Identification of the Variables Involved in People’s Intellectual Understanding of Outdoor Cultural and Natural Spaces with the Support of ICT

Abstract

The use of educational platforms that allow dynamic learning mediated by information and communication technologies (ICT) has become a common method in different educational institutions. Thus far, these methodologies have been seen mainly within the classroom. Thus, it would be relevant to identify whether using these technologies to recognize cultural and natural exteriors allows complete learning by the users. Based on the above, the objective of this work was to identify the variables involved in people’s intellectual understanding of outdoor cultural and natural spaces with the support of ICT through a systematic literature review methodology based on PRISMA. The study found gamification to be one of the most relevant elements in the learning experience as well as the interdisciplinary approach to learning as a teaching methodology. As the main conclusion, we found that, although different technological tools have been developed for more dynamic learning experiences, the models developed for the evaluation of these tools in learning about outdoor cultural and natural spaces do not yet focus on knowledge consciousness, which still leaves open the field of research in this aspect.

1. Introduction

The generation of awareness regarding the care of the environment and the preservation of natural resources has become more relevant in recent years, mainly since the pandemic caused by COVID-19 [1]. However, raising awareness is not easy; it requires an approach to the community and implementing different strategies to raise awareness about the importance of natural resources and the preservation of the different sites of natural and patrimonial relevance for society.

These strategies can be generated by taking advantage of the technological resources that exist today, allowing the creation of interactive and attractive user experiences. The application of digital technologies is becoming increasingly present in educational environments, especially when the desire is to study a place of importance that is not accessible in person [2]. The paradigm shift brought about by digital transformation and Industry 4.0 opens the opportunity to innovate in the field of tourism using digital technologies.

More personalized, interactive, and engaging tourism experiences can be offered, especially for digital natives [3]. The role of technology in education and tourism has been related to the use of multimedia computer technologies and geographic information systems to offer a different ecotourism experience. In this way, people can find information about travel sites and perform activities mediated by technologies during the trip [4]. Digital tools, such as geoinformation, geovisualization, and geolocation, have allowed the development of new methods that contribute to the development of tourism and education in geosites of heritage interest and with geotourism potential [5]. This is because the use of interactive digital tools in sites of natural and heritage interest allows the visual recognition of the site and the ability to add informative elements that provide knowledge about the site at the same time that the area is recognized and interacts digitally with the place.

In this line, e.g., Cayla and Martin [6] presented how the geovisualization tool can be used for geoconservation and interpretation by monitoring unstructured digital data records, such as high-resolution images or 3D rendering techniques, to prevent natural hazards in tourist geosites, e.g., rockfalls. Mobile applications have also proven to be an opportunity with great potential for tourism in geological and geomorphological heritage and learning. The study by Pica et al. [7] analyzes the touristic offer in natural sites from mobile applications, focusing on the transfer of geoscientific knowledge. Augmented reality (AR) has also been a cutting-edge technology that has provided new ways of interacting by eliminating physical and virtual barriers.

From the learning purpose, studies, such as the one by Siang et al. [3], which presents the development of an AR mobile application for the People’s Museum in Melaka and its behavioral intention in the face of gamification, have been addressed. Thus, in recent years this technology has been integrated with mobile applications to address cultural heritage, e.g., Ntagiantas et al. [8] explored AR through a children’s book to provide a tangible enjoyable experience for children about the pastoral life of the Psiloritis mountain in Crete.

This allows for visualizing the educational potential of current digital tools concerning places of natural and cultural interest, such as UNESCO geoparks, given the integration of informative, educational elements and the visual representation of those places with contemporary digital techniques that allow remote and virtual immersion in these places. However, despite the technological progress generated around the experience in sustainable tourism and education, little has been studied on the real assimilation and understanding of knowledge in natural areas, such as natural parks or geoparks and, in general, in sites subject to geological heritage. In this sense, this research aims to identify the variables involved in the intellectual understanding of people concerning outdoor cultural and natural spaces with the support of ICT.

Importance of Knowledge Consciousness through the Use of Technologies

Learning and knowledge technologies, used as didactic tools at the service of learning, contribute to knowledge management, ensure knowledge consciousness, and help to develop technological skills [9]. The consciousness must then be distinguished from the concept of learning. Knowledge consciousness is more related to the intellectual understanding of things. It is the action of abstractly understanding ideas [10]. Therefore, under the scenario of this study, it is important to understand the importance of using geobased technologies in acquiring geographic knowledge and behavior to experience places [11] and to apprehend (to understand something) the heritage in a place of tourism [12].

Geoparks [8], natural parks [13], and museums [3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13] are important heritage attractions that offer authentic cultural experiences. Visits to these places are considered travel, so it is appropriate to explain visitor experiences as tourism experiences [13]. In addition, historical and cultural heritage is characterized by an interesting landscape value that must necessarily pass through a knowledge activity. In this way, it has the potential to become a different experience for younger people through the use of digital technologies [13].

Previously, the uses and benefits of new technologies in heritage interpretation have been investigated [14]. People are increasingly interested in the scientific meaning behind the landscape rather than the landscape itself. As Han et al. [15] explained, an interpretation system plays an important role in scientific outreach. Interpretive panels for geosites and geomorphosites, where topics relevant to not only earth sciences but also historical, archaeological, and artistic aspects of the site are addressed to primary and secondary school students, university students, and the public for heritage conservation and geo-tourism promotion.

Thus, researchers, institutions, and governments have long been interested in finding and/or developing technological applications to advance educational missions to enhance the learning experiences at geotourism sites to target various groups [16]. Based on the above, the following research questions arise:

• What are the variables associated with knowledge in natural spaces?

• What are the variables associated with the use of ICT in natural areas?

• What are the knowledge-oriented technologies in natural areas?

2. Methods

Based on the general objective of this study and the research questions, a systematic literature review was performed using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) methodology developed to standardize systematic review writing. According to Selçuk [17], the guidelines of this methodology encompass a checklist of 27 items, represented in a four-phase flow chart. The phases mentioned above fall within the scope of a review: identification, selection, eligibility, and inclusion. Thus, the flowchart, checklist, and criteria guide authors, reviewers, and editors [18].

2.1. Eligibility Criteria

Eligibility criteria are essential in identifying relevant studies for analysis in a systematic review [19]. These are sometimes referred to as inclusion or exclusion criteria and allow assessment of the selected records’ validity, applicability, and completeness [20].

