Innovative and Interactive Technologies in Creative Product Design Education: A Review

Abstract

When discussing the Education 4.0 concept and the role of technology-based learning systems along with creativity, it is interesting to explore how these are reflected as educational innovations in the case of design education. This study aims to provide an overview of interactive technologies used in product design education and examine their integration into the learning process. A literature search was conducted, analyzing scientific papers to review relevant articles. The findings highlight several categories of technologies utilized in design education, including virtual and augmented reality, robotics, interactive embedded systems, immersive technologies, and computational intelligence systems. These technologies are primarily integrated as supportive tools throughout different stages of the design process within learning environments. This study suggests that integrating such technologies alongside pedagogical methods positively impacts education, offering numerous opportunities for further research and innovation. In conclusion, this review contributes to ongoing research in technological advancements and innovations in design education, offering insights into the diverse applications of interactive technologies in enhancing learning environments.

1. Introduction

In a continuously changing and challenging world, higher education institutions (HEIs) need to reimagine the current pedagogical approaches, in order to embrace the demands for new graduates with interdisciplinary skills. Today’s education should adopt flexible learning methods that will allow students to experience education in new ways. At the same time, the ever-growing use of information and communication technologies on an educational scope has been modifying the traditional classroom scene. This brings up the need to rethink the paradigms of enhancing learning through technology-driven methodologies [1]. Emerging technologies in educational environments can improve the teaching and the learning process. It is a way to motivate learners and stimulate their interest to participate in the learning materials [2]. Specific digital technologies shape the way teaching and learning knowledge and skills activities are delivered and contribute to the transformation of the educational process i.e., immersive technologies, big data analytics, cloud computing, machine learning, Internet of Things (IoT), sensing and actuation technologies, and 3D printing [3].

Technology tools that promote innovative teaching, learning approaches and value-added student experiences are all part of the concept of Higher Education 4.0 [4]. The adaptation and implementation of current and emerging technologies combined with innovative pedagogical procedures and best practices are known as Education 4.0. Miranda et al. [5] defined Education 4.0 as “The current period in which higher education institutions apply new learning methods, innovative didactic and management tools, and intelligent and sustainable infrastructures complemented by emerging technologies that improve knowledge generation and information transfer processes”.

In a more recent work, Miranda et al. [6] propose four components to shape the model of Education 4.0: (a) the developing of desirable competencies in students, (b) the incorporation of new learning methods, (c) the implementation of current and emerging Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs) and (d) the adaptation of innovative infrastructure. Their work suggests the redesign of traditional learning methods, with strategies, emerging technologies and activities that will allow access to all students in a variety of training programs. These programs are created based on student-centered or learner-centered models that require students to actively participate in the teaching learning processes. In this case, innovative learning methods are considered the use of emerging technologies along with pedagogical approaches, such as challenge-based learning, problem-based learning, learning-by-doing and gamification-based learning. In the same direction, according to Ramírez-Montoya et al., the Education 4.0 concept, seeks “best practices” of active learning, relying primarily on technological components for its implementation [7]. In addition, their proposed framework of five core components of Education 4.0 enables the designing of innovative pedagogical procedures to carry out best practices and dynamics, taking into account the appropriate technologies and infrastructure technologies. A main question that concerns the current paper is how this new way of thinking that reforms current pedagogies is reflected in the case of design education.

Design refers to the process of envisioning and creating ideas that form practical and attractive proposals; at the same time, design is the connection between creativity and innovation [8]. Design training requires the cultivation of a variety of thinking skills that promote creative thinking. According to Frascara [9] designers require to speak different disciplinary languages as they work on a multidimensional field that demands numerous skills. Recognizing the need for interdisciplinarity, design education builds on expanded knowledge, application in practice, and reflective learning [10]. Creativity is also a very essential component for design education [11]. Creativity must be cultivated from teachers to students as a guide in the design process [12].

Creativity in design education can be considered as a link point to the Education 4.0 concept. Creativity is the foundation of Education 4.0. It emphasizes the need to prepare students to take on challenges. On the other hand, [13] places design creativity and technology fluency at the forefront of Industry 4.0, due to the ever-growing complexity of the production lines. Therefore, technology is recognized as another key component of design education. Over the last decades, technological advancements such as Computer-Aided Design (CAD) software, pen computers and 3D printers, have changed the educational landscape in the design area. Today, the necessity for new competencies in graduates leads to the demand for skills in new design areas and the integration of new technological tools. As Norman [14] pointed out, speaking about industrial design, the design issues are far more complex and challenging and need more than just deep knowledge of forms, materials, sketching, drawing, and rendering skills. The designer requires a deep understanding of human cognition and emotion, sensory and motor systems, and sufficient knowledge of the scientific method, and experimental design. New design skills are linked with science, engineering, mathematics and are essential in design fields such as interaction and experience. Highlighting all the above characteristics as important aspects of design education, how can we rethink a new educational model that incorporates all the values of the design philosophy with the new perspective of innovative pedagogical procedures?

Design education has started to correspond to these new tech-challenges by promoting new pedagogies that embrace interactivity through technology-driven methodologies (T&L—teaching and learning). Interactivity is important in education, as it keep students actively involved in their learning process and increases their engagement to the material content. This study attempts to analyze whether the uses of innovative and interactive technologies in design education align with the expectations of Education 4.0.

For this reason, this paper presents a literature review-based discussion aimed at identifying innovative technology tools used in educational settings, specifically within the broad field of creative design education. More specifically, the research intends to examine how these tools are integrated into the educational process and the possible learning strategies or pedagogical approaches that may be employed for these purposes. The main research questions investigated are as follows:

• [Q1] What kind of innovative and interactive technology tools are being used in creative design education?
• [Q2] How are these technologies integrated into the educational process?
• [Q3] Is there any connection between technology tools and pedagogical methods?
• [Q4] How do these tools and methods affect the learning performance?

The types of technologies analyzed in this research are characterized by the element of interaction between the user and the technology—for example, technologies that support programming to perform specific tasks or technologies that contribute to the creation of interactive products, such as robotics, immersive technologies, and embedded systems.

The structure of this paper is organized as follows: Section 2 analyzes the structure of the methodology used for this review. Section 3 presents the research results, including the categorization of the identified technology types and a list of reviewed papers, followed by an analysis based on specific learning strategies. Section 4 summarizes this work and answers the defined research questions. Section 5 refers to the limitations of this study. Section 6 points out potential research gaps and suggests directions for future research.

2. Materials and Methods

The research method for performing the review was based on the examination of scientific papers indexed in Scopus and Google Scholar, including both academic journals and conferences papers, published in the last ten years. Scopus and Google Scholar databases were used during the current survey based on the University of Western Macedonia quality system procedures that calculate Key Performance Indicators from these databases. The purpose was to cover a wide range of topics regarding the identification of different technologies used in the learning process of product design-related courses. The PRISMA 2020 framework [15] guided the systematic process of literature identification and screening. An overview of the literature search strategy is shown in Figure 1.

2.1. Search Strategy and Data Collection

Because of the direct link of product design education with design-related courses, the intention of the research aimed to form a wider framework of cases concerning the utilization of technological tools in educational environments related to design, in order then to see how these are ultimately applied to product design. By choosing to restrict the search to only references from technological applications around product design education, it would create a very limited field of research, which would not respond to the objectives of the study that required a broader scope of research topics.

The relevant literature was acquired from Scopus and Google Scholar online databases and was performed over the months of February and March of 2024. The search concerned publications within the time span of 2013 to 2023, as the year 2024 was still ongoing. The search for papers was structured into two phases, using different sets of keywords. First, various keywords related to different technology terms were combined with “design education” and “design studies” (e.g., “innovative technologies in design education”, “interactive technologies in design studies”, “immersive technologies in design education”). This initial search identified the main types of technologies commonly reported in the literature and related to various types of technologies that involved in the creation of interactive applications. Specifically, “virtual reality”, “augmented reality”, “mixed reality”, “extended reality”, “spatial augmented reality”, “holograms”, robotics”, “artificial intelligence”, “machine learning”, “Internet of things”, “cloud computing”, and “interactive interfaces”. Then these terms were combined with “product design education”, OR “industrial design education”, OR “architectural design education”, OR “engineering design education”. Generally, the combination of keywords for the initial search aimed to identify publications covering a wide range of research papers related to design education and technologies involving interactive applications. During the second search, we combined terms of different technology types we identified at the previous stage with more specific design fields in education. The primary focus of the review was on product/industrial design-related education. Product design can be considered the subject of training in engineering design schools. Thus, we expanded the field of research to design fields covering cases from architectural and mechanical engineering education, when they explored design-related projects within the context of product/industrial design.

The initial database search returned 1736 articles, with 1284 sourced from Scopus and 452 from Google Scholar. When removing duplicates, 1328 documents were assessed for eligibility. The filtering process lasted five months from April 2024 to August 2024. First, the articles were screened based on the inclusion/exclusion criteria as presented in

Table 1. Inclusion and exclusion criteria for data selection.

Criteria	Inclusion	Exclusion
Time span of investigation	Between 2013–2023	Before 2013 and after 2023
Language	English	Not English
Access	Full text	Restricted access, limited availability, technical constrains
Type of documents	Journal article, conference paper	Poster, editorial, books
Research methodology	Empirical study	Extended abstract, review, theoretical study
General subject area	Engineering	Not related subject areas
Reference to specific technological applications (addressing RQ1)	Reported	Not reported
Field of design education	Product/Industrial, architecture, mechanical	Other not related fields
Research subject	Related to product design education	Unrelated subjects
Purpose of research	Educational application, course design plans or research regarding education	Applications that were not part of an educational context
Target group	Adults training and student education in higher education institutions (HEIs)	All other grades of education

, by reading their titles and abstracts. Subsequently, three authors performed an in-depth analysis of the full text of each report against additional criteria, to uncover any discussions that were not reflected in the abstract. The presented review involves the application of design as an educational subject, whether taught in theoretical contexts or through studio-based practice. So, based on that, we selected only papers that involved the implementation of technologies in educational environments in three situations—when they concern their involvement in the development of educational applications, when technologies are used as part of a course design plan or when they concern research conducted in educational environments. The review also focused only on cases of adult education or student training in higher education institutions (HEIs). At this stage, a significant number of studies concerning applications in school educational environments at all grades were excluded. Finally, during the manual screening process, several more cases that did not meet the above criteria were excluded. In the end, we came up with 125 papers that were considered to cover more than the criteria set as the basis of our research.

2.2. 1st Level Analysis

Next, all references were organized firstly based on general information (year, title, authors, paper type) and secondly based on more specific categories of information (technology type, design field of application, objective, how the technology is used during the educational process, whether the paper uses pedagogical method to their case study, if it includes evaluation research at the end). Figure 2 presents some descriptive statistics of the total material review analysis, i.e., the distribution of references per year, the types of the selected articles, the research as per subject of studies and the design fields of application. To further analyze the extensive bibliometric data and gain deeper insights into potential connections between them, a scientometric analysis was conducted. Scientometric analysis involves creating virtual bibliometric networks to explore significant patterns and relationships among academic articles using scientometric indicators [16,17]. VOSviewer (v.1.6.20, Leiden University, Leiden, The Netherlands) was employed as a software tool to generate and visualize the co-occurrence of keywords extracted from the cited publications [18]. This stage constitutes a preliminary analysis aimed at identifying and visualizing the relative proximity of subject areas within the reviewed literature. The analysis conducted in VOSviewer resulted in a total of 998 keywords, with a minimum occurrence set to three to highlight more relevant keywords. Approximately 78 keywords were selected, and their co-occurrence network is depicted in Figure 3. The varying sizes of keywords indicate their frequency of occurrence, while different colors highlight distinct research themes. The findings suggest a concentration of research in areas such as “immersive technologies”, “robotics”, “artificial intelligence”, “Internet of Things”, and “interactivity terms” alongside their respective technologies. Keyword connections illustrate the interrelatedness of publications and their association with various aspects of design education.

