mayor coherencia y viabilidad constructiva. Este enfoque integral propone un cambio de paradigma en la educación arquitectónica, donde la estabilidad y la estética convergen mediante un diseño instruccional centrado en la autoeficacia y la relevancia profesional.
Descargas
Citas
[1] Endres P.D. and Wetzel C., “Structure and architecture in the design studio,” in Structures and Architecture , CRC Press, 2013, pp. 1875–1882. Accessed: Mar. 09, 2026. [Online]. Available: https://www.taylorfrancis.com/chapters/edit/10.1201/b15267-256/structure-architecture-design-studio-endres-wetzel
[2] S. Kathrina, “Iterating Structures: Teaching Engineering as Design,” Journal of Architectural Engineering, vol. 20, no. 3, p. 05014003, Sep. 2014, doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)AE.1943-5568.0000152
[3] I. K. Chang, M. P. Callahan, P. Lu, H. Y. Chan, and S. Luong, “Teaching seismic and wind subjects to architecture students,” in Structures and Architecture: Concepts, Applications and Challenges - Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Structures and Architecture, ICSA 2013, 2013, pp. 1206–1213. doi: 10.1201/b15267-168.
[4] M. Callahan, S. Shadravan, and C. Leinneweber, “Blending structural application into architectural design studios,” in Structures and Architecture - Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Structures and Architecture, ICSA 2016, 2016, pp. 814–821. doi: 10.1201/b20891-113.
[5] O. S. LoPiccolo, “Implementing student-built physical models: Advanced framing and 3" cube to improve spatial reasoning ability among freshmen architectural engineering and construction management students,” in ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Conference Proceedings, 2011. [Online]. Available: https://scopus.puce.elogim.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85029034713&partnerID=40&md5=c9cf29af56c922bb06da18c391f6b07a
[6] N. G. Canakcioglu, O. Karadag, and Y. E. Esgin, “Structural literacy in architectural studio learning,” European Journal of Engineering Education, vol. 49, no. 5, pp. 965–991, 2024, doi: 10.1080/03043797.2024.2378861.
[7] B. T. E and M. R. M, “The Bowers Program: Effects of Cross-Disciplinary Design Activities on Architectural Engineering Student Performance,” Journal of Architectural Engineering, vol. 9, no. 4, pp. 119–125, Dec. 2003, doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)1076-0431(2003)9:4(119).
[8] J. Cleary, “Using the Flipped Classroom Model in a Junior Level Course to Increase Student Learning and Success,” Journal of Civil Engineering Education, vol. 146, no. 3, 2020, doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)EI.2643-9115.0000015.
[9] M. H. Head, C. Aloupis, J. H. Hanson, and A. A. Jayne, “Promoting Student Learning and Teaching in the Virtual Environment and In-PersonPromoting Student Learning and Teaching in the Virtual Environment and In-Person,” in ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Conference Proceedings, 2022. [Online]. Available: https://scopus.puce.elogim.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85138308707&partnerID=40&md5=32194f9a12f9c7b1a4924513dcc15e0f
[10] D. P. McCrum, “Evaluation of creative problem-solving abilities in undergraduate structural engineers through interdisciplinary problem-based learning,” European Journal of Engineering Education, vol. 42, no. 6, pp. 684–700, 2017, doi: 10.1080/03043797.2016.1216089.
[11] M. X. Rodriguez-Paz et al., “The Digital Transformation of Structural Analysis Courses: Implemented Changes in Recent Years,” in ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Conference Proceedings, 2025. doi: 10.18260/1-2--57211.
[12] V. Carbonell, C. Romero, E. Martínez, and M. Flórez, “Interactive simulations as teaching tools for engineering mechanics courses,” Eur. J. Phys., vol. 34, no. 4, pp. 991–1004, 2013, doi: 10.1088/0143-0807/34/4/991.
[13] S. Motaref, “Exploring Experiential Assessment in Mechanics of Materials: A Departure from Traditional Examinations,” in ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Conference Proceedings, 2024. [Online]. Available: https://scopus.puce.elogim.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85202020149&partnerID=40&md5=55010b53ced0299ae8bc32a5f9b5bde9
[14] J. G. Rangel-Ramirez, S. E. Crespo, M. X. Rodriguez-Paz, and L. H. H. Carrasco, “A Continous Evaluation System for a Challenge-Based Structural Engineering Courses,” in ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Conference Proceedings, 2024. [Online]. Available: https://scopus.puce.elogim.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85202057522&partnerID=40&md5=d121aebc42d91440f77da23fb621f009
[15] M. Akaki and T. Maeno, “THE SYSTEMATIC FEEDBACK METHOD FOR IDEATION MODE IN WORKSHOPS,” in Proceedings of the Design Society, 2023, pp. 3523–3532. doi: 10.1017/pds.2023.353.
[16] K. McLachlan and N. Tippett, “Kickstarting creative collaboration: placing authentic feedback at the heart of online digital media education,” Assess. Eval. High. Educ., vol. 49, no. 2, pp. 246–261, 2024, doi: 10.1080/02602938.2023.2209295.
[17] B. Frank, N. Simper, and J. Kaupp, “Formative feedback and scaffolding for developing complex problem solving and modelling outcomes,” European Journal of Engineering Education, vol. 43, no. 4, pp. 552–568, 2018, doi: 10.1080/03043797.2017.1299692.