2.1.1. Inclusion Criteria

The article presents information and communication technologies oriented to learning or knowledge. Therefore, variables related to the appropriation of knowledge through immersive technological tools that allow merging reality and virtuality in educational environments were considered, adopting gamification concepts that aim to implement game mechanics in multiple contexts [21,22]. Thus, terms that associate the capacity for autonomous learning from different perspectives were related, measuring the level and agility of the participants when interacting with different digital platforms and betting on a favorable climate through the implementation of participation strategies in educational environments [23,24]. In this sense, the articles had one of the following terms in the title, abstract, or keywords:

• “knowledge apprehension” o “savvy knowledge” o “learning process” o “aprehensión del conocimiento” o “proceso de aprendizaje”

  “gamification” o “digital technology” o “information and communication techno-logy” o “ict” o “immersive technolog” o “gamificación” o “tecnologías digitales” o “tecnologías de la información y la comunicación” o “tic” o “tecnologías inmersivas”.

Likewise, in a second instance to be considered for the inclusion of this study, research developed in open spaces with components associated with sustainable tourism, environmental protection, and geological heritage was evaluated as follows:

• “natural park” o “geopark” o “national park” o “environmental park” o “parque natural” o “geoparque” o “parque nacional” o “parque ambiental”

  “geotourism” o “geoheritage” o “turism” o “geoturismo” o “turismo”

  “outdoors” o “outside”.

2.1.2. Exclusion Criteria

Based on the recommendations of O’Dea et al. [25], we initially excluded publications that did not meet the minimum methodological rigor required, i.e., the publication was not conducted in an educational setting (primary, secondary, or vocational education). In addition, our study does not address experimental work in education in settings outside the classroom. Publications that were not available in full text were also excluded. Thus, for eligibility in the second instance, publications that did not assess or mention variables associated with knowledge and/or use of ICT for learning in external settings, e.g., outside the classroom, were excluded. In this way, the potential for complete analysis was guaranteed.

2.2. Source of Information and Search Strategy

Studies were identified using the Scopus database in June 2022. This database was used because of its broad coverage of journals in all fields and because it is one of the most widely used databases for developing bibliometric analyses for various purposes, namely, for research evaluation [26]. In addition, Scopus meets the standards of high quality and reliability for bibliographic data extraction [27]. For these reasons, this database was chosen to perform the search around the research objective.

To perform the information search, a strategy based on the use of descriptors contained in the title, abstract, and keywords related to the terms “knowledge apprehension”, “gamification”, and/or “information and communication technologies” in ALL “natural park” or “geopark” or “national park” or “environmental park” or “geotourism” or “external places” was used. Boolean logical operators were also used. The search equation used was as follows:

(TITLE-ABS-KEY (“aprehensión del conocimiento” OR “knowledge apprehension” OR “savvy knowledge” OR “learning process” OR “proceso de aprendizaje”) AND TITLE-ABS-KEY (gamificación OR gamification OR “digital technology” OR “tecnologías digitales” OR “tecnologías de la información y comunicación” OR “information and communication technology” OR ict OR tic OR “immersive technolog*” OR “tecnologías inmersivas”) AND ALL (“natural park” OR “parque natural” OR geopark OR “national park” OR “environmental park” OR geotourism OR geoheritage OR turism OR “parque nacional” OR “parque ambiental” OR geoparque OR geoturismo OR turismo OR outdoors OR outside)).

A total of 156 records were obtained in this search, which were reviewed for methodological rigor and relation to the study’s objective by three researchers. The search included English and Spanish. The search included research articles, book chapters, and conference proceedings accessible through the database.

2.3. Software and Data Extraction

From the publications recorded through the search equation in the selected database, the data were checked and examined for their content and contribution to the research topic. The 156 documents were downloaded in a comma-separated value (CSV) file. Then the file was converted to Microsoft Excel workbook from Office 365. The documents were checked to ensure that they contained the correct information, and during the analysis, no data with indexing errors or missing information was found.

Subsequently, duplicate publications were eliminated, and the inclusion and exclusion criteria were applied, resulting in a total of 31 documents suitable for the analysis of this research. Following the logic of the research questions, the review is divided into two parts: it begins with the variables or factors associated with the knowledge and use of ICT followed by the use of technologies to support the consciousness of knowledge in external locations.

2.4. Selection Process Data Analysis

We conducted a systematic literature review following the PRISMA 2020 guidelines [18,19]. The detailed route of inclusion of publications for the analysis was structured in three study phases: identification, screening, and inclusion, which can be observed in Figure 1. The first phase was based on an initial literature search from a search equation in the Scopus database (n = 156). Considering the inclusion and exclusion criteria, 123 publications were discarded in a human review in the second phase.

Three faculty members were in charge of reviewing the records, from the title to the keywords, to decide on the potential of the publications. At this point, 56 publications were excluded, and records that did not have full access to the text were also identified (n = 25) and discarded. In the last phase, 31 publications were carefully selected after identifying that they included the analysis of variables associated with ICT knowledge or use.

Based on the recommendations of Alqudah et al. [28], a quality assessment checklist was designed to include six items to assess the quality of the eligible research studies (n = 31). This checklist can be seen in Table 1. It evaluates the relevance to the research objective from 1 to 3, with 1 being the least relevant, 2 being relevant, and 3 being the most relevant. The results of this evaluation can be seen in Table 1. The chosen studies comply with the relevance assessment, each being evaluated on a scale of 2 or 3 and were, therefore, considered for evaluation.

3. Results

The selected publications can be seen in Appendix A (Table A1), where information is provided according to the technologies used, the study population, the place where the technology is implemented, and the country.

The publications considered were published in the period from 2008 to 2022. A total of 58% of the documents correspond to research articles, 35% to conference proceedings, and the remaining percentage (7%) to book chapters. In terms of technology, the most considered technology was related to gamification, followed by ICT, augmented reality, and virtual reality. Most of the studies were applied to students, whether in elementary, secondary, or university education; teachers; and users. Therefore, many study sites corresponded to universities and education centers as well as external places of interest for knowledge. Most of the publications were from Spain. There was also a recurrence of studies in countries such as Italy and India.

3.1. Variables Associated with Knowledge

Among the central variables of the analysis were those associated with the development of knowledge. Figure 2 shows the 14 variables found to be recurrent in the articles analyzed. One of the variables most mentioned by the authors was the interdisciplinary approach to learning, totaling seven mentions. García and Pareja Roblin [24] defined the interdisciplinary approach as the achievement of autonomous, critical, and reflective learning supported by a participatory and favorable climate generated by implementing various strategies and activities proposed to the students.

