Del rigor a la retórica emocional. Comunicación y discurso educativo TEDTalk para el aula

Francisco López-Cantos


En el presente trabajo se analizan las estrategias discursivas que se utilizan en las TEDTalks utilizando el análisis de contenido como metodología de investigación. Nuestro análisis concluye que los contenidos de las TEDTalks educativas tienen escasa utilidad real para su aplicación en las aulas más allá de aportar algunas anotaciones, por otro lado ya conocidas por los docentes y presentes entre las propuestas de enseñanza-aprendizaje contemporáneas, y mejor evitar la panacea del solucionismo simple a cuestiones educativas complejas y la particular ideología MIT que se promueve en este tipo de discursos.

Palabras clave

TED; estrategias de enseñanza; análisis del discurso; innovación educativa, competencias comunicativas, empoderamiento; plataforma digital; cultura digital

Texto completo:



ABEYSEKERA, Lakmal y DAWSON, Phillip (2015). Motivation and cognitive load in the flipped classroom: definition, rationale and a call for research. Higher Education Research y Development, 34(1), 1-14. DOI: 10.1080/07294360.2014.934336

ALBRETCH, Sophie Charlotte (2012). The game of happiness. Gamification of positive activity interventions. Maastricht: Maastricht University.

ALLGAIER, Joachim (2013). On the shoulders of YouTube. Science Communication, 35(2), 266–75. DOI: 10.1177/1075547012454949

BAKER, J. Wesley (2000). The “Classroom Flip”: Using web course management tools to become the guide by the side. Proceedings of 11th International conference on college teaching and learning, 9-17. Recuperado de:

BANDURA, Albert (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: W.H. Freeman.

BARTOLOMÉ, Antonio (2003). Vídeo digital. Comunicar, XI(21), 39-47. Recuperado de:

BARTOLOMÉ, Antonio y STEFFENS, Köln (2015). ¿Son los MOOC una alternativa al aprendizaje. Comunicar, XXII(44), 91-99. DOI: 10.3916/C44-2015-10

BENNET, David y JENNINGS, Richard (Eds.) (2011). Succesful science communication. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

BERGMANN, Jonathan y SAMS, Aaron (2012). Flip your classroom: Reach every student in every class every day. Washington: ISTE.

BOEVÉ, Anja, MEIJER, Rob, BOSKER, Roel, VUGTEVEEN, Jorien, HOEKSTRA, Rind y ALBERS, Casper J. (2017). Implementing the flipped classroom: and exploration of study behaviour and student performance. Higher Education, 74 (6), 1015-1032. DOI: 10.1007/s10734-016-0104-y

BRATTON, Benjamin (2013). We need to talk about TED. The Guardian. Recuperado de:

BRAVO RAMOS, Luis (1996). ¿Qué es el vídeo educativo?. Comunicar, IV(6), 100-106. Recuperado de:

BUCCHI, Massimiano (2017). Credibility, expertise and the challenges of Science Communication 2.0. Public Understanding of Science, 26(8), 890–93. DOI: 10.1177/0963662517733368

DAVIA RUBENSTEIN, Lisa (2012). Using TED Talks to Inspire Thoughtful Practice. Teacher Educator, 47(4), 261–67. DOI: 10.1080/08878730.2012.713303

DENSKUS, Tobias y ESSER, Daniel (2015). TED Talks on international development: Trans-Hegemonic promise and ritualistic constraints. Communication Theory, 25(2), 166–87. DOI: 10.1111/comt.12066

DESMET, Christy (2009). Teaching Shakespeare with YouTube. English Journal, 99(1), 65-70.Recuperado de:

DONOVAN, Jeremey (2014). How to deliver a TED talk: Secrets of the world’s most inspiring presentations. New York: McGraw Hill Education.

FERRES, Joan y MASANET, María-José (2017). La eficacia comunicativa en la educación: potenciando las emociones y el relato. Comunicar, XXV(52), 51-60. DOI: 10.3916/C52-2017-05

FEIRSTEIN, Bruce (2013). The Ted-O-Matic! How to generate your own, faux-profound TED Talk. Vanity Fair. Recuperado de:

FOUCAULT, Michel (1966). Les mots et les choses. Paris: Ed. Gallimard.

GOFFMAN, Erving (1974). Frame analysis: An essay on the organization of experience. New York: Harper y Row.

GIBBONS, Michael, LIMOGES, Camille, NOWOTNY, Helga, SCOT, Peter y TROW, Martin (1994). The new production of knowledge: The dynamics of science and research in contemporary societies. London: SAGE.

GIRALDEZ HAYES, Andrea y VAN NIEUWERBURGH, Christian (2016). Coaching educativo. Madrid: Paraninfo.

GLASSER, Barney y STRAUSS, Anselm (1967). The discovery of grounded theory strategies for qualitative research. Chicago: Edit. Aldine Pub.

GORE, Al (2006). Averting the climate crisis. TED Ideas Worth Spreading. Recuperado de:

Harvard Business Essentials (2005). Coaching y mentoring: cómo desarrollar el talento de alto nivel y conseguir mejores resultados. Barcelona: Ediciones Deusto.

