Active Learning Program Supported by Online Simulation Applet in

Engineering Education

D. Valiente

1,2,∗

, L. Pay

, S. Fern

andez de

Avila

, J. C. Ferrer

, S. Cebollada

and O. Reinoso

Systems Engineering and Automation Department, Miguel Hernandez University, Av. Universidad sn, 03202 Elche, Spain

Communications Engineering Department, Miguel Hernandez University, Av. Universidad sn, 03202 Elche, Spain

Keywords:

Online Simulation, Electronics, Engineering Education, eLearning.

Abstract:

Nowadays education programs in engineering degrees have evolved towards advanced learning models and

methodologies, which are either partially or entirely sustained by ICT (Information, Communication, and

Technology) resources, and blended approaches. In this sense, electronics courses have become of paramount

importance in most education plans within engineering degrees at university. Therefore the adaption to such

novel methodologies is increasingly demanded. According to this, we propose an improved teaching program

concentrated on the use of an online simulation tool, amongst other digital resources. The program is addressed

to students in ﬁrst levels of engineering degrees, within the framework of the Spanish public university system.

In particular, the methodology has been devised through the use of an online circuit simulation applet in Java,

which does not require any software installation. The main purpose is to enhance the general achievement of

the students, particularizing on their practical competences, digital skills, engagement and motivation towards

the learning of electronics, sustained by digital resources such as simulation. A population of 258 students

enrolled during the academic year 2017/2018 has been established as a sample for presenting achievement

results, surveys data and comparison statistics with other digital resources. Additionally, test groups of roughly

50% out of the total population of students have been established in order to conﬁrm the success of the

approach, in contrast to the former teaching methodology. As a result, the approach proves to be an active

model which allows the students to develop long-term and autonomous skills in electronics and simulation.

1 INTRODUCTION

Over the last decades, simulation resources have been

extensively integrated within teaching programs, es-

pecially in engineering. Initially, many approaches

have relied on the use of software tools for simulating

a wide ﬁeld of engineering problems (Huanyin et al.,

2009; Campbell et al., 2002; Dickerson and Clark,

2018). This tendency has been extrapolated to the

use of other digital resources. Virtual labs (Menen-

dez et al., 2006; Diwakar et al., 2012; Valiente et al.,

2018), web-based courses (Yalcin and Vatansever,

2016), mobile apps (Musing et al., 2011; Rakhmawati

and Firdha, 2018), are some up-to-date examples. Be-

sides the sort of tool, the instructional design repre-

sents another important aspect in this context. Tra-

ditional methodologies are constantly renewed with

blended-based (Aguilar-Pe

na et al., 2016), project-

based (Amiel et al., 2014) and problem-based ap-

proaches (Perales et al., 2015), amongst others.

Nonetheless, the actual success of such programs is

always dependent on the sort of activities designed

by the instructors. The ﬁnal success is closely tied to

the validity of the designed activities to stimulate ac-

tive learning through the taught concepts, and their

relation with the engagement and motivation (Ar-

rosagaray et al., 2019; Zylka et al., 2015) awaken in

the students. Hence the purpose of this work is de-

ﬁned from that starting point, from where related ob-

jectives are then established in order to overcome the

most typical difﬁculties reported by students of elec-

tronics subjects.

Regarding such difﬁculties, research on engineer-

ing and technical education ﬁelds has evidenced seri-

ous misconceived ideas amongst students of electron-

ics courses (Trotskovsky and Sabag, 2018; Sangam

and Jesiek, 2012). Most of these issues arise from the

instinctive reasoning and understanding they gener-

ally apply to the basis of electronics principles and

electronic circuits (Pitterson et al., 2016). Several

studies (Mart

ınez et al., 2018) conﬁrm that the key

aspect for these misconceptions are commonly asso-

Valiente, D., Payá, L., Fernández de Ávila, S., Ferrer, J., Cebollada, S. and Reinoso, O.

Active Learning Program Supported by Online Simulation Applet in Engineering Education.

DOI: 10.5220/0007916401210128

In Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Simulation and Modeling Methodologies, Technologies and Applications (SIMULTECH 2019), pages 121-128

ISBN: 978-989-758-381-0

121

Table 1: Group of students participating in the study.

Engineering Degree Mechanics (ME) Energy (EE) Electronis & Automation (EAE)

Test group (no. students) 65 (46%) 24 (53%) 36 (49%)

Enrolled (no. students) 140 45 73

ciated to macro physics models erroneously assumed,

such as the typical assumption by which many stu-

dents think that electric current ﬂows inside a pipe.