2.3. 2nd Level Analysis

In the final stage of this methodology, content analysis is employed to thoroughly explore and categorize the reviewed literature. This analysis involves both quantitative and qualitative methods to process and categorize the data, providing deeper insights into the research findings [19]. The content analysis was conducted manually by rigorously reading each selected paper in order to create a more oriented research framework in accordance with the questions posed at the beginning of the paper. The first research question and the main goal of this review was to identify the technologies types used in product design-related educational environments that belong to the spectrum of interactive technologies. The technologies were categorized based on their common characteristics and their frequency of occurrence into five broader clusters. The first category includes the types of immersive technologies that appeared more often in the studies reviewed, virtual and augmented reality. The second category involved all technology types around robotics applications. Third category included all the supportive technology systems embedded in physical objects that are used in order to create interactive applications. Fourth category included all the other types of immersive technologies that are used more rarely in educational settings. And the final category involved computational systems based on several branches of artificial intelligence technologies.

Then for each cluster, a second categorization was made regarding the second research question and the way these technologies are used over the educational process. From this stage analysis emerged two general categorizations: the cases where technologies are used as support mechanisms in several aspects of educational activities and when they are involved in different stages of the design process, during studio-based practice. The review describes in detail all the ways related to the integration of technologies during education. In addition, it was considered appropriate to analyze further the second category, as there was a need to identify the exact stage of the design process that technologies were being used.

Finally, as the coexistence of pedagogical approaches along with technological tools in educational settings was another aspect of this review, regarding the third research question, all studies where analyzed from a pedagogical perspective to examine if and in how many cases the adoption of technology tools is being implemented in conjunction with specific learning methods.

3. Results

According to the review method described above, the identified technology tools were clustered into five categories: (a) virtual and augmented reality, (b) robotics, (c) interactive embedded systems, (d) other types of immersive technologies and (e) computational intelligence systems. These five categories cover a wide range of interactive technology types used in design educational settings that have been mostly addressed in literature and form the core structure of this research. As is depicted in Figure 4, immersive technologies, virtual and augmented reality are the technologies that concern the subject of study in most of the research works reviewed. However, robotics and interactive embedded systems follow with a significant percentage difference from the first category. Then there are other types of immersive technologies that are used more rarely according to the literature and on the last category, technologies based on computational intelligence systems can be found. The temporal distribution graphic stresses the distribution of references per year and per category. It shows that generally immersive technologies and robotics can be found in almost every year of the time span investigated, while papers referring to embedded technologies and computational intelligence systems mainly concern the last years.

The following paragraphs present a description of the technologies and an analysis of the reviewed papers. Each technology category is followed by a graphic and a table that categorize the reviewed studies based on the way technologies are integrated into the educational process.

3.1. Technologies and Their Uses in Learning Environments

3.1.1. Virtual Reality (VR)/Augmented Reality (AR)

Virtual and augmented reality are the interactive technologies that appear most often in the studies reviewed. They belong to the kind of immersive technologies that become widely used in educational settings and work as supports tools in many learning environments [19]. Through virtual reality, a three-dimensional computer-generated environment is created, where the user can explore and interact with it, by manipulating objects or performing various actions [20]. On the other hand, augmented reality is an intermediate tool that integrates computer-generated data into real space, combining real and virtual objects together in real time [21,22]. In the field of design education, both VR and AR can enhance the teaching of design topics by enabling the students to visualize and interact with their designs in a more intuitive way.

A very large percentage of the studies uses VR/AR technologies as an integral part of the design process and during its various stages, when it is implemented in the context of studio-based educational practice. Neves and Duarte [23] examine the virtual reality technology and its potential as an innovative tool in Basic Design education. In the described course named “3D Design Lab”, students have the opportunity to create a new, intangible design element, such as immersion in virtual realities. The study shows that VR can affect positively the creative process during the learning experience, enhancing the students’ learning outcome. Another research [24] explores the use of virtual reality in the early stages of the design process, as an ideation and inspiration tool. In this study, they add a third dimension (i.e., depth) to the traditional 2D mood boards compositions and create a three-dimensional virtual mood board. This leads to a highly immersive and interactive experience for the designer, activating his interest and inspiration that helps to make style related decisions.

Continuing in the early design stages, Shih et al. [25] introduce VR as a 3D drawing tool during the sketching phase of the design process. Their case study focuses on industrial design education, where the designer uses hand-drawn forms to communicate his ideas with customers or for self-viewing. The research results show that the virtual reality drawing software Gravity Sketch^TM can be an effective tool to increase students’ creativity and completion. In line with this previous work, Joundi et al. [26] present research in a product design course that was carried out on Master level students, and investigates the effect of using VR as a sketch-based 3D modeling tool in the process of product styling. The results indicate that although the VR sketch tool (in this case Gravity Sketch^TM) was difficult to use as a form finding tool, students saw a lot of potential in the tool for visualizing their shape. VR can be a helpful tool in mediating from a shape idea towards the construction of that idea. In a more recent work, Rodríguez-Parada et al. [27] also use Gravity Sketch^TM software for conceptual design in a studio-based course. In addition, they use it as a tool for functional evaluation tests of products within an immersive VR environment. This allows students to interact with their designs in 3D space and make early decisions that can enhance various aspects of their products.

On the design visualization stage, Moural et al. [28] explore the use of virtual immersive environments for visualization of architectural spaces. Their system provides the possibility of seeing and interacting with architectural models at real scale, giving students the chance to test and evaluate their projects. On the other hand, Ayer et al. [29] explore the pedagogical value of using augmented reality technology, combined with a simulation game, with an aim to enhance building engineering and design education. EcoCampus^TM is the developed application that uses an augmented reality-based simulation game that allow users to visualize possible solutions for a given design problem. In this case, augmented reality helps students to visualize virtual information, in the context of its physical space, and simulation games can help present learning content during an applied scenario.

Salah et al. [30] introduce VR technology into product manufacturing in their study. Specifically, in alignment with the demands of Industry 4.0, students learn to design a product for a reconfigurable manufacturing system (RMS) using a virtual learning factory system. Their platform also supports a “learning by doing” strategy as a pedagogical tool. in their study, introduce VR technology in product manufacturing. More specifically, in line with the concept of Industry 4.0 demands, students learn to design a product of reconfigurable manufacturing system (RMS) using a virtual learning factory system. Their platform promotes also the learning by doing strategy as a pedagogical tool. From this point of view, Vo [31] gives student a luminaire design project and explores the influence of virtual reality technology combined with additive manufacturing (i.e., 3D printing) in design creativity. According to the findings, students show a very high level of interest and engagement in the use of these technologies with a very positive impact in their creativity. Roberts et al. [32] describe several case studies, highlighting the different applications of VR tools in a studio-based practice. First, they use VR at the beginning of the design process in order to initiate the design generation outcomes. In another case, they describe the application of VR for usability testing, as a mean to better understand user experiences and validate design outcomes. Finally, through training programs, they introduce digital modelling in virtual reality, giving students the opportunity to interact and feel the designed products at full size. Ibrahim and El Shakhs [33] introduce VR as a compelling design tool in education, where students can use to better communicate their proposed designs. Also, according to their research, VR is proved to be very effective in the case of visualizing abstract conceptual ideas of the 3D space. Banerjee et al. [34] study the impact of VR technology on industrial design students’ cognitive skill as an instructional medium for 3D visualization. Specifically, their paper explores the learning experience of immersive technologies by comparing usability, engagement, enjoyment and acceptability between conventional 3D model-making software and VR-based 3D model-making software. The research indicate that VR is a very effective 3D concept visualization and presentation tool and has more engagement and enjoyment and acceptability comparing to conventional software.

Of great interest are the cases that utilize VR/AR technology as tools for understanding design. Serdar et al. [35] in their work examine the potential of an augmented reality system as an educational tool in an engineering course for solid modeling. By integrating AR into the Computer Aided Design system with SolidWorks^TM software, students can better understand CAD drawings, geometric features and projection views. Alatta and Freewan [36] investigate the impact of immersive virtual environment on students’ spatial perception within the design process. VR gives students the opportunity to explore and check their design’s validity in greater depth, allowing them to better understand and comprehend complex morphologies. On the other hand, Horvat et al. [37], combines VR technology with a constructivism-based learning method in design education, with an aim to help students with lower expertise to better comprehend specific aspects of a design i.e., identification of rotation-based mechanisms.

Following the logic of using VR as a testing tool, Rentzos et al. [38] present a VR based methodology that is focused on the analysis of the human-product interaction. Through this technology, they use an immersive simulation session that enables the testing, experimentation and evaluation of the product in its full size. In their case, VR is proved to be a very effective tool in order to measure the complexity of the designed the product on the basis of human task. An interesting approach is the case study of Grajewski et al. [39] where they apply virtual reality for training and improving the skills of students in the field of eco-design. VR technologies are used for digital test evaluation of early prototypes of the product. Students have the opportunity to explore the product before it is constructed and make the right design decisions. Another approach that uses VR for testing and evaluating the product during the design phase is presented by Srihirun et al. [40]. In that case, they propose an integration of a virtual reality system with finite element analysis using e-learning and social media in the case of a plastic bottle package design. The results show that the VR system has significantly improved students’ skills and learning performance. In the same direction, Jimeno-Morenilla et al. [20] introduce a methodological proposal, which integrates virtual reality into an industrial 3D design course. In this case, VR techniques are used as a product design support tool that helps students to understand complex concepts and make more efficient and better design decisions. It is also mentioned that the pedagogical method, followed in this course, is oriented to active learning, which is based on student participation, investigation, and autonomous learning. Halabi et al. [41] implement a project-based learning methodology combined with VR technology in an introductory engineering course, in order to teach engineering design process and skills. Students use the immersive environment of CAVE^TM display to visualize and interact with their design ideas, giving them the chance to inspect their projects in different stages and discover possible problems that need redesigning. In more recent work, Halabi [42] uses again VR as a form of 3D prototyping technique. In this paper, VR through immersive CAVE^TM display is used in conjunction with PBL (Project-based Learning) in self-directed approach to design and evaluate a product. On the other hand, Mourtzis et al. [43] present an approach of intuitive visualizing and evaluating product design, using augmented reality technology. The paper introduces the development of an augmented reality application that aims to enable engineering students to envision the product on 1:1 scale, interact with it, evaluate the current design, detect possible flaws and improve the design. Huang and Chen [44] propose the use of virtual reality technology so that students can check their preliminary three-dimensional models, in order to proceed with the required changes in shape and structure. This technique can reduce the cost of sample products and improve students’ sense in creating more successful products. Jenek et al. [45] also investigate the use of virtual reality as a design-decision-making tool in the education process of architectural design. They present a case study, where students were asked to design a Media Architecture structure employing virtual-design-environment tools. Students approach the concept of Media Architecture as physical interactive structure with the virtual design environment. Agirachman et al. [46] in their paper introduce immersive virtual reality technology as an affordance-base design review tool in design process. The objective of the research was to determine if this technology, as a review method, effectively revise design concepts. The results show a very significant improvement of students’ work, especially in their ability to perceive the qualitative characteristics in their original design work.

Following the logic of reducing costs of physical prototyping, Akundi [47] investigates the use of a virtual reality as a rapid prototyping (RP) simulator tool. Students through this immersive virtual experience, could learn and better understand the concept of additive manufacturing process at no significant cost. Yamada et al. [48] in their work, propose an educational method for creative design, based on synthetic design thinking that can enhance a person’s ability to generate new concept of innovative products that are not merely extensions of existing ones. VR technology in this case is used at the final stage of their design procedure, as an immersive tool for creating an interactive virtual prototype. Häkkilä et al. [21] present different cases of various uses of VR technology in industrial design education. Students are introduced to this new technology and learn to use it in different phases of the design process. As an empathetic design tool to simulate visual disabilities, to create low-cost simulative prototypes and for exhibiting the final design proposal in an immersive display environment.