Next, we found communication and collaboration, mentioned in five articles and defined by Cabero et al. [29] as those actions that involve using digital resources to plan, organize, and conduct learning processes with peers as well as being able to communicate the acquired learning. Next, we find variable motivation, with a recurrence of 4, understood as a positive and enthusiastic attitude towards the learning process on the part of those acquiring or receiving knowledge [30,31].

The variables of blended learning and critical thinking, mentioned in four articles each, were found in the same recurrence. The blended learning variable has been defined as the combination of e-learning and conventional classroom methods [32] using, as a strategy, the possibility of providing a space for students to control the learning process [33]. On the other hand, the critical thinking variable involves learning to reflect critically and to adequately contextualize technologies that have enormous implications at the educational, domestic, and work levels [34].

Subsequently, there are variable class activities, which can be defined as those performed during the class session with a real-time accompaniment of the teacher or tutor [35]. The other variables had a total recurrence of 2. For these variables of greater recurrence, we identified that they were notable in the articles since they referred mainly to the methodological approach given in the teaching–learning process and how the recipients of the same approached the knowledge.

These variables have been associated mainly with research in the area of social and human sciences, specifically in approaches to environmental education and social education. This is why, although these variables have been found in articles published in journals with an engineering and technology focus, such as Advances In Intelligent Systems And Computing or Computer Applications In Engineering Education, they have been primarily prioritized in magazines, such as Education And Information Technologies, Comunicar, and Digital Applications In Archaeology And Cultural Heritage. Although these magazines have a focus on the inclusion of digitization in their areas of knowledge, their main axis is education and culture.

On the other hand, the emergence of these variables occurred approximately around the year 2014. Additionally, it can be identified that the variables in this group are focused on the competencies and skills required for the future in all areas of knowledge, such as critical thinking, communication and collaboration, innovation, and interdisciplinary learning associated with the STEAM areas (Science, Technology, Engineering, Arts, Mathematics). The foregoing indicates that, in the areas of social, human, and natural sciences, it is also necessary to develop technological competence to support the economic development of these areas.

3.2. Variables Associated with the Use of ICTs

Among the central variables of the analysis were those associated with information and communication technologies due to the immersive experience and virtual and augmented reality components sought in the research. Figure 3 shows the seven variables found that were recurrent in the articles analyzed. One of the variables most frequently mentioned by the authors was Gamification. With eight repetitions, it was the most constant variable associated with ICT. The variable gamification was defined as the action of applying game mechanics to any project, idea, or situation [26].

Gamification is the process during which ludic elements are applied without the main objective being the ludic activity [36], in which different game design elements are used in contexts that are not usually for this purpose [25].

The second most recurrent variable was Autonomy, with three mentions, which refers to a student’s ability to develop activities independently [37]. Then, the variable Use of ICT, as with the previous variable, had a recurrence of 3, understood as the familiarity and knowledge of students with ICT tools (specifically for the use of the internet and its most common applications) [24]. For the other variables, there was a recurrence of 2 for each one, among which were two variables associated with the learning process: Digital literacy and e-learning.

On the other hand, there is the variable experience of use, which refers mainly to the perception of those who use the ICT tool as part of their learning process and the results obtained from its use. Finally, the Augmented reality variable is defined as combining virtual and real objects in a real environment through mobile devices, working intuitively and in real-time; this involves a combination of virtual and real objects in the same environment [22].

These variables are mainly associated with the use and exploitation of information and communication technologies (ICT). Most of these variables were found in journal articles, such as the Journal of Physics Conference Series, Lecture Notes In Computer Science, Computer Applications In Engineering Education, and Sustainability Switzerland. Similar to the group of previous variables, these journals have a focus on social sciences and education.

However, Sustainability Switzerland stands out because it is associated with a territory with a relevant geological representation. Regarding the resulting variables, gamification and augmented reality have been tools and technologies that facilitate learning due to the user’s experience, interactivity, and immersion. These technologies are useful for teaching in areas of natural sciences. However, user experience and digital literacy also emerge as relevant variables since they are crucial for the appropriation of knowledge from these types of tools.

3.3. Technologies to Support Knowledge Consciousness

Educational processes have changed in recent years, adapting to today’s more dynamic and technological environment, where the tools and elements of Industry 4.0 have become increasingly relevant. In this sense, the use of different technological support elements that allow a more interactive and immersive learning process have become novel and progressive factors in different educational instances. For example, Bozzelli et al. [38] presented a project entitled “An integrated VR/AR framework for user-centric interactive experience of cultural heritage: The ArkaeVision Project” that integrated both virtual reality and augmented reality for an interactive experience centered on the user who wants to learn and know about cultural heritage.

This project involves a game-like exploration of a 3D environment virtually reconstructed with digital fiction elements. The authors evaluated the acceptance of the platform applied to two case studies: the exploration of the Temple of Hera II of Paestum with Virtual Reality (VR) technology and the exploration of the slab of the Tomb of the Swimmer with augmented reality (AR). The authors found that the combination of narrative elements with virtual reality and augmented reality allowed for a better performance graphically and in terms of learning about cultural heritage.

On the other hand, in the article “Gamification and active learning in higher education: is it possible to match digital society, academia and students’ interests?”, the authors examined whether it was possible to match digital society, academia, and students’ interests in higher education, testing to what extent the introduction of gamification in active learning systems affected the development of competencies. The authors concluded that the generation of a co-creative gaming experience that supported students’ overall value creation resulted in successful active learning configurations without loss of academic performance, enabling the development of relevant skills for 21st-century professionals [29].

In work developed by Gabellone [39], innovative models and tools were designed and developed for the capitalization and exploitation of cultural heritage, understood as an integrated and complex system conceived as a holistic model strongly based on the exploitation of ICT technologies. The project analyzed and built innovative solutions for the elements that constituted the cultural offer, namely, the knowledge of the cultural heritage to be offered to users, its use, its conservation, and preservation. Regarding the use, the authors proposed an intelligent system capable of enabling the concept of exploration of cultural heritage.

Similarly, in the paper entitled “Usability testing analysis on the Bana game as education game design references on junior high school”, the authors proposed an application based on an educational game for high school students. The application aimed to teach about the environment and nature conservation in outdoor locations, specifically the environment in which it is developed, in the Baluran forest located in the Baluran National Park, Situbondo, Indonesia. The authors conducted usability tests to analyze the game based on learnability, efficiency, memorability, errors, and satisfaction and found that using the application in the educational context enabled different good learning options [23].

