Theory of Objectification and Engineering Education
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.67294/rqv8mh56Keywords:
Theory of Objectification, Industry 4.0, Joint labour, Generative Artificial Intelligence, Curricular RedesignAbstract
This article identifies the contributions of the forums held in 2026 on the Theory of Objectification (TO) to consider options in engineering education in the face of the Fourth Industrial Revolution or Industry 4.0. The study evaluates the applicability of this historical-cultural framework in the training of engineers proposing an alternative to traditional, transmissive, and individualistic educational models. Through an ontological approach, the transition from data and information toward the construction of real knowledge is analyzed through the pedagogical concept of joint labour. The document integrates Aldert Kamp's perspectives on interdisciplinary curricular design toward the year 2030, Klaus Schwab's views regarding stakeholder capitalism, and Nagib Callaos' concepts surrounding cybernetic humanism. Likewise, it examines the impact of technological infrastructure and Generative Artificial Intelligence (GAI), conceived here as a semiotic mediator and thinking partner capable of activating metacognitive processes in the student. In the context of developing countries like Venezuela, the need to transform the teaching of basic sciences through real problem-situations linked to the local socio-political reality is raised. Potential findings evidence the demand to migrate from an individual and punitive evaluation toward a formative and communal model. Finally, it concludes that true digital transformation in higher education does not lie in the acquisition of hardware, but rather in adopting an epistemological stance that recovers the protagonism of human activity and promotes self-regulation, solidarity, and social responsibility.
References
Avella, A. (2026). Engineering Education in the Context of Industry 4.0. International Multidisciplinary Journal of Emerging Technologies and Applications, 1(2), 56-69. https://doi.org/10.67294/ppndh237
Callaos, N. (2015). Higher Education or Higher Instruction. https://www.academia.edu/14466263/Higher_Education_or_Higher_instruction
Callaos, N. (2018). La Noción de Ingeniería e Ingeniería para el Desarrollo. https://www.iiis.org/Nagib-Callaos/La-Nocion-de-Ingenieria-e-Ingenieria-para-Desarrollo/La-Nocion-de-Ingenieria-e-Ingenieria-para-Desarrollo.pdf
Callaos, N. (2022). Trans-disciplinary communication. Journal of Systemics, Cybernetics and Informatics, 20(1), 1-44. https://doi.org/10.54808/JSCI.20.01.1
Callaos, N., & Cristo, L. E. O. N. (2025). Education, Research, and Methodology: A Transdisciplinary Cybernetic Whole. Journal of Systemics, Cybernetics and Informatics, 23(4), 19-33. https://doi.org/10.54808/JSCI.23.04.19
Callaos, N., & Horne, J. (2025). Analogical and Logical Thinking. Journal of Systemics, Cybernetics and Informatics, 23(7), 1-17. https://doi.org/10.54808/JSCI.23.07.1
Cajas, F. (2024). El nuevo currículum de Ingeniería. In: J. Hinojos (Ed.). Rompiendo barreras: Avances y desafíos en la enseñanza de ingeniería y matemáticas en América Latina (pp 13-32) ITSON.
Galland, G., & Cura, R. (2012). Conocimiento tecnológico, ingenieril y complejidad. Aportes para un diseño curricular. Proceedings XI Congreso Brasilero de Educación en Ingeniería.
Garcés, G., & Peña, C. (2020). Ajustar la Educación en Ingeniería a la Industria 4.0: Una visión desde el desarrollo curricular y el laboratorio. Revista de estudios y experiencias en educación, 19(40), 129-148. https://doi.org/10.21703/rexe.20201940garces7
García-Carmona, A. (2023). Integración de la ingeniería en la educación científico-tecnológica desde un prisma CTS. Enseñanza de las Ciencias, 41(1), 25-41. https://doi.org/10.5565/rev/ensciencias.5611
Henao-Villa, C. F., García-Arango, D. A., Aguirre-Mesa, E. D., González-García, A., Bracho-Aconcha, R., Solorzano-Movilla, J. G., & Arboleda-Lopez, A. P. (2017). Multidisciplinariedad, interdisciplinariedad y transdisciplinariedad en la formación para la investigación en ingeniería. Revista Lasallista de Investigación, 14(1), 179-197. https://doi.org/10.22507/rli.v14n1a16
Kamp, A. (2016). Engineering Education in the Rapidly Changing World: Rethinking the Vision for Higher Engineering Education (2nd revised ed.). Delft University of Technology: TU Delft, Faculty of Aerospace Engineering.
McKinsey & Company, (2018), Evolución proceso transformación digital por sectores, https://cavecon.org.ve/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/Perspectivas_2021_Transformacion_digital_a_industria_4.0_nov20.pdf.
Micolini, O., Ventre, L., Ludemann, M., & Barto, C. (2025). Enfoques multidisciplinarios para abordar la complejidad en sistemas de ingeniería moderna. JAIIO, Jornadas Argentinas de Informática, 11(10), 33-46. https://revistas.unlp.edu.ar/JAIIO/article/view/19843
Paoli Bolio, F. J. (2019). Multi, inter y transdisciplinariedad. Problema: anuario de filosofía y teoría del derecho, (13), 347-357. https://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/articulo?codigo=8762251&orden=0&info=link
Radford, L. (2013a). Three key Concepts of the theory of objectification: Knowledge, knowing, and learning. Revista de Investigación en Didáctica de las Matemáticas, 2(1), 7-44. http://dx.doi.org/10.4471/redimat.2013.19
Radford, L. (2013b). On semiotics and education. Éducation et Didactique, 7(1), 185-204. https://doi.org/10.4000/educationdidactique.1668
Radford, L. (2014). De la teoría de la objetivación. Revista Latinoamericana de Etnomatemática, 7(2), 132-150. https://revista.etnomatematica.org/index.php/RevLatEm/article/view/123
Radford, L. (2020). What would an emancipatory teaching-learning activity look like? Joint labour in the theory of objectivation. Revista Colombiana de Matemática Educativa, RECME, 5(2), 15-31.
Radford, L. & Gómez Gumán, P. (2023). La teoría de la objetivación. Una perspectiva vygotskiana sobre saber y devenir en la enseñanza y el aprendizaje de las matemáticas. Bogotá: Uniandes. https://doi.org/10.51573/Andes.9789587983944.9789587983951.7895879839512
Radford, L. (2024a). Paulo Freire y la teoría de la objetivación: relaciones e implicaciones. REMATEC, 50, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.37084/REMATEC.1980-3141.2024.n50.e2024001.id688
Radford, L. (2024b). The dialectic between knowledge, knowing, and concept in the theory of objectification. Éducation & Didactique, 18(2), 147–159. https://doi.org/10.4000/11xa9
Radford, L. (2025). What does culture have to do with knowledge? A contribution to solving the riddle of the ontological constitution of knowledge from a sociocultural perspective. Hiroshima Journal of Mathematics Education, 18. https://www.jasme.jp/hjme/download/2025/Vol18_04.pdf
Schwab, K. (2018). The Fourth Industrial Revolution. World Economic Forum.
Serna, E., & Serna, A. (2017). Complejidad y Pensamiento Complejo para innovar los procesos formativos en ingeniería. Sistemas Cibernética e Informática, 14(1), 48-55. https://www.iiisci.org/journal/risci/FullText.asp?var=&id=CB176YI17
Siemens, G. (2005). Connectivism: A learning theory for the digital age. International. Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning, 2(1), 3-10. https://www.itdl.org/Journal/Jan_05/article01.htm
Silva Sprock, A., & Silva Sprock, O. (2026). Conceptualizing Cognitive and Agentic Digital Twins. International Multidisciplinary Journal of Emerging Technologies and Applications, 1(2), 16-40. https://doi.org/10.67294/knpyhb26.
Soler, L. C. T., & Sánchez, G. G. V. (2020). La ingeniería en tiempos de complejidad e incertidumbre. Encuentro Internacional de Educación en Ingeniería. https://doi.org/10.26507/ponencia.747
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Dr. Alfredo Avella Guevara (Author)

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.






