Overall, taking into account all these aspects, we

have proposed a blended learning program sustained

by an online circuit simulation applet in Java (Falstad

P., 2019), for simulating a wide variety of problems

and exercises with a straightforward implication to

real electronic circuits, during both the theory lec-

tures, practical tutorials and hands-on sessions in the

electronics laboratory. This tool was selected due

to its simplicity of use through its website, without

the need of any software installation. Our experi-

ence reveals that its use turns to be easier and at-

tractive for students, in contrast to more complete

and professional softwares such as Orcad − Pspice

or Matlab/Simulink (Peng and Bao, 2012; Iyoda and

Belanger, 2017). Apart from its simplicity and intu-

itive use, it does not require any software installation.

In addition to this, it provides a very simple menu

with almost all the components the students usually

study in the course.

The intervention was performed in several Bache-

lor’s degrees in engineering, fact that permitted com-

paring achievement results in the active learning of

students, engagement, motivation and attitude to-

wards the program. The validity of the use of an

online simulation tool is also compared with the use

of other digital resources during the course. More-

over, test groups were voluntarily established by stu-

dents, in order to extract further insights and compar-

isons with the outcomes of the rest of enrolled stu-

dents. It is evident that certain bias is likely to appear

when members of the test groups are conformed vol-

untarily (Chapman et al., 2006; Frederiksen, 1984).

Nonetheless our institution only considers voluntary

participation during the ﬁrst pilot experiment of a

program. After the main outcomes and beneﬁts are

demonstrated for this academic year, the program will

be further studied with formal test groups selection, in

next courses.

The rest of the paper is structured as follows:

section 2 presents an overview about the designed

methodology; section 3 focuses on the results ex-

tracted after the implementation was carried out; sec-

tion 4 provides a discussion on the main conclusions

and insights derived from the results.

2 MATERIALS AND METHODS

This learning program was devised and conducted

during the academic year 2017/2018 with several un-

dergraduate engineering students within the Spanish

ofﬁcial university system. The program was divided

into theory lectures, practical tutorials and hands-on

sessions in the electronics laboratory.

2.1 Implementation

The set of executed actions were chronologically

planned along two semesters, according to the follow-

ing development steps:

1. Studying and selecting an efﬁcient online simula-

tion software alternative.

2. Elaborating a survey to assess student’s concep-

tions, engagement and satisfaction with the pro-

gram.

3. Teaching an introductory seminar to the simula-

tion applet tool (Falstad P., 2019).

4. Preparing a set of activities with simulation sup-

port for all the theory lectures, practical and

hands-on sessions. Designing an extra assignment

dossier with activities to be solved by simulation.

5. Analysing the survey results and the corrections

of the assignment dossier with activities.

6. Assessing the achievement of the students at the

end of the course (test groups and the rest of the

enrolled students).

2.2 Target Groups

The entire set of students participating in this study

are presented in Table 1. They were students enrolled

in three different engineering degrees (Mechanics;

Energy; Electronics and Automation) who all took the

electronics course presented in this work. Despite for-

mal approaches for test groups selection (Chapman

et al., 2006; Frederiksen, 1984), we were limited by

institutional policies to allow students to voluntarily

join the test groups. They accepted to hand in a ﬁ-

nal assignment dossier of activities to be solved with

the online simulation applet, during the entire course.

SIMULTECH 2019 - 9th International Conference on Simulation and Modeling Methodologies, Technologies and Applications

122

Table 2: Classiﬁed questions of the survey.

Question no. Content

1-10 Electronics’ essentials

11-12 Availability and use of support resources

13-16 Motivation, satisfaction and attitude to the program

(a) (b)

Figure 1: Main menu window of the simulation applet in Java (Falstad P., 2019).(a): typical full-wave rectiﬁer circuit with

ﬁlter, for AC-DC conversion. (b) custom limiter circuit studied in the course.

In terms of percentage, the test groups represented al-

most the 50% out of the total number of enrolled stu-

dents in each degree. This permits obtaining consis-

tent and signiﬁcative results when deﬁning compara-

tive results and statistics.

