适应性学习技术与学生学习成果的关系

Garry L. White
{"title":"适应性学习技术与学生学习成果的关系","authors":"Garry L. White","doi":"10.28945/4526","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Aim/Purpose: The purpose of this study is to determine the effectiveness of an Adaptive Learning Technology (ALT), as compared to traditional teaching methods, in an undergraduate management information course. The effectiveness is based on Bloom’s Taxonomy of Learning Competencies\n\nBackground: Previous studies have investigated factors involved with ALT. From one study, students enjoyed how to use new technology and believed it improves learning. However, the literature lacks studies showing gains in understanding and remembering as defined by Bloom’s Taxonomy of Learning Competencies.\n\nMethodology: Correlations between ALT usage and test/course grades were performed. McGraw-Hill’s Connect LearnSmart® was used as the ALT. The ALT was optional for extra credit in the class. Correlations were performed between LearnSmart® scores and tests. Then, since usage was bimodal (students who took the initiative to fully complete LearnSmart® and those who did not do LearnSmart®), an independent-samples t-test was performed between these two distinct groups. \nSampling was from an Information Technology course at a major university. The data collection methods composed of recording LearnSmart® scores and test scores. \n\nContribution: This study aims to provide empirical evidence of ALT outcomes in learning, to show if ALT enhance learning over traditional teaching methods. If not, the value of using ALT is provided.\n\nFindings: Results showed no relationships between ALT usage and test/course grades. No differences between the two groups (those who completed ALT and those that did not do the ALT) were found with each of the four tests and final course grades. Since the ALT group did the LearnSmart® as an option, the tool appears to be a preference for learning style and provides user satisfaction. This is consistent with prior studies.\n\nRecommendations for Practitioners: Practitioners should use ALT for convenience, preferences, and students’ satisfaction. The use of both traditional teaching methods and newer technology teaching methods might be most effective because they provide flexibility for the best method that satisfies the student. Editors and developers of publishers need to consider student preferences in learning. \n\nRecommendation for Researchers: Opinions and perceptions by subjects may be misleading. In future research, empirical evidence needs to be provided to validate opinions and perceptions. Research needs to focus more on students’ characteristics such as learning style, learning preferences, and initiative.\n\nImpact on Society: This research suggests that an ALT is efficient for the learning process rather than effective for outcomes and enhanced learning. Students can learn just as well without an ALT. Decisions to use an ALT should be based on convenience and student preferences.\n\nFuture Research: In this study, students had the option to do an ALT. They showed initiative. For future research, initiative needs to be removed. Random assignments to do an ALT or not need to be studied to further confirm the findings of this study. Also, a future study needs to use the same subject’s outcomes for both an ALT and traditional teaching methods. \n\n","PeriodicalId":220667,"journal":{"name":"J. Inf. Technol. Educ. Res.","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-03-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Adaptive Learning Technology Relationship with Student Learning Outcomes\",\"authors\":\"Garry L. White\",\"doi\":\"10.28945/4526\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Aim/Purpose: The purpose of this study is to determine the effectiveness of an Adaptive Learning Technology (ALT), as compared to traditional teaching methods, in an undergraduate management information course. The effectiveness is based on Bloom’s Taxonomy of Learning Competencies\\n\\nBackground: Previous studies have investigated factors involved with ALT. From one study, students enjoyed how to use new technology and believed it improves learning. However, the literature lacks studies showing gains in understanding and remembering as defined by Bloom’s Taxonomy of Learning Competencies.\\n\\nMethodology: Correlations between ALT usage and test/course grades were performed. McGraw-Hill’s Connect LearnSmart® was used as the ALT. The ALT was optional for extra credit in the class. Correlations were performed between LearnSmart® scores and tests. Then, since usage was bimodal (students who took the initiative to fully complete LearnSmart® and those who did not do LearnSmart®), an independent-samples t-test was performed between these two distinct groups. \\nSampling was from an Information Technology course at a major university. The data collection methods composed of recording LearnSmart® scores and test scores. \\n\\nContribution: This study aims to provide empirical evidence of ALT outcomes in learning, to show if ALT enhance learning over traditional teaching methods. If not, the value of using ALT is provided.\\n\\nFindings: Results showed no relationships between ALT usage and test/course grades. No differences between the two groups (those who completed ALT and those that did not do the ALT) were found with each of the four tests and final course grades. Since the ALT group did the LearnSmart® as an option, the tool appears to be a preference for learning style and provides user satisfaction. This is consistent with prior studies.\\n\\nRecommendations for Practitioners: Practitioners should use ALT for convenience, preferences, and students’ satisfaction. The use of both traditional teaching methods and newer technology teaching methods might be most effective because they provide flexibility for the best method that satisfies the student. Editors and developers of publishers need to consider student preferences in learning. \\n\\nRecommendation for Researchers: Opinions and perceptions by subjects may be misleading. In future research, empirical evidence needs to be provided to validate opinions and perceptions. Research needs to focus more on students’ characteristics such as learning style, learning preferences, and initiative.\\n\\nImpact on Society: This research suggests that an ALT is efficient for the learning process rather than effective for outcomes and enhanced learning. Students can learn just as well without an ALT. Decisions to use an ALT should be based on convenience and student preferences.\\n\\nFuture Research: In this study, students had the option to do an ALT. They showed initiative. For future research, initiative needs to be removed. Random assignments to do an ALT or not need to be studied to further confirm the findings of this study. Also, a future study needs to use the same subject’s outcomes for both an ALT and traditional teaching methods. \\n\\n\",\"PeriodicalId\":220667,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"J. Inf. Technol. Educ. Res.\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-03-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"4\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"J. Inf. Technol. Educ. Res.\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.28945/4526\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"J. Inf. Technol. Educ. Res.","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.28945/4526","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