According to Topal and Sener [22] the main design activities that augmented technology could enhance, is in prototyping stages and in presentations. Especially in presentations, students can enrich their presentations and make them substantially more informative. In another research, Topal and Şener [49] present a case study that was carried out in an educational context with industrial design postgraduate students. The project was focused on using the mobile AR-App Metaio^TM in a bedside alarm clock, to enhance students’ presentations of interactive and multimedia products. Saorín et al. [50] in their case study present an educational cloud-based collaborative 3D modeling platform, with an aim to train students in engineering graphics of product design. VR and AR technologies were used at the end of this experience as a presentation tool of their work. López Chao et al. [51] applied project-based methodology in a course, where students can learn several pieces of software for graphic simulations, including immersive tools, leading students to use these tools in their final project presentations.

Several studies investigate the use of virtual and augmented reality technologies as an interactive learning platform, without necessarily being part of a project’s design process. Zhang [52] introduces virtual and augmented reality technology to the teaching course of cultural and creative product design. A flow field visualization method is used to create a virtual platform that simulates a 3D cultural scene, in order to help students deeply explore the technical aspects of the cultural environment. The immersive experience can enhance the student’s perception ability and guide them to develop and evaluate cultural creative products. Bashabsheh et al. [53] developed a computer software using VR technology for building construction courses. The platform contains 4D model (3D model and time dimension) for certain building construction phases, using VR technology to introduce immersive and non-immersive virtual reality experience for the students during learning. Kassim and Md Zubir [54] presented their application called (AREEE), augmented reality (AR) on engineering equipment for education, which includes 3D images of engineering equipment and tools designed into an AR platform that uses as a valuable learning tool for students. On another approach, Urban et al. [55] presented an augmented reality (AR) platform called “AR-supported Teaching”, applicable for both Architecture, Engineering and Construction (AEC) education and as a Construction 4.0 technology. The developed application enables students to access a variety of AEC AR content available for education. Following this, Onecha et al. [56] investigated also augmented reality metaverse environments in order to improve the learning process of construction and rehabilitation in architectural studies. Through this experiment work, students could visit and examine in detail various projects under construction without time or movement limitations.

On the other hand, González-Almaguer et al. [57] applied a gamification strategy with an aim to train industrial design students on a VEP (Virtual Enterprise Planning) simulator, which replicates the processes of a car assembly plant using ERP (Enterprise Resource Planning) with elements including quality, statistics, experiment design and problem solving. For this purpose, they use VR and AR technologies to enable the students experiencing the processes and products of the Meccano^TM’s manufacturing plant. The same authors in more recent research, González-Almaguer et al. [58] described the academic experience of redesigning a theoretical course by applying gamification and problem-solving methodologies, facilitated through virtual and augmented reality technologies. More specifically, they created a board game called Problem-Solving Race (PSR) that manage students to be more motivated and engaged to the learning process. From this point of view, Gill et al. [59] developed and evaluated a theoretical design course in an immersive virtual reality (iVR) environment, based on the theory of microlearning, embedded with gamification elements. The course material concerned a lesson about the Bauhaus design movement and the learning content was delivered through various interactive activities, including interactive videos and slideshows, 3D models, games and puzzles. Furthermore, on another research, Gill et al. [60] investigated the utilization of augmented-reality (AR) and gamification strategy in the teaching course of Design for Manufacturing and Assembly (DfMA). The developed application is an educational game which consists of a tangible puzzle with an AR interface that creates an enhanced learning experience for students, encouraging engaging and collaboration practices.

A different aspect of using VR/AR in an educational context concerns the development of technical skills that students are required to have. Gavish et al. [61] developed and evaluated VR/AR platforms for Industrial Maintenance and Assembly (IMA) tasks training. The IMA-VR platform concerns a controlled multimodal virtual environment, aimed at transferring the motor and cognitive skills involved in assembly and maintenance task. On the other hand, the IMA-AR training system allows the trainee to perform assembly operations on the real machines using real instruments for interaction. Jou and Wang [62] investigated the impact of virtual reality learning environments on technical skills, focusing more on knowledge, comprehension, simulation, application and creativity.

On another research, Chandramouli et al. [63] introduced a VR-based educational module for digital manufacturing that educate and train skilled technicians on advanced manufacturing processes. Their training module simulates various devices and equipment, allowing students to interact and test these devices without risking equipment damage. In addition, the VR modules are presented in the form of a game-like interface that makes the interaction more fun-based and reduces the cognitive load. Cordero-Guridi et al. [64] in their wok described the development of a virtual/augmented reality (VR/AR) laboratory to support learning, training, and collaborative ventures related to additive manufacturing for the automotive industry. In that direction, Mathur et al. [65] presented a framework that uses a VR immersive environment to train industrial design students on additive manufacturing (AM) process knowledge. Students through the VR application platform can interactively learn about AM systems and its components. The application’s goal is not only to empower learners with the skills to design and evaluate digital artifacts for AM but also to foster them to solve emerging design problems with AM.

Focusing more on the pedagogical approach, Abbas et al. [66] investigated with the synergy between VR environments and adaptive-based learning as a method to develop a VR-based training system for educating train conductors on technical skills. The results of this approach show a higher learning preference and an increase in individual motivation of trainees. Acuña and Melón [67] created a multimodal and interactive virtual reality platform for the immersive teaching of high-risk equipment operation. They promote knowledge and active training in the use of the main wood and metal cutting machines in Industrial Design and Architecture workshops. Cassola et al. [68] also presented a virtual reality training platform in industrial training. But in their case study, they promote an autonomous interactive VR-based experiential training without the support of development experts. In this way, the learner plays an active role in the learning process. Yang et al. [69] presented an experiment with college students using an augmented reality (AR) system in an assembly task training. Their paper evaluates the results of the HoloLens-based AR training method based on natural human behaviors and knowledge retention. The findings indicate that AR system can improve the training effect and is more effective than ordinary training in increasing the knowledge retention. Maulana et al. [70] developed a furniture Augmented Reality Application (FunAR), which provide the basic information about existing equipment in Lab Furniture. The application is designed to contain digital content of information, images and 3D models that allow students to interact with the learning materials and help them to better understand lab workshop complex equipment.

Advanced virtual and augmented reality technologies are proved to be a valuable tool in developing students’ spatial skills. Farzeeha et al. [71] in their study make use of augmented reality learning environments to ease undergraduates engineering students in understanding orthographic and isometric projection, especially in visualizing the 3D objects from the 2D projection images and vice versa. In addition, Omar et al. [72] introduce the use of mobile augmented reality in the teaching and learning of orthographic projection. They present the Augmented Reality Engineering Drawing Apps (AREDApps), as a new pedagogical approach to attract students’ interest in engineering drawing courses and to enhance their visualization skills.

On the other hand, González [73] integrates virtual and augmented reality technologies during descriptive geometry for industrial design and architecture students. Through this course students learn to visualize any object by developing perception and spatial representation in understanding the spatial sense for the constructive visual representation. In that direction, Molina-Carmona et al. [74] in their work, conducted an experimental learning activity, based on a virtual reality application, in order to improve students’ spatial ability, by applying various spatial visualization test. Gómez-Tone et al. [75] present the case study of a comparative analysis on first-year engineering students that were trained with an AR-based representational system, to improve their spatial skills. The results indicate significant gains in students’ level of spatial perception and abilities. In the case of Akkus and Arslan [76], augmented reality (AR) is also used to investigate its effects on students’ spatial skills and academic achievement. They presented three AR applications for a technical drawing course. The results of the research indicate an important contribution to the engineering education. A different approach is followed by Fonseca et al. [77]. Based on the use of virtual reality technology, the main aim of their work is to show how the implementation of gamified virtual strategies in architecture and urban design can increase students’ spatial comprehension and citizens’ interest in the collaborative/gamified/interactive design of spaces.

In most studies, virtual and augmented reality technologies are part of a course plan or integrated into the design process. Some studies, however, focus more on learning the specific type of technology. For example, Häfner et al. [78] presented the design of a teaching methodology for a practical course in virtual reality. The course focused on learning about virtual reality, by simulating interdisciplinary industrial projects with the purpose to develop skills for practical engineering problems, teamwork, working in interdisciplinary groups and time management.

Team work, on the other hand, has been the research subject of several studies. Many papers present their work on collaborative learning environments through the use of virtual reality technology. Gül et al. [79] presented three case studies on collaborative design teaching by integrating 3D virtual worlds into design education. Their platforms create virtual learning communities that include various collaboration tools, allowing students to develop, share, and document design ideas. An interesting aspect of these platforms is that they follow a constructivist learning approach by providing students opportunities for self-exploration and manipulation to actively build skills and knowledge that are close to their interest.

On another case study, Karmokar and Rive [80] also follow a constructivist approach and examine how teams of creative technologies learn design thinking, by creating and using collaborative tools, designed in a virtual world, while used in a virtual learning environment. By following this approach, Vogel et al. [81] present their science research project, which involves the development of a virtual reality application that allows design thinking teams to work on a collaborative environment. Their application serves as a virtual room that supports gestural interaction and hand tracking so that users can communicate during their collaboration. In addition, Huang et al. [82] present a 3D modeling learning experience, experiment based on virtual reality technology. Their learning model was designed to employ a learning community, where students could discuss design directions and freely come up with new ideas. The results indicate that students could effectively learn 3D modeling in this collaborative virtual environment.

Figure 5, summarizes the identified types regarding the ways virtual and augmented reality are integrated into learning environments of design educational subjects. According to the literature review, it shows that the most frequent use of VR and AR in education concerns its use as supporting tools during the design process. In other cases, they deal with the utilization of the tools in creating interactive learning environments and training platforms for various learning subjects, for collaboration or for developing specific skills that designers require to have.

Table 2. Studies related to the different types of virtual and augmented reality used in educational environments.

