<table><caption>**Table 11** Categories for tutorial interventions</caption><thead><tr><td>Category</td><td>Description</td></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Beginning of the debate</td><td>The topic of discussion and the guiding questions that will bring the debate to life are presented, and the participants are asked to intervene in the development of the debate</td></tr><tr><td>Partial synthesis</td><td>What was discussed is summarized, highlighting the main contributions and refocusing the discussion with new questions</td></tr><tr><td>Final summary</td><td>What was discussed is summarized, highlighting the main contributions, and the debate is finalized</td></tr><tr><td>Rationale</td><td>The participants are invited to express themselves in more detail on the issues they raise</td></tr><tr><td>Applicability</td><td>There is a focus on reflection concerning how the course work can contribute to their professional development</td></tr><tr><td>Exchange of experiences and information</td><td>Interventions aimed at facilitating participants to share experiences and information, which could be useful for other participants</td></tr><tr><td>Feedback</td><td>Interventions that guide the participant in the course work and the use of resources</td></tr></tbody></table>

Source Taken from [29]

<table><caption>**Table 12** Categories for interventions by participating teachers</caption><thead><tr><td>Category</td><td>Description</td></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Theoretic elements</td><td>They present theoretical elements related to learning theories and cognitive foundations related to the course contents</td></tr><tr><td>Previous experience</td><td>They intervene from their experiences related to their own teaching practice or from those narrated by other participants</td></tr><tr><td>Course appreciation</td><td>Course appreciation and the influence of the course on their professional development are given</td></tr><tr><td>Transfer to the Classroom</td><td>They refer to the transfer to the classroom of the various aspects of the course such as: activities, materials, methodological strategies among others</td></tr><tr><td>New training needs</td><td>They express the need for further teacher training related to course content, didactic strategies for teaching course content, and mastery and integration of ICT resources</td></tr><tr><td>Structural problems</td><td>They refer to structural problems that hinder teaching practice and innovations, which do not depend on the teacher, such as lack of technological infrastructure, time, material and support from pedagogical and/or managerial teams</td></tr></tbody></table>

Source Taken from [29]

<figure><img src="image_62.png" /></figure>
<figure><img src="image_63.png" /><figcaption>**Fig. 1** Methodological strategy for the analysis of interaction in CMC environments</figcaption></figure>

<table><caption>**Table 13** Times and types of interaction per session in the electronic forum modality</caption><thead><tr><th rowspan="2">Session</th><th rowspan="2">Time of use of the platform</th><th colspan="3">Type and number of interactions</th></tr><tr><th>General Exploration</th><th>Task orientation</th><th>Contribution to the task (number of messages)</th></tr></thead><tbody></tbody></table>

Source Taken from [30]

<table><caption>**Table 14** Percentage of categories of the types of presence of participants in the forum</caption><thead><tr><th>Presence</th><th>Categories</th><th>Frequency</th><th>Percentage</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td rowspan="3">Teacher presence (coded segments)</td><td>Instructional design and organization</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Facilitating discourse</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Direct teaching</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td rowspan="4">Cognitive presence (coded segments)</td><td>Trigger event</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Exploration</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Integration</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Resolution</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td rowspan="3">Social presence (coded segments)</td><td>Affective</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Interactive</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Cohesive</td><td></td><td></td></tr></tbody></table>

Source Taken from [30]

<figure><img src="image_64.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_65.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_66.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_67.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_68.png" /></figure>
<table><caption>**Table 15** Knowledge construction (KC) in the forum, phase 1 and phase 2, without teacher presence</caption><thead><tr><th>Phase 1 extract</th><th>KC Phase (Gunawardena Model, 1997)</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Al: Student with little prior knowledge of the subject</td><td>1. Share/compare information</td></tr><tr><td>Phase 2 extract</td><td>KC Phase (Gunawardena Model, 1997)</td></tr><tr><td>A2: Student with an advanced level of knowledge on the subject</td><td>2. Exploration of dissonances and inconsistencies between ideas and concepts</td></tr></tbody></table>

*Source* Taken from [30]

<table><caption>**Table 16** Strategies used by the tutor to support knowledge construction in the forum</caption><thead><tr><th>Phase 4 extract: Evaluation or modification of ideas (co-construction)</th><th>Discursive Strategies</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>T: Teacher<br>S2: Student with an advanced level of knowledge on the subject</td><td>Joint construction</td></tr><tr><td>T: Teacher<br>S2: Student with an advanced level of knowledge on the subject</td><td>Repetition/Elaboration</td></tr></tbody></table>