With the aim of learning and recognizing the natural environment, [36] also proposed a didactic tool that was developed to help teachers and parents create a learning process during which students playfully become familiar with the plants that live in their immediate environment. In the paper entitled “The gamification of elementary school biology: a case study on increasing understanding of plants”, the authors tested the application on groups of students of approximately 11 years old and found that this teaching methodology significantly improved students’ knowledge about plants and motivated them through an active and playful learning process.

Differently, the authors of the paper “Analyzing the negative effects of motivating e-learning tools in archeology teaching”, explored the positive and negative effects of the use of e-learning tools in learning about archeology and suggested that the use of these tools in order to increase students’ motivation can have a negative effect on their efficiency if they engage with the applications in the wrong way [25].

On the other hand, in the paper “Museum Exhibits that Interact with Pupils’ Mobile Devices. The Case of Hellenic Maritime Museum” by Rammos and Bratitsis [40], the authors developed a playful interactive activity based on augmented reality (AR) in the Hellenic Maritime Museum (HMM), finding that when activities during guided tours were gamified, the learning process became more attractive; thus, the interest of visitors increased. In [24], called “Supporting and promoting tourism network systems through ICT applications”, the authors explored the concept of destination management systems (DMS) as an opportunity to innovate in the tourism industry, allowing different forms of collaboration and cooperation measured by information and communication technologies (ICT).

Finally, it is possible to understand that the use of ICT in these areas of knowledge goes beyond the simple fact of strengthening the economy of the sector and its digitization. These technologies, such as augmented reality and gamification, due to the closeness and interactivity they allow, facilitate the understanding and acquisition of knowledge by the user. Additionally, they provide the experience, replicability, and possibility of evaluating the acquired knowledge later in a simple way. On the other hand, in situations where the users cannot physically arrive at the site, these technologies make it possible to bring the site to the person and allow them to acquire the same knowledge as someone who is physically present.

4. Discussion

After implementing the quality assessment checklist to the eligible research studies, the 31 most relevant documents were examined according to the selection criteria, allowing an analysis of the current situation of appropriating knowledge about learning technologies. Within the study, three technologies were identified as the most relevant and those that appeared most frequently. Thus, as shown in Appendix A, the most mentioned technology was ICT, appearing in 42% of the publications, followed by gamification with a percentage of participation of 39%, and augmented reality with 19%.

Around the variables associated with knowledge, the three main variables identified were the interdisciplinary approach to learning with 22% participation, the communication and collaboration variable with 16%, and, finally, motivation with 13%. In this sense, Alonso-García et al. [41] presented that good practices with ICTs have adaptable components and enable student collaboration, interaction, and motivation.

Thus, the interactive [38,39], interdisciplinary, and motivational components of ICT, [42,43], gamification [35,36,44,45], and augmented reality [3,8,22,37,46] are conglomerated as key components in the consciousness processes. They are conceived as didactic mediation objects that facilitate subject–object study interaction in a discursive context in which, based on co-creation and metacognition, differential approaches to the discursive genre of the phenomenon or problem to be studied are generated.

From the above, the consulted authors supported the concept of increasing responsibility for both the developers of educational applications and the educational managers. Thus, to promote contents, methodologies, and applications that, apart from promoting motivation, enjoyment, and access to knowledge, are also consistent with the work of the educational community. Additionally, these are also consistent with the work of pedagogical mediation, allowing the flexibility and enrichment of learning structures [4,16,21,30,32,35,37] within the framework of education for ecological awareness and sustainability [15,21,30] and, thus, contributing to the achievement of sustainable development goals.

The efforts for the consciousness of knowledge in the topics mentioned here should be directed with a systemic approach in that they should be consolidated through the evaluation of their application in the communities, considering the collective benefits that can be obtained related to the holistic component [3,6,12,23,24]. In this sense, UNESCO Global Geoparks seek to involve the participation of local stakeholders, generating awareness through the components of protection, education, and sustainable development [23]. From the above, it is necessary to consider the importance of studies oriented towards validating and verifying [45,47] the achievements of the related strategies and methodologies to achieve greater synergies and collective constructions for the holistic development of consciousness [46,48].

5. Conclusions

The results show that, among the most relevant variables, gamification, autonomy, and an interdisciplinary approach to learning, collaboration, and communication were found. These variables show the relevance of ICTs in an increasingly self-taught learning strategy and allow collaborative work and exchange among users in this autonomy [49,50]. These latter aspects allow the recognition of these spaces and openness to discussion among those who use them [49,50].

Based on the results obtained, it is possible to sustain that knowledge has been one of the fundamental pillars for the development of society and in the learning and recognition of natural and patrimonial spaces and resources [51,52]. In this sense, the technological developments obtained as a result of knowledge have been used as support in different contexts of society, including the educational and sustainable development context [53,54].

Therefore, developing technologies oriented to support the knowledge and intellectual understanding of natural areas of interest to society become a great advancement for promoting environmental conservation and facilitating sustainable tourism and interactive learning about sites of natural and heritage interest [55,56]. Likewise, these technologies transfer co-knowledge about the geological, cultural, and natural heritage that people can experience [57,58]. Based on the above, the objective of this article was to identify the variables involved in the intellectual understanding of people concerning outdoor cultural and natural spaces (natural parks, national parks, geoparks, and museums, among others) with the support of technology.

Therefore, the use of gamification and virtual and augmented reality tools in different educational contexts makes the traditional methodologies more flexible, allowing students to be more motivated and, therefore, more focused on their learning [58,59]. Incorporating these technological elements becomes an allied tool when rethinking how knowledge transfer is conducted at sites of cultural, natural, and patrimonial relevance [60,61]. Using this type of technology in natural spaces becomes an allied tool for the different governmental, touristic, and educational entities that intend to bring information and deliver knowledge about these places, generating awareness and recognition of these sites of natural importance [62,63]. Given the interactive strategy used by these technologies, the above makes the information provided about the places more interactive and less dense [64,65].

However, it is necessary to validate the different tools used since the incorporation of these elements alone does not guarantee consciousness of knowledge as the narrative and visual contents must follow the content to be delivered [66,67].

One of the main limitations obtained in the study was to be able to approach the review from the term knowledge apprehension since the literature still does not quite address this term, which is related to the absorption of knowledge but from the actual acquisition and understanding of knowledge in any subject by people. Additionally, there is still not much literature on using technological tools for an immersive experience in natural spaces, which further limited the study. In future research, it is suggested to analyze how much these immersive technology tools influence the understanding and adequate retention of knowledge about natural and cultural heritage [68,69].

