Eric C. K. Cheng
ABSTRACT
This paper explores the pedagogical approaches teachers employ and the strategies that school leaders implement to promote the use of an Adaptive Learning Platform (ALP) in a high school in Hong Kong. It assesses how such an AI-powered platform can support teachers in enhancing student engagement and learning outcomes. The study employs a case study methodology to identify the factors influencing the incorporation of ALP. Qualitative data were collected through teacher interviews, and an in-depth analysis was carried out to identify effective pedagogies and strategies for implementing adaptive learning. The findings of this study underscore the significance of supportive school leadership that encourages teachers to embrace ALP as a tool for promoting student learning. Additionally, effective implementation of ALP necessitates a shift in pedagogical practices from traditional teacher-centred approaches to more student-centred strategies. The study concludes that the integration of ALP into teaching practices can boost student engagement and elevate the quality of learning outcomes. In summary, this research contributes to understanding the successful implementation of ALP in high schools, emphasising the critical roles of school leadership support and the adoption of student-centred pedagogies. The findings provide valuable insights for educators, administrators, and policymakers interested in utilising ALP to improve student learning outcomes.
- Diane Haager and Janette Klinger. 2005. Differentiating Instruction in Inclusive Classrooms. Pearson, Boston, MA.Google Scholar
- Cathy Li and Farah Lalani. 2020. The COVID-19 pandemic has changed education forever. This is how. (April 2020). Retrieved from https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2020/04/coronavirus-education-global-covid19-online-digital-learning/Google Scholar
- Larry Johnson, Samantha Adams Becker, Victoria Estrada, and Alex Freeman. 2015. NMC Horizon Report: 2015 K-12 Edition. Retrieved from http://www.nmc.org/publication/nmc-horizon-report-2015-k-12-edition/Google Scholar
- Steven Oxman and William Wong. 2014. White paper: Adaptive learning systems. DV X Innovations DeVry Education Group.Google Scholar
- Robert Murphy, Lawrence Gallagher, Andrew Krumm, Jessica Mislevy, and Amy Hafter. 2014. Research on the Use of Khan Academy in Schools. Retrieved from https://s3.amazonaws.com/KA-share/impact/khan-academy-implementation-report-2014-04-15.pdfGoogle Scholar
- Alan C. K. Cheung and Robert E. Slavin. 2013. The effectiveness of educational technology applications for enhancing mathematics achievement in K-12 classrooms: a meta-analysis. Educational Research Review 9, 1 (June 2013), 88-113. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2013.01.001Google ScholarCross Ref
- Li-Ping Yang and Tao Xin. 2022. Changing educational assessments in the post-covid-19 era: from assessment of learning (AoL) to assessment as learning (AaL). Educational Measurement, Issues and Practice 41, 1 (Spring 2022), 54–60. DOI: http://doi.org/10.1111/emip.12492Google ScholarCross Ref
- Margaret Heritage. 2018. Assessment for learning as support for student self-regulation. Australian Educational Researcher 45, 1 (March 2018), 51–63. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13384-018-0261-3Google ScholarCross Ref
- Gavin T.L Brown. 2019. Is assessment for learning really assessment? Frontiers in Education (Lausanne) 4, Article 64 (June 2019), 7 pages. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2019.00064Google ScholarCross Ref
- Dylan Wiliam. 2011. What is assessment for learning? Studies in Educational Evaluation 37, 1 (March 2011), 3–14. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2011.03.001Google ScholarCross Ref
- Steve T. Fukuda, Bruce W. Lander, and Christopher J. Pope. 2022. Formative assessment for learning how to learn: Exploring university student learning experiences. RELC Journal 53, 1 (April 2022), 118–133. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0033688220925927Google ScholarCross Ref
- Carina Granberg, Torulf Palm, and Björn Palmberg. 2021. A case study of formative assessment practice and the effects on students' self-regulated learning. Studies in Educational Evaluation 68, Article 100955 (March 2021), 1-10. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2020.100955Google ScholarCross Ref
- Eleanor Hawe and Helen Dixon. 2017. Assessment for learning: a catalyst for student self-regulation. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education 42, 8 (2017), 1181–1192. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2016.1236360Google ScholarCross Ref
- Maaike C. Heitink, Fabienne M. Van der Kleij, Bernard P. Veldkamp, Kim Schildkamp, and Wilma B. Kippers. 2016. A systematic review of prerequisites for implementing assessment for learning in classroom practice. The Educational Research Review 17, (February 2016), 50-62. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2015.12.002Google ScholarCross Ref
- Chris Davison. 2019. Using assessment to enhance learning in English language education. In Second Handbook of English Language Teaching, Xuesong Gao (Ed.). Springer, Cham, Switzerland, 433-454. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-02899-2_21Google ScholarCross Ref