*Source* Taken from [30]

<table><caption>**Table 17** Type of Strategies used by the tutor to support knowledge construction (Phase 5) in Forum 2</caption><thead><tr><th>Phase 5 extract: New agreements/application of new meanings</th><th>Discursive Strategies</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>T: Teacher<br>S2: Student with an advanced level of knowledge on the subject<br>A3: Student with an intermediate level of knowledge on the subject</td><td>Joint construction<br>Anaphoric connection</td></tr><tr><td>T: Teacher<br>S2: Student with an advanced level of knowledge on the subject</td><td>Repetition/elaboration</td></tr></tbody></table>

*Source* Taken from [30]

### 3.4.3 Content Analysis in Virtual Interactions

Content analysis is a method for studying interactions based on a constructivist and collaborative approach to learning, defined on the basis of three stages: (i) communication of information; (ii) first response to this information; and (iii) second response to the initial information, related to the first one [31] (Table 18).

The approach of the analysis requires recognizing the roles of participation. Table 19 describes the forms of participation.

## 4 By Way of Conclusion

The process of analyzing interactions demands several stages, some concurrent and other preliminary, the important thing is to identify the categories of analysis, which

<figure><img src="image_69.png" /></figure>
<table><caption>**Table 18** Categories of analysis</caption><thead><tr><th>Dimension</th><th>Operationalization</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Participatory</td><td>Participation in general, whose indicator is the number of contributions to the discussion and the active participation or direct involvement in the learning process</td></tr><tr><td>Social</td><td>All those participations that are not related to the learning process</td></tr><tr><td>Interactive</td><td>Interactive participations<br>Implicit answers<br>Explicit answers<br>Implicit comments<br>Explicit comments<br>Independent participations<br>Unrelated participations</td></tr><tr><td>Cognitive</td><td>1. Initial clarification: where a basic understanding of the problem is given, identifying its components<br>2. Deep clarification: where values, beliefs and assumptions underlying the problem definition are identified<br>3. Inferences (deductive and inductive), admitting or proposing an idea based on its connection with propositions previously assumed to be true<br>4. Judgment, which includes decision making, propositions, appreciations and criticisms, and<br>5. Strategies, which include the proposal of coordinated actions for the implementation of a solution or a decision</td></tr><tr><td>Metacognitive</td><td>It includes evidence of metacognitive knowledge (declarative) and metacognitive skills (procedural knowledge about assessment, planning, self-regulation and self-reception)</td></tr></tbody></table>

Source Taken from [31]

as we have seen, vary from model to model. In any case, the study of the interactions leads to the identification of the aspects that contribute to the construction of knowledge. To that extent, it is important to consider the variety of dimensions and categories involved. This overview of the models of analysis of interactions not only shows the diversity of categories involved, but also the need to integrate them, in order to have a better understanding of the collaborative construction of knowledge.

369

370

371

372

373

374

<figure><img src="image_70.png" /></figure>
<table><caption>**Table 19** Roles assumed by students</caption><thead><tr><td>Role</td><td>Description</td><td>Forms of participation</td></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Initiator</td><td>The student who always initiates the interactions. He/she is usually identified during the first few days after the face-to-face session</td><td>He/she starts bis/her participation with phrases such as "I think ... " or "In my opinion ..."</td></tr><tr><td>Helpers</td><td>These students do not let conflicts appear; they always agree with their peers' previous comments</td><td>They initiate their participation with phrases like "I agree with what you mention, [name of the addressee of the comment] ... ", "I couldn't agree more with you, [addressee], "What you say, [addressee], is very interesting"</td></tr><tr><td>Troublesome</td><td>Students who, at least once a week, demonstrate against some of their classmates' contributions. They do not offer very deep arguments about why they do not agree</td><td>Their contributions are brief and clearly against the ideas of some of their peers in the group. They do not offer many arguments to support their point of view</td></tr><tr><td>Occasionally against</td><td>Students who are generally in favor of the comments of others, but who at some point express an opinion against</td><td>This type of student offers ample justification for not supporting the comments of a given partner. They strive in their arguments to make it clear that this is not a personal matter</td></tr><tr><td>Mediators</td><td>They are students who, when faced with a situation of disagreement, seek to mediate so that the discussion ends</td><td>In this case, the comments issued by the mediators go towards the resolution of a conflict; they use phrases such as "... let's see, let's continue with the initial discussion ... "</td></tr></tbody></table>

Source Taken from [31]

References

375

1. García-Ruiz, R., Aguaded, I., Bartolomé, A.: La revolución del "blended learning" en la educación a distancia. RIED Rev. Iberoam. Educ. Distancia **21(1)**, 25-32 (2017)

376

377

2. Aleksi, V., Ivanovic, M.: Blended Learning in Tertiary Education: A Case Study. BCI, 19-21 Sept 2013, Thessaloniki, Greece (2013)

378

379

3. González, M., Perdomo, K., Pascuas, Y.: Aplicación de las TIC en modelos educativos blended learning: una revisión sistemática de literatura. Sophia **13**(1), 144-154 (2017)

380

381

4. Castro-Rodríguez, Y., Lara-Verástegui, R.: Percepción del Blended Learning en el proceso enseñanza-aprendizaje por estudiantes del posgrado de Odontología. Educ. Médica **19**(4), 223-228 (2017)

382

383

384

5. Turpo-Gebera, O., García-Peñalvo, F.: La producción científica sobre el Blended Learning en Perú: avances y perspectivas. EDUTEC 2019, Lima, pp. 1087-1097 (2019)

385

386

6. Aguaded, I., Cabero, J.: Tecnologías y medios para la educación en la e-sociedad. Alianza, Madrid (2013)

387

388

<figure><img src="image_71.png" /></figure>
7. García-Peñalvo, F.: Cómo entender el concepto de presencialidad en los procesos educativos en el siglo XXI. Educ. Knowl. Soc. (EKS) **16**(2), 6-12 (2015)

8. García-Aretio, L., Ruíz, M.: La eficacia de la educación a distancia: ¿un problema resuelto? Teoría Educ. **22**(1), 141-162 (2010)

9. Turpo-Gebera, O., Hernández Serrano, M.: La convergencia pedagógica y tecnológica de la modalidad "Blended learning". In: Martín García, A. (ed.). Blended learning en Educación Superior. Perspectivas de innovación y cambio (pp. 101-119). Síntesis, Madrid (2014)

10. Yiloria, H., Hamburger, J.: Uso de las herramientas comunicativas en los entornos virtuales de aprendizaje. Chasqui. Rev. Latinoam. Comun. **140**, 367-384 (2019)

11. Coll, C., Mauri, M., Onrubia, J.: Análisis de los usos reales de las TIC en contextos educativos formales: una aproximación sociocultural REDIE. Rev. Electrón. Investig. Educ. **10**, 1-18 (2008)

12. Perera, H.: Estudio de la interacción didáctica en E-learning. Tesis doctoral. Universidad de Sevilla (2007)

13. Bartolomé, A.: Blended Learning. Conceptos básicos. Pixel-Bit, Rev. Medios Edu**23**, 7-20 (2004)

14. Adell, J., Area, M.: eLearning: Enseñar y aprender en espacios virtuales. In: De Pablos, J. (ed.) Tecnología Educativa. La formación del profesorado en la era de Internet. Aljibe, Málaga, pp. 391-424 (2009)

15. Salinas, J., De Benito, B., Pérez, A., Gisbert, M.: Blended Learning, más allá de la clase presencial. RIED. Rev. Iberoam. Educ. Distancia**21**(1), 195-213 (2018)

16. Serrano, J., Pons, R.: La concepción constructivista de la instrucción: Hacia un replanteamiento del triángulo interactivo. Rev. Mex. Investig. Educ. **38**, 681-712 (2008)

17. Fishman, D.: Transcending the efficacy versus effectiveness research debate: proposal for a new, electronic. J. Pragmatic Case Stud. (2000)

18. Coll, C., Martín, E., Mauri, T., Miras, M., Onrubia, J., Solé, I., Zabala, A.: El constructivismo en el aula. Graó, Barcelona (2007)

19. Gallucci, J.: Investigating the effect of increasing positive teacher-student interactions on adolescent behavior and teacher student relationships. Doctoral dissertations, Universidad de Connecticut (2014)

20. Morales, R., Infante-Moro, J., Gallardo-Pérez, J.: La mediación e iteración en un AYA para la gestión eficaz en el aprendizaje virtual. Campus Virtuales **8**(1), 49-61 (2019)

21. Yillalta, M., Palacios, D.: Discurso y práctica pedagógica en contextos de alto rendimiento escolar. Estud. Pedagógicos **40**(2), 373-389 (2014)

22. Torrado, J., Pozo, J.: Del dicho al hecho: De las concepciones sobre el aprendizaje a la práctica de la enseñanza de la música. En J. Pozo, N. Scheuer, M. Pérez, M. Mateos, E. Martín y M. De la Cruz, Nuevas formas de pensar la enseñanza y el aprendizaje. Las concepciones de profesores y alumnus, pp. 205-228. Graò, Barcelona (2006)

23. Zapata-Ros, M.: El diseño instruccional de los MOOC y el de los nuevos cursos abiertos personalizados. RED-Rev. Educ. Distancia **45** (2015).

24. Constatino, G.: Discurso Didáctico Electrónico: Los modos de interacción discursiva en el aula virtual en contraste con el aula presencial. Linguagem em (Dis)curso-LemD 6(2), 241-267 (2006)

25. Constantino, G., Álvarez, G.: Los foros de discusión en las prácticas de formación online: una propuesta para su análisis. Revista Did@xis on line **16** (2006)

26. Bossolasco, M.: El foro de discusión: entorno mediado para la mediación cognitiva (Masters thesis), ILCE (México)-UNT (Argentina) (2010)

27. Rinaudo, C., Donolo, D., Chiecher, A.: Interacciones entre profesores y alumnos en ambientes de aprendizaje asíncrono. In: reflexiones y propuestas sobre la educación superior actual. Serie Cuadernos Virtuales 1, Secretaria Academia de la UNRC (2005)

28. Badia, A., Becerril, L., Romero, M.: La construcción colaborativa de conocimiento en las redes de comunicación asíncrona y escrita (RCAE): una revisión de los instrumentos analíticos. Cult. Educ. **22**(4), 455-474 (2010)
29. Silvia, J., Gros, B.: Una propuesta para el análisis de interacciones en un espacio virtual de aprendizaje para la formación continua de los docentes. Teoría Educ. Educ. Cult. Soc. Inf. **8**(1), 81-105 (2007)

30. García, B., Márquez, L., Bustos, A., Miranda, G., Espíndola, S.: Análisis de los patrones de interacción y construcción del conocimiento en ambientes de aprendizaje en línea: una estrategia metodológica. Rev. Electrón. Investig. Educ. **10**(1), (2008)

31. Ponce-Rojo, A., Hernández-Vega, L., Hernández-Contreras, J., Fernández, J.: Análisis de contenido de las interacciones en línea en cursos de pregrado usando Facebook en una modalidad de Blended Learning. Sinéctica **39** (2012)
# Anexo 5.5.

## Work-in-Progress: Blended Learning in Engineering Education in Peru. A Systematic Review of University Theses

Osbaldo Turpo-Gebera<fnref n="1" />, Juan Zarate-Yepez<fnref n="1" />(CBI), Francisco García-Peñalvo, and Fernando Pari-T

**Abstract.** Blended Learning is established as a standard modality in the training of engineers in Peruvian universities, establishing objects of study that show its transcendence and potential. In this sense, the theses reports presented to the universities have been systematically reviewed. Eight thesis reports were recovered from the Repositorio Nacional de Trabajos de Investigación (RENATI). The results show a growing research interest in areas and fields of teaching rather than management; high concentration of research in postgraduate rather than undergraduate studies; and centrality of knowledge in the capital (Lima) instead of the provinces, more in public than in private universities as well as emphasis on quantitative studies and techno-pedagogical orientations combined with convergent models. Such dynamics bring Latin American contexts closer, and places them far from other realities.

**Keywords:** Blended learning · University theses · Systematic review · Perú

## 1 Introduction

Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) bring about changes in personal and social interaction, inducing changes in the ways we relate to the subjects, processes and spaces of pedagogical interactivity. The paradigmatic turns are propitiating adaptations that contribute to the improvement of the formative process [1]. In this perspective, Blended Learning (BL) is instituted and consolidated as a "standardized" modality [2], which facilitates increasing access to learning opportunities, as well as collaborative interactivity, among other potentialities [3]. Essentially, BL favors the techno-pedagogical confluence, connecting worlds that are artifactually "separated," so that knowledge flows on multiple platforms, sharing resources, spaces, etc., that strengthen the relationship mediated between teachers and students [4].