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, A.V.-A., P.R.C. and V.G.-P.; methodology, W.L., J.Q.-F. and D.G.-A.; software, A.V.-A., V.G.-P. and W.L.; validation, J.Q-F. and D.G.-A.; formal analysis, V.G.-P., W.L. and J.Q.-F.; investigation, A.V.-A., P.R.C. and V.G.-P.; resources, A.V.-A. and P.R.C.; data curation, V.G.-P. and W.L.; writing—original draft preparation, A.V.-A., P.R.C. and V.G.-P.; writing—review and editing, W.L., J.Q.-F. and D.G.-A.; supervision, A.V.-A. and D.G.-A. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Institutional Review Board Statement

For the development of the study, the use of living beings or procedures that implied the use or tests of animals, plants, people or methods that will affect the health, safety or integrity of people or animals were not required.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

The data may be provided free of charge to interested readers by requesting the correspondence author’s email.

Acknowledgments

Thanks to the Corporación Universitaria Americana and Instituto Tecnológico Metropolitano for financing this research. Thanks to the Universidad Señor de Sipán for the payment of APC.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Footnotes

Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Figures and Table

Figure 1. Literature search and evaluation for inclusion in the critical review.

Figure 2. Most recurrent variables associated with knowledge.

Figure 3. Most recurrent variables associated with ICT use.

Table 1

Quality assessment checklist.

Sr	Question
1	Is the methodological design used well specified?
2	Is the method of analysis used well specified?
3	Is the type of population analyzed specified?
4	Is the location used for the analysis specified?
5	Is an assistive technology for intellectual understanding of the study site included?
6	Does the study increase readers’ knowledge or understanding?

Appendix A

Table A1

Full list of the included publications.

Sr	Source	Year	Document Type	Studied Technology	Sample Type	Studied Place	Country	Relevance
1	Puig et al. [42]	2022	Article	Gamification	Basic education students	Basiceducationinstitution	Spain	2
2	Cabero-Almenara et al. [29]	2022	Article	ICT	Universitystudents	University	Chile	3
3	Murillo-Zamorano et al. [35]	2021	Article	Gamification	Universitystudents	University	Spain	3
4	Kupchyk and Litvinchuk [43]	2021	Conference Paper	ICT	Universityprofessors and students	University	Ukraine	2
5	Margaretha et al. [70]	2021	Article	Cyberslacking	Universitystudents	University	Indonesia	2
6	Flore et al. [71]	2021	Conference Paper	ICT	Universitystudents	Inside and outside the classroom—university	Italy	2
7	Pozo-Sánchez et al. [37]	2021	Article	AugmentedReality	High schoolstudents	Secondaryeducationinstitution	Spain	2
8	Rammos and Bratitsis [40]	2021	Conference Paper	AugmentedReality	Students and parents of the group	Hellenic Maritime Museum	Greece	3
9	Parra-González et al. [30]	2020	Article	Gamification	High schoolstudents	Secondaryeducationinstitution	Spain	3
10	Pozo Sánchez et al. [47]	2020	Article	Gamification	Students	Spanish educational center	Spain	2
11	Mengual-Andrés et al. [31]	2020	Article	Gamification	Universityprofessors	University	Spain	2
12	Vélez et al. [49]	2020	Conference Paper	Gamification	Universitystudents	University	Ecuador	2
13	Arfandi et al. [50]	2020	Conference Paper	ICT	Teachers	Vocational high schools	Indonesia	2
14	Kamarazaly et a. [32]	2020	Article	ICT	Universitystudents	University	Malaysia	2
15	Brenes Monge et al. [21]	2020	Article	ICT	Teachers	Classrooms	Costa Rica	2
16	Bozzelli et al. [38]	2019	Article	Virtual Reality, AugmentedReality, andGamification	Users	Museum and archaeological site	Italy	3
17	Ramankulov et al. [51]	2019	Article	ICT	Specialization students	University	Kazakhstan	2
18	Borsos [36]	2019	Article	Gamification	Primary school students	Basiceducationinstitution	Serbia	3
19	Durão et al. [22]	2019	Conference Paper	AugmentedReality andGamification	Universityprofessors	University	Portugal	2
20	Karaaslan and Kılıç [34]	2019	Article	ICT	Students	ForeignLanguage School	Turkey	2
21	Astuti et al. [47]	2019	Article	ICT	Primary school students	Inside and outside the classroom—school	Indonesia	2
22	Villagrasa et al. [46]	2018	Book Chapter	AugmentedReality andGamification	Universitystudents	University	Spain	2
23	Aggarwal [23]	2018	Conference Paper	CloudComputing	Students	Inside and outside the classroom—university	India	2
24	Wen et al. [52]	2017	Conference Paper	ICT	Students	Educational environment	Malaysia	2
25	Adnan et al. [53]	2017	Article	Gamification	High schoolstudents	Secondaryeducationinstitution	Indonesia	3
26	Molinero-Polo et al. [48]	2016	Conference Paper	Virtual Reality application	Universitystudents	Archeological site	Spain	3
27	Gabellone [40]	2015	Conference Paper	AugmentedReality and Virtual Reality	Users	Museum	Italy	3
28	Cabero-Almenara and Marín-Díaz [54]	2014	Article	ICT	Universitystudents	University	Spain	2
29	Palomo-Duarte et al. [55]	2014	Conference Paper	Gamification	Universitystudents	University	Spain	2
30	De Maggio et al. [24]	2010	Book Chapter	ICT	Users	Tourist sites	Italy	3
31	Margalef García and Pareja Roblin [25]	2008	Article	ICT	Universityprofessors and students	University	Spain	2

References

1. Sarabia, N.; Peris, J.; Segura, S. Transition to agri-food sustainability, assessing accelerators and triggers for transformation: Case study in Valencia, Spain. J. Clean. Prod.; 2021; 325, 129228. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.129228]

2. Sepasgozar, S.M.E. Digital Twin and Web-Based Virtual Gaming Technologies for Online Education: A Case of Construction Management and Engineering. Appl. Sci.; 2020; 10, 4678. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/app10134678]

3. Siang, T.G.; Azis, K.B.A.; Ahmad, Z.B.; Suhaifi, S.B. Augmented Reality Mobile Application for Museum: A Technology Acceptance Study. Proceedings of the 2019 6th International Conference on Research and Innovation in Information Systems (ICRIIS); Johor Bahru, Malaysia, 2–3 December 2019; [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1109/ICRIIS48246.2019.9073457]

4. Chai-Arayalert, S. Smart application of learning ecotourism for young eco-tourists. Cogent Soc. Sci.; 2020; 6, 1772558. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2020.1772558]

