Exploring Student Preference between Textbook Chapters and Adaptive Learning Lessons in an Introductory Environmental Geology Course
In a Fall 2017 introductory course in Environmental Geology, homework assignments alternated between traditional textbook chapters in an electronic format and adaptive learning platform (ALP) modules on the Smart Sparrow (www.smartsparrow.com) platform to assess student preference for and satisfaction with either modality. Few studies have evaluated the role of ALP technology in a classroom setting, and none have investigated ALPs in a homework setting. To probe student preferences between these assignments, and their engagement with the material through the different modalities, all (n = 17) students in the course were given eight surveys over the Fall 2017 semester. A subset of six students volunteered for qualitative interviews in addition to the quantitative surveys. Analysis of the results shows that students were more satisfied with the ALP modules, except for the longest assigned module. No relationships were found between preference for one module over another and major, engagement, or interest in environmental geology. A majority of the students interviewed identified the interactivity of the adaptive learning modules as a contributing factor to the retention of concepts presented. This suggests students experienced a higher level of cognitive engagement with the ALP material.
KeywordsAdaptive learning platforms Student satisfaction Personal interest
The authors appreciate the participation of the students in the Fall 2017 GEOL005 Environmental Geology course, and formative discussions of the research plan with Julie Sexton, Assistant Director of Assessment at the University of Northern Colorado. The authors also gratefully acknowledge the suggestions of four anonymous reviewers and appreciate the efforts of the editors to improve the manuscript.
Access to the Smart Sparrow adaptive learning platform was provided by Smart Sparrow and The Inspark Teaching Network for all 17 students, one faculty member (ECF), and one instructional designer who collaborated on module development (AJH).
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Except for the direct financial assistance provided by Smart Sparrow and The Inspark Teaching Network as described above, none of the authors have any financial interest benefit from this research.
- Bolliger, D. U., & Wasilik, O. (2012). Student satisfaction in large undergraduate online courses. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 13(3), 153–165.Google Scholar
- Harackiewicz, J. M., Durik, A. M., Barron, K. E., Linnenbrink-Garcia, L., & Tauer, J. M. (2008). The role of achievement goals in the development of interest: Reciprocal relations between achievement goals, interest, and performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100(1), 105–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Johnson, R., & Christensen, L. (2017). Educational research. Washington, D.C: Sage.Google Scholar
- Keller, J. M. (2009). Motivational design for learning and performance: The ARCS model approach (ebook). Springer.Google Scholar
- Opidee, I. (2014). Textbook industry forecast: Radical change ahead. Retrieved August, 9, 2019 from www.universitybusiness.com.
- Pelech, J., & Hibbard, S. T. (2011). Evaluating the effectiveness of reading strategies for college students: An action research approach. Journal of Research in Education, 21(1), 99–114.Google Scholar
- Pintrich, P. R, Smith, D. A., Garcia, T., & McKeachie, W. J. (1991). A manual for the use of the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ). Office of Educational Research and Improvement. Accessed 11 July 2017 at http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED338122.pdf.
- Posner, Z. (2018). Personalizing adaptive learning. TD: Talent Development, 72(1), 24–28.Google Scholar
- Salinger, T., & Fleischman, S. (2005). Research matters: Teaching students to interact with text. Educational Leadership, 63(2), 90–92.Google Scholar
- Sculz, A. C. (2013). Reinventing book printing: The next generation of custom textbooks. Publishers Weekly.Google Scholar
- Waters, J. K. (2014). Adaptive learning: Are we there yet? T H E Journal, 41(4), 12–16.Google Scholar
- Webley, K. (2013). A is for adaptive. Time, 81, 23 0040781X.Google Scholar