BL as a training modality incorporates an array of technological tools, and pedagogical approaches and methods [5, 6] to generate more active and adapted learning in a flexible and personalized didactic context [7]. In BL, a high level of acceptance is obtained among students and professionals, who affirm that BL led them to achieve

<footnote n="1">¹ Universidad Nacional de San Agustín, Arequipa, Peru
{oturpo,jzaratey,fpari}@unsa.edu.pe</footnote>

<footnote n="2">² Universidad de Salamanca, Salamanca, Spain
fgarcia@usal.es</footnote>
satisfactory results. The role of the teacher-tutor acquires relevance [8] by relating the conceptual and practical aspects, the diversity of learning styles, and directing it towards the improvement of the educational quality.

The construction of knowledge in BL involves greater tutorial intervention, as well as feedback and continuity of critical debates, bringing together computer-mediated collaborative learning (CMC) with factual relationships (face-to-face), along with other complementary activities (workshops, laboratories, etc.) that contribute to the amplification and enhancement of learning [9, 10]. The operation of BL allows the use of techno-pedagogical devices (teleconferences, forums, etc.) together with a series of didactic strategies (Flipped Classroom, Serious Games, etc.), configuring a techno-pedagogical ecosystem that recovers the social presence and educational participation in the pedagogical dynamics, institutional management and technological infrastructure [11, 12].

In BL, quality is defined by perceptions and emotions, motivation and learning styles, integration of experiences and ideas, as well as instructional design, altruism, participation and interaction [13]. These components make BL a viable alternative, where it is not necessary to share the same spatial context, but rather a learning one which involves the use of technological tools and group discussions. BL goes beyond the integration of training spaces; it involves the concurrence of learning strategies [14] and the indistinct confluence of the face-to-face and virtual modes. In this way, the students advance towards autonomy, overcoming the in person-virtual dichotomy, immersing themselves in the convergence and techno-pedagogical continuity [4, 6, 15].

In the transition of BL, the formative processes are beneficial, collaborative, flexible and motivating; likewise, they induce new forms of teaching and learning, beyond the spatial-temporal coordinates [13, 16]. BL has transformed the traditional educational spaces causing an efficient use of technology [17], moving toward an intense social interaction and generation of positive feelings, by achieving greater effectiveness in problem solving [18]. The emergence of new learning devices, such as augmented reality and others, has led BL into new scenarios [19], which implies a new vision and renewed teaching practice, intensely creative and prone to more realistic scenarios, with enriched, safe and controlled environments.

The technological, institutional, educational, and other changes in BL, raise the need to investigate the research dynamics of those who choose them as objects of study. Reviewing the Latin American context, through research published in scientific journals, we discover the thematic contexts, methodological orientations, etc. that point to the prevalence of descriptive studies without empirical references, oriented towards disciplinary areas such as psychology, education, economics, and computer science [20]. On the other hand, by studying the same spatial context, the multiple denominations of BL (mixed, hybrid, semi-presential, virtual distance) become evident as a paradigm that mixes or hybridizes, maintaining the presential-virtual duality [21]. In other studies, the evolution and techno-pedagogical transitions of BL are analyzed: from the combination to the convergence of mediations and resources, through the integration of environments [4, 21].

Reviewing the trends and impact of BL in Latin America, we find that didactic interaction has generated positive results, as well as the development of cognitive skills and critical and constructive thinking for problem solving [22]. Analyzing university
theses in Peru, it was found that BL is applied to the training in different professional fields. The results help us recognize differences in theoretical and methodological approaches and emphasis on training areas [23, 24]. The different studies provide a global understanding of BL in teaching; there is no specific research on BL in Peru in training by profession, except for the field of Communication for Development [25]. Hence, this research, due to its particularity on the specialized knowledge of engineering education, brings specific situations to the considerations assumed of the university reality of Peru.

Having provided an overview of what BL is and its trends and impact in Latin America, the second section will describe how the study was carried out, to finally mention the results of the study that focus on the situation and evolution of university research of BL in engineering education in Peru, the fields and sub-fields of knowledge of BL in engineering education, the infrastructure supporting the activities of BL in engineering training, the findings of the research on BL in engineering education, and BL models in engineering training with techno-pedagogical mediation systems.

