Um Mapeamento Sistemático da Literatura sobre Iniciativas que avaliam a Experiência do Aprendiz


A Learner eXperience (LX) pode ser definida como percepções e desempenhos dos estudantes interagindo com ambientes de aprendizagem, produtos educacionais e recursos. É importante avaliar a LX, a fim de analisar aspectos da experiência dos estudantes no uso de tecnologias educacionais que impactam em sua aprendizagem. Portanto, este artigo apresenta um Mapeamento Sistemático da Literatura (MSL) que teve como objetivo identificar as iniciativas que avaliam a LX e que utilizam recursos tecnológicos na aprendizagem. Dezoito estudos foram analisados e os resultados mostram que há variações significativas de elementos e recursos tenológicos utilizados nas avaliações de LX. Este MSL apresenta diferentes formas de avaliar LX com recursos tecnológicos.

Palavras-chave: Learner eXperience, Elementos de LX, Recursos tecnológicos, Avaliação da LX


Agarwal, R., Edwards, S. H., and Pérez-Quiñones, M. A. (2006). Designing an adaptive learning module to teach software testing. In Proceedings of the 37th SIGCSE technical symposium on Computer science education, pages 259–263.

Camilleri, V., de Freitas, S., Montebello, M., and McDonagh-Smith, P. (2013). A case study inside virtual worlds: use of analytics for immersive spaces. In Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Learning Analytics and Knowledge, pages 230–234.

Campos, T., Damasceno, E., and Valentim, N. M. (2022). Proposta e avaliação de um si colaborativo para apoio a revisões sistemáticas e estudos de mapeamento. In Anais do XVIII Simpósio Brasileiro de Sistemas de Informação (SBSI).

Chapman, J. R., Seeley, E. L., Wright, N. S., Glenn, L. M., and Adams, L. L. (2016). An empirical evaluation of a broad ranging e-text adoption with recommendations for improving deployment success for students. e-Journal of Business Education and Scholarship of Teaching, 10(2):1–14.

Corbin, B. (2019). Students’ wants and preferences for essay feedback in college level english courses. English in Texas, 49(2):24–30

Dias, J. and Diaz, R. S. (2021). Ensino híbrido no processo de aprendizagem de programação: uma revisão sistemática. RENOTE, 19(2):396–405.

Donelan, H. and Kear, K. (2018). Creating and collaborating: students’ and tutors’ perceptions of an online group project. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 19(2).

Dune, T., Bidewell, J., Firdaus, R., and Kirwan, M. (2016). Communication idol: Using popular culture to catalyse active learning by engaging students in the development of entertaining teaching and learning resources. Journal of University Teaching & Learning Practice, 13(5):15

El Mawas, N., Tal, I., Moldovan, A.-N., Bogusevschi, D., Andrews, J., Muntean, G.-M., and Muntean, C. H. (2020). Investigating the impact of an adventure-based 3d solar system game on primary school learning process. Knowledge Management & E-Learning: An International Journal, 12(2):165–190.

Fotaris, P., Mastoras, T., Leinfellner, R., and Rosunally, Y. (2016). Climbing up the leaderboard: An empirical study of applying gamification techniques to a computer programming class. Electronic Journal of e-learning, 14(2):94–110.

França, G. A., Yoshida, D. A., Mazzoni, U. R. C., and Fernando, P. H. L. (2019). As tecnologias emergentes nos processos de inspeção da produção no conceito de indústria 4.0. REGRASP-Revista para Graduandos/IFSP-Câmpus São Paulo, 4(3):50–66

Harpstead, E., Richey, J. E., Nguyen, H., and McLaren, B. M. (2019). Exploring the subtleties of agency and indirect control in digital learning games. In Proceedings of the 9th international Conference on Learning Analytics & Knowledge, pages 121–129.

Huang, R., Spector, J. M., and Yang, J. (2019). Educational Technology a Primer for the 21st Century. Springer.

Huang, R., Yang, J., and Hu, Y. (2012). From digital to smart: The evolution and trends of learning environment. Open Education Research, 1(1):75–84.

Jraidi, I., Chaouachi, M., and Frasson, C. (2013). A dynamic multimodal approach for assessing learners’ interaction experience. In Proceedings of the 15th ACM on International conference on multimodal interaction, pages 271–278.