Types of Integration of Technology Tools into the Learning Process		Explanation	Authors
Support technology during the design process (In studio-based education practice)	Ideation and inspiration tool	At the very early stage of the design process as immersive tool for exploring potential abstract concepts.	Neves and Duarte, 2015 [23]; Rieuf et al., 2015 [24]
	Conceptual/Sketching tool	As a 3D drawing tool during the sketching phase of the design process to produce hand-drawn forms in the 3D space or to generate new concepts and communicate draft design ideas.	Shih et al., 2019 [25]; Joundi et al., 2020 [26]; Rodríguez-Parada et al., 2022 [27]; Roberts et al., 2020 [32];
	Visualization tool/Modeling tool	To visualize and model different aspects, possible functions and aesthetics of a specific design solution.	Moural et al., 2015 [28]; Ayer et al., 2016 [29]; Salah et al., 2019 [30]; Vo, 2022 [31]; Roberts et al., 2020 [32]; Ibrahim and El Shakhs, 2023 [33]; Banerjee et al., 2023 [34]; Serdar et al., 2013 [35]; Mourtzis et al., 2018 [43]; Huang et al., 2021 [82]; Camba et al., 2017 [83];
	Design comprehension tool	Helps students to better comprehend complex aspects of a design that would be difficult to understand in a conventional way. Improves students’ visual perception.	Jimeno-Morenilla et al., 2016 [20]; Serdar et al., 2013 [35]; Alatta and Freewan, 2017 [36]; Horvat et al., 2022 [37]; Probst and Ebner, 2018 [84];
	Evaluation/Decision making tool	It evaluates a product’s performance and other important characteristics. Identifies possible defects, in order to decide the appropriate design direction.	Jimeno-Morenilla et al., 2016 [20]; Rodríguez-Parada et al., 2022 [27]; Moural et al., 2015 [28]; Salah et al., 2019 [30]; Roberts et al., 2020 [32]; Serdar et al., 2013 [35]; Rentzos et al., 2014 [38]; Grajewski et al., 2015 [39]; Srihirun et al., 2015 [40]; Halabi et al., 2018 [41]; Halabi, 2020 [42]; Mourtzis et al., 2018 [43]; Huang and Chen, 2019 [44]; Jenek et al., 2020 [45]; Agirachman et al., 2022 [46];
	Prototyping tool	A tool that turns design solutions into product prototypes. It can be used as a way to create a low-cost physical version of real products and significantly reduce design development time.	Häkkilä et al., 2018 [21]; Rentzos et al., 2014 [38]; Halabi et al., 2018 [41]; Halabi, 2020 [42]; Huang and Chen, 2019 [44]; Akundi, 2017 [47]; Yamada et al., 2017 [48]; Topal and Şener, 2015 [49]; Probst and Ebner, 2018 [84]; Liu et al., 2021 [85]
	Presentation tool	As a tool to improve the presentation of projects, enriching the designs with more details and making them more informative, so that students can better communicate their design ideas to the audience.	Jimeno-Morenilla et al., 2016 [20]; Häkkilä et al., 2018 [21]; Topal and Sener, 2015 [22]; Ibrahim and El Shakhs, 2023 [33]; Banerjee et al., 2023 [34]; Yamada et al., 2017 [48]; Topal and Şener, 2015 [49], Saorín et al., 2019 [50]; López Chao et al., 2022 [51]; Camba et al., 2017 [83];
As part of an interactive learning environment/platform		When technology is used as part of a teaching system that creates an environment in which students are able to interact with the learning subject, contributing to an interactive learning experience.	Zhang, 2023 [52]; Bashabsheh et al., 2019 [53]; Kassim and Md Zubir, 2019 [54]; Urban et al., 2022 [55]; Onecha et al., 2023 [56]; González-Almaguer et al., 2022 [58]; Gill et al., 2022 [59]; Gill et al., 2023 [60]; Mathur et al., 2023 [65]; Maulana et al., 2023 [70]
As a practical training platform for technical skills		Referring to a training system that allows students to develop their technical skills by performing operations of various devices and equipment in a controlled environment without risking equipment damage.	González-Almaguer et al., 2022 [58]; Gavish et al., 2015 [61]; Jou and Wang, 2013 [62]; Chandramouli et al., 2018 [63]; Cordero-Guridi et al., 2022 [64]; Mathur et al., 2023 [65]; Abbas et al., 2023 [66]; Acuña and Melón, 2022 [67]; Cassola et al., 2022 [68]; Yang et al., 2023 [69]; Maulana et al., 2023 [70];
To develop spatial skills		A useful tool to improve students’ understanding of three-dimensional (3D) morphologies, enhancing their spatial perception and their ability to visualize and understand the relationships between objects.	Alatta and Freewan, 2017 [36]; Farzeeha et al., 2017 [71]; Omar et al., 2019 [72]; González, 2018 [73]; Molina-Carmona et al., 2018 [74]; Gómez-Tone et al., 2020 [75]; Akkus and Arslan, 2022 [76]; Fonseca et al., 2021 [77]
To teach students about this technology		When the purpose of an educational activity is more focused on learning a specific type of technology.	Häkkilä et al., 2018 [21]; Roberts et al., 2020 [32]; Akundi, 2017 [47]; López Chao et al., 2022 [51]; Häfner et al., 2013 [78]; Camba et al., 2017 [83]
Collaboration tool		When the technology tool is used to create a learning community for the purpose of working in a collaborative environment.	Gül et al., 2014 [79], Karmokar and Rive, 2016 [80]; Vogel et al., 2021 [81]; Huang et al., 2021 [82];
Simulator tool for various conditions		When the tool is used to simulate specific environmental conditions or physical disabilities necessary for the design project that would be impossible to experience in any other way.	Häkkilä et al., 2018 [21]

, depict every type of use, including the categorization of the references for each category. There are references that can be found in more than one category as the technology tools can be used with different ways for the same learning subject. In addition, the design stages are further analyzed to identify exactly where in the design process VR and AR technologies are used. Based on the number of references found in each category, VR and AR tools prove to be particularly useful in the stages, where there is a need to visualize the idea of a product, to evaluate its performance and make the right decisions for adjustments and improvements. Also, according to the review, prototyping in virtual environments is an effective way of significantly reducing design development time by creating low-cost prototypes. Another frequent use of VR and AR concerns the final stages of the design process and the creation of an immersive experience that enhances the final presentation style to attract the audience. Finally, the fewer case studies involving the integration of VR and AR are seen in the early stages of the design process.

3.1.2. Robotics

The second category includes robotics-related technologies. Robotics have a wide range of applications in the field of education, and can be found as: (a) learning objects, (b) learning tools and (c) learning aids. The aim of robotics is to improve the learning experience of students through the creation, implementation, improvement and validation of pedagogical activities. On the other hand, robotics enhances interdisciplinary thinking skills, such as problem solving, teamwork, logical reasoning and creative design, things that are also essential in the design studies. In design-related courses, robotics has several benefits in the process of solving various kinds of design problems and contribute in improving students’ design skills i.e., problem definition, information gathering, solution generation, analysis of the solutions and test/implementation.

Robotics are integrated into the design process in various ways. An et al. [86] designed and implemented an online educational robotics course addressed to service teachers by applying instructional design factors as well as problem-solving and collaboration strategies. Telenko et al. [87] presented a multidisciplinary learning activity, based on the integration of problems from multiple educational subjects. Each described challenge combines problem clarification, concept generation and prototyping with subject content such as: circuits, biology, thermodynamics, differential equations or software with controls. Robotic systems are used as a support technology during these design processes. Tan et al. [88] presented a robot design competition as an effective tool for project-based education in undergraduate robotics. The designed problem that was posed to the students was to build and test mobile robots that can accomplish a task. The developed robotic systems were used as an education medium for a practical design experience on mechanical design, electronic circuits and programming. Almaguer et al. [89] described the use of Meccano^TM, a metal constructive game base, to help engineering and design students simulate the manufacturing process. The project is based on STEAM (Science Technology Engineering Art Mathematics) education and uses gamification learning techniques. Students used Meccano^TM parts to build their prototypes for the design challenges. Heyden et al. [90] presented their work on a Design Education Platform for a physical robotic system that was developed in the context of a problem-based interdisciplinary learning course. Students were asked to design and produce physical product variants of a robotic system and take part in a competition. The developed robotic systems are based on the design education course and technical specifications and divided into different modules, which are attached on the Design Education Platform.

Kuppuswamy and Mhakure [91] explored the project-based learning methodology in a mechanical engineering product design course. As part of the project, students were asked to design a Selective Compliance Assembly Robot Arm for a given application according to the industry demands. This case study focuses more on the learning methodology and uses robotics as the assigned project for the studio-based practice. Kleppe et al. [92] introduced an Industry 4.0 Idea Lab for bridging design and automatic manufacturing in Engineering Education 4.0. They designed a course based on activity-based learning methodology, which goal is to learn how to design products for Industry 4.0 manufacturing. Robots are used for the manufacturing and assembly process. Yazar et al. [93] presented an experiment on basic design studio students that investigates the utilization of a robotic arm as a design and production tool. Students were introduced to digital fabrication technologies and experiment with the integration in the design processes.

On other cases, robotics was used as the main learning subject. Phan and Ngo [94] proposed a novel framework for a multidisciplinary mechatronics program that introduces a community-based PBL learning approach. They investigated learning and teaching robotics systems from a collaborative perspective. As part of the designed course, students had to work together with other learners in the electronics, software, control automation, and mechanics fields, followed by the design of an open platform integrated multidisciplinary approach. Kilic-Bebek et al. [95] explored and presented the benefits of short online courses for the transdisciplinary competence development of graduate students for an Innovative Course on Wearable and Collaborative Robotics.

Deniz and Cakır [96] developed a novel interactive robot training platform that includes subjects related to robots in engineering education such as programming, kinematics, workspace, speed-acceleration and robot dynamic parameters. This platform recreates the conditions of an industrial environment, it is based on open-source libraries and is designed for the offline programming of industrial robots. Yu and Da Silva [97] presented their study on designing and implementing an online workshop for Robot Assembly. The assembly process through an automated system, like a robotic system, is crucial knowledge for students as it demonstrates that they understand the design rules and implement them in the actual product design. The objective of this research was to teach students, how to use and program a robot assembly that does not require access to lab facilities.

Other research approach the education of robotics not only as a subject to be learned but also as a teaching tool and support technology during the learning process. Grandi et al. [98] described a course, where students were required to mechanically design and program autonomous robots (to use in a competition among teams), in order to gain practical knowledge on mobile robotics. For this purpose, the Lego Mindstorms^TM Kit and Java-based firmware LeJOS had been selected as a tool to help in the learning process. Garcia et al. [99] described the methodology of designing a robotic hand, in order to facilitate and accelerate the teaching/learning process for mechatronics lecture-based courses. The study presents the design and implementation of a movement control system for recognition of hand gestures. The aim is to create a tool, based on mechatronics systems design that will help students gain a direct hands-on experience of the course topics. Montés et al. [100] explored the design of a challenge-based learning program, according to the STEAM product design education. The paper focuses on how STEAM learning can be integrated into the project, with an aim to improve students learning on topics concerning the engineering of product design.

Brell-Çokcan and Braumann [101] introduced robotic arm in architectural education, not just as a pure fabrication device, but as an open interface, allowing students to have an interactive and intuitive feeling for robotic fabrication. In their designed courses, robotic arms can act as a motivator that transfer valuable knowledge from many disciplines, such as geometry and programming. During courses, students went through the process of designing custom manufacturing workflows, according to their individual strengths, i.e., workflows that capture the movements of a dancer and transform it into robot toolpaths, adaptable structures used for form exploration. In the same design field, Shi et al. [102] introduced a new didactic pedagogical approach, based on the principles of robotic tectonics that provides interdisciplinary knowledge to architecture students and enables them to use advanced digital tools, such as robots for automated construction. Furthermore, Yi [103] describes an architectural robotic class that is structured to provide students with applied knowledge of kinematics and mechanisms. The courses are focused on design experimentation with kinetic (responsive) building prototyping and construction automation of a complex building form, using an industrial robot arm. Finally, Jiehan et al. [104] applied their work to engineering education, by designing a virtual remote lab, based on the title ‘Robotic Automation Virtual Lab’. They built a system to remotely manipulate a robotic arm through a website.

Figure 6 illustrates the most common uses of robotics technology related to design education courses. Based on the literature review, robotic-based technology is used equally as both a learning object and an assistive technology, during the design process for various projects in the context of practical student training. Other uses involve the utilization of robotics as part of an interactive learning platform that help students in interacting with the learning subject, or works as supporting system that facilitates teachers in the teaching of specific topics. Finally, there are some cases that use of robotics as an aid to various manufacturing strategies, i.e., to test several manufacturing constraints and prototyping parameters. In

Table 3. Studies related to the different types of robotics used in educational environments.

Types of Integration of Technology Tools into the Learning Process		Explanation	Authors
Support technology during the design process (In studio-based education practice)	Prototyping tool	When is used to create robotic prototypes or when robotic technology is used as an auxiliary tool in the process of developing the prototypes of specific projects.	Telenko et al., 2016 [87]; Almaguer et al., 2020 [89]; Heyden et al., 2020 [90]; Kuppuswamy and Mhakure, 2020 [91]; Kleppe et al., 2022 [92]; Yazar et al., 2023 [93]; Bedillion et al., 2018 [105]; Castelli and Giberti, 2019 [106]; Benitez et al., 2020 [107]
As part of an interactive learning environment/platform		When technology is used as part of a teaching system that creates an environment in which students are able to interact with the learning subject, contributing to an interactive learning experience.	Tan et al., 2016 [88]; Deniz and Cakır, 2017 [96]; Yu and Da Silva, 2021 [97]; Benitez et al., 2020 [107]; Carrasco-Navarro et al., 2022 [108]; Dewi et al., 2018 [109]
To teach students about this technology		When the purpose of an educational activity is more focused on learning a specific type of technology.	An et al., 2022 [86]; Kleppe et al., 2022 [92]; Phan and Ngo, 2020 [94]; Kilic-Bebek et al., 2023 [95]; Yi, 2021 [103]; Castelli and Giberti, 2019 [106]; Benitez et al., 2020 [107]; Dewi et al., 2018 [109]; Orsolits et al., 2022 [110];
As support technology during teaching		When technology supports the teaching of specific subjects and works as an auxiliary tool to facilitate the learning process.	Telenko et al., 2016 [87]; Grandi et al., 2014 [98]; Garcia et al., 2020 [99]; Montés et al., 2022 [100]; Carrasco-Navarro et al., 2022 [108]
As an assistive tool in manufacturing process		When the technology works as an aid to various manufacturing strategies, to test several manufacturing constraints and prototyping parameters.	Brell-Çokcan and Braumann, 2013 [91]; Shi et al., 2020 [102]; Yi, 2021 [103]; Jiehan et al., 2022 [104]

, the reviewed studies are categorized in relation with the different types of robotics use that have been identified in educational settings. As far as it concerns the design process, it is observed that robotics is used exclusively in the prototyping stage. These cases involve the development of robotic prototypes as part of a problem-solving project, or the utilization of robotic technology as an auxiliary tool for building prototypes of specific projects.