- Christopher DeLuca, King Luu, Youyi Sun, and Don A. Klinger. 2012. Assessment for learning in the classroom: Barriers to implementation and possibilities for professional teacher learning. Assessment Matters 4, 5-29. DOI: https://doi.org/10.18296/am.0104Google ScholarCross Ref
- Therese N. Hopfenbeck, Maria Teresa Flórez Petour, and Astrid Tolo. 2015. Balancing tensions in educational policy reforms: Large-scale implementation of assessment for learning in Norway. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice 22, 1 (January 2015), 44-60. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2014.996524Google ScholarCross Ref
- Lorna M. Earl and Helen Timperley. 2014. Challenging conceptions of assessment. In Designing assessment for quality learning, Claire Wyatt-Smith, Valentina Klenowski, and Peta Colbert (Eds.). Springer, Dordrecht, 325-336. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-5902-2_20Google ScholarCross Ref
- David Carless. 2013. Trust and its role in facilitating dialogic feedback. In Feedback in Higher and Professional Education (1st. ed.), David Boud and Elizabeth Molloy (Eds.). Routledge, Abingdon, England, 90-103.Google Scholar
- Valerie J. Shute and Seyedahmad Rahimi. 2017. Review of computer-based assessment for learning in elementary and secondary education. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 33, 1 (February 2017), 1–19. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12172Google ScholarDigital Library
- Alice Barana, Marina Marchisio, and Matteo Sacchet. 2021. Effectiveness of automatic formative assessment for learning mathematics in higher education. In Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Higher Education Advances. Universitat Politècnica de València, València, 1-8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4995/HEAd21.2021.13030Google ScholarCross Ref
- Sue Timmis, Patricia Broadfoot, Rosamund Sutherland, and Alison Oldfield. 2016. Rethinking assessment in a digital age: Opportunities, challenges and risks. British Educational Research Journal 42, 3 (June 2016), 454–476. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/berj.3215Google ScholarCross Ref
- Malcolm Brown, Mark McCormack, Jamie Reeves, D. Christopher Brook, Susan Grajek, Bryan Alexander, Maha Bali, Stephanie Bulger, Shawna Dark, Nicole Engelbert, Kevin Gannon, Adrienne Gauthier, David Gibson, Rob Gibson, Brigitte Lundin, George Veletsianos, and Nicole Weber. 2020. 2020 Educause Horizon Report Teaching and Learning Edition. EDUCAUSE Louisville.Google Scholar
- Hanover Research. 2014. Emerging and future trends in K-12 education. (October 2014). Retrieved from http://www.hanoverresearch.com/media/Emerging-and-Future-Trends-in-K-12-Education-1.pdfGoogle Scholar
- Diem M. Nguyen, Yi-Chuan Hsieh, and Donald G. Allen. 2006. The impact of web-based assessment and practice on students' mathematics learning attitudes. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching 25, 3 (July 2006). 251–279.Google Scholar
- James A. Kulik. 2003. Effects of Using Instructional Technology in Elementary and Secondary Schools: What Controlled Evaluation Studies Say. SRI International, Arlington, VA.Google Scholar
- John F. Pane, Beth Ann Griffin, Daniel F. McCaffrey, and Rita Karam. 2014. Effectiveness of Cognitive Tutor Algebra I at Scale. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis 36, 2 (June 2014), 127–144. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3102/0162373713507480Google ScholarCross Ref
- Thomas. J. Gross and Gary Duhon. 2013. Evaluation of computer-assisted instruction for math accuracy intervention. Journal of Applied School Psychology 29, 3 (August 2013), 246-261. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/15377903.2013.810127Google ScholarCross Ref
- Jim Ysseldyke, Richard Spicuzza, Stacey Kosciolek, and Christopher Boys. 2003. Effects of a learning information system on mathematics achievement and classroom structure. The Journal of Educational Research 96, 3, 163-173. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00220670309598804Google ScholarCross Ref
- Kenneth R. Koedinger, Elizabeth A. McLaughlin, and Neil T. Heffernan. 2010. A quasi-experimental evaluation of an online formative assessment and tutoring system. Journal of Educational Computing Research 43, 4 (December 2010), 489–510. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2190/EC.43.4.dGoogle ScholarCross Ref
- Wan Ng and Jennifer Fergusson. 2019. Technology-enhanced science partnership initiative: Impact on secondary science teachers. Research in Science Education 49, 1 (February 2019), 219-242. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-017-9619-1Google ScholarCross Ref
- Punya Mishra and Matthew J. Koehler. 2006. Technological pedagogical content knowledge: a framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record 108, 6 (June 2006), 1017–1054. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9620.2006.00684.xGoogle ScholarCross Ref
- Lee S. Shulman.1987. Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review 57, 1 (February 1987), 1–22. DOI: https://doi.org/10.17763/haer.57.1.j463w79r56455411Google ScholarCross Ref
- Matthew J. Koehler, Punya Mishra, and William Cain. 2013. What is technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK)? Journal of Education 193, 3 (October 2013), 13-19. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/002205741319300303Google ScholarCross Ref
