您好,欢迎进入未来科学出版社官网!

用科学铸就未来,用阅读滋养人生

Use science to create the future, and use reading to nourish life

+65 6396 6190

客服服务时间:9:00-18:00

The Impact of Personalized Learning Path Design on Online Education Platforms on Students’ Self-Learning Abilities

作者:Zhang Yinlei

院校:Hengshui University, China

摘要:The study investigates the impact of personalized learning path design on students’ self-learning abilities (SLA) within online education platforms. Employing a mixed-methods approach, the research examines the effectiveness of personalized learning through quantitative surveys and qualitative interviews with a diverse sample of online learners. The findings indicate that personalized learning path design significantly enhances students’ self-efficacy, engagement, and satisfaction, leading to improved SLA. The study’s conceptual model and empirical data support the hypothesis that personalization in learning environments fosters self-directed learning skills. The discussion highlights the implications for educational practice, emphasizing the need for online platforms to prioritize personalization and for educators to adapt their teaching methods to support diverse learner needs. The research also acknowledges limitations and suggests future directions, including longitudinal studies and expanded participant demographics. The study concludes that personalized learning path design is a promising strategy for online education platforms to empower learners and promote lifelong learning skills.

关键词

Personalized Learning; Online Education Platforms; Self-Learning Abilities; Learner Engagement; Self-Efficacy; Learning Path Design; Mixed-Methods Research; Educational Technology; Adaptive Learning; Learner-Centered Education

全文

PDF

参考

[1] Bandura, A. (1994). Self-efficacy. In V. S. Ramachaudran (Ed.), Encyclopedia of human behavior (Vol. 4, pp. 403-406). New York, NY:
Academic Press.
[2] Smith, J. A. (2019). The impact of learner analytics on personalized learning environments. Journal of Educational Technology & Society,
22(3), 97-111.
[3] Davis, F. D. (2020). Perceived usefulness, ease of use, and acceptance of information technologies: A test of the technology acceptance
model. MIS Quarterly, 14(2), 319-340.
[4] Johnson, L., Lee, J., & Kim, M. (2017). Personalized learning and student engagement: A comparative analysis of online education
platforms. International Journal of Educational Technology, 18(1), 55-69.
[5] Duffy, T. M., & Jonassen, D. H. (2012). Constructivism and the technology of instruction: A conversation. In R. A. Reiser & J. V.
Dempsey (Eds.), Trends and issues in instructional design and technology (3rd ed., pp. 86-104). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.
[6] Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (Eds.). (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy
of educational objectives. New York, NY: Longman.
[7] Chickering, A. W., & Gamson, Z. F. (1987). Seven principles for good practice in undergraduate education. AAHE Bulletin, 39(7), 3-7.
[8] Picciano, A. G. (2009). The evolution of big data in education: Privacy and ethical issues. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 17(22), 1-30.
[9] Slavin, R. E. (2013). Educational psychology: Theory into practice (7th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson.

+65 6396 6190

微信二维码