## 2 Method

In order to determine the production of knowledge about BL training in engineering, eight thesis reports have been recovered from the National Research Work Repository (RENATI), managed by the National Superintendence of Higher University Education (SUNEDU): http://renati.sunedu.gob.pe/. The documents come from Peruvian universities, which voluntarily allow access to the theses of their graduates and the theses defended in foreign universities and deposited for the purpose of degree recognition (Resolution No. 033-2016-SUNEDU/CD).

The research questions that guided the review are:

* RQ1. How has university research on BL evolved in engineering education, according to degree, geographic region and university ownership regime?

* RQ2. What are the fields and sub-fields of knowledge of BL in engineering education addressed in Peruvian university theses?

* RQ3. What significant findings are evident in Peruvian university theses when investigating BL in engineering education?

The following inclusion criteria were taken into account for the selection of thesis reports:

* Search term: "Blended Learning", "Semi-presential", "Engineering" and "Technology".

* Scope. Tertiary education (university and technological institutes).

* Period of publication of university theses (last 5 years): 2015-2019.

* Full access to the thesis report.

* Research work of empirical nature.
The search was carried out between February and March 2020. The detennination of the analyzed theses followed the sequence of analysis below:

<table><caption>Fig. 1. Study sample determination sequence.</caption><thead><tr><th>Identification</th><th>Selection</th><th>Elegible Theses</th><th>Included In the study</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Total number of theses retrieved from RENATI: 26</td><td>Total of thesis with restricted access: 2</td><td>Total of theses with full access: 20</td><td>Total of theses included in the revision: 14</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>Total of seized theses: 0</td><td>Total of excluded theses (do not respond to criteria):</td><td></td></tr><tr><td></td><td>Total of theses with a wrong URL: 1</td><td>- Monographies / Essays: 1</td><td></td></tr><tr><td></td><td>Total of theses with incomplete files: 3</td><td>- Improvement plans/ Innovation: 0</td><td></td></tr><tr><td></td><td></td><td>- Theses with a different object of study or context: 5</td><td></td></tr></tbody></table>

<figure><img src="image_72.png" /><figcaption>Fig. 2. Theses according to university of origin</figcaption></figure>

These 14 theses constitute the corpus of analysis used in the development of the aspects that define BL in engineering education in Peruvian universities.

## 3 Results

Considering the systematized information, arguments to answer the research questions (RQ) were formulated from the comparison, contrast and qualitative analysis of the sorted data [26].
## Situation and Evolution of University Research Of BL in Engineering Education in Peru

In terms of the theses that investigate BL in engineering education in Peru, the last 5 years demonstrate its presence as an object of study. Seventy-nine percent of the theses correspond to graduate studies (5 master's and 6 doctorate), 21% corresponds to undergraduate studies in different areas of engineering and technology.

<figure><img src="image_73.png" /><figcaption>Fig. 3. Evolution of university research of BL in engineering education.</figcaption></figure>

In the first years of the study period, the majority of the theses related to engineering education in Peru are for graduate (Master's degrees and doctorates) works, with a low incidence of undergraduate works; whereas in the last years, both graduate and undergraduate levels share interest in these kinds of studies. The evolution shows the growing interest in the research of BL in engineering education. BL as a study modality represents a topic of growing interest in different areas of professional training, with a little lower incidence in engineering and technology [23], yet its importance is tangible today, given that the country is moving rapidly through a process of change in university education towards greater virtualization.
<figure><img src="image_74.png" /><figcaption>Fig. 4. Universities where BL theses in engineering education were defended.</figcaption></figure>

In Peru, private universities outnumber public universities in terms of enrollment and coverage. The largest scientific production of BL in engineering education is concentrated in public universities (in 7 of the 10 universities). In the national repository there is a thesis from a foreign university, which was deposited for the purpose of recognizing the foreign degree in the country (homologation). It is noticeable that out of the 10 universities that researched BL in engineering education, only one is located in the capital (Lima), the rest are located in the provinces, in the periphery of knowledge.

## Fields and Sub-fields of Knowledge of BL in Engineering Education

The determination of the fields responds to the nature of the studies, some of which are directed to the development and academic strengthening through the subjects that compase the curricula of the engineering careers, namely general studies (GS) and specialized studies (SS), and others related to the management of the institution and study platform.

<table><caption>Table 1. Fields and subfields of BL in engineering education addressed in university theses.</caption><thead><tr><th>Knowledge field</th><th>Sub-knowledge field</th><th>2015</th><th>2016</th><th>2017</th><th>2018</th><th>2019</th><th>Total</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td rowspan="5">Teaching<br>(86%)</td><td>Mathematics (GS)</td><td></td><td>1</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>1</td></tr><tr><td>Physics (GS)</td><td>1</td><td>2</td><td>1</td><td></td><td></td><td>4</td></tr><tr><td>Systems dynamics (SS)</td><td>1</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>1</td></tr><tr><td>Humanities (GS)</td><td></td><td>1</td><td></td><td>1</td><td>1</td><td>3</td></tr><tr><td>Communication (GS)</td><td>1</td><td>1</td><td></td><td></td><td>1</td><td>3</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="2">Management<br>(14%)</td><td>Mentoring support</td><td></td><td>1</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>1</td></tr><tr><td>Social responsibility</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>1</td><td></td><td>1</td></tr><tr><td colspan="2"><strong>Total</strong></td><td>3</td><td>6</td><td>1</td><td>2</td><td>2</td><td><strong>14</strong></td></tr></tbody></table>
The field of knowledge prioritized in universities that conduct research on BL in engineering is teaching (86%), with an emphasis on the GS (79%) rather than the SS (7%). An even interest is observed on both science and humanities-related subjects due to the emphasis of the current University Law on a wholistic education that includes general and specialized students as a graduation requirement. Another field addressed in the research is related to management (14%) in two areas or subfields complementary to university training.

## Infrastructure Supporting BL Activities in Engineering Training

In BL, the infrastructure includes both virtual and face-to-face formats, which are employed according to the techno-pedagogical development of each institution. The thesis reports point out the access and capacity gaps. Various resources are recognized (not always cutting-edge ones), while attendance is marked exclusively by being physically present at classes at the university.

<figure><img src="image_75.png" /><figcaption>Fig. 5. Supporting infrastructure</figcaption></figure>

In the experiences researched, the support infrastructure is far from the avant-garde conceptions and resources typical of other realities. In the Peruvian universities, in terms of virtuality only 75% of public universities and 25% of private universities have virtual platforms. Universities resort to various digitalized resources such as the use of USBs, CDs or printed books for virtual interactivity, more frequently in public universities than in private ones. In terms of attendance, universities in general consider the classroom as the only setting for physical work meetings. None of the research considered other possibilities, such as synchronous attendance or visits to other training scenarios.

## Findings of the Research on BL in Engineering Education

The educational aspects declared in the research, as evidence favorable to the formation of students are considered achievements; while the limitations are given by the aspects that hinder academic progress.
<figure><img src="image_76.png" /><figcaption>**Fig. 6.** Achievements and limitations of BL in engineering education</figcaption></figure>

The academic achievements identified in BL's theses in engineering education have been classified in four domains: 1) cognitive-epistemic: breadth of knowledge and critica] thinking, 2) social: confidence and autonomy, 3) formative: tutoría] accompaniment, responsibility, time management and autonomy, and 4) technological: digital literacy and interactivity. Although the boundaries between them are blurred, certain predominance can be expressed. Among the limitations are those of a didactic nature, directly related to the teaching of faculty members, in most cases, where teachers are in turn tutors. The role of teacher tutors ends up overloading the training activity, since the teachers need to both prepare content and accompany the process [27].

## BL Models in Engineering Training with Techno-Pedagogical Mediation Systems

In the different realities, experiences that express the changes of BL are described. These experiences explain the diverse techno-pedagogical transitions that refer to a normalized modality, that is to say, transitions with an own identity. Among the evolutions we can recognize: i) separate or combined systems, which distinguish moments of presence and virtuality, ii) mixed or integrated systems of hybridization of training scenarios, and iii) expansive or convergent systems, where the boundaries are diluted and continuity prevails [4, 27-29].
<figure><img src="image_77.png" /><figcaption>Fig. 7. Pedagogical-technological mediation systems</figcaption></figure>

The referents assumed by those who investigate BL in engineering education are basically the combined systems, where the virtual and face-to-face moments are defined and separated, which places it in its beginnings. Only one study refers to an integrated model of hybridization of components and training moments.