3.1.3. Interactive Embedded Systems

Interactive embedded systems (IES) describe the technology tools that are embedded on physical objects and communicate with other devices and systems over the internet by exchanging data. Refers to the Internet of Things (IoT), which is defined as a network of physical objects that collects environmental data through sensors and analyzes it, to make decisions for changing the environment through actuators [111]. It also includes control systems, where a person can interact with digital information through the physical environment, like Arduino^TM-based platforms and Tangible User Interfaces (TUI).

The majority of papers investigating the use of interactive embedded systems technologies in design learning environments, concern their integration into the design process and their contribution to the creation of interactive prototypes, during studio-based educational practice. Alsos [112] presents a project-based work for an industrial design course called “Prototyping Interactive Media”. In this course, students were asked to design innovative interactive everyday products using Arduino^TM, an open-source electronics platform. The aim of the course was to teach students programming by introducing them into the processing language through project-based learning methodology. Narahara [113] also presents a project-based oriented course for beginning design students. The course concerned first the introduction of students in fundamental technical knowledge upon the new technological tools, i.e., sensors, actuators, and microcontrollers and secondly the designing and production of creative interactive prototypes. In similar research, Conradie et al. [114] combine Tangible User Interface and rapid prototyping technologies for a Mechatronic Product Design course. The course follows a project-based approach and starts with an introduction of mechatronics and the basics of Arduino^TM. Then students design and produce their own interactive products, based on real world problems in close collaboration with industry. 3D printing and laser-cut were used to materialize and finish the final prototypes.

Liu and Qu [115] structure an interactive prototyping course for students, concerning aged users. The objective of the course is to help students, learn and practice interactive prototyping skills, by developing interactive and experiential prototypes. On experiment research, Rodriguez-Sanchez et al. [116] present a case study, where they combine project-based learning (PBL) and Collaborative Learning (CL) integrated with information communication technologies for a Master’s course in embedded systems. Open-source platform like Arduino^TM, as well as wireless communications, were also used for this course. According to the research results, this combination of pedagogical methods and technological tools, were proved to be beneficial for the students and the learning process itself. Velásquez-Montoya [111] on the other hand, describes a Human-Centered design course, which emphasize on the development of products with social impact, integrated with innovative and ubiquitous technologies i.e., IoT. In the context of the course, students were asked to design products or services that include technology components for user-product/service interaction.

Carulli and Bordegoni [117] present a problem-based multidisciplinary course, for designing and developing the prototypes of domestic products that allows tangible interaction with live-data streams. The innovation of the course lies on the instruction given to the students, not to use any kind of digital display to create their prototypes, but instead to use real effects, like moving some parts of the product or changing its shape or using lighting effects, sounds, and smells. Embedded systems, rapid prototyping and physical computing techniques and technologies were used in order to produce the final prototypes. Qu et al. [118] investigate the development of interaction design, considering the transmission of human emotions, through the human computer interaction process. The design of the interactive prototypes uses real material as the carrier, embedded in open-source hardware technology. The aim for the students is to learn designing products that interact with users through behavior and information exchange, resulting in a real 3D embodied interactive experience. Omar [119] presents a new approach in teaching automatic control by conducting Arduino^TM-based projects. More specifically, he has integrated Arduino^TM into carefully designed projects that supports all the course subjects that students need to learn. In that direction, Nam and Choh [120] experiment with the introduction of microcontroller interactive prototyping tools into design education. They developed a microcontroller board that allows quick prototyping of design ideas, without requiring any special coding training. The board can be easily used as a basic design prototype tool for industrial design students, with an aim to acquire relevant knowledge on design workshops.

Istanbullu and Taşçı [121] conducted a survey and evaluated the effect of using project-based learning (PBL) approach combined with open-source hardware, for a design course in engineering education. The course focused on the usefulness and ease of using Arduino^TM platform, in order to develop real-life projects for the learners. Kim [122] experiment with the implementation of technology in an interactive physical prototyping class. Students were provided with technical materials, such as sensors, actuators and display modules. This experience of matching a technology to an action helped students understand the relationship between electronic materials and actions. Allam and Alacame [123] use Arduino^TM as a physical computation environment for a digital fabrication course. They designed a series of project-based exercises, combined with theoretical lectures, with the aim to develop diverse products or applications in the context of dynamic designs. Each course has tailored these methods to address Rhino3D^TM, Grasshopper^TM and Arduino^TM in a parametric–algorithmic–kinetic application within computational design and digital fabrication courses. Sun et al. [124] research refers to the contribution of IoT technology in the creation of a distance teaching system of interior design course. The course is designed based on an education platform and IoT, which is used to set the communication architecture of the software part.

Figure 7 presents the different ways of using interactive embedded systems in design education. Compared to previous types of technology, embedded systems present fewer ways of integration into the educational process. As before, most studies focus on the utilization of technology as supporting tool during the design process. Another way involves the use of embedded systems as a new learning object for students with an aim to introduce them to new technological tools, equipment and electronic materials. Finally, embedded technologies, usually combined with other types of technology, can contribute to the creation of interactive teaching systems and platforms. In

Table 4. Studies related to the different types of interactive embedded systems used in educational environments.

Types of Integration of Technology Tools into the Learning Process		Explanation	Authors
Support technology during the design process (In studio-based education practice)	Ideation and inspiration tool	When various applications and devices enhanced with embedded interactive technology helps in the ideation phase of the design process.	Jansen and Colombo, 2023 [125]
	Prototyping tool	A tool that turns design solutions into product prototypes. It can be used as a way to create a low-cost physical version of real products and significantly reduce design development time.	Velásquez-Montoya, 2016 [111]; Alsos, 2015 [112]; Narahara, 2015 [113]; Conradie et al., 2016 [114]; Liu and Qu, 2015 [115]; Rodriguez-Sanchez et al., 2016 [116]; Carulli and Bordegoni, 2017 [117]; Qu et al., 2017 [118]; Omar, 2018 [119]; Nam and Choh, 2019 [120]; Istanbullu and Taşçı, 2019 [121]; Kim, 2020 [122]; Allam and Alacame, 2023 [123]; Probst and Ebner, 2018 [84]; Bedillion, et al., 2018 [105]; Castelli and Giberti, 2019 [106]; Benitez et al., 2020 [107]; Carrasco-Navarro et al., 2022 [108]
To teach students about this technology		When the purpose of an educational activity is more focused on learning a specific type of technology.	Velásquez-Montoya, 2016 [111]; Alsos, 2015 [112]; Narahara, 2015 [113]; Conradie et al., 2016 [114]; Carulli and Bordegoni, 2017 [117]; Nam and Choh, 2019 [120]; Allam and Alacame, 2023 [123]; Castelli and Giberti, 2019 [106];
As part of an interactive learning environment/platform		When technology is used as part of a teaching system that creates an environment in which students are able to interact with the learning subject, contributing to an interactive learning experience.	Sun et al., 2022 [124]; Benitez et al., 2020 [107];

, the reviewed studies are categorized based on the types of use identified earlier. With respect to the design process in the context of students’ training practice, almost all cases involve the utilization of embedded systems in the final stages of developing interactive and experiential prototypes. There was one case though, where embedded technology combined with other technological systems contributed to the creation of a device that helped in the ideation phase of a design process, generating new concepts for future products.

3.1.4. Other Types of Immersive Technologies

This category refers to the different types of immersive technologies that are more rarely found in the literature i.e., spatial augmented reality (SAR), mixed reality (MR), extended reality (XR) and holograms. These technologies are included on the spectrum between the real world and the complete virtual world. They introduce several ways of blending physical and digital information, allowing different degrees of sensing Reality-Virtuality, reshaping each time the way human-computer-environment interact [126]. In the field of design education, these technologies are integrated into the educational experience in various ways. As in the case of VR and AR, they are mostly found in the various stages of the design process in the context of design studios practice.

Tang et al. [127] developed an application based on mixed reality (MR) technologies, for teaching product design to university students. They used the application during design projects and tested its effectiveness in five main areas: (a) the ability of students to comprehend design, (b) understanding product functions, (c) visualizing 3D geometry, (d) understanding geometric relationship and (e) students’ creativity. Ranscombe et al. [128] implement a mixed-reality visualization system in a prototyping process in order to support practice-based studio design projects. In the context of an industrial design studio project, students were asked to design a product for making food or hot drinks. The MR prototype system was used to contextualize students’ preliminary concepts, as a basic test for product dimensions and proportions. Darwish et al. [126] test with the implementation of extended reality technology (XR) in the early design studio education and its impact on students’ general spatial skills. Specifically, they examined students’ cognitive levels, on their abilities to visualize and understand the relationships between objects. According to the results, XR technology significantly increased the scores of the students in the spatial ability test. Ricci et al. [129] on the other hand, use MR technologies within an industrial design program that develops novel interfaces for the Metaverse^TM. The research presents a multidisciplinary approach for a novel lab that aims to teach students, how to design innovative Graphical User Interfaces (GUIs) for home appliances, by exploiting MR technologies and promote a possible interaction in the Metaverse^TM. In addition, Mast et al. [130] present a workshop that concerned the design of an interactive system, beyond typical GUIs, based on spatial augmented reality (SAR). The prototyping methodology (Wizard of Oz) is a technique, for testing interface design ideas at an early stage in the design process. The interactive SAR technology was used to create the prototypes. Based on the results of the workshop, the students were very creative in the way, they chose to use SAR technology, such as choosing different sizes and different viewing angles and contexts for their interactions.

In the case of Park et al. [131] the use of spatial augmented reality (SAR) technology works as an evaluation tool for product appearance. The technique involves projecting a high-quality rendered image of the final product’s appearance, onto a mock-up of the product, including a camera calibration to compensate the color distortion. This method allows a more intuitive evaluation of the product characteristics that define its appearance. Quintero et al. [132] used interactive video-mapping technology for a design project in a combined classroom from Digital Art, Architecture and Industrial Design programs. The project concerned the development of an architectural model and the video-mapping technology contributed to a different interpretation of the model, by creating the impression of a moving surface.

Experimenting with different technologies for creating interactive learning environments, Bringardner and Jean-Pierre [133] describe a case study of a flipped classroom pedagogy that was applied for the creation of instructional videos, for an introduction lab course to Engineering and Design. The video resources provide students with uniformity and expert guidance, through a visual representation of the topics. Holograms were one of the technologies used to contribute to the creation of an interactive learning environment. Specifically, the video editor was able to generate 3D hologram representations of the design, in order to promote visualization of potential solution. Hologram technology is also described in the study of Ramirez-Lopez et al. [134] but in this case for a distance synchronistic educational experience. Their research presents an educational technology ecosystem supported by hologram effect combined with an active learning pedagogy.

A different aspect of using spatial augmented reality (SAR) technology concerns, its support in cooperative learning environments. Rajeb and Leclercq [135] examine applications of SAR in collaborative design training. Their research focuses on four SAR configurations: (a) remote sharing of graphic documents and annotations in real time, (b) remote expert consultation, (c) collaborative design, (d) project review and group evaluation. In a more recent work, Rajeb and Leclercq [136] present the implementation of SAR technology on a project-based group, training in design education, aiming to develop the students’ general and specific skills to devise complex projects in design. On another approach, Calixte and Leclercq [137] describe the implementation of an interactive projection mapping installation (referring to SAR), designed for a multidisciplinary collaboration in an architectural workshop. The created co-design environments were supported by the SAR technology during the design process. More specifically, all the required documents for the design work were projected on a surface for graphic work and were available for synchronous manipulation and annotation by all users. The technology also supported video-conference system and proved to be helpful tool for collective understanding of complex shapes.