IBARRA UNZUETA, Andoni (2012). Epistemic networks. New Subjects for new forms of (scientific) knowledge production. Science, Technology and Innovation Studies, 8(1), 61-74.

JAFFAR, Akram Abood (2012). YouTube: An emerging tool in anatomy education. Anatomical Sciences. Education, 5(3), 158-164. DOI: 10.1002/ase.1268

JONES, Troy y CUTHRELL, Kristen (2011). YouTube: Educational potentials and pitfalls. Computers in the schools, 28(1), 75-85. DOI: 10.1080/07380569.2011.553149

KAESER, Eduard (2013). Science kitsch and pop science: A reconnaissance. Public Understanding of Science, 22(5), 559–569. DOI: 10.1177/0963662513489390

KEDROWICZ, April y TAYLOR, Julie (2016). Shifting rhetorical norms and electronic eloquence: TED talks as formal presentations. Journal of Business and Technical Communicationm, 30(3), 352-377. DOI:10.1177/1050651916636373

KNORR-CETINA, Karin (1981). The manufacture of knowledge. An essay on the constructivist and contextual nature of science. Oxford: Pergamon Press.

KULGEMEYER, Christoph y PETERS, Cord (2016). Exploring the explaining quality of physics online explanatory videos. European Journal of Physics, 37(6), 1-14. DOI: 10.1088/0143-0807/37/6/065705

LATOUR, Bruno (2009). “Tarde’s idea of quantification”. In M. Candea (Ed.). The social after Gabriel Tarde: Debates and assessments. London: Routledge, pp. 145–162.

LÓPEZ-CANTOS, Francisco (2017). Cultura visual y conocimiento científico. Comunicación transmedia ze la ciencia en la era BigData. Barcelona: UOC.

LOPEZ-PEREZ, Lourdes y OLVERA-LOBO, María-Dolores (2016). Comunicación pública de la ciencia a través de la Web 2.0. El caso de los centros de investigación y universidades públicas de España. El Profesional de la Información, 25(3), 441–448. DOI: 10.3145/epi.2016.may.14

LUDEWIG, Julia (2017). TED Talks as an emergent genre. CLCWeb: Comparative Literature and Culture, 19(1), 1-9. DOI: 10.7771/1481-4374.2946

LYOTARD, Jean-François (1979). La condition postmoderne. Raport sur le savoir. Paris: Editions du Minuit.

MATTELART, Armand (1996). La mondialisation de la communication. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.

McCLEAN, Stephen, McCARTAN, Kenneth, MESKIN, Sheryl, GEORGES, Beronia y HAGAN, Paul (2016). Reflections on ‘’: An online video-sharing platform to engage students with chemistry laboratory classes. Journal of Chemical Education, 93(11), 1863-1870. DOI:10.1021/acs.jchemed.6b00045

MESEGUER-MARTÍNEZ, Ángel, ROS-GÁLVEZ, Alejandro y ROSA-GARCÍA, Alfonso (2017). Satisfation with online teaching videos: A quantitative approach. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 54(1), 62-67. DOI: 10.1080/14703297.2016.1143859

MIJIN, Lee (2014). Metaphor Use in TED Talks: Implications for EFL. The Sociolingüistic Journal of Korea, 22(2), 65–90. DOI: 10.14353/sjk.2014.22.2.65

MORENO-CASTRO, Carolina (2011). Periodismo y divulgación científica. Tendencias en el ámbito iberoamericano. Biblioteca Nueva / OEI-Organización de Estados Iberoamericanos.

MOROZOV, Evgeny (2013). To save everything, click here: The folly of technological solutionism. New York: Public Affairs.

NEGROPONTE, Nicholas (1984). Five Predictions. TED Ideas Worth Spreading. Recuperado de:

PFOTENHAUER, Sebastian; JASANOFF, Sheila (2017). Panacea or Diagnosis? Imaginaries of Innovation and the “MIT Model” in Three Political Cultures. Social Studies of Science, 47(6), 783–810. DOI:10.1177/0306312717706110

ROBINSON, Ken (2006). Do Schools Kill Creativity?. TED Ideas Worth Spreading. Recuperado de:

SCHÄFER, Mike (2009). From public understanding to public engagement: An empirical assessment of changes in science coverage”. Science Communication, 30(4), 475–505. DOI:10.1177/1075547008326943

SCHARRER, Lisa, RUPIEPER, Yvonne, STADTLER, Marc y BROMME, Rainer (2016). When science becomes too easy: Science popularization inclines laypeople to underrate their dependence on Experts. Public Understanding of Science, 26 (8), 1003-1018. DOI: 10.1177/0963662516680311

ZORN, Theodore, ROPER, Juliet, WEAVER, Kay y RIGBY, Colleen (2012). Influence in science dialogue: Individual attitude changes as a result of dialogue between laypersons and scientists. Public Understanding of Science, 21(7), 848–64. DOI: 10.1177/0963662510386292

Enlaces refback

  • No hay ningún enlace refback.

Pie del portal UFV