- Jun-Jie Tseng, Ching Sing Chai, Lynde Tan, and Moonyoung Park. 2022. A critical review of research on technological pedagogical and content knowledge (TPACK) in language teaching. Computer Assisted Language Learning 35, 4, 948–971. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2020.1868531Google ScholarCross Ref
- Punya Mishra. 2019. Considering contextual knowledge: the TPACK diagram gets an upgrade. Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education 35, 2, 76-78. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/21532974.2019.1588611Google ScholarCross Ref
- Joyce Hwee Ling Koh and Ching Sing Chai. 2016. Seven design frames that teachers use when considering technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK). Computers and Education 102, (November 2016), 244–257. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2016.09.003Google ScholarDigital Library
- Montgomery Van Wart, Alexandru Roman, XiaoHu Wang, and Choeol Liu. 2017. Integrating ICT adoption issues into (e-)leadership theory. Telematics and Informatics 34, 5 (August 2017), 527–537. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2016.11.003Google ScholarDigital Library
- Jane P. Preston, Lyndsay Moffatt, Sean Wiebe, Alexander McAuley, Barbara Campbell, and Martha Gabriel. 2015. The use of technology in Prince Edward Island (Canada) high schools. Educational Management Administration & Leadership 43, 6 (November 2015), 989–1005. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1741143214535747Google ScholarCross Ref
- Alejandro Garcia and Chuey Abrego. 2014. Vital skills of the elementary principal as a technology leader. Journal of Organizational Learning and Leadership 12, 1 (2014), 12-25.Google Scholar
- I-Hua Chang. 2012. The effect of principals' technological leadership on teachers' technological literacy and teaching effectiveness in Taiwanese elementary schools. Educational Technology & Society 15, 2 (April 2012), 328–340.Google Scholar
- Lin Zhong. 2017. Indicators of digital leadership in the context of K-12 education. Journal of Educational Technology Development and Exchange 10, 1 (2017), 27-40. DOI: https://doi.org/10.18785/jetde.1001.03Google ScholarCross Ref
- Nancy Law, Man Wai Lee, and Albert Chan. 2010. Policy impacts on pedagogical practice and ICT use: an exploration of the results from SITES 2006. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 26, 6 (December 2010), 465–477. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2729.2010.00378.xGoogle ScholarCross Ref
- Sara Dexter. 2018. The role of leadership for information technology in education: Systems of practices. In Second Handbook of Information Technology in Primary and Secondary Education, Joke Voogt, Gerald Knezek, Rhonda Christensen, and Kwok Wing Lai (Eds.). Springer International Publishing, Cham, 483-498.Google Scholar
- Martina A. Roth and Jon K. Price. 2016. The critical role of leadership for education transformation with successful technology implementation. In ICT in Education in Global Context, Ronghuai Huang, Kinshuk, Jon K. Price (Eds.). Springer, Berlin, 195–213. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-47956-8_10Google ScholarCross Ref
- William Sterrett and Jayson W. Richardson. 2020. Supporting professional development through digital principal leadership. Journal of Organizational & Educational Leadership 5, 2 (July 2020), 1-19.Google Scholar
- Robert B. Kozma. 2003. ICT and educational change: a global phenomenon. In Technology, Innovation, and Educational Change: A Global Perspective, Robert B. Kozma (Ed.). International Society for Technology in Education, Eugene, OR, 1-18.Google Scholar
- Jayson W Richardson, Justin Bathon, Kevin L Flora, and Wayne D Lewis. 2012. NETS-A scholarship: A review of published literature. Journal of Research on Technology in Education 45, 2, 131-151. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2012.10782600Google ScholarCross Ref
- Mal Lee and Michael Gaffney. 2009. Leading schools in a digital age. In Leading a Digital School, Mal Lee & Michael Gaffney (Eds.). Australian Council for Educational Research, Melbourne.Google Scholar
- John Schiller. 2003. Working with ICT: perceptions of Australian principals. Journal of Educational Administration 41, 2, 171–185. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/09578230310464675Google ScholarCross Ref
- Arumugam Raman, Yahya Don, and Abd Latif Kasim. 2014. The relationship between principals' technology leadership and teachers' technology use in Malaysian secondary schools. Asian Social Science 10, 18 (2014), 30-36. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5539/ass.v10n18p30Google ScholarCross Ref
- Dianne L. Yee. 2000. Images of school principals' information and communications technology leadership. Journal of Information Technology for Teacher Education 9, 3, 287-302. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14759390000200097Google ScholarCross Ref
- Sara Dexter. 2008. Leadership for IT in schools. In International Handbook of Information Technology in Primary and Secondary Education. Joke Voogt and Gerald Knezek (Eds.). Springer, New York, 543-554. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-73315-9_32Google ScholarCross Ref