Figure 8, presents and categorizes the most common uses of the above immersive types of technologies found in the reviewed studies. According to the literature, as proved in the cases of VR and AR, generally immersive technologies are mainly used as supporting tools for practice-based studio design projects. Other cases, involve the contribution of immersive technologies in developing interactive learning platforms or provide the equipment and conditions to create collaborative learning environments. Some case studies focus only on teaching of immersive technologies as a learning subject or use them as educational tools to improve students’ spatial abilities and perception.

Table 5. Studies related to the different types of other immersive technologies used in educational environments.

Types of Integration of Technology Tools into the Learning Process		Explanation	Authors
Support technology during the design process (In studio-based education practice)	Visualization tool/Modeling tool	To visualize and model different aspects, possible functions and aesthetics of a specific design solution.	Tang et al., 2018 [127]; Ricci et al., 2023 [129]; Camba et al., 2017 [83]
	Design comprehension tool	Helps students to better comprehend complex aspects of a design that would be difficult to understand in a conventional way. Improves students’ visual perception.	Darwish et al., 2023 [126]; Tang et al., 2018 [127]; Calixte and Leclercq, 2017 [137];
	Evaluation/Decision making tool	It evaluates a product’s performance and other important characteristics. Identifies possible defects, in order to decide the appropriate design direction.	Park et al., 2015 [131]
	Prototyping tool	A tool that turns design solutions into product prototypes. It can be used as a way to create a low-cost physical version of real products and significantly reduce design development time.	Ranscombe et al., 2023 [128]; Mast et al., 2023 [130];
	Presentation tool	As a tool to improve the presentation of projects, enriching the designs with more details and making them more informative, so that students can better communicate their design ideas to the audience.	Ricci et al., 2023 [129]; Quintero et al., 2019 [132]; Camba et al., 2017 [83]
As part of an interactive learning environment/platform		When technology is used as part of a teaching system that creates an environment in which students are able to interact with the learning subject, contributing to an interactive learning experience.	Bringardner and Jean-Pierre, 2017 [133]; Ramirez-Lopez et al., 2021 [134]; Orsolits et al., 2022 [110]
To develop spatial skills		A useful tool to improve students’ understanding of three-dimensional (3D) morphologies, enhancing their spatial perception and their ability to visualize and understand the relationships between objects.	Darwish et al., 2023 [126]
To teach students about this technology		When the purpose of an educational activity is more focused on learning a specific type of technology.	Ricci et al., 2023 [129]; Camba et al., 2017 [83]
Collaboration tool		When the technology tool is used to create a learning community for the purpose of working in a collaborative environment.	Rajeb and Leclercq, 2013 [135]; Rajeb and Leclercq, 2014 [136]; Calixte and Leclercq, 2017 [137]

, includes the categorization of the references found in each category. It shows from the further analysis of the studio-based design process, all the stages that other types of immersive technologies are used to facilitate the educational practice. Most cases use immersive types of technologies, in order to visualize and model the concept of a design project or use them as helpful tools for understanding complex aspects of design problems that would be difficult to understand in conventional ways. In addition, there are cases where immersive technologies are being used for evaluation of a products performance regarding various required specifications, or as prototyping tools to create low-cost prototypes or as tools to improve and enrich the designs in the final presentation stages. Generally, it could be concluded that immersive technologies of this category are found in all stages of the design process between visualizing the product to the final presentation style.

3.1.5. Computational Intelligence Systems

Computational intelligence systems refer to the type of computer technologies that have the ability to process vast amount of data in order to simulate the human intelligence and imitate the way that humans learn [138]. It refers to artificial intelligence and its several branches, combined with computer science (deep learning, machine learning, cloud computing, etc.) and focuses on the use of data and algorithms. These technologies work as recognition tools of several data patterns in order to generate ideas and prediction.

Technologies of computational intelligence systems in educational settings can mainly be found in different stages of the design projects. Chien and Yao [139] present a case study in product design education using artificial intelligence (AI) in the early stages of the design process. They propose an AI application that provides students with information regarding user behavior patterns and product preferences. Their AI userbot system constitutes an interaction platform with a dialog process mechanism that aims to be virtual representations of real product users, to help students carry out participatory design and develop their design skills. On another approach, Basarir [138] presents an experiment case study during the several design stages, by introducing AI tools and techniques to students of architecture. The research aimed at integrating AI in design workflow practice. AI tools and Machine Learning technology were used in the process of collecting data about user needs as well as analyzing various design parameters. More specifically, the course covered topics i.e., possible contributions of artificial intelligence implementations to problem-solving practices, training principles of artificial intelligence, role and significance of data towards solving design problems, collection of data on problems and their analysis using adequate techniques, evaluation of results by sensitivity analyses. Zhang et al. [140] developed a machine learning tool in product design education that uses an algorithm to analyze data from over 1000 concepts, thereby aiding the concept clustering process. The collection of data is based on natural language descriptions of concepts and the aim of the machine learning tool is to identify meaningful patterns in clustering, in order to enhance divergent concept generation processes. Tong et al. [141] explored the possibilities that AI technologies offer for design representation and visualization. Their case study investigates the integration of AI into first year design educational course. More specifically, they experiment with the combination of orthographic projections with AI-assisted generated images and evaluate the final outputs. According to the results, although there is an obvious need for careful implementation of AI tools in the design process, students benefit in expressing their ideas from AI tools during the development of their work. Wendrich [142] experimentally explored the integration of Creative AI (CAI) technology in conjunction with Hybrid Design Tools (HDTs), their environments (HDTEs), and cloud architecture. The aim is to develop a creative collaboration as the foundation for discovering new ideas in design engineering processes and education.

Exploring different aspects of AI technology, Meron and Tekmen Araci [143] investigated the potential of using an AI language model as a virtual colleague in the creation process of design-focused learning content. More specifically, they tested ChatGPT (Chat Generative Pretrained Transformer) during the collaboration with university educators in designing materials for higher education design students. The authors found that despite the weaknesses of this particular technology in creating content that was often generic, ChatGPT is proved to be a useful tool for brainstorming as well as structuring and editing language, which could significantly help save time from the process of designing masters-level course materials. Kuo and Xia [144] presented research on how AI-based technology can be used as a data processing and analysis tool with an aim to form the development of a more suitable design course. In their paper, design students were assigned to interact with smart home products with intelligent user interfaces, to evaluate their experience as users and submit a product experience report. ChatGPT was one of the different approaches that was used to collect and analyze the data from the course activity in order to provide feedback regarding evaluation aspects of smart home products from design students perspective.

Figure 9 summarizes the identified types of computational intelligence systems in design education. Computational intelligence systems are mainly used for the practical training of students and especially in the design phases, where research through data and parameter analysis is required. Other uses concern the teaching of this kind of technology as a new learning subject for students, who are not familiar with processing language before, or its contribution to the creation of teaching platforms as interactive learning systems. Finally, there are some cases that explore new aspects on the application of technology in design education as: (a) an auxiliary tool in developing content material for specific design courses, (b) a data processing and analysis tool for extracting valuable information for new products requirements that can be used for educational practice. In

Table 6. Studies related to the different types of computational intelligence systems used in educational environments.

Types of Integration of Technology Tools into the Learning Process		Explanation	Authors
Support technology during the design process (In studio-based education practice)	Identification of user needs	To identify the user needs of a product or service, in terms of the required specifications it must have to fulfill user expectations.	Basarir, 2022 [138]; Chien and Yao, 2020 [139]
	Design parameter analysis tool	Collect and analyze data on the parameters of specific design problems and compare multiple solutions in order to optimize the best design solution.	Basarir, 2022 [138]
	Ideation and inspiration tool	When algorithmic mechanisms through an information-processing system can act as a creative collaborator in the early design stages of discovering new ideas and supporting the creative process.	Wendrich, 2021 [142]; Jansen and Colombo, 2023 [125]
	Conceptual tool	When the machine learning capabilities of intelligence technology can be used in the design process of multiple concept generation.	Zhang et al., 2017 [140]; Wendrich, 2021 [142]
	Visualization tool	When AI can act as an assisted-image visualization tool that helps in the process of representing and expressing students’ ideas.	Tong et al., 2023 [141]
	Prototyping tool	When intelligent hardware combined with other technologies contributes in the creation of interactive prototypes.	Liu et al., 2021 [85]
As part of an interactive learning environment/platform		When technology is used as part of a teaching system that creates an environment in which students are able to interact with the learning subject, contributing to an interactive learning experience.	Dewi et al., 2018 [109]
To teach students about this technology		When the purpose of an educational activity is more focused on learning a specific type of technology.	Basarir, 2022 [138]; Jansen and Colombo, 2023 [125]; Dewi et al., 2018 [109]
As a helpful tool to create course materials		When technology is used in the process of creating and structuring content material for specific learning topics.	Meron and Tekmen Araci, 2023 [143]
As a data processing and analysis tool		When technology is used for collecting and analyzing data in order to extract valuable conclusions that can lead to defining specific requirements for the design of new products.	Kuo and Xia, 2023 [144]

, the reviewed studies are categorized according to the types of use described earlier. Unlike the other types of technology, computational intelligence systems are used mainly in the initial stages of the design process. It can be used as a tool for identifying user needs or as a tool for collecting and analyzing data from specific design criteria that will help in choosing better design solutions. In the stages of ideation and concept generation, every technology based on intelligent systems through algorithmic mechanism, can act as a creative collaborator that supports increased creativity. At the same time, it can be used as visualization tool for students’ ideas or can contribute with other technologies in developing product prototypes.

3.1.6. Combinations of Different Technologies

An interesting approach is the research of Camba et al. [83] where they use Emerging Visualization Technologies” (virtual, augmented and holographic visualizations) in order to investigate, how these various types of interactive technologies can enrich presentations and simulations in a project-based course for undergraduate students in multidisciplinary Design Education. On another approach, Probst and Ebner [84] introduce an IoT platform with focus on augmented reality that aims to teach complex engineering design to students. The IoT application platform is a mobile App ThingWorx^TM, which uses a special code called ThingMark^TM to connect the app with data of the IoT server. The data concern a number of several 3D models of technical drawings that through the platform are embedded in an AR experience. In this way, students can navigate to the immersive environment, which makes it much easier for them to comprehend the functionality and other aspects of the 3D models. Liu et al. [85] present a case study, where the VR, AR and computational intelligence systems are combined in a transdisciplinary course for experiential concepts in user experience design (UX). The teaching method is focused on project-based practice and aims to cultivate practical abilities in students. Their research project entitled ‘designing future life experience on smart home and wearables’ involves the development of an application and a product prototype on virtual reality (VR), augmented reality (AR) and intelligent hardware systems that demonstrate human-computer interaction (HCI) and user experience (UX) design directions.

Bedillion et al. [105] present an Arduino^TM-based platform, developed for a design project in a Mechanical Engineering Sophomore Design Course. The projects are introducing students to mechatronic systems by developing a product concept and building a physical prototype of a small, remote-controlled, ground robot for USAR (Urban Search And Rescue). The students were provided with several laboratory activities, in order to familiarize themselves with the hardware, while a user manual created, specifically for the assigned tasks, include instructions for coding, driving actuators and handling sensors. Castelli and Giberti [106] describe a robotic system design course, enhanced by additive manufacturing and rapid electronic prototyping (Arduino^TM). Students are introduced to all aspects of a robotic system, from mechanical design to the final prototyping. Benitez et al. [107] combine robotics with IoT technology, for online teaching of robotic courses. Their research describes the design and construction of a robotic system. It is an open-source robot arm, empowered by IoT technology. IoT technology is used to demonstrate important robotic topics, regarding handling the robotic system and is embedded in a smartphone interface, deployed using wireless communication. The courses are based on project-based learning strategy and aim for students to understand the robotics design process, from the theoretical aspects to the actual coding and construction of a prototype.

