Quadro ARIA: acompanhar a integração crítica das inteligências artificiais generativas no ensino superior

Barra lateral del artículo

PDF (accepté) (Français)
Publicado: may 11, 2026
DOI: https://doi.org/10.52358/mm.vi25.533
Palabras clave:
marco ARIA inteligencia artificial generativa integración crítica evaluación acompañamiento pedagógico educación superior

Contenido principal del artículo

Sandrine Decamps
Haute Ecole Louvain en Hainaut - Université catholique de Louvain
Axelle Zanichelli
Institut Supérieur de Formation Sociale et de Communication

Resumen

Este artigo apresenta o quadro ARIA, concebido para acompanhar uma integração crítica das IAg no ensino superior. O ARIA articula quatro pilares (Aceitabilidade, Responsabilidade, Inteligência coletiva, Acessibilidade) e um ciclo metodológico (Analisar, Repensar, Integrar, Acompanhar). Os pilares estabelecem quatro condições: compreensão das ferramentas, rastreabilidade do trabalho intelectual, pluralidade de abordagens e equidade de acesso. O ciclo estrutura o processo de apropriação coletiva. Experimentado na Bélgica e em Marrocos entre janeiro e abril de 2025, o quadro funcionou como vocabulário partilhado para nomear as tensões vividas e organizar a reflexão no seio das equipas. O artigo apresenta a arquitetura do ARIA, ilustra a sua implementação e discute as condições da sua apropriação.

Descargas

Los datos de descargas todavía no están disponibles.

Detalles del artículo

Cómo citar
Decamps, S., & Zanichelli, A. (2026). Quadro ARIA: acompanhar a integração crítica das inteligências artificiais generativas no ensino superior. Mediaciones Y Mediatizaciones, (25). https://doi.org/10.52358/mm.vi25.533
Número
Núm. 25 (2026): Varia 2026
Sección
Los artículos de profesionales
Creative Commons License

Esta obra está bajo una licencia internacional Creative Commons Atribución-NoComercial-CompartirIgual 4.0.

Biografía del autor/a

Sandrine Decamps, Haute Ecole Louvain en Hainaut - Université catholique de Louvain

Sandrine Decamps, HELHa – UCLouvain

Sandrine Decamps es asesora pedagógica y tecnopedagoga en la Haute École Louvain en Hainaut (HELHa), donde coordina la Unidad de Acompañamiento Pedagógico. También es docente en la Université catholique de Louvain. Su trabajo se centra en el acompañamiento del profesorado, la innovación pedagógica y el desarrollo de competencias digitales en la educación superior.

Diseña e imparte programas de formación sobre los usos pedagógicos de las tecnologías digitales, la enseñanza híbrida y en línea, así como sobre los desafíos éticos y educativos vinculados a la inteligencia artificial. Sus investigaciones y actividades profesionales exploran especialmente la evolución de la relación con el aprendizaje, la evaluación y la agencia estudiantil en contextos marcados por la automatización y la co-construcción del conocimiento con sistemas de IA generativa.

Citas

Aillerie, C., et Martineaud, T. (2024). Political Issues of “All-Digital” in Schools and Teacher’s Power to Act. Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology, 49(4), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.21432/cjlt28455 DOI: https://doi.org/10.21432/cjlt28455

Alombert, A. (2025). De la bêtise artificielle : pour une politique des technologies numériques. Allia.

Ali, I., Warraich, N. F., et Butt, K. (2024). Acceptance and use of artificial intelligence and AI-based applications in education: A meta-analysis and future direction. Information Development, 41(3), 859 74. https://doi.org/10.1177/02666669241257206 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/02666669241257206

Anderson, T., et Shattuck, J. (2012). Design-Based Research: A Decade of Progress in Education Research? Educational Researcher, 41(1), 16-25. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X11428813 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X11428813

Barrett, A., et Pack, A. (2023). Not quite eye to A.I.: Student and teacher perspectives on the use of generative artificial intelligence in the writing process. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 20(59). https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-023-00427-0 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-023-00427-0

CAST. (2024). Universal Design for Learning Guidelines version 3.0. https://udlguidelines.cast.org/

CSE-CEST. (2024). Intelligence artificielle générative en enseignement supérieur : enjeux pédagogiques et éthiques. Québec, Le Conseil; La Commission. https://www.cse.gouv.qc.ca/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/50-0566-RP-IA-generative-enseignement-superieur-enjeux-ethiques.pdf

Cosgrove, J., et Cachia, R. (2025). DigComp 3.0: European Digital Competence Framework - Fifth Edition. Publications Office of the European Union. https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2760/0001149

Creswell, J. W., et Plano Clark, V. L. (2018). Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods Research (3 rd ed.). SAGE.

Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319-340. https://doi.org/10.2307/249008 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/249008

Decamps, S., et Zanichelli, A. (2025). L’intelligence artificielle en enseignement supérieur : étude exploratoire des perceptions, usages et inégalités d’adoption des étudiants et étudiantes. Revue internationale des technologies en pédagogie universitaire, 22(3), article 1. https://doi.org/10.18162/ritpu-2025-v22n3-01 DOI: https://doi.org/10.18162/ritpu-2025-v22n3-01

Fan, Y., Darvishi, A., Khosravi, H., Gašević, D., et Siemens, G. (2024). Beware of metacognitive laziness: Effects of generative artificial intelligence on learning motivation, processes, and performance. British Journal of Educational Technology. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13544 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13544

Gerlich, M. (2025). AI tools in society: Impacts on cognitive offloading and the future of critical thinking. Societies, 15(1), 6. https://doi.org/10.3390/soc15010006 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/soc15010006

Hodges, C., Moore, S., Lockee, B., Trust, T. et Bond, A. (2020). The difference between emergency remote teaching and online learning. EDUCAUSE Review. https://er.educause.edu/articles/2020/3/the-difference-between-emergency-remote-teaching-and-online-learning

Kasneci, E., Seßler, K., Küchemann, S., Bannert, M., Dementieva, D., Fischer, F., Gasser, U., Groh, G., Günnemann, S., Hüllermeier, E., Kruber, S., Kuber, G., Lubova, S., Metternich, M., Nerdel, C., Neumann, J., Pfeffer, J., Poquet, O., Sailer, M., … Kasneci, G. (2023). ChatGPT for good? On opportunities and challenges of large language models for education. Learning and Individual Differences, 103, 102274. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2023.102274 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2023.102274

Kuzma, J. D. (2025). The Irreplicable Nature of Human Intuition: A Critical Response to Claims of Artificial Intuition. Philosophy & Technology, 38(2), 59. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13347-025-00894-5 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13347-025-00894-5

Luo, J. (2024). A critical review of GenAI policies in higher education assessment: a call to reconsider the “originality” of students’ work . Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 49(5), 651–664. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2024.2309963 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2024.2309963

Peraya, D. (2010). Médiatisation et médiation. Des médias éducatifs aux ENT. Dans V. Liquète (dir.), Médiations (p. 33-48). Paris : CNRS Éditions. https://doi.org/10.4000/books.editionscnrs.14730 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4000/books.editionscnrs.14730

Perkins, M., Roe, J., Furze, L., Postma, D., McGaughran, J., Tran, V. D., Perkins, H., et MacVaugh, J. (2024). The AI Assessment Scale Revisited: A Framework for Educational Assessment. arXiv. https://arxiv.org/abs/2412.09029

Picquenot, A. (2002). GATHER THURLER (Monica). Innover au cœur de l’établissement scolaire. Issy-les-Moulineaux :ESF, 2000, (« Pédagogies »), 235 p. Carrefours de l'éducation, 13(1), IX-IX. https://doi.org/10.3917/cdle.013.0172i. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3917/cdle.013.0172i

Rabardel, P. (1995). Les hommes et les technologies : approche cognitive des instruments contemporains. Armand Colin. https://hal.science/hal-01017462

Robinson, L., Schulz, J., Blank, G., Ragnedda, M., Ono, H., Hogan, B., Mesch, G. S., Cotten, S. R., Kretchmer, S. B., Hale, T. M., Drabowicz, T., Yan, P., Wellman, B., Harper, M.-G., Quan-Haase, A., Dunn, H. S., Casilli, A. A., Tubaro, P., Carvath, R., … Khilnani, A. (2020). Digital inequalities 2.0: Legacy inequalities in the information age. First Monday, 25(7). https://doi.org/10.5210/fm.v25i7.10842 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5210/fm.v25i7.10842

Rosa, H. (2010). Accélération : une critique sociale du temps. La Découverte.

Rose, D. H., et Meyer, A. (2002). Teaching every student in the digital age: Universal design for learning. ASCD.

Stiegler, B. (2010). Ce qui fait que la vie vaut la peine d’être vécue : de la pharmacologie. Flammarion.

Tankelevitch, L., Kewenig, V., Simkute, A., Scott, A., Sarkar, A., Sellen, A., et Rintel, S. (2024). The metacognitive demands and opportunities of generative AI. Dans Proceedings of the CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Article 607). ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/3613904.3642902 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1145/3613904.3642902

Tardif, M., et Lessard, C. (1999). Le travail enseignant au quotidien : contribution à l’étude du travail dans les métiers et les professions d’interactions humaines. De Boeck Université. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9782763713052

UNESCO. (2024). Référentiel de compétences en IA pour les apprenants. UNESCO. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000392652

Université de Sherbrooke. (2025). Adapter les programmes d’études pour tenir compte de l’IA à l’Université de Sherbrooke. Recommandations et invitation à l’action. Service de soutien à la formation, Université deSherbrooke. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.13376588

Venkatesh, V., Thong, J. Y. L., et Xu, X. (2012). Consumer acceptance and use of information technology: Extending the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology. MIS Quarterly, 36(1), 157-178. https://doi.org/10.2307/41410412 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/41410412

Veletsianos, G. (2023). Generative artificial intelligence in Canadian post-secondary education: AI policies, possibilities, realities, and futures. Canadian Digital Learning Research Association. https://www.cdlra-acrfl.ca/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/2023-AI-Report_special-report.pdf

Wang, S., et Zhang, H. (2026). Pedagogical partnerships with generative AI in higher education: How dual cognitive pathways paradoxically enable transformative learning. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 23, 11. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-026-00585-x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-026-00585-x

Wenger, E. (2005). La théorie des communautés de pratique : apprentissage, sens et identité (F. Gervais, trad.). Presses de l’Université Laval. (Ouvrage original publié en 1998)

Xia, Q., Weng, X., Ouyang, F., Lin, T. J., et Chiu, T. K. F. (2024). A scoping review on how generative artificial intelligence transforms assessment in higher education. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 21, 40. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-024-00468-z DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-024-00468-z

Zhou, T., et Wang, M. (2025). Examining Generative AI User Discontinuance from a Dual Perspective of Enablers and Inhibitors. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 41(20), 13140–13150. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2025.2470280 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2025.2470280