摘要

目的/目的:本研究的目的是确定与传统教学方法相比,适应性学习技术(ALT)在本科管理信息课程中的有效性。背景:以前的研究已经调查了ALT的相关因素。从一项研究中,学生喜欢如何使用新技术,并相信它可以提高学习。然而,文献缺乏布鲁姆学习能力分类法所定义的理解和记忆方面的研究。方法:ALT使用与考试/课程成绩之间的相关性。McGraw-Hill的Connect LearnSmart®被用作ALT。ALT是可选的,可以在课堂上获得额外的学分。在LearnSmart®分数和测试之间进行相关性分析。然后,由于使用是双峰的(主动完全完成LearnSmart®的学生和没有完成LearnSmart®的学生),因此在这两个不同的组之间进行独立样本t检验。样本来自一所重点大学的信息技术课程。数据收集方法包括记录LearnSmart®成绩和考试成绩。贡献:本研究旨在提供ALT对学习效果的实证证据,以表明ALT是否比传统教学方法更能促进学习。如果没有,则提供使用ALT的值。结果显示ALT的使用与考试/课程成绩之间没有关系。两组(完成ALT和未完成ALT的组)在四项测试和最终课程成绩上都没有发现差异。由于ALT组将LearnSmart®作为一种选择,该工具似乎是学习风格的首选,并提供用户满意度。这与之前的研究结果一致。对从业者的建议:从业者应使用ALT方便,偏好和学生的满意度。使用传统的教学方法和较新的技术教学方法可能是最有效的,因为它们为满足学生的最佳方法提供了灵活性。编辑和出版商的开发者需要考虑学生的学习偏好。给研究人员的建议:研究对象的意见和看法可能具有误导性。在未来的研究中,需要提供经验证据来验证观点和看法。研究需要更多地关注学生的特征,如学习风格、学习偏好和主动性。对社会的影响:本研究表明ALT对学习过程是有效的,而对结果和强化学习是无效的。没有ALT,学生也能学得很好。使用ALT的决定应该基于方便和学生的喜好。未来研究:在这项研究中,学生可以选择做ALT。他们表现出主动性。对于未来的研究,主动性需要被移除。随机分配做或不做ALT需要进一步研究,以进一步证实本研究的发现。此外,未来的研究需要在ALT和传统教学方法中使用同一受试者的结果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Adaptive Learning Technology Relationship with Student Learning Outcomes
Aim/Purpose: The purpose of this study is to determine the effectiveness of an Adaptive Learning Technology (ALT), as compared to traditional teaching methods, in an undergraduate management information course. The effectiveness is based on Bloom’s Taxonomy of Learning Competencies Background: Previous studies have investigated factors involved with ALT. From one study, students enjoyed how to use new technology and believed it improves learning. However, the literature lacks studies showing gains in understanding and remembering as defined by Bloom’s Taxonomy of Learning Competencies. Methodology: Correlations between ALT usage and test/course grades were performed. McGraw-Hill’s Connect LearnSmart® was used as the ALT. The ALT was optional for extra credit in the class. Correlations were performed between LearnSmart® scores and tests. Then, since usage was bimodal (students who took the initiative to fully complete LearnSmart® and those who did not do LearnSmart®), an independent-samples t-test was performed between these two distinct groups. Sampling was from an Information Technology course at a major university. The data collection methods composed of recording LearnSmart® scores and test scores. Contribution: This study aims to provide empirical evidence of ALT outcomes in learning, to show if ALT enhance learning over traditional teaching methods. If not, the value of using ALT is provided. Findings: Results showed no relationships between ALT usage and test/course grades. No differences between the two groups (those who completed ALT and those that did not do the ALT) were found with each of the four tests and final course grades. Since the ALT group did the LearnSmart® as an option, the tool appears to be a preference for learning style and provides user satisfaction. This is consistent with prior studies. Recommendations for Practitioners: Practitioners should use ALT for convenience, preferences, and students’ satisfaction. The use of both traditional teaching methods and newer technology teaching methods might be most effective because they provide flexibility for the best method that satisfies the student. Editors and developers of publishers need to consider student preferences in learning. Recommendation for Researchers: Opinions and perceptions by subjects may be misleading. In future research, empirical evidence needs to be provided to validate opinions and perceptions. Research needs to focus more on students’ characteristics such as learning style, learning preferences, and initiative. Impact on Society: This research suggests that an ALT is efficient for the learning process rather than effective for outcomes and enhanced learning. Students can learn just as well without an ALT. Decisions to use an ALT should be based on convenience and student preferences. Future Research: In this study, students had the option to do an ALT. They showed initiative. For future research, initiative needs to be removed. Random assignments to do an ALT or not need to be studied to further confirm the findings of this study. Also, a future study needs to use the same subject’s outcomes for both an ALT and traditional teaching methods.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信