## 4 Conclusions

The review of the scientific production of BL in engineering trammg in Peruvian universities, from the theses analyzed, reveals its emergence as an object of study and growing interest. The last five years have revealed the need to adapt the training models to the greater virtualization that the country is experiencing, and to accelerate the changes brought about by the university law. The research analyzed reveals the shift in the centrality of the knowledge generated from the capital to the provinces given that more universities in the regions are researching BL in engineering training, more in the public universities than in the private ones, more in the field of teaching than management, more in general studies subjects than in specialized ones.

The infrastructure supporting BL in engineering training expresses the delays with respect to other realities, since there is no greater innovation, and resources that are far from the vanguard are used. Among the significant results referred to in the theses, a greater distinction is made between those of a cognitive and formative nature, among others that are equally important; while the limitations are more of a teaching nature. The research reviewed, when contrasted with the techno-pedagogical mediation systems, refer us to the dawn of BL because they prioritize the combinatoria! systems of separation of components.
In essence, the analysis of the uniqueness of Peruvian university research reveals continuities and disparities with respect to global dynamics [30]. Research on BL in Peru is currently in its third transitional phase (2010-2013), which is to "talk about the experiences of students or teachers regarding the implementation, application and results obtained" [31]. This is a stage that coincides with the dynamics experienced by Latin American countries, and is far from the experiences of European countries, which are increasingly innovative. The path of the review reveals proximities and routes of advances and perspectives of the transformations assumed in the development of BL [17].

## References

1. Gros, B., García-Peñalvo, F.: Future trends in the design strategies and technological affordances of e-learning. In: Spector, M., Lockee, B., Childress, M. (eds.) Learning, Design, and Technology. An International Compendium of Theory, Research, Practice, and Policy, pp. 1-23. Springer International Publishing, Switzerland (2016)

2. García-Ruiz, R., Aguaded, I., Bartolomé, A.: La revolución del "blended learning" en la educación a distancia. RIED Rev. Iberoam. Educ. Distancia **21**(1), 25-32 (2017)

3. Martín-García, A.: Blended Learning: Convergence between Technology and Pedagogy. Springer, Switzerland (2020)

4. García-Aretio, L.: Blended learning y la convergencia entre la educación presencial y a distancia. RIED Revista Iberoamericana de Educación a Distancia **21**(1), 9-22 (2018)

5. Gonzáles, K., Padilla, J., Rincón, D.: Fundamentos conceptuales para la evaluación del docente en contextos b-learning. Revista Virtual Universidad Católica del Norte **34**, 220-243 (2011)

6. Turpo-Gebera, O., Hemández Serrano, M.: La convergencia pedagógica y tecnológica de la modalidad "Blended learning". In: Martín García, A. (ed.) Blended learning en Educación Superior. Perspectivas de innovación y cambio, pp. 101-119. Síntesis, Madrid (2014)

7. Lange, P., Neumann, A.T., Nicolaescu, P., Klamma, R.: An integrated learning analytics approach for virtual vocational training centers. Int. J. Interactive Multimedia Artif. Intell. 5 (2), 32-38 (2018)

8. Gomez, M., Aleman, L., Figueroa, C.: B-learning modality: a strategy to strengthen blended learning vocational training. Virtualidad Educación y Ciencia **10**(18), 37-51 (2019)

9. Pinto-Llorente, A., Sánchez-Gómez, M., García-Peñalvo, F.: A research on students' perceptions on a B-Learning English environment to improve written skills. In: Ahuja, V., Rathore, S. (eds.) Multidisciplinary Perspectives on Human Capital and Information Technology Professionals, pp. 179-201. IGI Global, Hershey (2018)

10. Sorathia, K., Servidio, R.: Learning and experience: teaching tangible interaction and edutainment. Procedía - Soc. Behav. Sci. **64**, 265-274 (2012)

11. García-Holgado, A., García-Peñalvo, F.: The evolution of the technological ecosystems: an architectural propasa! to enhancing learning processes. In: Proceedings of the First International Conference on Technological Ecosystem for Enhancing Multiculturality, pp. 565-571. Association for Computing Machinery, New York (2013)

12. Duarte-Hueros, A., Guzmán-Franco, M., Yot-Domínguez, C.: Aportaciones de la formación blended learning al desarrollo profesional docente. RIED Revista Iberoamericana de Educación a Distancia **21**(1), 155-174 (2018)