In addition to the above, Carrasco-Navarro et al. [108] present their work on the development of a smart educational kit that takes advantage of the IoT technology, and creates an interactive remote simulation of a physical laboratory. The platform includes programmable features that allow it to be manipulated by the students in real time through remotely controlling and monitoring a mobile robot that works as an interactive actuator. In this case, robots are used as devices that can be programmed and optimized to conduct diverse tasks and desired movements with high accuracy. Jansen and Colombo [125] present the design and test of a Machine Leering toolkit (Mix and Match) that supports designers during the ideation process by providing Machine Leering (ML) knowledge and by enabling open exploration through a tangible approach. The toolkit consists of three elements: a set of tangible tokens, a sensing board, and a web interface. The tokens are placed on the sensing board and display detailed information in the web interface about data types and ML capabilities. Mix and Match ML toolkit could help in the ideation phase and could function as a purely educational tool for students to learn ML basic concepts and how to apply them to generate novel ideas. Dewi et al. [109] present an interactive application of an open-source and low-cost software simulation, designed for the purpose of introducing students to robotics and artificial intelligence. The paper discusses a project-based learning approach about the design and application of fuzzy logic controller in a mobile firefighter robot. Orsolits et al. [110] combine immersive technologies like mixed reality with robotics education. This novel approach aims to contribute to the use of a mixed reality, based on a digital twin platform for introducing students into robotic courses. Through this combined system of desktop robotics, students have the chance to explore robot behavior in class and experiment with the capabilities of mixed reality in industrial engineering without the need to access industrial robot systems.

3.2. Learning Methods

Education 4.0 seeks to improve the learning experience through innovative pedagogies supported by emerging technologies [145]. Another important parameter under investigation in the literature review are the cases where technologies and pedagogical methodologies coexist as complementary and supporting each other tools in learning environments. Most cases of those already presented in Section 2 focused exclusively on the use of technological tools. A significant number, however, referred also to learning methodologies depending on the desired objective of each study. Figure 10 depicts that 34% of the examined references, present case studies, where technology and specific learning methods are integrated together in the educational process. At the same time, their classification is included and presents the learning methodologies identified in the case studies, together with the number of references found in each category. It is evident that project-based methodology is being applied more often in design learning environments than any other learning method. Other methods like problem-based learning, methodologies that use game strategies, constructivism and active learning follow but with fewer cases of application.

Figure 11 presents the categorization of the learning methods and the identified technological types, included in this review and shows the relations between those two pedagogical tools. Virtual and augmented reality appear in almost every category of the learning methods, while all the technology types are applied in a context of project-based learning approach. The following,

Table 7. Learning methods found during the literature survey.

Learning Method	Description	Authors
Project-based learning	In Project-based learning students are introduced into the learning process by participating in real –world meaningful projects. Students are being involved in constructing hands-on multiple solutions to difficult or ill-structured problems. It also provides students the opportunity to apply their prior knowledge on new challenges while at the same time developing critical thinking skills through teamwork.	Halabi et al., 2018 [41]; Halabi, 2020 [42]; López Chao et al., 2022 [51]; Fonseca et al., 2021 [77]; Tan et al., 2016 [88]; Kuppuswamy and Mhakure, 2020 [91]; Alsos, 2015 [112]; Narahara, 2015 [113]; Conradie et al., 2016 [114]; Rodriguez-Sanchez et al., 2016 [116]; Istanbullu and Taşçı, 2019 [121]; Allam and Alacame, 2023 [123]; Rajeb and Leclercq, 2014 [136]; Camba et al., 2017 [83]; Liu et al., 2021 [85]; Benitez et al., 2020 [107]; Dewi et al., 2018 [109];
Problem-based learning	Problem-based learning is a student-centered pedagogy in which real-world problems are used as a mean in the effort for the students to learn about various subjects. Students’ motivation to learn is indirectly enhanced by this need to solve the specific problem. It is based on the collaborative problem-solving process combined with individual initiative and creativity.	González-Almaguer et al., 2022 [58]; Telenko et al., 2016 [87]; Tan et al., 2016 [88]; Heyden et al., 2020 [90]; Phan and Ngo, 2020 [94]; Carulli and Bordegoni, 2017 [117]; Basarir, 2022 [138];
Gamification	Gamification is referring to the pedagogical strategy of turning the learning environment itself into a game by entering game mechanics and game design elements in the learning process. It is considered as a very effective tool for engaging and motivating students in the educational content. Gamification also enhances enthusiasm and curiosity and leads learners to be active and take responsibility upon their own learning.	González-Almaguer et al., 2021 [57]; González-Almaguer et al., 2022 [58]; Gill et al., 2022 [59]; (Gill et al., 2023 [60]; Almaguer et al., 2020 [89]
Game based learning	Game-based learning can take use of a game as part of the learning process. It is a method that is designed to combine theoretical content and learning through the use of digital or non-digital games. It creates a playful environment by designing learning activities and gaming concepts that allow students to engage with educational material.	Ayer et al., 2016 [29]; Chandramouli et al., 2018 [63]; Fonseca et al., 2021 [77]; Almaguer et al., 2020 [89];
Constructivism-based learning	In constructivism learners construct their knowledge rather than just passively take in information. While experiencing the world and reflecting upon those experiences, they build their own representations and incorporate new information into pre-existing knowledge.	Horvat et al., 2022 [37]; Gül et al., 2014 [79]; Karmokar and Rive, 2016 [80]
Active learning	Active learning is based on student participation, investigation, and autonomous learning. Through active learning, students carry out various contextual activities to build their knowledge. They engage in learning through activities and discussions in class instead of passively listening to an expert. Active learning emphasizes higher-order thinking for analysis, synthesis, and evaluation. It often involves group work.	Jimeno-Morenilla et al., 2016 [20]; Yu and Da Silva, 2021 [97]; Ramirez-Lopez et al., 2021 [134]
Experiential learning	In experiential learning, which has its roots in the “learning by doing”, the student plays an active role in the learning process. This learning model corresponds to a cyclical process of learning experiences, defined in four stages: (1) concrete experience; (2) abstract conceptualization; (3) reflective observation; and (4) active experimentation.	Cassola et al., 2022 [68]
Adaptive-based learning	Adaptive learning is a methodology for teaching and learning oriented to personalize lessons, readings, practice activities, and assessments for individual students based on their current skills progress, engagement and performance. It provides personalized learning experiences to all students regardless of individual differences and learning styles.	Abbas et al., 2023 [66]
Blended learning	Blended learning is the integration of traditional face-to-face learning experiences with online distance learning, combining the best elements of each educational model. It is a learning approach that offers the opportunity to all students to advance the learning material at their own pace.	Roberts et al., 2020 [32]
Flipped classroom	Flipped classroom is a type of blended learning using instructional strategy through short video lectures on focused topics. It includes for learners to watch course videos or listen to course material online at any time they needed instead of being in a traditional classroom. In that case the teacher has more time to interact in class more effectively with each student individual.	Bringardner and Jean-Pierre, 2017 [133]
Learning by doing	Learning by doing is an educational approach that motivates students to learning experience through actions that are close to their needs and interests. The methodology allows learners a more meaningful learning experience through engaging activities. The role of the teacher is to drive students to learn by stimulating their curiosity.	Salah et al., 2019 [30]
Challenge-based learning	Challenge-based learning methodology engages students in real-world problems that exist in their environments that need a solution. It involves the use of technology, teamwork and self-directed learning as students apply the knowledge they acquired during their professional training. In this methodology, the teacher role is to accompany and guide the student through this challenge.	Montés et al., 2022 [100]
Activity-based learning	Activity-based learning is a learning methodology used in training process and based on various activities. This style of learning encourages students to actively engage in their training subject through practical exercises. It can be considered as a combination of problem-based learning and problem-oriented learning through an effective student-teacher interaction.	Kleppe et al., 2022 [92]
Microlearning	Microlearning is a way of teaching and delivering content to learners through small bursts of training materials that learners can comprehend in a short time, according to their preferred schedule and location. The theory of microlearning focuses on a single learning outcome, is multimodal, is typically delivered in short bursts, and is highly interactive. The learner is in control of what and when they are learning, and can complete their training at a time and place that suits their busy schedule.	Gill et al., 2022 [59]
Collaborative learning	Collaborative learning is an educational approach to teaching and learning that involves groups of learners working together to understand an idea, complete a task, solve a problem or create a product. Is based on the idea that learning is a naturally social act in which participants talk among themselves. This learning style ensures learners remain engaged in content while thinking critically and sharing ideas with each other.	Rodriguez-Sanchez et al., 2016 [116]

, briefly describes the definitions of the methodologies and in which of the references they are used.

Summarizing about the above research results, it can be stressed that all the learning methods that have been identified promote a transition from the teacher-centered to the student-centered pedagogies and from passive to active learning. As opposed to traditional education and in accordance with Education 4.0 concept, the results indicate a tendency to centralize the student’s role in the educational process. Students become the protagonists of their teaching, trying to face challenges and look for solutions that allow the construction of different areas of knowledge through multidisciplinary projects. Silva et al. [146] define active methodologies (such as project-based learning, collaborative-based learning, problem-based learning, blended learning, flipped classroom, game-based learning) as educational practices that allow students to relate reflection, questioning and searching for knowledge, based on its application in authentic contexts. These methodologies allow the development of practical knowledge and critical thinking through formal analysis and creative thinking.

It is evident that project-based learning is the method that is most frequently applied in design educational settings. Design education refers to the teaching of theory and application of design concepts that are applied in the context of tasks and projects. It is oriented around project work, preparing students for design practice. As Frascara [9] mentioned, “Design education has always been organized as problem-based learning, embedded in projects”. This is another common point with Educational 4.0 philosophy, as it emphasizes on problem-solving training, where students are linked with real problems, by participating in real learning scenarios through projects and living laboratories [145,147] also points out that in design studios, which are consider the backbone for design education, students are mainly engaged in project-based learning.

The combination of technological tools with pedagogical methods is a field that is still under investigation. Most research usually focuses either on the use of technological tools or on specific learning methodologies. However, the way these two strategies can coexist and enhance each other in the educational process has not been sufficiently explored. The examined cases and the research results, whether they concern the development of educational applications or the creation of design courses, combine the technological tools with specific teaching-learning methods and thus increases significantly the added value offered.

4. Discussion

The present paper discusses innovative pedagogical procedures in learning environments of design education, based on the perspective of interactive technology tools. The main research questions concern the types of different technologies used today, the way these tools are incorporated into the educational process, the pedagogical learning methods used and how all these ultimately affect the learning outcome.

Answering the first research question [Q1] about the innovative and interactive technology tools that are being used in creative design education, it is evident that the research area of this review involved technologies that enable interactivity during the teaching and learning process. Interactivity was considered as part of the learning process, whether it was about its contribution to the creation of interactive products in educational environments or it was seen as a mean of interacting with other tools, in order to program them to perform specific tasks. Virtual and augmented reality, robotics, interactive embedded systems, other types of immersive technologies and computational intelligence systems are the technologies presented in this study. In summary, the identified types and their applications in design education show that virtual and augmented reality are most commonly used in learning environments. They present numerous ways of integrating into the learning process. Then there are the cases of robotics and interactive embedded technologies applications. Finally, more limited use in the cases examined concern the rarely types of immersive technologies and the computational intelligence systems as well, where they present the fewer references. In addition, it can be seen how significantly the number of reports regarding the use of technological tools in design educational environments, has increased in recent years. It is also evident that most types of technologies present cases of application in almost every year of the period under study and the papers referring to embedded technologies and computational intelligence systems mainly concern the latest period.

Regarding the second research question [Q2], about the way technology tools are used in design educational environments, there are essentially two main categories:

• When technology is used in different stages of the design process, during studio-based practice;
• When technology supports different aspects of the educational process and the learning material without necessarily being applied in specific projects.

