Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Mixed method assessment shows adaptive e-learning significantly improves learning outcomes and engagement in participants.
BackgroundnbspAdaptive e-learning personalizes instruction content and delivery based on the real-time learners data to improve engagement and learning outcomes. While there are many documented studies touting its effectiveness in formal educational settings little is known about whether it can be applied or has been tried in short-term intensive training programs such as online workshopsAimnbspTo evaluate the adaptive e-learning role and effectiveness in improving learning outcomes during the online workshops and to dissect participants experiences and perceptions of adaptive e-learning.MethodsnbspThis study adopted the use of both quantitative and qualitative approaches. This involved 74 participants including faculty members and postgraduate students enrolled in an online workshop. The quantitative phase assessed learning outcomes through pre- and post-tests. All the participants were then randomly assigned into two groups. One received the feedback on the pre-test results while the other group did not no record. In the qualitative aspect we employed in-depth interviews to explore the participants experiences.ResultsnbspBoth groups showed significant post-test improvements. The lsquoRecord grouprsquo performed significantly better than the lsquoNo recordrsquo group P 0.002 suggesting that feedback enhanced learning outcomes. Six qualitative themes emerged personalized learning e-library technology-driven learning self-directed learning reinforcement and overall effectiveness. Participants reported high satisfaction with the adaptive learning experience.ConclusionnbspAdaptive e-learning supports learner engagement and indeed the learning outcome of the learners is very significant when the feedback is involved. Adaptive e-learning should be implemented in short-term professional development workshops.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kirubakaran et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: