Differences in personalized learning practice and technology use in high- and low-performing learner-centered schools in the United States

被引:9
|
作者
Lee, Dabae [1 ]
Huh, Yeol [2 ]
Lin, Chun-Yi [3 ]
Reigeluth, Charles M. [4 ]
Lee, Eunbae [5 ]
机构
[1] Kennesaw State Univ, KH 2328,1000 Chastain Rd, Kennesaw, GA 30144 USA
[2] Ewha Womans Univ, Jinseonmi Gwan 334,52 Ewhayeodae Gil, Seoul 03760, South Korea
[3] Natl Taiwan Normal Univ, Dept Educ, 162 East Ho Ping Rd,Sec 1, Taipei 106, Taiwan
[4] Indiana Univ, 201 N Rose Ave, Bloomington, IN USA
[5] Catholic Univ Korea, Jibong Ro 43,Dasol Hall 237, Bucheon 14662, Gyeonggi Do, South Korea
关键词
Learner-centered school; Personalized learning; Personalized integrated educational system; Competency-based education; Project-based learning;
D O I
10.1007/s11423-021-09937-y
中图分类号
G40 [教育学];
学科分类号
040101 ; 120403 ;
摘要
The Every Student Succeeds Act supports personalized learning (PL) to close achievement gaps of diverse K-12 learners in the United States. Implementing PL into a classroom entails a paradigm change of the educational system. However, it is demanding to transform traditional practice into a personalized one under the pressure of the annual standardized testing while it is unclear which PL approaches are more likely to result in better academic outcomes than others. Using national survey data of ELA teachers in identified learner-centered schools, this study compared high and low-performing learner-centered schools (determined by their standardized test results) in terms of their use of five PL features (personalized learning plan, competency-based student progress, criterion-referenced assessment, project- or problem-based learning, and multi-year mentoring) and their use of technology for the four functions of planning, learning, assessment, and recordkeeping. Generally, teachers in high-performing schools implemented PL more thoroughly and utilized technology for more functions than those in low-performing schools. Teachers in high-performing schools more frequently considered career goals when creating personal learning plans, shared the project outcomes with the community, and assessed non-academic outcomes. They stayed longer with the same students and developed close relationships with more students. Also, they more frequently used technology for sharing resources and reported having a more powerful technology system than those in low-performing schools. This study informs educators, administrators, and researchers of which PL approaches and technology uses are more likely to result in better academic outcomes measured by standardized assessments.
引用
收藏
页码:1221 / 1245
页数:25
相关论文
共 30 条
  • [21] Promoting socially shared regulation of learning in CSCL: Progress of socially shared regulation among high- and low-performing groups
    Malmberg, Jonna
    Jarvela, Sanna
    Jarvenoja, Hanna
    Panadero, Ernesto
    COMPUTERS IN HUMAN BEHAVIOR, 2015, 52 : 562 - 572
  • [22] High- and Low-Performing Adult Cochlear Implant Users on High-Variability Sentence Recognition: Differences in Auditory Spectral Resolution and Neurocognitive Functioning
    Tamati, Terrin N.
    Ray, Christin
    Vasil, Kara J.
    Pisoni, David B.
    Moberly, Aaron C.
    JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN ACADEMY OF AUDIOLOGY, 2020, 31 (05) : 324 - 335
  • [23] Spontaneous Scientific Argumentation and Socially Shared Metacognitive Regulation of High- and Low-Performing Small Groups in Virtual Collaborative Science Learning
    Telenius, Marko
    Iiskala, Tuike
    Laakkonen, Eero
    Vauras, Marja
    JOURNAL OF RESEARCH IN SCIENCE TEACHING, 2025,
  • [24] What Makes Students Engaged in Learning? A Time-Use Study of Within- and Between-Individual Predictors of Emotional Engagement in Low-Performing High Schools
    Park, Sira
    Holloway, Susan D.
    Arendtsz, Amanda
    Bempechat, Janine
    Li, Jin
    JOURNAL OF YOUTH AND ADOLESCENCE, 2012, 41 (03) : 390 - 401
  • [25] What Makes Students Engaged in Learning? A Time-Use Study of Within- and Between-Individual Predictors of Emotional Engagement in Low-Performing High Schools
    Sira Park
    Susan D. Holloway
    Amanda Arendtsz
    Janine Bempechat
    Jin Li
    Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 2012, 41 : 390 - 401
  • [26] Exploring differences in self-regulated learning strategy use between high- and low-performing students in introductory programming: An analysis of eye-tracking and retrospective think-aloud data from program comprehension
    Cheng, Gary
    Zou, Di
    Xie, Haoran
    Wang, Fu Lee
    COMPUTERS & EDUCATION, 2024, 208
  • [27] Variation in organisational factors across high- and low-performing hospitals with regard to spontaneous vaginal birth for Black women in four states: a cross-sectional descriptive study
    Clark, Rebecca R. S.
    Boland, Mary Regina
    BMJ OPEN, 2024, 14 (11):
  • [28] Racial and Socioeconomic Differences and Surgical Outcomes in Pancreaticoduodenectomy Patients: A Systematic Review of High- Versus Low-Volume Hospitals in the United States
    Ikram, Mohammad
    Shen, Chan
    Pameijer, Colette R.
    AMERICAN SURGEON, 2024, 90 (02) : 292 - 302
  • [29] The Use of Learning and Study Strategies Inventory (LASSI) to Investigate Differences Between Low vs High Academically Performing Medical Students
    Khalil, Mohammed K.
    Williams, Shanna E.
    Hawkins, H. Gregory
    MEDICAL SCIENCE EDUCATOR, 2020, 30 (01) : 287 - 292
  • [30] The Use of Learning and Study Strategies Inventory (LASSI) to Investigate Differences Between Low vs High Academically Performing Medical Students
    Mohammed K. Khalil
    Shanna E. Williams
    H. Gregory Hawkins
    Medical Science Educator, 2020, 30 : 287 - 292