TAEP4.0: Teacher Assistance Educational Process to Promote 21st

Century Skills in the Context of Education 4.0

Deivid Eive Silva

, Marialina Corrêa Sobrinho

and Natasha Malveira Valentim

Department of Informatics, UFPR – Federal University of Paraná, Curitiba, Brazil

PPGSND, UFOPA - Federal University of Western Pará, Santarém, Brazil

Keywords: Education 4.0, Educational Process, Teacher Assistance, Skills and Competencies, 21st Century.

Abstract: Today's professionals need to be enabled to be fit for Industry 4.0. Thus, it is the school's role to prepare the

student to be a professional who has the skills and competencies required in the 21st Century. This practice

redefines Education, known as Education 4.0. Based on the literature, we perceived that most studies in the

context of Education 4.0 are interested in student development, but few propose teacher support in this new

challenge. In this sense, this paper presents the Teacher Assistance Educational Process (TAEP4.0) to support

teachers in activities related to Education 4.0. TAEP4.0 can help to prepare student-centered classes and train

students for life in the 21st Century with hands-on and interactive activities. TAEP4.0 was evaluated by 6

Education professionals to check the ease of use, usefulness, and intention of future use, using the Technology

Acceptance Model (TAM) indicators. After this exploratory study, quantitative and qualitative data analysis

was performed. The results showed that TAEP4.0 can broaden teachers' knowledge and interaction with

Education 4.0, as well as support them in preparing their classes.

1 INTRODUCTION

Society has received strong influence from the fourth

Industrial Revolution. Much has been discussed

about Industry 4.0. Industry 4.0 gains driving force

through the digital age and can be represented as the

industry's digitization and computerization process.

This process focuses on data management, work

systems through technology, communication, and

human resource-related work efficiency

improvements (Winanti et al., 2018).

With the advancement of Industry 4.0, many other

sectors have received impacts on their traditional

structure, such as the education sector. There was a

need for an education that is more aligned with the

contemporary world, which prepares young people

for the challenges of the 21st Century, such as dealing

with disruptive technological resources and processes

such as robotics, artificial intelligence and the

Internet of Things. This is a new parameter that

redefines the format of education, known as

Education 4.0 (Hartono et al., 2018).

https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1066-0750

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3928-5432

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6027-3452

In this sense, education and technology together

are the primary source for addressing the challenges,

barriers, and needs of Industry 4.0's workforce.

Besides, Information Technology-based teaching can

support this process, because it is supposed that who

will succeed in Industry 4.0 is a country that has

innovation, creativity, and skill in the field of

technology (Winanti et al., 2018).

Thus, it is believed that traditional teaching

methods are reaching their limit when it comes to

vocational training to act in this new market concept.

Alternatively, Education 4.0 initiatives can prepare

future professionals with the necessary competencies

and skills (Mourtzis, 2018).

From this perspective, it is indicated to carry out

educational training still in Basic Education

(kindergarten, elementary, and high school), focusing

on Education 4.0. In this way, students will be able to

develop the skills and competencies required in the

21st Century such as problem-solving, collaboration,

communication, autonomy, mastery of technologies,

creativity, and innovation. Based on the teaching of

Silva, D., Sobrinho, M. and Valentim, N.

TAEP4.0: Teacher Assistance Educational Process to Promote 21st Century Skills in the Context of Education 4.0.

DOI: 10.5220/0009387702490259

In Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Computer Supported Education (CSEDU 2020) - Volume 1, pages 249-259

ISBN: 978-989-758-417-6

249

skills and competencies, these future professionals

are expected to have a higher chance of employability

in Industry 4.0 demand (Pérez-Pérez et al., 2018).

Given this, the guiding question raised for this

research is: How to support teachers of Basic

Education to develop skills and competencies in

students in the context of Education 4.0?

Therefore, this paper aims to present an

educational process to assist teachers in basic

education in the elaboration of classes for the use of

technological resources in context Education 4.0. The

results indicate that the proposed educational process,

called Teacher Assistance Educational Process

(TAEP4.0), can help in the elaboration of classes with

the explicit participation of the student, besides

allowing the development of several 21st Century

skills and competencies.

This paper is organized as follows: Section II

presents some concepts and characteristics of

Education 4.0 and lists some works related to the

development of 21st Century skills and competencies.

Section III shows the methodology of evidence-based

research. Section IV presents the Educational Process

of Teacher Assistance in the context of Education 4.0.

Section V presents the organization of this

exploratory study. Section VI presents TAEP4.0

acceptance analysis. Section VII presents qualitative

data analysis. Section VIII presents the discussion of

the results. Section IX presents threats to validity.

Finally, Section X concludes the paper with final

considerations and next steps.

2 BACKGROUND

The first mention for Education 4.0 was given in 2015

in Germany (Ciolacu et al., 2017), and is a learning

model that meets the needs of Industry 4.0. Thus,

there is little written literature, including empirical

studies on this topic (Ayub et al., 2018). From the

appearance of the term Education 4.0, seven facets

were presented to configure a classroom, being: (1)

Personalization, (2) Gamification, (3) Learning

Manager System, (4) Adaptability, (5) Support, (6)

Intelligent Question and Answer System and (7) E-

Assessment. These facets can contribute to student

protagonism, improvement in the teaching and

learning processes, and collaborate in the

development of skills necessary for life in the 21st

Century (Ciolacu et al., 2017).

There are distinct classifications for skills and

competencies. These can be Organizational (time

management, leadership, and planning),

Communicative (negotiation and communication),

Behavioral (initiative, creativity, ethics, and

coherence), Cognitive (problem-solving, critical

thinking, decision-making agility, planning,

interpretation, reflection, generalization, abstract

thinking, and entrepreneurship) and Socio-emotional

(interpersonal relationship, teamwork, interest

management, environmental awareness, self-

confidence, self-development, integrity, persuasion,

self-control of emotions, empathy, flexibility,

emotional stability, collaboration, patience,

enthusiasm, resilience, and optimism) (Cotet et al.,

2017), (Piñol et al., 2017), (Mourtzis, 2018).

In the context of Education 4.0, much has been

discussed about these competencies and skills. An

important consideration is about the definitions of

these terminologies and how they are related. In the

literature, competencies are understood as the ability

to achieve the proposed goals through cognitive

resources, such as knowledge, techniques, and

attitudes (Perrenound, 1999). Competencies can be

defined as a combination of knowledge, experience,

and skills (Angrisani et al., 2018). However,

competence is not limited to cognitive elements. It

also covers functional aspects (technical skills), as

well as interpersonal attributes (social and

organizational skills), among others (Ananiadou and

Claro, 2009). In general, skill is the capacity to

perform tasks and solve problems, while competence

is the ability to apply learning outcomes in a defined

context, such as education, work, personal, or

professional development (Cedefop, 2008).

The discussion about the teaching and

development of competencies and skills are

highlighted in the Education 4.0 scenario. Some

initiatives to promote 21st Century competencies and

skills are presented below:

 Teaching Factory (Mourtzis, 2018): This

approach is based on knowledge triangulation

(teaching, research, and technology transfer) to

train professionals with useful skills that will

support their future careers in manufacturing.

 Robotics Activities in Classroom (Messias et al.,

2018): in this case, students followed the process

suggested by LEGO Education Maker and

answered a self-assessment questionnaire about

their developed skills, like problem-solving,

learning to learn, communication, collaboration,

creativity, and innovation.

 Engineering Education Adaptation for Industry

4.0 (Coskun et al., 2016): This framework consists

of 3 main steps: curriculum, lab, and student club.

These steps enable you to develop skills through

students' experiences in practical activities.

CSEDU 2020 - 12th International Conference on Computer Supported Education

250

 International Society for Technology in Education

(ISTE, 2016): ISTE has numerous online

resources and publications for educators with a

purpose to prepare them for challenges of the 21st

century skills such as problem-solving, creativity

and innovation.

Based on the literature, few studies were

identified that focused on teacher education aimed at

teaching or developing 21st-century skills and

competencies (Ananiadou and Claro, 2009).

Initiatives such as ISTE contribute to the Education

4.0 scenario, however, to develop 21st-Century skills

and competencies remains a challenge, especially for

teachers. Thus, this study presents an educational

process to assist teachers of Basic Education in the

elaboration of classes focusing on the competencies

and skills pertinent to Education 4.0. The

methodology used for the construction of TAEP4.0

will be presented below.

3 METHODOLOGY

We used an evidence-based methodology

(Bittencourt and Isotani, 2018) to design and evaluate

the TAEP4.0 educational process. The steps of the

methodology are described following:

1. Preliminary Studies: At this stage, studies were

conducted on: (1) Digital Storytelling and

STEAM (art of storytelling and multidisciplinary

methodology for working with Science,

Technology, Engineering, Arts and Mathematics,

respectively); (2) Scratch tool and creative

learning spiral: visual programming language and

educational process that supports learning by

doing, respectively); (3) Unplugged Computing

(teaching programming logic without computer

use) and (4) Educational Robotics (projects

robotics with students). These educational

approaches were chosen because they fit the

facets such as personalization (Ciolacu et al.,

2017). Besides, these approaches enable the

student to have experience and connection, some

of the hallmarks of Education 4.0 (Hartono et al.,

2018). In all studies, the skills and competencies

of the 21st Century were worked on, and

knowledge that applies to Education 4.0 was

produced.

2. Systematic Mapping Study (SMS): At this stage,

an SMS was conducted to collect information on

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1Tk6TmRsCczr0fLgv

RpfREy6i2uxUWwIG

educational processes and/or professional training

that is being developed to further the advancement

of Education 4.0 and assist in the lack of qualified

human resources to work in Industry 4.0.

3. Analysis of the Studies Found: In this stage, the

initiatives related to Education 4.0 and/or Industry

4.0 were verified. From the identified initiatives,

those that realize activities with students or

develop training with professionals were selected,

besides containing a methodological process that

supports the development of 21st Century skills

and competencies. Subsequently, the analysis of

these studies made it possible to gather reasonable

practices to be incorporated into the TAEP4.0.

4. Proposal Definition: In this stage, the TAEP4.0

process was constructed. TAEP4.0 consists of

three main activities: Planning (the teacher

prepares his class), Execution (the teacher

develops his planning with the student), Learning

Verification (the teacher conducts the assessment

process with the student). TAEP4.0 is presented in

more details in the next section.

5. Proposal Evaluation and Evolution: In this step,

TAEP4.0 was tried and evaluated by education

professionals. The feedback received made it

possible to verify possible improvements in the

process, which allowed the evolution of this

proposal. TAEP4.0 steps will be presented in the

following section.

4 TAEP4.0

TAEP4.0 prepares students for collaborative project

development, with technological resources and

processes supporting teaching and learning. TAEP4.0

was developed in a clickable PDF format and enables

teacher interaction with TAEP4.0

(Silva et al.,

2019). This format contains buttons that show usage

examples, explanatory notes and tools that can help

the teacher to design a lesson that aligns with the

contemporary world.

TAEP4.0 consists of thirteen steps distributed in

planning, execution, and verification (Figure 1).

These steps will be detailed below with their

respective base references. In the Planning activity,

there are seven steps described following:

 Define Scope (Hur et al., 2018): In this step, the

teacher delimits the project to be developed with

the students. Through scope documentation, the

following

are requested: to define the class to be

TAEP4.0: Teacher Assistance Educational Process to Promote 21st Century Skills in the Context of Education 4.0

251

Figure 1: TAEP4.0 steps.

worked on, the discipline and content to be

disseminated, the themes related to the

Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) to be

worked on (in order to encourage socio-emotional

skills, but not limited to them), the areas of

STEAM that will be inserted (in order to enable

the student to work in a multidisciplinary way) as

well as the competencies and skills of the 21st

Century that will be developed.

 Check Technological Resources (Ciolacu et al.,

2017): In this step, the teacher chooses the tool,

according to the reality of the school. Therefore,

the availability of computers with internet access

to students, investments for equipment and

resources, among others, should be checked. In

this way, it will be possible to adapt the examples

and suggestions according to the reality of the

school. As support material for teachers, TAEP4.0

offers suggestions of tools for Gamification,

Robotics, Programming, Augmented Reality, and

Digital Storytelling.

 Prepare the Diagnostic Evaluation (Kin and

Lee, 2017): This step presents the need to conduct

a diagnostic evaluation with students. Thus, it will

be possible to align the scope, in addition to

realizing the difficulties and needs of the class.

This step can make it easier to choose the

appropriate elements, such as problems, projects,

tools, materials, among others. Therefore,

suggestions on how to perform the diagnostic

assessment in the classroom are shown.

 Set Challenges Problems (Nurdyansyah et al.,

2017): In this step, the choice of challenges to

work on problem-solving is encouraged. In this

activity, the construction of knowledge occurs

through the discussion of the problem in groups.

The students study a specific subject, they write

down their doubts or difficulties and then they

present the issues solved. In addition, some

examples of problems that may be linked to

projects are presented.

 Define Project (Beier, 2018): In this step, the

project is delimited by adjusting the previous

steps. From project-based learning, students

engage in a process of research,

they look for

resources, and practical application of

information until they come to a solution or

product.

 Prepare Support Materials (Silva et al., 2019):

For this step, the previous steps need to be well

defined: scope, tools, problems, and design. In

addition, the diagnostic evaluation must have

been applied. In this way, it will be possible to

know the needs of the students, and later it will be

easier to produce the support materials. Support

materials consist of everything students will use

during the activity, including slides, worksheets,

pens, manuals, among others.

 Organize Project (Beier, 2018): In this step, it is

indicated to organize the support materials, to

choose the classroom configuration that allows

the interaction among the participants. For this, it

is taken into consideration the size of the

classroom, number of chairs, and tables,

computers with internet access, among others. In

general, classroom logistics should be designed to

reduce risk and avoid discomfort.

In the Execution stage, there are four steps, where

the active participation of the student, mediated by the

CSEDU 2020 - 12th International Conference on Computer Supported Education

252

teacher and IT professional in Education, is indicated.

The execution steps are as follows:

 Apply Diagnostic Evaluation (Kin and Lee,

2017): In this step, the use of gamification tools

to improve the diagnostic assessment applied with

students is indicated. Besides, other ways of

performing this type of assessment are presented,

such as textual production, solving problems with

mathematical operations, or even looking for the

performance rate and result of previous

evaluations. The results obtained in the diagnostic

evaluation can provide an overview of the class

difficulties. This will allow us to identify which

students need further guidance.

 Apply Project (Beier, 2018): In this step, the

teacher will present the proposal to the students,

make sure that everyone understands the steps of

the project. In addition, he will organize the

groups and he will deliver the support materials.

Also, it is recommended to make a checklist to

check if there are enough computers in the lab

with internet access, if the necessary tools for the

project are installed on computers, if there is a

multimedia projector available, among other. This

check is essential because, at the time of class,

everything should work correctly.

 Learn by Doing (Porvir, 2019): In this step, the

methodology of the invention cycle to work the

project is presented. This methodology helps

students learn through error and works as follows:

the students imagine, build, and test if the idea

works, share. Otherwise, the students identify the

error, think, refine, test again and then share.

Thus, error allows students to have playful

experiences, discovery, and assists in rescuing

students' interest in learning, especially in areas

where students have little affinity.

 Preparing Formative Evaluation (Luckesi,

2011): Formative assessment takes place from the

contexts experienced by the teacher and students,

which allows the regulation of learning. In this

way, examples of how to prepare a formative

assessment for students are presented. Formative

assessment considerably demands teacher

participation, such as time availability. Therefore,

it is necessary to construct a record about each

student and update this record whenever new data

appears.

Finally, in the Verification stage, there are two

steps, where the active participation of the student,

mediated by the teacher, is indicated. Being them:

 Conduct Formative Evaluation (Vidakis,

2019): In this step, the student is assessed

throughout the learning process. As the teacher

will accompany the students, it will be easier for

this teacher to check the student's progress, the

acquisition of knowledge, the improvement of

some skills and competencies. However, it may be

that this student is having difficulties, so the

problems can already be solved.

 Reflect and Share (Silva et al., 2019): At the final

of the process, students need to evaluate

themselves, reflect, outline perceptions and

experiences, comment on strengths and what

could be improved in the future projects, among

others. Later, the teacher is indicated to allow his

students to present the developed projects.

An exploratory study was realized to verify the

feasibility of the TAEP4.0 proposal. The exploratory

study will be presented below.

5 EXPLORATORY STUDY

This study was organized based on the steps of the

experimental process proposed by Lazar et al. (2010).

This exploratory study is divided into Planning,

Execution, and Analysis.

5.1 Study Planning

This exploratory study was performed with six

education professionals from different levels of

education. The sample was selected by convenience,

consisting of four teachers of Educational

Technology of the basic education, one teacher of

Higher Education in Computing and one teacher of

Geography of the basic education. Participants signed

the Informed Consent Form (ICF) and completed a

characterization form that allowed them to classify

their experience about: (1) assessment of educational

resources, (2) training of teachers to use technological

resources (3) project monitoring in the Informatics in

Education laboratory, (4) development of projects

using technological resources and (5) preparation of

a lesson plan.

In sequence, some artifacts were prepared to

support this experiment. In addition to the

characterization form and ICF, a presentation was

produced with the purpose and motivation of the

research, the step-by-step of study and an overview of

TAEP4.0. Also, it was made available a template for

participants to plan a project and a post-use

questionnaire to obtain feedback from participants

about TAEP4.0. Before the study was executed, the

artifacts were validated by a researcher of Informatics

in Education so that no problem made the study

execution impossible.

TAEP4.0: Teacher Assistance Educational Process to Promote 21st Century Skills in the Context of Education 4.0

253

5.2 Study Execution

At the beginning of the study, the researcher acted as

a moderator and gave the participants information

about the experiment. Subsequently, the structure of

TAEP4.0 was presented. In this sense, participants

were instructed to plan a project through TAEP4.0.

For this, the template contained the seven planning

steps of TAEP4.0, which are Define Scope, Verify

Technology Resources, Prepare Diagnostic

Evaluation, Prepare Problem Challenges, Define

Project, Prepare Supporting Materials, and Organize

Project. Thus, the participants were able to try

TAEP4.0 partially but did the general evaluation of

the 13 steps technically and pedagogically.

The study was applied to three educational

institutions. Both participants took approximately

two hours to use and evaluate TAEP4.0. During the

study, each participant read the instructions and

examples presented in TAEP4.0 to develop an

educational project. All participants returned their

project planning at the end of the experiment. Finally,

participants answered their degree of acceptance

regarding TAEP4.0 through a post-use questionnaire.

6 QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS

The post-use questionnaire was built based on the

TAM model indicators. The indicators are: (a) ease of

use, (b) perceived usefulness, and (c) intended future

use. Participants provided their answers on a six-point

scale (Lanubile et al., 2003). Possible answers were

strongly agreed, strongly agree, partially agree,

partially disagree, strongly disagree, and strongly

disagree. This response scale was considered

adequate because there is no intermediate value.

Thus, the distribution of the scale helps to avoid the

bias of the central tendency in classifications, which

may induce participants to judge the outcome as

appropriate or inappropriate. The TAM indicators for

verifying TAEP4.0 acceptance was: Ease of use,

Perceived Usefulness and Intended Future Use.

6.1 Acceptance Analysis of TAEP4.0

The Ease of use indicator defines the degree to which

a person believes that using a specific technology

would be effortless through the following questions:

(E1) My interaction with TAEP4.0 was clear and

understandable, (E2) Using TAEP4.0 does not

require much of my mental effort, (E3) I find

TAEP4.0 easy to use and (E4) I find it easy to use

TAEP4.0 to prepare a didactic 4.0 class. Figure 2

presents the participants' perception regarding the

Ease of Use indicator. The vertical axis of the graph

represents the affirmative of the indicator and the

horizontal axis refers to the degree of acceptance of

the participants. The bars were added codes that

represent the participants (P1, P2, P3, P4, P5, and P6)

and their respective evaluations.

In Figure 2, we identified that P6 felt more

difficulties in use TAEP4.0. This issue points to the

need to include the support of computer professionals

in education for the use of the educational process. It

is possible to notice that there is a discrepancy in the

levels of agreement. We saw a large concentration of

total agreement in the affirmative (E3) and a greater

variation in affirmatives (E1 and E4). This indicates

that TAEP4.0 is considered easy to use (E3).

However, resources, methodologies, and

nomenclatures for Education 4.0, maybe are

unknown to the teacher. Therefore, a short time of use

may not have been enough to the TAEP4.0 to be clear

and understandable to prepare a class in the context

of Education 4.0 (E1 and E4). Thus, we reinforce the

idea that TAEP4.0 will be assisted by an Educational

Technology professional.

Figure 2: Degree of acceptance of participants regarding the

Ease of use of TAEP4.0.

The Perceived Usefulness indicator defines the

degree to which a person believes technology could

improve their performance through the following

questions: (U1) Using TAEP4.0 can improve my

performance in preparing lessons with a didactic 4.0,

(U2) Using TAEP4.0 can increase my productivity in

preparing lessons with 4.0 didactic, (U3) Using

TAEP4.0 can increase my effectiveness in preparing

lessons with 4.0 didactic and (U4) I consider

TAEP4.0 to support the preparation of lessons

focusing on the development of 21st-century skills

and competencies.

Figure presents the participants’ perceptions

regarding the Perceived Usefulness indicator. In this

question, we perceived a higher level of agreement in

statement U4, which indicates that TAEP4.0 can use

to the development of 21st-Century skills and

CSEDU 2020 - 12th International Conference on Computer Supported Education

254

competencies. Besides, we identified that P2 and P4

recognize the usefulness of TAEP4.0 for the

challenges of Education 4.0. In sequence, we realized

that P6 and P1 widely agree on some statements like

U2 and U3, which means that the participants believe

that TAEP4.0 is useful for the preparation of classes

related to Education 4.0, but that it can still be

improved.

Figure 3: Degree of acceptance of participants regarding the

Perceived Usefulness of TAEP4.0.

Finally, the Intended Future Use indicator defines

the degree to which a person believes they would use

technology in future projects through the following

questions: (I1) Assuming I have access to TAEP4.0,

I intend to use it and (I2) Given that I have access to

TAEP4.0, I predict that I will use it at other times.

Figure 4 presents participants' feedback regarding

Intended Future Use. Based on the same

interpretation as Figures 2 and 3, Figure 4 shows that

participants are interested in using TAEP4.0. In this

indicator, P1 considers TAEP4.0 appropriate for

future work. Besides, the other participants state that

they intend to use TAEP 4.0 at other times.

Figure 4: Degree of acceptance of participants regarding the

Intention to use TAEP4.0.

Subsequently, a qualitative analysis of the data

obtained from the open questions contained in the

post-use questionnaire was performed.

7 QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS

For qualitative analysis, the Grounded Theory (GT)

method was adopted. Therefore, participants'

comments on TAEP4.0 were analyzed through a

subset of the coding phases suggested by Strauss and

Corbin (2008), being open (1st step) and axial (2nd

step) coding. In the first step of the GT (open coding),

the codes were created according to the participants'

feedback. Subsequently, the codes were grouped

according to their properties, forming concepts that

represent categories. Finally, these codes were related

to each other - axial coding (2nd step). The researcher

did not use the selective coding (3rd step) because the

GT rule is the circularity between the collection and

analysis stages until the theoretical saturation is

reached (Strauss and Corbin, 2008).

The objective of the qualitative analysis in this

exploratory study was to understand how TAEP4.0

can contribute to the challenges of Education 4.0 and

the development of 21st-century competencies and

skills in students.

7.1 Benefits of TAEP4.0

Regarding the benefits of TAEP4.0 for students in the

context of Education 4.0, one participant said that

TAEP4.0 can enable the student to develop various

skills (see the quotation from P1 below). Another

participant noted that TAEP4.0 can rescue the

importance of collaborative work (see a quotation

from P2 below). Also, one participant shared that

TAEP4.0 can allow classes with clear student

participation (see the quotation from P6 below).

Following, another participant reported that TAEP4.0

works on problem-solving (see the quotation from P3

below).

“The process gives the student the skills to

develop various life skills” (P1).

“The process underscores the importance of

working with students in a constructive and

collaborative way” (P2).

“The process stimulates [...] dynamic classes

with clear student participation” (P6).

“The process works on problem solving and

interdisciplinarity” (P3).

Regarding TAEP4.0's contribution to the

elaboration of projects in the context of Education

4.0, it was identified that TAEP4.0 can collaborate in

the preparation of a class with didactic 4.0. In addition

to preparing students for the challenges of the 21st

Century. Some views were: TAEP4.0 (I) helps

organize classes (see a quotation from P1 below), (II)

improves project quality (see a quotation from P2

below), and (III) directs what to do in the project (see

the quotation from P5 below).

“The process helps to organize and structure

school classes and projects” (P1).

TAEP4.0: Teacher Assistance Educational Process to Promote 21st Century Skills in the Context of Education 4.0

255

“Using the process can [...] improve the quality

of school projects” (P2).

“The process provides guidance on how to

develop and conduct classroom projects” (P5).

Regarding TAEP4.0's contribution to supporting

teachers in the context of Education 4.0, one

participant said that TAEP4.0 could broaden teacher

contact with Education 4.0 (see the quotation from P5

below). Another participant reported that TAEP4.0 is

an effective lesson design tool (see a quotation from

P6 below). Subsequently, another participant shared

that TAEP4.0 helps guide teachers in designing

activities involving educational technologies (see the

quotation from P1 below).

“The process helps guide teachers in planning

[...], in addition to expanding teachers' knowledge

and interaction with Education 4.0” (P5).

“The use of the process allows teachers, both

those at the beginning of their teaching career and

those with experience, to use an effective tool in the

preparation of their classes” (P6).

“The process helps guide teachers in designing

activities with technology resources” (P1).

Reports show that TAEP4.0 can support students

in the development of 21st Century skills and

competencies through technical support to the

teacher. It is believed that in this way, the teacher will

be able to prepare student-centered classes and

conduct training for life in the 21st Century with

practical, interactive and diverse activities. Therefore,

TAEP4.0 will be able to work on the student's integral

development, such as cognitive, socio-emotional and

cultural aspects based on educational technology.

7.2 Content of TAEP4.0

Regarding the content presented in TAEP4.0, one

participant said that the examples available in

TAEP4.0 help the teacher structure his proposal (see

the quotation from P4 below). Another participant

said that the examples presented in TAEP4.0 might

subsidize the classroom teacher (see the quotation

from P6 below).

“I consider it to be quite complete, with several

examples for the educator to take as an example to

structure his proposal” (P4).

“The process provides examples that allow

teachers to subsidize their classroom work” (P6).

TAEP4.0 is not limited to presenting structure,

online resources, publications and examples of best

practices. The TAEP4.0 allows teachers to select the

resources available on the internet, according to the

discipline and needs of their students. Thus, following

the steps of TAEP4.0, the teacher finds directions to

prepare a class/project with the characteristics of

Education 4.0 based on 21st-century skills and

competencies.

7.3 Improvements in TAEP4.0

In the aesthetics and ease of use of TAEP4.0, through

feedback from participants, it was possible to identify

which visual features of TAEP4.0 are being used. In

addition, TAEP4.0 has a good use. Some views were:

TAEP4.0 (I) is visually beautiful (see the quotation

from P4 below), (II) has easy-to-understand

navigation (see a quotation from P2 below), and (III)

has good visuals (see a quotation from P1 below).

“The process is very clear, visually beautiful”

(P4)

“The educational process has a clear reading,

easy navigation” (P2).

“Fonts, pictures, and colors are good” (P1).

Comments show that TAEP4.0 has different tools

and examples that support student-centered lesson

preparation. Features that, when combined with

appropriate fonts, colors, and pictures, can provide

clear reading and easy understanding. Therefore,

participants provided feedback on suggestions for

improvements, as seen in the following section.

One of the improvement suggestions for

TAEP4.0 that deserves attention is the types of

evaluations worked on in the proposal. For some

participants, summative assessment should be

avoided, especially in the context of Education 4.0

(see a quotation from P4 and P1 below). Summative

assessment, also known as classificatory, is done

through evidence (Luckesi, 2011). Therefore, in the

evolved version of TAEP4.0 presented in section 4,

we prioritize formative assessment, with emphasis on

teacher coaching throughout the student learning

process.

“I would like you to pay attention to the types of

evaluation [...]. Today we are looking for formative

evaluation and not summative, be careful with that”

(P4).

“Depending on the outcome of the project, there

would be no need for a summative assessment. The

result itself would already be evaluated, without the

need for another evaluation” (P1).

Other suggestions for improvements were: (I)

having less text explaining project organization (see

P2 the quotation below) and (II) changing the color of

the navigation buttons for easier viewing (see P5 the

quotation below). In future work, we intend to add

more examples of team and project organization. The

idea is that these examples give a guide on how to

organize projects from different perspectives.

CSEDU 2020 - 12th International Conference on Computer Supported Education

256

“At the point of “Defining the project,” I thought

that the explanation of team organization could be

reduced, which would allow room for more

examples” (P2).

“I suggest changing the color of the navigation

buttons because they match the main color of the

process because it is tiring for those with vision

problems” (P5).

From the exploratory study, it was possible to

evolve TAEP4.0 to a second version (v2), which we

present in this study (Figure 4). This release follows

the Business Process Model and Notation (BPMN)

model used to create processes, including those of an

educational nature (Pereira, 2011). In v2, the

“Learning by Doing” step stands out, as this is where

there is greater student participation. According to the

conditional defined in TAEP4.0, while the student is

producing, the teacher must perform formative

assessment throughout the activity. Finally, when the

student finishes his activity, the teacher directs him to

the “Reflect and Share” step. In this way, the process

is terminated.

In TAEP4.0 V2, most of the changes made were

internal, such as reducing the amount of text in some

parts, increasing the font size, changing the colors of

navigation icons, inserting more illustrations, among

others, as mentioned before. From the comments of

the participants, the suggestions were attributed to

improving the teachers' experience with TAEP4.0 for

future use with their students.

8 DISCUSSIONS

TAEP4.0 was considered a useful process to help

teachers in the Education 4.0 scenario. This

educational process allows the teacher to prepare

practical, diversified and interactive classes with a

focus on 21st-century skills and competencies.

Based on qualitative analysis, we identifiers that

TAEP4.0 can provide support for the teacher in

planning and execution of the classes, including the

assessment of 21st-century skills. Following the steps

of TAEP4.0, the teacher selects the information and

the appropriate technology to work in the classroom,

according to discipline and the needs of the students.

For this, TAEP4.0 gathers several materials available

on the web with the intention of the teacher to have

access to the greatest number of possibilities and

news.

Based on the quantitative analysis, we realized the

importance of the Educational Technologies

professional to support the teachers to use the new

educational technologies in the classroom. In this

way, TAEP4.0 can be a useful resource for teacher

training. Thus, the teacher can feel more secure in

using TAEP4.0 to streamline and improve their

activities. Besides, students will be increasingly

updated and under a didactic aligned to the 21st

century.

However, we recognize that one of the biggest

challenges for TAEP4.0 is the participation and

encouragement of the pedagogical coordinators of the

schools. In one of the educational institutions that we

carried out the exploratory study, we realized that the

more frequent teachers in the computer lab are those

who are charged for their coordination. On the other

hand, those who are not encouraged end up following

the traditional teaching model. In this way, no matter

how interesting the technology is, it is not used. This

attitude ends up affecting students' learning. In the

next studies, this limitation should be reduced.

In general, in this exploratory study, we identified

that TAEP4.0 can contribute to active learning, where

the protagonism by the student and learn by doing can

be worked. In addition to cultivating 21st-century

skills and competences, instead of using a set of

predefined data.

9 THREATS TO VALIDITY

In this sense, as in all studies, some threats may affect

the validity of the results. In this exploratory study,

threats were categorized according to the approach of

Wohlin et al. (2000). Thus, threats of the internal,

external, conclusion and construct type were

identified. We sought to soften them while

conducting the exploratory study to reduce the

possible risks.

For Internal Validity: (a) training effects: to avoid

this type of risk, the activities were carried out with

education professionals, following the same scope.

(b) experience in classification: it was not necessary

to classify participants according to knowledge and

experience, as it was a heterogeneous sample to

evaluate TAEP4.0 from different perspectives:

Computing, Education and Informatics in Education,

evaluate the proposal, and (d) mediator influence: to

reduce the mediator's relative influence on the

analysis of the experiment result, the data were

reviewed in pairs.

For external validity: (a) participants who were

not specialists in Informatics in Education: under

these conditions, the experiment sought feedback

from educators in general, but prioritizing

participants' experience in using technologies to

TAEP4.0: Teacher Assistance Educational Process to Promote 21st Century Skills in the Context of Education 4.0

257

support teaching and learning processes; (b) the study

was not conducted with students: in this first moment,

the study focused on validating the process with

educators to improve it and remove possible flaws

and inconsistencies. So, later, you can apply it to a

class of students and analyze their results.

For the validity of the conclusion: the main

problem is the sample size because they are 6

educators. This number of participants is not

statistically ideal, although this problem is recurrent

in studies of Informatics in Education. However, the

sample has heterogeneity, as the participants are

educators from 3 different institutions. Even so, there

was a limitation of the results, which are considered

indicative and not conclusive.

For construct validity: there may be an influence

of the indicators that were applied in the quantitative

analysis, such as ease of use, perceived utility and

intended use. These indicators have been defined and

evaluated by other researchers in various studies and

represent important aspects to verify the acceptance

of a technology (Nakamura et al., 2017).

10 CONCLUSIONS AND FUTURE

WORK

This paper presented an educational process to

provide technical support to the basic education

teacher in the development of activities in the context

of Education 4.0. Therefore, TAEP4.0 was proposed

to support the development of student-centered

classes. To achieve the objectives defined in this

paper and to reach the current version of TAEP4.0, an

evidence-based methodology was used.

From the analysis of the preliminary studies and

studies identified in the MSL, the TAEP4.0 was

created and presented. This process is made up of 13

steps, each step containing examples, explanatory

notes, tools, among other elements, to facilitate its

handling.

An exploratory study was conducted to validate

this technology with six education professionals from

3 different educational institutions. Therefore,

through the acceptance analysis of TAEP4.0 and

qualitative analysis of the data, it was possible to

realize that TAEP4.0 can help in the elaboration of

classes with the clear participation of the student,

besides enabling the development of 21st-Century

Skills. Following the steps of TAEP4.0, the teacher

will find instructions needed to prepare activities for

an Education 4.0, based on cognitive, socio-

emotional and cultural aspects. One of the limitations

identified in this exploratory study is that the

pedagogical coordination and the school management

itself need to encourage the teacher to use TAEP4.0

and its possibilities.

As future works, it is intended to add more

examples of project organization in order to guide

teachers in the preparation of educational proposals

under the context of Education 4.0. Besides, studies

will be conducted to verify how the use of TAEP4.0

can benefit student learning. From the next student

studies, we intend to update and transform TAEP4.0

into a web application. Thus, it is expected to

facilitate the insertion and access to new resources

and enable teachers to share classes and experiences

on the TAEP4.0 platform. Besides, make an

integration between teacher, education technology

professional and pedagogical coordination to see how

TAEP4.0 works under the school.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The authors would like to thank the teachers who

participated in this case study, providing the

necessary data for this research. This study was

developed with financial support from CNPq

(Brazilian National Council for Scientific and

Technological Development).

REFERENCES

Ananiadou, K. & M. Claro. (2009). 21st Century Skills and

Competences for New Millennium Learners in OECD

Countries. OECD Education Working Papers, n. 41.

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/218525261154

Ayub, E., Wei, G., Luaran, J., & Leong, L. An Exploratory

Study of a Framework for Designing and Developing a

Massive Online Course as Smart Future Classroom in

VLE. Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference

on E-Education, EBusiness, and E-Technology, pp. 57-

62. DOI: 10.1145/3241748.3241778

Angrisani, L., Arpaia, P., Capaldo, G., Moccaldi, N.,

Salatino, P., & Ventre, G. (2018) Academic Fablab at

University of Naples Federico II: New Research and

Development Opportunities in the Fileds of IoT and

Industry 4.0. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, v.

1065. DOI: 10.1109/METROI4.2018.8439043

Beier, M., Kim, M., Saterbak, A., Leautaud, V., Bishnoi, S.,

& Gilberto, J. The effect of authentic project-based

learning on attitudes and career aspirations in STEM,

Journal of Research in Science Teaching, pp. 1-21,

2018.

Bittencourt, I., & Isotani, S. (2018). Informatics in

Evidence-Based Education: A Manifesto. Brazilian

Journal of Informatics in Education. 26(3). DOI:

CSEDU 2020 - 12th International Conference on Computer Supported Education

258

https://doi.org/10.5753/rbie.2018.26.03.108(in

Portuguese).

Cedefop (2008) Terminology of European education and

training policy. A selection of 100 key terms.

Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the

European Communities.

Ciolacu, M., Tehrani, A., Beer, R., Popp, H. (2017).

Education 4.0 - Fostering Student Performance with

Machine Learning Methods. IEEE 23rd International

Symposium for Design and Technology in Electronic

Packaging (SIITME), pp. 438-443. DOI:

10.1109/SIITME.2017.8259941

Cotet, G. B., Balgiu, B. A., & Negrea, V. (2017).

Assessment procedure for the soft skills requested by

Industry 4.0. In MATEC Web of Conferences, v. 121,

2017.

Coskun, S., Gencay, E., & Kayikci, Y. (2016). Adapting

Engineering Education to Industrie 4.0 Vision. 16th

Production Research Symposium. DOI:

https://doi.org/10.3390/technologies7010010

Hartono, S., Kosala, R., Supangkat, S., & Ranti, B. (2018).