2.3 Assessment

As described above, the learning program was con-

ceived to be supported by circuit simulation during

all the stages of the course: theory lectures, practi-

cal tutorials and hands-on sessions. All the activities

and exercises presented by the instructors during the

sessions were afterwards validated with the simula-

tion applet, regardless they comprised theory aspects

or analytical resolutions of electronic circuits. Ab-

stract physics concepts and the main difﬁculties de-

tected in the students, were tackled with the aid of

simulation examples and activities. Using graphical

representation of variables, together with the simulta-

neous evolution of the current and voltage signals on

the circuit, revealed signiﬁcative beneﬁts on the active

learning of the students, who demonstrated to rectify

their previous misconceptions by their own, with the

slight guidance and supervision of the instructors.

In order to assess the actual beneﬁts of this pro-

gram more speciﬁcally, we elaborated a survey to be

answered by students. This survey was validated by

a group of ﬁve full professors from other universi-

ties, with broad experience in the ﬁeld. It contained

questions related to basic electronics concepts, mo-

tivation and attitude to the program. The questions

were classiﬁed, as denoted in Table 2, into three main

blocks: questions 1-10 dealt with physic magnitudes,

general circuit lows, simple circuit resolution, graph-

ical representation and interpretation; questions 11-

12 were intended to evaluate the use of support re-

sources made by students. Finally, questions 13-16

were aimed at assessing the general engagement and

motivation towards the learning of electronics, as par-

ticularly experienced during this program, and the at-

titude of students to the use of the online circuit sim-

ulation applet.

Moreover, the test groups received a speciﬁc as-

signment dossier with activities to be solved with sim-

ulation. Figure 1 presents two examples of activity

with the simulation applet. Figure 1(a) represents a

typical application of a full-wave rectiﬁer circuit for

AC-DC conversion, whereas Figure 1(b) presents a

custom design for a limiter circuit. In this manner,

we aimed at a more explicit evaluation of the outputs

of this approach, which permitted comparing results

amongst the entire group of students enrolled in the

course (who did not work on the assignment with sim-

ulation), versus the speciﬁc test groups in each degree.

Active Learning Program Supported by Online Simulation Applet in Engineering Education

123

2013/2014 2014/2015 2015/2016 2016/2017 2017/2018

academic year

mean marks (0-10)

0.35

0.4

0.45

0.5

0.55

0.6

Mean marks and %-passed vs academic year

marks

%-pass

50% level

Figure 2: Mean marks & percentage of students who passed

the course during the ﬁve last academic years.

3 RESULTS

The main results extracted from this study are focused

on: i) the achievement of the students and ii) the per-

ceived motivation and satisfaction for the active and

autonomous learning through this program, and its ac-

tual validity for the long-term learning and self con-

struction of knowledge of the students.

3.1 Achievement Results

Firstly, the current academic year, 2017/2018, in

which the simulation tool has been ﬁrst included, is

compared in terms of mean marks. A record corre-

sponding to the ﬁve last academic years is presented

for comparison in Figure 2. The left-side axis encodes

the mean marks of the entire set of enrolled students

within the three degrees (Table 1). It can be observed

that the current academic year presents better marks.

It is also worth highlighting the substantial increase

in the percentage of students who succeed in passing

the course (marks≥5), in the right-side axis, up to the

55% in the current academic year (highest value over

the ﬁve past years). As a preliminar output, we can

state that the inclusion of simulation resources within

the program in 2017/2018, has signiﬁcantly improved

the ﬁnal achievement of the entire set of students, in

contrast to the previous years.

Nonetheless, more speciﬁc comparison data are

required. Hence we compare in Figure 3 the marks

obtained by the test groups and the rest of the stu-

dents, in the academic year 2017/2018. Firstly, Fig-

ure 3(a) depicts an illustrative insight, since it evi-

dences that the marks distribution is signiﬁcantly im-

proved for the test groups, where a 50% of the stu-

dents reached the highest marks ([8-10]). The per-

centage of students who did not pass the course is

also lower for the test group. Finally, but not less im-

portant, all the students within the test groups took

the exam, in contrast to a 37% out of the rest of the

students, who dropout the course during the current

academic year. Secondly, Figure 3(b) presents a com-

parison for both groups in terms of mean marks. Then

it also reveals better performance for the test groups

in mean terms.

Another aspect to consider is the inﬂuence of the

use of the simulation applet and its beneﬁts, in con-

trast to other methodologies and digital resources.