5. Cayla, N.; Hobléa, F.; Reynard, E. New Digital Technologies Applied to the Management of Geoheritage. Geoheritage; 2014; 6, pp. 89-90. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12371-014-0118-8]

6. Cayla, N.; Martin, S. Chapter 16—Digital Geovisualisation Technologies Applied to Geoheritage Management. Geoheritage; 2018; pp. 289-303. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-809531-7.00016-2]

7. Pica, A.; Reynard, E.; Grangier, L.; Kaiser, C.; Ghiraldi, L.; Perotti, L.; Del Monte, M. GeoGuides, Urban Geotourism Offer Powered by Mobile Application Technology. Geoheritage; 2018; 10, pp. 311-326. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12371-017-0237-0]

8. Ntagiantas, A.; Manousos, D.; Konstantakis, M.; Aliprantis, J.; Caridakis, G. Augmented Reality children’s book for intangible cultural heritage through participatory content creation and promotion. Case study: The pastoral life of Psiloritis as a UNESCO World Geopark. Proceedings of the 2021 16th International Workshop on Semantic and Social Media Adaptation & Personalization (SMAP); Corfu, Greece, 4–5 November 2021; [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1109/SMAP53521.2021.9610762]

9. Valarezo Castro, J.W.; Santos Jiménez, O.C. Las tecnologías del aprendizaje y el conocimiento en la formación docente. Conrado; 2019; 5, pp. 180-186.

10. García-Reche, A.; Callejo, M.L.; Fernández, C. La aprehensión cognitiva en problemas de generalización de patrones lineales. Investigación en Educación Matemática XIX; Fernández, C.; Molina, M.; Planas, N. SEIEM: Alicante, Spain, 2015; pp. 279-288.

11. Tussyadiah, l.P.; Zach, F.J. The role of geo-based technology in place experiences. Ann. Tour. Res.; 2012; 39, pp. 780-800. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.annals.2011.10.003]

12. Bessière, J. ‘Heritagisation’, a challenge for tourism promotion and regional development: An example of food heritage. J. Herit. Tour.; 2013; 8, pp. 275-291. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1743873X.2013.770861]

13. Pirinu, A.; Martínez-Medina, A.; Paba, N. Integrated digital survey for the knowledge and enhancement of the IIWW heritage. The Natural Park Molentargius-Saline (Cagliari, Italy). Proceedings of the IMEKO TC-4 International Conference on Metrology for Archaeology and Cultural Heritage Proceedings; Virtual, 22–24 October 2020.

14. Jin, L.; Xiao, H.; Shen, H. Experiential authenticity in heritage museums. J. Destin. Mark. Manag.; 2020; 18, 100493. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jdmm.2020.100493]

15. Barton, R.; Cooper, D.; Guyomard, A.; Justice, S.; Samson, P.; Pickett, E.; Posthumis, C.L.; Cayla, N. The HINT Project—Exploring the Use of New Technologies in Heritage Interpretation. J. Earth Sci. Eng.; 2014; 4, pp. 156-174.

16. Han, J.; Wu, F.; Tian, M.; Li, W. From Geopark to Sustainable Development: Heritage Conservation and Geotourism Promotion in the Huangshan UNESCO Global Geopark (China). Geoheritage; 2018; 10, pp. 79-91. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12371-017-0227-2]

17. Parmley, D.L. Using Technology and Cultural Heritage to Provide Interpretive Learning Services. Proceedings of the SITE 1995—Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference; Waynesville, NC, USA, 1995; Available online: https://www.learntechlib.org/primary/p/46579/ (accessed on 13 March 2023).

18. Selçuk, A.A. A Guide for Systematic Reviews: PRISMA. Turk. Arch. Otorhinolaryngol.; 2019; 57, pp. 57-58. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.5152/tao.2019.4058] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31049257]

19. Moher, D.; Shamseer, L.; Clarke, M.; Ghersi, D.; Liberati, A.; Petticrew, M.; Shekelle, P.; Stewart, L.A. PRISMA-P Group. Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement. Syst. Rev.; 2015; 4, 1. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/2046-4053-4-1]

20. Shamseer, L.; Moher, D.; Clarke, M.; Ghersi, D.; Liberati, A.; Petticrew, M.; Shekelle, P.; Stewart, L.A. PRISMA-P Group. Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015: Elaboration and explanation. Br. Med. J.; 2015; 349, g7647. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.g7647]

21. Peixoto, B.; Pinto, R.; Melo, M.; Cabral, L.; Besa, M. Immersive Virtual Reality for Foreign Language Education: A PRISMA Systematic Review. IEEE Access; 2021; 9, pp. 48952-48962. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3068858]

22. Brenes Monge, M.M.; Fernández Martínez, M.D.M.; Pérez Esteban, M.D.; Carrión Martínez, J.J. Teacher and Context Factors Associated with the Educational Use of ICT: A Costa Rican Case Study. Sustainability; 2020; 12, 10170. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/su122310170]

23. Durão, N.; Moreira, F.; Ferreira, M.J.; Pereira, C.S.; Annamalai, N. A comparative study about mobile learning with gamification and augmented reality in high education instituitions across South Europe, South America, and Asia countries. Proceedings of the 2019 14th Iberian Conference on Information Systems and Technologies (CISTI); Coimbra, Portugal, 19–22 June 2019; [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.23919/CISTI.2019.8760854]

24. Aggarwal, D. Leveraging the Power of Cloud Computing for Technology Enhanced Learning (TEL). Proceedings of the 2018 7th International Conference on Reliability, Infocom Technologies and Optimization (Trends and Future Directions) (ICRITO); Noida, India, 29–31 August 2018; [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1109/ICRITO.2018.8748538]

25. De Maggio, M.; Ndou, V.; Schina, L. Supporting and promoting tourism network systems through ICT applications. Digital Culture and E-Tourism: Technologies, Applications and Management Approaches; IGI Global: Hershey, PA, USA, 2011; [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.4018/978-1-61520-867-8.ch008]

26. O’Dea, R.E.; Lagisz, M.; Jennions, M.D.; Koricheva, J.; Noble, D.W.A.; Parker, T.H.; Gurevitch, J.; Page, M.; Stewart, G.; Moher, D. et al. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses in ecology and evolutionary biology: A PRISMA extension. Biol. Rev.; 2021; 96, pp. 1695-1722. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/brv.12721]

27. Mongeon, P.; Paul-Hus, A. The journal coverage of Web of Science and Scopus: A comparative analysis. Scientometrics; 2016; 106, pp. 213-228. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11192-015-1765-5]

28. Herrera-Franco, G.; Montalván-Burbano, N.; Carrión-Mero, P.; Apolo-Masache, B.; Jaya-Montalvo, M. Research Trends in Geotourism: A Bibliometric Analysis Using the Scopus Database. Geosciences; 2020; 10, 379. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/geosciences10100379]

29. AlQudah, A.A.; Al-Emran, M.; Shaalan, K. Technology Acceptance in Healthcare: A Systematic Review. Appl. Sci.; 2021; 11, 10537. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/app112210537]

30. Cabero-Almenara, J.; Gutiérrez-Castillo, J.J.; Guillén-Gámez, F.D.; Gaete Bravo, A.F. Competencias digitales de estudiantes técnico-profesionales: Creación de un modelo causal desde un enfoque PLS-SEM. Campus Virtuales; 2022; 11, pp. 167-179. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.54988/cv.2022.1.1008]

31. Parra-González, M.E.; López Belmonte, J.; Segura-Robles, A.; Fuentes Cabrera, A. Active and Emerging Methodologies for Ubiquitous Education: Potentials of Flipped Learning and Gamification. Sustainability; 2020; 12, 602. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/su12020602]

32. Mengual-Andrés, S.; López Belmonte, J.; Fuentes Cabrera, A.; Pozo Sánchez, S. Modelo estructural de factores extrínsecos influyentes en el flipped learning. Educ. XX1; 2020; 23, pp. 75-101. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.5944/educxx1.23840]

33. Kamarazaly, M.A.; Xuan, T.K.; Raml, M.A.; Tatt, S.L.; Yaakob, A.M.; Ling, S.C.A. Quantity surveying students’ learning styles in blended learning environment. Malays. Constr. Res. J. RISM Int. Res. Conf.; 2020; 9, pp. 134-150.

34. Karaaslan, H.; Kılıç, N. Students’ attitudes towards blended language courses: A case study. J. Lang. Linguist. Stud.; 2019; 15, pp. 174-199. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.17263/jlls.547699]

35. Pötzsch, H. Critical Digital Literacy: Technology in Education Beyond Issues of User Competence and Labour-Market Qualifications. tripleC Commun. Capital. Crit.; 2021; 17, pp. 221-240. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.31269/triplec.v17i2.1093]

36. Murillo-Zamorano, L.R.; López Sánchez, J.Á.; Godoy-Caballero, A.L.; Bueno Muñoz, C. Gamification and active learning in higher education: Is it possible to match digital society, academia and students’ interests?. Int. J. Educ. Technol. High Educ.; 2021; 18, 15. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s41239-021-00249-y]

37. Borsos, E. The gamification of elementary school biology: A case study on increasing understanding of plants. J. Biol. Educ.; 2019; 53, pp. 492-505. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00219266.2018.1501407]

38. Pozo-Sánchez, S.; Lopez-Belmonte, J.; Moreno-Guerrero, A.J.; Fuentes-Cabrera, A. Effectiveness of flipped learning and augmented reality in the new educational normality of the COVID-19 era. Texto Livre Ling. Tecnol.; 2021; 14, e34260. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.35699/1983-3652.2021.34260]

39. Bozzelli, G.; Raia, A.; Ricciardi, S.; De Nino, M.; Barile, N.; Perrella, M.; Tramontano, M.; Pagano, A.; Palombini, A. An integrated VR/AR framework for user-centric interactive experience of cultural heritage: The ArkaeVision project. Digit. Appl. Archaeol. Cult. Herit.; 2019; 15, e00124. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.daach.2019.e00124]

40. Gabellone, F. Integrated Technologies for Museum Communication and Interactive Apps in the PON DiCet Project. Augmented and Virtual Reality. AVR 2015, Lecture Notes in Computer Science; De Paolis, L.; Mongelli, A. Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2015; Volume 9254, pp. 3-16. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-22888-4_1]

41. Rammos, D.; Bratitsis, T. Museum Exhibits that Interact with Pupils’ Mobile Devices. The Case of Hellenic Maritime Museum. Internet of Things, Infrastructures and Mobile Applications. IMCL 2019. Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing; Auer, M.E.; Tsiatsos, T. Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2021; Volume 1192, pp. 189-201. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-49932-7_19]

42. Alonso-García, S.; Aznar-Díaz, I.; Cáceres-Reche, M.; Trujillo-Tórres, J.; Romero-Rodríguez, J. Systematic Review of Good Teaching Practices with ICT in Spanish Higher Education. Trends and Challenges for Sustainability. Sustainability; 2019; 11, 7150. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/su11247150]

43. Puig, A.; Rodríguez, I.; Baldeón, J.; Múria, S. Children building and having fun while they learn geometry. Comput. Appl. Eng. Educ.; 2022; 30, pp. 741-758. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cae.22484]

44. Kupchyk, L.; Litvinchuk, A. Constructing personal learning environments through ICT-mediated foreign language instruction. J. Phys. Conf. Ser.; 2021; 1840, 012045. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1840/1/012045]

45. Lama-Larenas, P.A.; Mora-Chaparro, J.C.; Gomez-Romero, J.; Canet, C.; Cruz-Pérez, M.Á.; García-Alonso, E.J.; Salgado-Martínez, E. Comments on “UNESCO Global Geoparks in Latin America and the Caribbean, and Their Contribution to Agenda 2030 Sustainable Development Goals” (Rosado-González et al. 2000, Geoheritage 12: 1–15, 2020). Geoheritage; 2021; 13, 20. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12371-021-00546-y]

46. Pozo Sánchez, S.; López Belmonte, J.; Fuentes Cabrera, A.; López Núñez, J.A. Gamification as a Methodological Complement to Flipped Learning—An Incident Factor in Learning Improvement. Multimodal. Technol. Interact.; 2020; 4, 12. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/mti4020012]

47. Astuti, I.A.D.; Bhakti, Y.B.; Sumarni, R.A.; Sulisworo, D.; Toifur, M. The implementation of flipped classroom models to increase self-reliance and motivation of student learning. Int. J. Sci. Technol. Res.; 2019; 8, pp. 3635-3639.

48. Cifuentes-Correa, L.; Quiroz-Fabra, J.; Valencia-Arias, A.; Londoño-Celis, W.; Hincapie, M. Methodological proposal to determine the potential of a territory to become a UNESCO Geopark: Case study of Nevado del Ruiz Volcano initiative, Colombia. Episodes; 2023; pp. 1-12. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.18814/epiiugs/2023/023004]

49. Molinero-Polo, M.A.; Hernández, C.; Mendez-Rodríguez, D.M.; Pérez-Ruiz, S.; Acebo, A.; Jurado, F.; Rodríguez, P.; Atrio, S.; Sacha, G.M. Analyzing the negative effects of motivating e-learning tools in archeology teaching. Proceedings of the 2016 International Symposium on Computers in Education (SIIE); Salamanca, Spain, 13–15 September 2016.