Smart Hybrid Learning Framework Based on Three-

Layer Architecture to Bolster Up Education 4.0. In

International Conference on ICT for Smart Society

(ICISS), pp. 1-5. DOI: 10.1109/ICTSS.2018.8550028

Hur, K., Sohn, W., & Kwon, K. (2018). Block Coding

Algorithm Training Examples using the Arduino

Board. International Journal of Advanced Science and

Technology, v.115, pp.1-10. DOI:

http://dx.doi.org/10.14257/ijast.2018.115.01

ISTE. International Society of Technology Educational.

Skills Learners Need to Thrive in Work and Life.

Available: https://www.iste.org/standards

Lanubile, F., Mallardo, T., & Calefato, F. (2003). Tool

support for geographically dispersed inspection teams.

Software Process: Improvement and Practice. 8(4), pp.

217-231. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/spip.184

Lazar, J., Feng, J., & Hochheiser, H. (2010). Research

Methods in Human-Computer Interaction. John Wiley

and Sons, 1st edition.

Luckesi, C. C. (2011). Learning assessment: component of

the pedagogical act. São Paulo: Cortez, 2011. (in

Portuguese).

Kin, S. & Lee, W. (2017). Study of educational method

using app inventor for elementary computing

education. Journal of Theoretical and Applied

Information Technology, 95(18).

Messias, G., Rodrigues, U., Braga, L., Nakamura, W.,

Ferreira, B., Paiva, A., & Valentim, N. (2018).

Education 4.0 and 21st Century Skills: A Case Study

with Robotics Activities in the Classroom. Brazilian

Symposium on Computers in Education, DOI:

http://dx.doi.org/10.5753/cbie.sbie.2018.715

Mourtzis, D. (2018). Development of Skills and

Competences in Manufacturing Towards Education

4.0: A Teaching Factory Approach. In J. Ni et al.

(Eds.): AMP 2018, LNME, pp. 194–210. DOI:

10.1007/978-3-319-89563-5_15

Nakamura, W., Marques, L., Rivero, L., Oliveira, E., &

Conte, T. (2017). Are Generic UX Evaluation

Techniques Enough? A study on the UX Evaluation of

the Edmodo Learning Management System. Brazilian

Symposium on Computers in Education (SBIE). DOI:

http://dx.doi.org/10.5753/cbie.sbie.2017.1007

Nurdyansyah, N., Siti, M., & Bachtiar, S. (2017). Problem

Solving Model with Integration Pattern: Student’s

Problem-Solving Capability. Atlantis Press. Advances

in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research,

v. 173, https://doi.org/10.2991/icei-17.2018.67

Pereira, M. F. (2011). Teaching Material Production

Model: The Use of BPMN Notation in Distance

Learning. Revista de Administração e Inovação, 8(4),

p. 45-66. (in Portuguese).

Pérez-Pérez, M., Gómez, E., & Sebastián, M. (2018).

Delphi Prospection on Additive Manufacturing in

2030: Implications for Education and Employment in

Spain. In Journal Materials. doi:

10.3390/ma11091500.

Perrenoud, P. (1999). Build Skills from School. Porto

Alegre, Artmed Editora. (in Portuguese).

Piñol, T.C., Artigas, S., Rodríguez, M. C., & Minguella, J.

(2017). Study of the training needs of industrial

companies in the Barcelona area and proposal of

training courses and methodologies to enhance further

competitiveness. Procedia Manuf. v. 13, p. 1426–1431,

2017.

Porvir. (2019). Special Education Hands-On. Available:

https://porvir.org/especiais/maonamassa/ (in

Portuguese).

Silva, D., Correa Sobrinho, M., & Valentim, N. (2019).

STEAM and Digital Storytelling: a case study with high

school students in the context of Education 4.0,

Brazilian Symposium on Computers in Education

(SBIE). http://dx.doi.org/10.5753/cbie.sbie.2019.159

Silva, D., Correa Sobrinho, M., & Valentim, N. (2019).

Teacher Assistance Educational Process for Education

4.0 - TAEP4.0. Available:

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1Tk6TmRsCczr0fL

gvRpfREy6i2uxUWwIG

Strauss, A. & Corbin, J. (2008). Basics of Qualitative

Research. Techniques and Procedures for Developing

Grounded Theory. Sage Pub, pp. 400.

Vidakis, N., Barianos, A. K., Trampas, A. M., Papadakis,

St. Kalogiannakis, M., & Vassilakis, K. (2019).

Generating Education in−Game Data: The Case of an

Ancient Theatre Serious Game. In B. McLaren, R.

Reilly, S. Zvacek, & J. Uhomoibhi (Eds), Proceedings

of the 11th International Conference on Computer

Supported Education (CSEDU 2019), Vol 1, 36−43,

Heraklion, Crete, Greece, 2−4 May, 2019.

Winanti, N., Gaol, F., Napitupulu, T., Soeparno, H., &

Trisetyarso A. (2018). Learning framework in the

industrial age 4.0 in higher education. In: 2018

Indonesian Association for Pattern Recognition

International Conference (INAPR), pp. 227–232. DOI:

10.1109/INAPR.2018.8627039

Wohlin, C., Runeson, P., Höst, M., Ohlsson, M., Regnell,

B., & Wessl. A. (2000). Experimentation in software

engineering: an introduction”. KluwermAcademic

Publishers, pp. 236.

TAEP4.0: Teacher Assistance Educational Process to Promote 21st Century Skills in the Context of Education 4.0

259