Kawano, A., Motoyama, Y., and Aoyama, M. (2019). A lx (learner experience)-based evaluation method of the education and training programs for professional software engineers. In Proceedings of the 2019 7th International Conference on Information and Education Technology, pages 151–159.

Keele, S. et al. (2007). Guidelines for performing systematic literature reviews in software engineering. Technical report, Technical report, ver. 2.3 ebse technical report. ebse.

Kitchenham, B. and Charters, S. (2007). Guidelines for performing systematic literature reviews in software engineering. Citeseer.

Lykke, M., Coto, M., Jantzen, C., Mora, S., and Vandel, N. (2015). Motivating students through positive learning experiences: A comparison of three learning designs for computer programming courses. Journal of Problem Based Learning in Higher Education, 3(2):80–108.

Magyar, N. and Haley, S. R. (2020). Balancing learner experience and user experience in a peer feedback web application for moocs. In Extended Abstracts of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pages 1–8.

Nygren, E., Blignaut, A. S., Leendertz, V., and Sutinen, E. (2019). Quantitizing affective data as project evaluation on the use of a mathematics mobile game and intelligent tutoring system. Informatics in Education, 18(2):375–402.

Pinheiro, F. D. C., Von Wangenheim, C. G., and Missfeldt Filho, R. (2018). Teaching software engineering in k-12 education: A systematic mapping study. Informatics in Education, 17(2):167.

Reyna, J. and Meier, P. (2018). Using the learner-generated digital media (lgdm) framework in tertiary science education: a pilot study. Education Sciences, 8(3):106.

Roll, I., Macfadyen, L. P., and Sandilands, D. (2015). Evaluating the relationship between course structure, learner activity, and perceived value of online courses. In Proceedings of the Second (2015) ACM Conference on Learning@ Scale, pages 385–388.

Ruiz, J. and Snoeck, M. (2018). Adapting kirkpatrick’s evaluation model to technology enhanced learning. In Proceedings of the 21st ACM/IEEE International Conference on Model Driven Engineering Languages and Systems: Companion Proceedings, pages 135–142.

Santos, G. C., Eive, D., and Valentim, N. M. (2022). Relatório técnico: Um mapeamento sistemático sobre iniciativas que avaliam a experiência de aprendizagem. Disponível em:

Shi, L. (2014). Defining and evaluating learner experience for social adaptive e-learning. In 2014 Imperial College Computing Student Workshop. Schloss Dagstuhl-Leibniz-Zentrum fuer Informatik.

Silva, D. E., Lopes, T., Sobrinho, M. C., and Valentim, N. M. C. (2021). Investigating initiatives to promote the advancement of education 4.0: A systematic mapping study. In CSEDU (1), pages 458–466.

Stanley, D. and Zhang, J. (2018). Do studentstudent-produced produced videos videos enhance enhance engagement engagement and learning learning in the online online environmentenvironment. Online Learning, 22(2).

Tabares, M. S., Vallejo, P., Montoya, A., Sanchez, J., and Correa, D. (2021). Seca: A feedback rules model in a ubiquitous microlearning context. In International Conference on Data Science, E-learning and Information Systems 2021, pages 136–142.

Vosylius, A. E. and Lapin, K. (2015). Usability of educational websites for tablet computers. In Proceedings of the Mulitimedia, Interaction, Design and Innnovation, pages 1–10.

Witthaus, G. (2018). Findings from a case study on refugees using moocs to (re) enter higher education. Open Praxis, 10(4):343–357.

Yeh, S.-W. and Chen, C.-T. (2019). Efl learners’ peer negotiations and attitudes in mobile-assisted collaborative writing. Language Education & Assessment, 2(1):41–56.
Como Citar

Selecione um Formato
SANTOS, Gabriela C. dos; SILVA, Deivid Eive dos S.; VALENTIM, Natasha M. C.. Um Mapeamento Sistemático da Literatura sobre Iniciativas que avaliam a Experiência do Aprendiz. In: SIMPÓSIO BRASILEIRO DE INFORMÁTICA NA EDUCAÇÃO, 33. , 2022, Manaus. Anais [...]. Porto Alegre: Sociedade Brasileira de Computação, 2022 . p. 621-633. DOI: