Home All Issues Issue articles Previous article

Immersive Technologies in Education 4.0: Improving Spatial Visualization in Orthogonal Projections and Cylindrical Sections Using GeoGebra and Qubism 3D Modeling

Cacilda Helena Chivai 1 * ,
Armando Assuncao Assunção 2,
Paula Catarino 2
1 Maputo Pedagogical University, MOZAMBIQUE2 University of Trás-os-Montes and Alto Douro, PORTUGAL* Corresponding Author
Educational Point, 3(3), 2026, e188, https://doi.org/10.71176/edup/19685
Publication date: Oct 28, 2026
Research Article
Open Access Open Access
Download PDF

ABSTRACT

In the context of Education 4.0, General Secondary Education in Mozambique faces challenges in integrating digital technologies, with teaching practices still largely traditional. This study analyses the contribution of digital tools, namely GeoGebra and Qubism 3D Modeling, to the development of spatial visualization skills in Orthogonal Projections and Cylindrical Sections. Framed within smart learning ecosystems, the research adopted a quasi-experimental design with mixed methods, involving 165 students divided into experimental and control groups. The findings show that the integration of immersive technologies and active methodologies led to significant improvements in academic performance and three-dimensional spatial visualization. Data analysis, supported by learning analytics practices, revealed substantial gains in the experimental group. The study concludes that the incorporation of digital tools enhances adaptive personalization and highlights the need to strengthen teacher digital literacy, as well as educational governance, in alignment with the demands of Industry 4.0.

KEYWORDS

qubism 3d modeling geogebra orthogonal projections cylindrical sections education 4.0 immersive technologies spatial visualization

CITATION (APA)

Chivai, C. H., Assunção, A. A., & Catarino, P. (2026). Immersive Technologies in Education 4.0: Improving Spatial Visualization in Orthogonal Projections and Cylindrical Sections Using GeoGebra and Qubism 3D Modeling. Educational Point, 3(3), e188. https://doi.org/10.71176/edup/19685
Harvard
Chivai, C. H., Assunção, A. A., and Catarino, P. (2026). Immersive Technologies in Education 4.0: Improving Spatial Visualization in Orthogonal Projections and Cylindrical Sections Using GeoGebra and Qubism 3D Modeling. Educational Point, 3(3), e188. https://doi.org/10.71176/edup/19685
Vancouver
Chivai CH, Assunção AA, Catarino P. Immersive Technologies in Education 4.0: Improving Spatial Visualization in Orthogonal Projections and Cylindrical Sections Using GeoGebra and Qubism 3D Modeling. Educational Point. 2026;3(3):e188. https://doi.org/10.71176/edup/19685
AMA
Chivai CH, Assunção AA, Catarino P. Immersive Technologies in Education 4.0: Improving Spatial Visualization in Orthogonal Projections and Cylindrical Sections Using GeoGebra and Qubism 3D Modeling. Educational Point. 2026;3(3), e188. https://doi.org/10.71176/edup/19685
Chicago
Chivai, Cacilda Helena, Armando Assuncao Assunção, and Paula Catarino. "Immersive Technologies in Education 4.0: Improving Spatial Visualization in Orthogonal Projections and Cylindrical Sections Using GeoGebra and Qubism 3D Modeling". Educational Point 2026 3 no. 3 (2026): e188. https://doi.org/10.71176/edup/19685
MLA
Chivai, Cacilda Helena et al. "Immersive Technologies in Education 4.0: Improving Spatial Visualization in Orthogonal Projections and Cylindrical Sections Using GeoGebra and Qubism 3D Modeling". Educational Point, vol. 3, no. 3, 2026, e188. https://doi.org/10.71176/edup/19685

REFERENCES

  1. Bairaktarova, D., & Cohen, C. (2023). Interactive spatial training stimulates performance differences among first-year engineering students. Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering, 30(2), 89-106. https://www.dl.begellhouse.com/journals/00551c876cc2f027,7dad3e8152691d53,365a6f3750fddb1d.html
  2. Bardin, L. (2016). Análise de conteúdo. Edições 70. https://madmunifacs.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/anc3a1lise-de-contec3bado-laurence-bardin.pdf
  3. Blake, E., & Hunter, L. (2023). Exploring the use of virtual reality in enhancing STEM education for children. Proceedings of the International Conference of Innovation, Science, Technology, Education, Children, and Health, 3(1), 215–218. https://doi.org/10.62951/icistech.v3i1.150
  4. Chivai, C. H. (2024). Computer simulations in the development of 3D spatial ability: A study in general secondary education in Mozambique [Doctoral dissertation, University of Trás-os-Montes and Alto Douro]. Institutional Repository of the University of Trás-os-Montes and Alto Douro. https://repositorio.utad.pt/entities/publication/646f4ab8-8bc9-40df-8c80-84ef4f9ee25f
  5. Chivai, C. H., Soares, A. A., & Catarino, P. (2024). Promotion of spatial visualization with GeoGebra and Qubism 3D software. Educação e Pesquisa, 50, Article e275201. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1678-4634202450275201en
  6. Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (5th ed.). SAGE Publications. https://www.sagepub.com/shop/buy-a-book/research-design-6-270550
  7. Direnga, J., Timmermann, D., Kieckhäfer, F., Brose, A., & Kautz, C. (2018). The discriminative learning gain: a two-parameter quantification of the difference in learning success between courses. Australasian Journal of Engineering Education. 23(2), 71-82. https://doi.org/10.1080/22054952.2018.1553357
  8. Dutra, H. S., & Reis, V. N. (2016). Experimental and quasi-experimental study designs: Definitions and challenges in nursing research. UFPE Nursing Journal/Revista de Enfermagem UFPE on line, 10(6), 2230–2241. https://openurl.ebsco.com/EPDB%3Agcd%3A10%3A38247002/detailv2?sid=ebsco%3Aplink%3Ascholar&id=ebsco%3Agcd%3A116593490&crl=c&link_origin=www.google.com
  9. Gegenfurtner, A., & Kollar, I. (2024). Designing effective digital learning environments (1st ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003386131
  10. Ibáñez, M. B., & Delgado-Kloos, C. (2018). Augmented reality for STEM learning: A systematic review. Computers & Education, 123, 109–123. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.05.002
  11. Küçük Avcı, Ş., Çoklar, A., & İstanbullu, A. (2019). The effect of three-dimensional virtual environments and augmented reality applications on the learning achievement: A meta-analysis study. Education and Science, 44(198), 149-182. https://doi.org/10.15390/EB.2019.7969
  12. Küçük, K., & Gün, Ö. (2023). The effects of GeoGebra-assisted transformation geometry instruction on student achievement, attitudes, and beliefs. Journal of Computer and Education Research, 11(22), 671–690. https://dergipark.org.tr/en/download/article-file/3252386
  13. Libâneo, J. C. (2013). Didática (2.ª ed.). Cortez. https://konektacommerce.nyc3.cdn.digitaloceanspaces.com/TEXT_SAMPLE_CONTENT/didatica-cortez-editora-4154-1.pdf
  14. Lvovna, N. A., & Shagiyazovna, S. S. (2023). Application of pedagogical technologies in teaching module “Positional Tasks” on the subject “Engineering Graphics”. Vital Annex: International Journal of Novel Research in Advanced Sciences, 2(3), 191–195. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Anjela-Nam/publication/369471901_Application_of_Pedagogical_Technologies_in_Teaching_Module_Positional_the_Tasks_on_the_Subject_Engineering_Graphics/links/641fd273315dfb4cceab1829/Application-of-Pedagogical-Technologies-in-Teaching-Module-Positional-the-Tasks-on-the-Subject-Engineering-Graphics.pdf
  15. Schwab, K. (2023). The fourth industrial revolution. World Economic Forum. https://law.unimelb.edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0005/3385454/Schwab-The_Fourth_Industrial_Revolution_Klaus_S.pdf
  16. Selamet, C. S. (2026). AI-supported education and teachers’ perspectives: Pedagogical transformation or loss of control? Educational Point, 3(1), Article e153. https://doi.org/10.71176/edup/18454
  17. Selwyn, N. (2022). Education and technology: Key issues and debates (3rd ed.). Bloomsbury. https://www.bloomsbury.com/uk/education-and-technology-9781350145566/
  18. Silva, M. R. da, & Pazuch, V. (2024). Digital technologies in geometry education: A systematic literature review. Mathematics Education Research: Journal of the Graduate Program in Mathematics Education, 26(2), 31–55. https://doi.org/10.23925/1983-3156.2024v26i2p031-055
  19. UNESCO (2023). Global education monitoring report 2023: Technology in education: A tool on whose terms? UNESCO. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000385723
  20. Uribe‐Flórez, L. J., & Wilkins, J. L. (2010). Elementary school teachers' manipulative use. School Science and Mathematics, 110(7), 363-371. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1949-8594.2010.00046.x
  21. Valiyev, A. N., Choriyev, R. K., & Amirqulov, X. Q. (2023). Inter-sessional assignments of correspondence students and their assessment. Science and Innovation, 2(1), 345-351. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7569473
  22. Zeng, J., Zhang, P., Zhou, J., Shang, J., & Black, J. B. (2025). The impact of embodied scaffolding sequences on STEM conceptual learning. Educational Technology Research and Development, 73(2), 767–792. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-024-10438-x

LICENSE

Creative Commons License
This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.