According to the literature review, most of the learning environments that referring in the examined case studies concern the context of design studio courses, where technologies are used as supporting tools at various stages of the design process. Design studio courses are considered central pedagogical cells of design education and work as a simulation of the professional practice [148]. An interesting finding that emerged from the review, concerns this first category of application, where technology tools integrate into the design process. Figure 12, includes all case studies found to be applied in contexts of studio-based practice in relation with the design process. The studies are distributed based on their technology type, at all stages, from the identification of user needs to the final presentation. Based on this summary, there are some technologies that are used almost exclusively in specific stages and others that can be found in more than one stages even with different frequency. For example, robotics and interactive embedded technologies can be mainly involved with the creation of prototypes for products, as opposed to VR and AR technologies that are found in almost every stage of the design process, and other types of immersive technologies that are used from the middle of the design process to the end. On the other hand, computational intelligence systems proved more useful in the early design stages, as tools for identifying user needs and analyzing data from specific design parameters. Also observing the number of cases identified in each category and the upward trend of the diagram, it appears that in general the majority of technological applications in the case studies are incorporated in the final stages of the design process (towards project completion). There are significantly limited cases of technology application concerning the early stages of the design process. The lack of research topics around the use of interactive technologies in this area, can be seen as a research gap that creates many potentials for future investigation.

For the third research question [Q3], the term connection is used in order to examine three topics. First, as the study is focused in research of interactive technologies in design education, it is additionally examined if and in how many cases the adoption of technology tools is being implemented in a more delimited educational framework that is being strengthened from specific learning methods. Following, these methods were identified along with their appearance in research. Last, it was a matter of research to determine which of the learning methods are more often combined with specific technology tools.

As is mentioned in the results, approximately 34% of the analyzed studies refer to specific learning methods that are analytically presented in Figure 10 and Table 6. According to the findings, active methodologies (such as project-based learning, collaborative-based learning, problem-based learning, blended learning, flipped classroom, game-based learning) appear more frequently in the examined case studies. Generally, all the learning methods that were identified recognize the important role of the student in the educational process. Most of the methodologies encourage the student in taking initiatives and having the control of his own education. This can be achieved in many ways, for example by decisions needing to be taken for solving possible problems, or by combining new information with previous gained knowledge or by creating teams in order to solve issues that arise in a collaborative way. All these features are consistent with the design education philosophy of creating active and interactive learning environments through which students as protagonists can cultivate a variety of thinking skills. This study finds that there are connections of technologies and learning methodologies in design educational environments that are related to the implementation of interactive technologies. This is obviously considered relevant to the need of providing a more energetic educational setting where participants are invited to interact not only with technology tools but also with the general educational content.

Moreover, according to the results, project-based learning represents by far the most common learning methodology used in education regarding design and is combined with all the identified technology types in this research. This is expected due to the nature of the specific learning subject, as design is mainly oriented around project work, taught in design studios, where students engage in project-based scenarios.

The final research question [Q4], is about the learning performance and whether technology tools and educational methods can ultimately be considered effective as innovative learning approaches. The technology tools identified in this review, have various uses in educational environments and affect students’ academic performance in different ways. Using immersive environments for learning, improve students design skills in many areas i.e., in the process of generating, envisioning, testing, communicating ideas. Virtual and augmented reality technologies improve students’ spatial abilities, imagination and creativity. Allow observation of design from multiple perspectives, which encourages diverse ways of thinking, affecting positively the creative process. All these results are contributing towards a very significant improvement of students’ work. In their ability to perceive the qualitative characteristics in their original design and make design decisions in the revised design work. Other immersive technologies, such as spatial augmented reality, positively affects students’ ability in comprehending design and geometric relationships, understanding product functions, or visualizing 3D geometry. Students also proved to be very creative in the way they chose to use SAR technology, enhancing the self-learning process, contributing to a more intuitive learning experience. Holograms, aim at increasing the creativity in student design solutions, resulting in positive learning outcomes. On the other hand, technology around robotics, act as motivator for transferring valuable knowledge from many disciplines and improve students learning on topics i.e., geometry, programming, kinematics, and mechanisms. They support the design process, mainly through gamified challenges, projects and problem-based learning activities that combine problem clarification, concept generation and interactive prototyping skills. Interactive embedded systems introduce students to new technical materials and equipment, like sensors, actuators, microcontrollers and display modules, in order to help them learn and practice interactive prototyping skills by creating experiential prototypes. Students have the opportunity to explore important aspects of interaction design by assessing parameters such as human behavior and emotions and how these are affected, when information is exchanged. Computational intelligence systems enhance the design process by providing students important information regarding user behavior patterns and product preferences, creating this way a valuable collaborator in discovering new ideas, helping students make design decisions and improving their design skills.

This study also showed that a significant percentage of 34%, which corresponds to 42 case studies of the examined papers refers to the involvement of specific pedagogical approaches in their proposed projects, along with the utilization of technological tools. Learning methodologies are applied as tools that facilitate the learning process at multiple levels. They can be used as a mean of creating an accessible and attractive learning environment that allows the development of critical thinking skills, encourages teamwork and self-directed learning. In some examples the use of VR in conjunction with project-based-learning method facilitated the attainment of desirable goals in engineering design projects, improved achievement of course learning outcomes and promoted effective communication. In many of the cases that involved the use of robotics technology, project-based-learning was used as an effective pedagogy that could offer students the opportunities to experience design the way it is practiced in real world-projects. There were cases that indicate that project-based learning has positive impact in students’ performance regarding knowledge gained and skills. Other methodologies like problem-based learning from a perspective that reflects collaboration can help students be open to experimenting with innovative technologies. By collaborating with their peers in problem-based context, students become better equipped with specialized knowledge that helps them overcome their insecurities and increase their ability to solve multidisciplinary problems. Also, in collaborative environments, especially between nonheterogeneous teams, many case studies indicate positive results in learning performance. It is, for example, the benefit that students gain from exposure to a diversity of design backgrounds, coming from their colleagues, along with opportunities to share their areas of expertise within their groups. In studies concerning challenge-based learning approaches, results indicate that learning through knowledge discovery, when robotic technologies are involved, significantly improves students’ understanding of basic concepts. Constructivism-based learning in relation to immersive technologies is providing opportunities for students to actively build skills and knowledge in relation to their interest. In addition, all the identified technologies that are found to be applied along with game-based learning methodologies, constitute examples of innovative pedagogies and emerging technologies working in harmony to positively influence motivation and learning performance. Pedagogies that use game strategies, can reduce the cognitive load, improve learning, develop students’ competencies, and increase their motivation in material content.

Summarizing, from the above 42 case studies, which refer to the involvement of specific pedagogical methods, 93% refer exclusively to positive effects on the educational process and the impact they have on learning performance. The other percentage of 7%, along with the positive effects also mentioned some barriers that may arise during their implementation. These barriers, however, do not concern the combination of technological tools with educational methods but rather the supportive context around their implementation. For example, the proper training of teaching staff is considered a crucial factor for the successful development of a program that includes new technologies. Also, in cases where pedagogical methods include collaborative projects, although the majority of them showed positive results, generally, collaboration itself entails complications. Such as in cases where not all students start from the same cognitive level or they don’t have the same attitude towards the projects, especially when one or more of them are not fully engaged in the project.

Concluding, the cases, where technologies and pedagogical methods coexist in learning design environments as complementary and mutually supporting tools, present very effective and encouraging educational results. Incorporating technology tools in the educational process, could attract students’ interest, but when it is combined with specific pedagogical methodologies, it could engage them even more, leading to a very positive learning performance.

Another important issue regarding the implementation of new technologies in education concerns the social and psychological aspects that these innovations may have on students. Introducing new technologies to students especially for the first time, while it can create an interest and excitement in students, on the other hand, it can cause enough anxiety to undermine educational goals. In these cases, a more oriented educational context and a pedagogical method that can create a more friendly environment, can be very beneficial not only for the learning process and performance but also for these parameters. According to the above observations concerning some conclusions from the application of educational methods along with technology tools, some of the presented learning methods are directly linked with the social behavior of students and include educational aspects that are critical for the social status of students, and could indirectly affect their psychology.

5. Limitations

It is noted that this study follows the PRISMA 2020 statement guidelines for systematic reviews, and employs best practices in bibliometric analysis. Despite the measures taken to reduce bias in all of the critical steps of the review, this study still presents some limitations that must be acknowledged. Firstly, as already mentioned, the search strategy and data collection were restricted to two databases, Scopus and Google Scholar, based on the University of Western Macedonia quality system procedures. Although these databases cover a substantial proportion of the scientific literature, there might be relevant studies published in other databases that were not captured in this review. Future research could expand the search to additional databases and sources, to minimize the risk of missing relevant publications. Secondly, the study only focused on articles published in English, thus potentially missing relevant research published in other languages that could contribute to the research findings. Furthermore, the search strategy for data collection was based on the author’s intention to initially create the broader research context regarding the utilization of interactive technologies in educational environments related to product design. However, due to the correlation of product design with design in general, there are potentially cases of technology applications that could not be identified. Future work could consider employing complementary inclusion criteria, to enhance the findings.

Moreover, the scope of this review focuses only on specific aspects of using technologies in educational environments, regarding mainly the identification of the different technology types, the ways these technologies are integrated into the educational process and how technologies can be applied in more structured educational contexts involving specific pedagogical methods. The practical implementation of technologies in education includes also aspects concerning several implications and effects like ethical considerations, or social and psychological aspects that need a more in-depth examination. This study indicates the importance of the contribution of specific pedagogical methods in introducing new technologies into learning environments. It is a wide area of research that could be explored further in the future, as is important to examine how such pedagogical tools can be effectively used to successfully support the educational process.

6. Conclusions

The Education 4.0 concept has started to reform the current pedagogical approaches in HEIs. Traditional learning methods are being upgraded including technologies, strategies and activities that place student at the center of the learning process. The literature discussed in this review attempts to clarify some aspects of this reformation in the field of design education. Focusing on the technological components that have emerged in recent years in the landscape of design education, 125 case studies have been examined based on the interactive technology tools that they use in their learning environments and the way these tools are integrate in the learning process. Subsequently, the case studies are analyzed from a pedagogical perspective, identifying the learning methodologies followed in each case.

According to the results, some research gaps are identified, which could be further investigated:

• Immersive technologies and robotics are presented in most of the examined papers. Significantly fewer studies focus on the use of more rare types of immersive technologies, interactive embedded systems or technologies based on computational intelligence systems. In addition, papers referring to embedded technologies and computational intelligence systems mainly have begun to appear in the recent years. So, there is a need to further investigate the application of these technologies in design education.
• Concerning the integration of technologies as supporting tools in the design process during studio-based practice, there are specific types of technologies like robotics and interactive embedded systems that are used exclusively on the prototyping stage. There are no cases studies, which to explore how these technologies could integrate to other design stages as well.
• Furthermore, the majority of technological applications in the case studies are incorporated in the final stages of the design process towards project completion. There are significantly limited cases of technology application concerning the early stages of the design process. There is a lack of research topics around the use of interactive technologies in this area, and that creates many potentials for future investigation.
• Regarding the learning methodologies, the results indicate that project-based learning present, by far, the most widely applied methodology in design educational settings. Other methodologies follow but with significantly fewer cases. So, it could be extremely useful to further investigate how other pedagogical approaches can be integrated into design education.
• There are few studies investigating different types of technologies combined with different learning methodologies. Only virtual and augmented reality appear in almost every category of the identified learning methods of this review. Generally, the cases where technologies and pedagogical methods coexistence in learning design environments is a field that is still under investigation and present many aspects that need to be explored in greater depth.

Finally, this review is expected to contribute towards the ongoing research in the field of technological advancements and applications in design education according to the Education 4.0 concept. Based on the research gap that have been discussed through the literature survey, more investigation is needed on further exploring the educational issues surrounding the utilization of interactive technological tools and learning methodologies. The coexistence and collaboration of these two educational tools could lead research work towards new directions. Future work will focus on developing methodological frameworks that will optimally combine adequate appropriate technology tools and learning methodologies in order to address innovative pedagogical strategies in design education. In relation to the gaps identified in this work, the areas to be investigated in the future concern the application of interactive technologies in the context of studio-based practice, focusing on the stages of the design process that present few research works. In addition, the contribution and integration of learning methodologies other than project-based learning could be further explored.