50. Firwana, A.; Abu Shouqer, M.; Aqel, M. Effectiveness of E-learning Environments in Developing Skills for Designing E-tivities Based on Gamification for Teachers of Technology in Gaza. Educ. Knowl. Soc.; 2021; 22, e23907. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.14201/eks.23907]

51. Margaretha, M.; Sherlywati,; Monalisa, Y.; Mariana, A.; Junita, I.; Martalena,; Iskandar, D.; Nur,. Cyberslacking Behavior and Its Relationship with Academic Performance: A Study of Students in Indonesia. Eur. J. Educ. Res.; 2021; 10, pp. 1881-1892. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.12973/eu-jer.10.4.1881]

52. Fernández-Giménez, M.E.; Fillat Estaque, F. Pyrenean Pastoralists’ Ecological Knowledge: Documentation and Application to Natural Resource Management and Adaptation. Hum. Ecol.; 2012; 40, pp. 287-300. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10745-012-9463-x]

53. Flore, F.; Montresor, A.; Marchese, M. A Maker Approach for The Future of Learning. Proceedings of the FabLearn Europe/MakeEd 2021—An International Conference on Computing, Design and Making in Education (FabLearn Europe/MakeEd 2021); New York, NY, USA, 2–3 June 2021; [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1145/3466725.3466761]

54. Barrado-Timón, D.A.; Hidalgo-Giralt, C. The Historic City, Its Transmission and Perception via Augmented Reality and Virtual Reality and the Use of the Past as a Resource for the Present: A New Era for Urban Cultural Heritage and Tourism?. Sustainability; 2019; 11, 2835. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/su11102835]

55. Vélez, B.; Verdugo, G.; Mejía Pesantez, M.; Veintimilla-Reyes, J.; Maldonado-Mahauad, J. Playing in the Classroom: A Game Proposal for the Flipped Classroom. Proceedings of the 2020 XV Conferencia Latinoamericana de Tecnologias de Aprendizaje (LACLO); Loja, Ecuador, 19–23 October 2020; [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1109/LACLO50806.2020.9381163]

56. Vareiro, L.; Sousa, B.B.; Silva, S.S. The importance of museums in the tourist development and the motivations of their visitors: An analysis of the Costume Museum in Viana do Castelo. J. Cult. Herit. Manag. Sustain. Dev.; 2021; 11, pp. 39-57. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1108/JCHMSD-05-2020-0065]

57. Arfandi, A.; Purnamawati,; Nurfaedah,. The development of a Thurstone scale for identifying teacher ability in using information and communication technology. J. Phys. Conf. Ser.; 2020; 1456, 012038. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1456/1/012038]

58. Luo, Y.; He, J.; Mou, Y.; Wang, J.; Liu, T. Exploring China’s 5A global geoparks through online tourism reviews: A mining model based on machine learning approach. Tour. Manag. Perspect.; 2021; 37, 100769. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tmp.2020.100769]

59. Ramankulov, S.Z.; Dosymov, E.; Mintassova, A.S.; Pattayev, A.M. Assessment of Student Creativity in Teaching Physics in a Foreign Language. Eur. J. Contemp. Educ.; 2019; 8, pp. 587-599.

60. Pinto, R.D.; Peixoto, B.; Melo, M.; Cabral, L.; Bessa, M. Foreign Language Learning Gamification Using Virtual Reality—A Systematic Review of Empirical Research. Educ. Sci.; 2021; 11, 222. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/educsci11050222]

61. Wen, A.S.; Zaid, N.M.; Harun, J. Enhancing students’ ICT problem solving skills using flipped classroom model. Proceedings of the 2016 IEEE 8th International Conference on Engineering Education (ICEED); Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, 7–8 December 2016; [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1109/ICEED.2016.7856069]

62. Wang, J.; Du, F.; Wu, M.; Liu, W. Embedded technology transfer from an institution and culture nexus perspective: Experiences from the Mombasa-Nairobi Standard-Gauge Railway. J. Geogr. Sci.; 2021; 31, pp. 681-698. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11442-021-1865-5]

63. Adnan, F.; Prasetyo, B.; Nuriman, N. Usability Testing Analysis on The Bana Game as Education Game Design References on Junior High School. J. Pendidik. IPA Indones.; 2017; 6, pp. 88-94. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.15294/jpii.v6i1.9597]

64. Lopes, E.; Araújo-Vila, N.; Perinotto, A.R.C.; Cardoso, L. Tourism and Land Planning in Natural Spaces: Bibliometric Approach to the Structure of Scientific Concepts. Land; 2022; 11, 1930. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/land11111930]

65. Cabero-Almenara, J.; Marín-Díaz, V. Posibilidades educativas de las redes sociales y el trabajo en grupo. Percepciones de los alumnos universitarios. Comunicar; 2014; 42, pp. 165-172. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3916/C42-2014-16]

66. Nunes, D.O.M.; Mayer, V.F. Mobile technology, games and nature areas: The tourist perspective. Tour. Manag. Stud.; 2014; 10, pp. 53-58.

67. Palomo-Duarte, M.; Berns, A.; Dodero, J.M.; Cejas, A. Foreign language learning using a gamificated APP to support peer-assessment. Proceedings of the TEEM’14, Second International Conference on Technological Ecosystems for Enhancing Multiculturality; Salamanca, Spain, 1–3 October 2014; [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2669711.2669927]

68. Bec, A.; Moyle, B.; Timms, K.; Schaffer, V.; Skavronskaya, L.; Little, C. Management of immersive heritage tourism experiences: A conceptual model. Tour. Manag.; 2019; 72, pp. 117-120. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2018.10.033]

69. Margalef García, L.; Pareja Roblin, N. Innovation, research and professional development in higher education: Learning from our own experience. Teach. Teach. Educ.; 2008; 24, pp. 104-116. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2007.03.007]

70. Villagrasa, S.; Fonseca, D.; Redondo, E.; Duran, J. Teaching case of gamification and visual technologies for education. J. Cases Inf. Technol.; 2018; 16, pp. 38-57. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.4018/jcit.2014100104]

71. Zainuddin, Z.; Chu, S.K.W.; Shujahat, M.; Perera, C.J. The impact of gamification on learning and instruction: A systematic review of empirical evidence. Educ. Res. Rev.; 2020; 30, 100326. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2020.100326]