[18] K. W. Michael Siu, “Formative student feedback: Enhancing the quality of learning and teaching,” in Enhancing Learning and Teaching Through Student Feedback in Engineering, 2012, pp. 43–59. doi: 10.1016/B978-1-84334-645-6.50003-3.
[19] E. Kalaitzopoulou, P. Matthews, S. Mystakidis, and A. Christopoulos, “Engagement with Optional Formative Feedback in a Portfolio-Based Digital Design Module,” Information (Switzerland), vol. 14, no. 5, May 2023, doi: 10.3390/info14050287.
[20] J. Bai and A. Mohan Singh, “Exploring Computer-Aided Environmental Art Design: A Course Overview,” Data and Metadata, vol. 4, Jan. 2025, doi: 10.56294/dm2025488.
[21] S. Söderström, T. Palm, and C. Granberg, “The effects of mathematical ability and motivational beliefs on students’ perceptions of feedback usefulness,” Front. Educ. (Lausanne)., vol. 9, 2024, doi: 10.3389/feduc.2024.1374664.
[22] J.-W. Strijbos, R. J. Pat-El, and S. Narciss, “Structural validation of a feedback perceptions questionnaire,” in Learning in the Disciplines: ICLS 2010 Conference Proceedings - 9th International Conference of the Learning Sciences, 2010, pp. 334–335. [Online]. Available: https://scopus.puce.elogim.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-84880547465&partnerID=40&md5=9ff59caa8df29e3030be37615e455e12
[23] B. Qi, L. Ma, and X. Wang, “Using meta-analytic path analysis to examine mechanisms relating students’ perceived feedback, motivation, self-efficacy, and academic performance,” Learn. Motiv., vol. 88, 2024, doi: 10.1016/j.lmot.2024.102059.
[24] V. Induja, M. G. Nair, and A. Suryan, “Transdisciplinary learning exercise on post occupancy evaluation and retrofitting of built spaces,” Environ. Dev. Sustain., vol. 27, no. 9, pp. 20493–20517, 2025, doi: 10.1007/s10668-022-02531-z.
[25] Y. Hu, S. Grigoryan, N. Ullah, and M. Ding, “Application of Outcome-Based Education Framework for the ‘Design Workshop’ Course in Emerging Engineering Education,” in Proceedings - Frontiers in Education Conference, FIE, 2022. doi: 10.1109/FIE56618.2022.9962593.
[26] L. Mackintosh, “Just doing it: The role of experiential learning and integrated curricula in architectural education,” International Journal of Pedagogy and Curriculum, vol. 20, no. 3, pp. 67–78, 2014, doi: 10.18848/2327-7963/cgp/v20i03/48969.
[27] E. V Ellis and D. A. Kratzer, “Transforming structure: The metaphorical construction process and structural design,” in Structures and Architecture: Bridging the Gap and Crossing Borders - Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Structures and Architecture, ICSA 2019, 2019, pp. 540–547. doi: 10.1201/9781315229126-64.
[28] T. Lorenz, A. B. H. de Bruin, and R. Crutzen, “Effects of item-based feedback in Computer-Based Learning environments on autonomous motivation: a systematic review,” Dec. 01, 2025, Elsevier B.V. doi: 10.1016/j.chbr.2025.100818.
[29] L. Ukaj and A. Reshani, “The Mediating Role of Motivation and Students’ Engagement in the Relationship Between Perceived Feedback and Academic Success,” Human Research in Rehabilitation, vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 69–81, 2025, doi: 10.21554/hrr.042506.
[30] E. L. Dietrich and S. C. McWatt, “Exploring perceptions of alternative assessment and grading in graduate anatomy education,” Anat. Sci. Educ., vol. 18, no. 2, pp. 172–191, Feb. 2025, doi: 10.1002/ase.2550.
[31] N. Fang, “Correlation between students’ motivated strategies for learning and academic achievement in an engineering dynamics course,” Global Journal of Engineering Education, vol. 16, no. 1, pp. 6–12, 2014, [Online]. Available: https://scopus.puce.elogim.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-84899486992&partnerID=40&md5=8a508cb22bf1f0e6f6be69b71b4868d6
[32] A. Bedel and E. Hamarta, “The Relationship between Interpersonal Problem Solving and Academic Motivation 1,” 2014. [Online]. Available: http://ilkogretim-online.org.tr
[33] Å. Diseth and T. Kobbeltvedt, “A mediation analysis of achievement motives, goals, learning strategies, and academic achievement,” British Journal of Educational Psychology, vol. 80, no. 4, pp. 671–687, 2010, doi: 10.1348/000709910X492432.
[34] L. M. G. Costa and M. J. C. S. Reis, “Motivational Teaching Techniques in Secondary and Higher Education: A Systematic Review of Active Learning Methodologies,” Sep. 01, 2025, Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute (MDPI). doi: 10.3390/digital5030040.
[35] N. Monazam-Tabrizi, Y. Kurt, and W. il K. Kang, “Navigating learning disruptions: The role of digital learning platforms in student motivation, feedback and emotion,” Comput. Educ., vol. 246, Jun. 2026, doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2025.105534.
Publicado
Cómo citar
Número
Sección
Licencia
Derechos de autor 2026 Luis Jaime Fernández Sánchez, Luis Manuel Fernández Delgado, Diego Enrique Fernández Sánchez, Roberto Sebastián Quintana Vásconez
Esta obra está bajo una licencia internacional Creative Commons Atribución 4.0.
Esta publicación está bajo una 