- Ronald E. Anderson and Sara Dexter. 2005. School technology leadership: An empirical investigation of prevalence and effect. Educational Administration Quarterly 41, 1 (February 2005), 49–82. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X04269517Google ScholarCross Ref
- Kathryn Moyle. 2006. Leadership and Learning with ICT: Voices from the Profession Teaching Australia, Canberra.Google Scholar
- Linda Flanagan and Michele Jacobsen. 2003. Technology leadership for the twenty-first century principal. Journal of Educational Administration 41, 2, 124-142. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/09578230310464648Google ScholarCross Ref
- Sharan B. Merriam and Elizabeth J. Tisdell. 2015. Qualitative Research: A Guide to Design and Implementation (4th ed.). John Wiley & Sons, San Francisco, CA.Google Scholar
- Jason Seawright and John Gerring. 2008. Case selection techniques in case study research: A menu of qualitative and quantitative options. Political Research Quarterly 61, 2 (June 2008), 294–308. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1065912907313077Google ScholarCross Ref
- Robert K. Yin. 2014. Case Study Research Design and Methods (5th ed.). Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.Google Scholar
- Robert E. Stake. 1995. The Art of Case Study Research. Sage Publications. Thousand Oaks, CA.Google Scholar
- J. Amos Hatch. 2002. Doing Qualitative Research in Education Settings. State University of New York Press, New York.Google Scholar
- Sarah Seleznyov. 2018. Lesson study: an exploration of its translation beyond Japan. International Journal for Lesson and Learning Studies 7, 3 (September 2018) 217-229. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/IJLLS-04-2018-0020Google ScholarCross Ref
- Akihiko Takahashi and Thomas McDougal. 2016. Collaborative lesson research: maximising the impact of lesson study. ZDM Mathematics Education 48, 4 (July 2016), 513–526. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-015-0752-xGoogle ScholarCross Ref
- J. Amos Hatch. 2002. Doing Qualitative Research in Education Settings. State University of New York Press, New York.Google Scholar
- Anselm Strauss and Juliet M. Corbin. (Eds.). 1997. Grounded Theory in Practice. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks.Google Scholar
- Sheila Payne. 2007. Grounded theory. In Analysing Qualitative Data in Psychology, Evanthia Lyons and Adrian Coyle (Eds.). SAGE Publications, 65-86. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446207536Google ScholarCross Ref
- Benjamin F. Crabtree and William L. Miller. 1999. Doing Qualitative Research (2nd ed.). Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks.Google Scholar
- Lee S. Shulman. 1986. Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher 15, 2 (February 1986), 4–14. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X015002004Google ScholarCross Ref
- Barry J. Zimmerman. 1990. Self-regulated learning and academic achievement: an overview. Educational Psychologist 25, 1 (1990), 3-17. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep2501_2Google ScholarCross Ref
- Sanna Järvelä and K. Ann Renninger. 2014. Designing for learning: interest, motivation, and engagement. In The Cambridge Handbook of the Learning Sciences, R. Keith Sawyer (Ed.). Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 668-685. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139519526.040Google ScholarCross Ref
- Tianchong Wang and Eric C. K. Cheng. 2021. An investigation of barriers to Hong Kong K-12 schools incorporating artificial intelligence in education. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence 2, Article 100031, 11 pages. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2021.100031Google ScholarCross Ref
Index Terms
- Exploring Pedagogies & Strategies for Integrating Adaptive Learning Platforms: A Case Study of a High School in Hong Kong
Recommendations
An Exploratory Study of Using the Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS) to flip Hong Kong Secondary School Science Education
ICSET 2018: Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on E-Society, E-Education and E-TechnologyIn Hong Kong, student interest and achievement in science have been declining in recent years. We thus aim to seek ways to improve our science education. This paper reports an attempt of using the flipped classroom approach together with the Next ...
Policies and strategies of technology enhanced learning in lifelong education in China, Hong Kong, Macau, Taiwan and Singapore
ICHL'11: Proceedings of the 4th international conference on Hybrid learningPolicies and strategies of technology-enhanced learning issued by governments have played an important role in improving the quality of lifelong education. The objective of this study is to evaluate the effects of policies and strategies of technology-...
Using Interactive Whiteboards (IWB) to Enhance Learning and Teaching in Hong Kong Schools
Proceedings of the 2006 conference on Learning by Effective Utilization of Technologies: Facilitating Intercultural UnderstandingInteractive whiteboard (IWB) has been widely used as a learning tool in the western classrooms since 1991. Many researches reported that the technology benefits students by increasing their engagement in classroom activities, arousing learners' ...
Comments