Despite the fact that the course is eminently oriented

towards the use of simulation during the theory, prac-

tical and hands-on sessions, the students also have

other additional resources. The students have access

to a (Moodle) site where diverse digital resources

are available: a collection of solved exercises, videos

with theory lessons and resolution of exercises, a fo-

rum to ask questions, some multiple choice test for

self-assessment, etc. In this sense, we have also anal-

ysed the relation of the students achievement and the

dependency on the sort of resources.

Table 3 comprises the correlation results for such

framework, in which the marks of the students who

participated in the test groups (who took the assign-

ment based on simulation activities) are compared

with students who made use of other digital resources

in the Moodle site of this course, and also with stu-

dents who did not use any of the previous. It is worth

emphasizing that students in the test groups worked

on the assignment dossier with the simulation tool

during the entire course (two semesters). In this con-

text, the test groups present the only signiﬁcative cor-

relation (>0.7) between the use of simulation and the

positive marks. Moreover, a statistical contrast test

has been carried out by means of a χ

-test. The marks

have been considered qualitatively as f ail or pass, for

each type of digital resource. Assuming a conﬁdence

value of 95% for the test (α=0.05), the only resource

which proves a clear dependency between its use and

the marks obtained by the students is simulation, since

> χ

test

(23.74>3.84) and p-value<al pha (5.74E-

7<0.05). Besides this, it is clear that students who do

not use any kind of digital resource have less chances

to obtain high marks, as per the negative correlation

value, r

=-0.12.

SIMULTECH 2019 - 9th International Conference on Simulation and Modeling Methodologies, Technologies and Applications

124

Dropout <5 [5-6] [6-8] [8-10]

Marks

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

% of students

Marks distribution & Dropout. 2017-2018

Test groups

Rest of students

(a)

0 2 4 6 8 10

mean marks [0-10]

Mean marks comparison. 2017-2018

Test groups

Rest of students

std

(b)

Figure 3: (a): marks distribution for the test groups and the rest of the students during the academic year 2017/2018. (b) mean

marks comparison between test group and the rest of the students, in the academic year 2017/2018.

Table 3: Correlation results and contrasts tests between the use of speciﬁc digital resources and the marks obtained by students.

Digital resource r

p-value χ

test

Moodle 0.31 2.11 0.096 3.84

Simulation assignment 0.77 23.74 5.74E-7 3.84

None -0.12 1.03 0.24 3.84

3.2 Survey Analysis

The results processed from the responses of the sur-

vey are presented in Figure 4. As described in Sec-

tion 2.3 (Table 2), the set of questions were clas-

siﬁed into concepts regarding electronics essentials

(questions 1-10), availability and use of resources to

support their learning (questions 11-12) and general

engagement, motivation and satisfaction towards the

learning of electronics sustained by the online sim-

ulation applet (questions 13-16). On the one hand,

Figure 4(a) and Figure 4(c) represent the mean re-

sults for responses of the rest of students enrolled in

the course, who did not participate in the test groups.

For further detail, the different degrees have been rep-

resented separately by with colored bars. It can be

observed that students in the degrees of Energy and

Electronic & Automation prove slightly higher levels

in all the sort of questions. Nevertheless, the general

trend in the responses is quite similar for the three de-

grees.

On the other hand, Figure 4(b) and Figure 4(d)

represent the mean results for responses of the stu-

dents in the test groups (who took the assignment

dossier with the online simulation tool during the en-

tire course). Again, signiﬁcant outcomes are demon-

strated by the test groups, which present a substantial

increase all over the three blocks of questions, in con-

trast to the rest of the students. All in all, the survey

conﬁrms the beneﬁcial outcomes of the use of simu-

lation resources, not only in the learning of concepts,

but also on the self-conﬁdence and motivation for the

long-term and active learning of the students in the

near future within their current engineering education.

4 CONCLUSIONS

This work has dealt with a case study in which a learn-

ing program for a course of electronics in engineering

degrees has been redeﬁned through the support of an

online simulation applet implemented in Java, with-

out the need of local software installation. Three set

of students enrolled in different undergraduate engi-

neering degrees within the Spanish ofﬁcial university

system, have taken part in the study. The basis of the

program consisted of a blended learning model with

an incipient support of activities carried out with sim-

ulation, in order to aid during the theory lessons, the

practical and the hands-on sessions. The main goal

was to enhance the global achievement of the students

Active Learning Program Supported by Online Simulation Applet in Engineering Education

125

Questions 1-10. Rest of students

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

question no.

value [1-5]

EAE

(a)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

question no.

value [1-5]

Questions 1-10. Test groups

EAE

(b)

11 12 13 14 15 16

question no.

value [1-5]

Questions 11-16. Rest of students

EAE

(c)

11 12 13 14 15 16

question no.

value [1-5]

Questions 11-16. Test groups

EAE

(d)

Figure 4: Left axes (a), (c): survey results associated to the responses of the rest of the students enrolled in the course. Right

axes (b), (d): survey results associated to the responses of the test groups.  Mechanichs Eng.;  Energy Eng.;  Electronics

& Automation Eng.

in terms of self-autonomy and comprehension, for

their further active learning. Long-term knowledge

and understanding of concepts are reinforced, and ro-

bust and consistent development of competences are

promoted through digital skill acquisition.

According to the statistical results processed in

this work, in comparison to previous academic years,

the current course (2017/2018) in which the simula-

tion tool was ﬁrst included as a pilot experiment, re-

veals improved mean marks, and specially, encour-

aging rates of pass marks. Nevertheless, further in-

sights can be extracted from the analysis. Students

within test groups (who worked on an assignment

dossier of activities to be done with the simulation

tool during the entire course) demonstrated enhanced

achievement results than the rest of the students. The

distribution of their marks is another evident outcome

of the program, but most importantly, the fact that

none of the students in the test group did dropout the

course, contrarily to the high rate of dropout regis-

tered for the rest of the students in the course. Fu-

ture works will consider more proper studies which

avoid possible bias on the voluntary enrollment of the

members in the test groups. So far, our institution

SIMULTECH 2019 - 9th International Conference on Simulation and Modeling Methodologies, Technologies and Applications

126

only considers voluntary participation during the ﬁrst

pilot experiment of a program. Other possible bias

such as those associated to the academic record of the

students in previous courses will be also consider in

more detail.

Additionally, a survey was designed in order to

assess more precisely the success in the understand-

ing of fundamental electronics concepts, but also to

evaluate the use of resources made by students, and

their motivation, satisfaction and attitude to the learn-

ing program conducted in the course. Again, the re-

sults presented demonstrate a clear increase in terms

of comprehension and general satisfaction by the stu-

dents who participated in the test groups, in contrast

to the rest of the students. Finally, the use of other

available digital resources has been compared with

the use of the simulation tool, as a ﬁnal prove of the

validity of the approach. The only resource which

proves a linear correlation between its use and the

achievement of the students is simulation. To that

aim, statistical contrasts tests have been performed.

Again, our future work is considering inferences from

the survey and internal consistency between different

responses.

Overall, we can conclude that the main objetives

have been covered by the presented learning program.

According to the results, the validity and suitability of

this approach for its future application is conﬁrmed

by the positive improvements measured on the self-

autonomy of the students and the active and long-term

learning, sustained by the inclusion of an easy simu-

lation applet within the main teaching methodology.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This research has been partially funded by the Span-

ish Government through the project DPI2016-78361-

R (AEI/FEDER, UE); the Valencian Research Coun-

cil through the project AICO/2017/148; the Valen-

cian Research Council and the European Social Fund

through the post-doctoral grant APOSTD/2017/028.

REFERENCES

Aguilar-Pe

na, J. D., Mu

noz-Rodr

ıguez, F. J., Rus-Casas, C.,

and Fern

andez-Carrasco, J. I. (2016). Blended learn-

ing for photovoltaic systems: Virtual laboratory with

pspice. In 2016 Technologies Applied to Electronics

Teaching (TAEE), pages 1–6.

Amiel, F., Abboud, D., and Trocan, M. (2014). A project

oriented learning experience for teaching electron-

ics fundamentals. IEEE Communications Magazine,

52(12):98–100.

Arrosagaray, M., Gonzalez-Peiteado, M., Pino-Juste, M.,

and Rodriguez-Lopez, B. (2019). A comparative

study of spanish adult students? attitudes to ict in

classroom, blended and distance language learning

modes. Computers & Education, 134.

Campbell, J. O., Bourne, J. R., Mosterman, P. J., and

Brodersen, A. J. (2002). The effectiveness of learn-

ing simulations for electronic laboratories. Journal of

Engineering Education, 91(1):81–87.

Chapman, K. J., Meuter, M., Toy, D., and Wright, L. (2006).

Can?t we pick our own groups? the inﬂuence of group

selection method on group dynamics and outcomes.

Journal of Management Education, 30(4):557–569.

Dickerson, S. J. and Clark, R. M. (2018). A classroom-

based simulation-centric approach to microelectronics

education. Computer Applications in Engineering Ed-

ucation, 26(4):768–781.

Diwakar, A., Poojary, S., and Noronha, S. B. (2012). Virtual

labs in engineering education: Implementation using

free and open source resources. In 2012 IEEE Inter-

national Conference on Technology Enhanced Educa-

tion (ICTEE), pages 1–4.

Frederiksen, N. (1984). The real test bias: Inﬂuences of

testing on teaching and learning. American Psycholo-

gist, 39(3):193–202.

Huanyin, Z., Jinsheng, L., Yangjie, W., Hong, X., and Min,

Q. (2009). Computer simulation for undergraduate en-

gineering education. In 2009 4th International Con-

ference on Computer Science Education, pages 1353–

1356.

Iyoda, I. and Belanger, J. (2017). History of power sys-

tem simulators to analyze and test of power electron-

ics equipment. In 2017 IEEE HISTory of ELectrotech-

nolgy CONference (HISTELCON), pages 117–120.

Mart

ınez, J., Rosa, S., Liminana, Menargues, A., Nicol

as,

C., and Savall, F. (2018). El circuito el

ectrico sim-

ple. un modelo micro. Alambique: Did

actica de las

ciencias experimentales, 92:30–37.

Menendez, L. M., Salaverria, A., Mandado, E., and Da-

costa, J. G. (2006). Virtual electronics laboratory: A

new tool to improve industrial electronics learning. In

IECON 2006 - 32nd Annual Conference on IEEE In-

dustrial Electronics, pages 5445–5448.

Musing, A., Drofenik, U., and Kolar, J. W. (2011). New

circuit simulation applets for online education in

power electronics. In 2011 5th IEEE International

Conference on E-Learning in Industrial Electronics

(ICELIE), pages 70–75.

Peng, L. and Bao, L. (2012). Application of mat-

lab/simulink and orcad/pspice software in theory of

circuits. In Wu, Y., editor, Software Engineering and

Knowledge Engineering: Theory and Practice, pages

1055–1064, Berlin, Heidelberg. Springer Berlin Hei-

delberg.

Perales, M. A., Barrero, F., and Toral, S. L. (2015).

Learning achievements using a pbl-based methodol-

ogy in an introductory electronics course. IEEE Re-

vista Iberoamericana de Tecnologias del Aprendizaje,

10(4):296–301.

Active Learning Program Supported by Online Simulation Applet in Engineering Education

127

Pitterson, N., Streveler, R., and Brown, C. (2016). Ex-

ploring undergraduate engineering students’ concep-

tual learning of complex circuit concepts in an intro-

ductory course. In 2016 IEEE Frontiers in Education

Conference (FIE), pages 1–8.

Rakhmawati, L. and Firdha, A. (2018). The use of mo-

bile learning application to the fundament of digital

electronics course. IOP Conference Series: Materials

Science and Engineering, 296(1):012–015.

Sangam, D. and Jesiek, B. K. (2012). Conceptual under-

standing of resistive electric circuits among ﬁrst-year

engineering students. In 2012 ASEE Annual Confer-

ence & Exposition, pages 25.339.1 – 25.339.11, San

Antonio, Texas. ASEE Conferences.

Falstad P. (2019). Falstad Simulation Applets.

Trotskovsky, E. and Sabag, N. (2018). Engineering stu-

dents’ solutions to accuracy problems in analog elec-

tronics course. In Teaching and Learning in a Digi-

tal World, pages 218–223. Springer International Pub-

lishing.

Valiente, D., Berenguer, Y., Pay

a, L., Peidr

o, A., and

Reinoso, O. (2018). Development of a platform

to simulate virtual environments for robot localiza-

tion. In INTED 2018, the 12th annual International

Technology, Education and Development Conference,

pages 1232–1241, Valencia, Spain.

Yalcin, N. A. and Vatansever, F. (2016). A web-based vir-

tual power electronics laboratory. Computer Applica-

tions in Engineering Education, 24(1):71–78.

Zylka, J., Christoph, G., Kroehne, U., Hartig, J., and Gold-

hammer, F. (2015). Moving beyond cognitive ele-

ments of ict literacy: First evidence on the structure

of ict engagement. Computers in Human Behavior,

53.

SIMULTECH 2019 - 9th International Conference on Simulation and Modeling Methodologies, Technologies and Applications

128