Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Learning Technology Models that Support Personalization within Blended Learning Environments in Higher Education

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
TechTrends Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Personalized learning has the potential to transfer the focus of higher education from teacher-centered to learner-centered environments. The purpose of this integrative literature review was to provide an overview of personalized learning theory, learning technology that supports the personalization of higher education, current practices, as well as case studies of implementing technology models to support personalized learning. The review results revealed the following: three technological models that support personalized learning within blended learning environments in higher education, an increase in personalized learning implementation in higher education with the support of the referenced technology models and platforms, and a lack of data-driven and independent research studies that investigate the effectiveness and impact of the personalized learning and technology models on student learning. The article informs educators and higher education administrators of the emerging models, platforms, and related opportunities to implement personalized learning in higher education settings. The review discusses the barriers, challenges, and theoretical and practical implications of implementing a personalized learning approach in higher education. Finally, recommendations for future research are discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abramovich, S., Schunn, C., & Higashi, R. M. (2013). Are badges useful in education? It depends upon the type of badge and expertise of learner. Educational Technology Research and Development, 61, 217–232.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ahn, J., Pellicone, A., & Butler, B. S. (2014). Open badges for education: What are the implications at the intersection of open systems and badging? Research in Learning Technology, 22.

  • Alamri, H., Lowell, V., Watson, W., & Watson, S. L. (2020). Using personalized learning as an instructional approach to motivate learners in online higher education: Learner self-determination and intrinsic motivation. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 52(3), 322–352. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2020.1728449.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Andre, T., Chik, K. C., Meyer, R., Liming, G., Knott, F. R., & Harris-Thompson, D. (2017, July). Competency-based training system for personalized learning. In international conference on applied human factors and ergonomics (pp. 186–196). Springer, Cham.

  • APLU (2016). APLU announces awards for seven public research universities to accelerate use of adaptive courseware to improve undergraduate Education. July 14, 2016.

  • Ascione, L. (2016). Case studies highlight adaptive learning outcomes. Retrieved from https://www.ecampusnews.com/2016/01/19/adaptive-learning-outcomes-651/

  • Barr, R. B., & Tagg, J. (1995). From teaching to learning: A new paradigm for undergraduate education. Change, 27(6), 13–25.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beyea, S. C., & Nicoll, L. H. (1998). Writing an integrative review. AORN Journal, 67(4), 877–880.

    Google Scholar 

  • BNED Loudcloud. (2020). Competency learning platform. NJ: Basking Ridge Retrieved from http://www.bnedloudcloud.com/competency-learning-platform/.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bergmann, J., & Sams, A. (2012). Flip your classroom: Reach every student in every class every day. International Society for Technology in Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bray, B., & McClaskey, K. (2015). Make learning personal: The what, who, wow, where, and why. Corwin Press.

  • Camacho, D. J., & Legare, J. M. (2016). Shifting gears in the classroom—Movement toward personalized learning and competency-based education. The Journal of Competency-Based Education, 1(4), 151–156.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walkington, C., & Bernacki, M. L. (2020). Appraising research on personalized learning: Definitions, theoretical alignment, advancements, and future directions. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 52(3), 235–252. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2020.1747757.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clements, K., West, R. E., & Hunsaker, E. (2020). Getting started with open badges and open microcredentials. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 21(1), 153–171.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cooper, H. M. (1988). Organizing knowledge synthesis: A taxonomy of literature re- views. Knowledge in Society, 1, 104–126.

    Google Scholar 

  • Demski, J. (2012). This time It's personal: True student-centered learning has a lot of support from Education leaders, but it Can't really happen without all THE right technology infrastructure to drive it. And the technology just may be ready to deliver on its promise. THE Journal, 39((1)), 32.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dyckhoff, A. L., Zielke, D., Bültmann, M., Chatti, M. A., & Schroeder, U. (2012). Design and implementation of a learning analytics toolkit for teachers. Educational Technology & Society, 15(3), 58–76.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elsevier. (2016). Adaptive learning. Retrieved January 05, 2018, from https://evolve.elsevier.com/education/adaptive-learning/keys-toimproving-outcomes-and-retention/

  • Fain, P. (2014). Badging From Within. Retrieved January 05, 2018, from https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2014/01/03/uc-davissgroundbreaking-digital-badge-system-new-sustainable-agriculture-program

  • Fain, P. (2015). March. In Texas-size math lab Retrieved January 05, 2018, from https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2015/03/20/austin-community-colleges-promising-experiment-personalized-remedial-mathematics.

    Google Scholar 

  • Finkelstein, J., Knight, E., & Manning, S. (2013). The potential and value of using digital badges for adult learners. Washington.

    Google Scholar 

  • Foss, K. A., Foss, S. K., Paynton, S., & Hahn, L. (2014). Increasing College Retention with a Personalized System of Instruction: A Case Study. Journal of Case Studies in Education, 5.

  • Gallagher, S., & Garrett, G. (2013). Disruptive education: Technology-enabled universities. NSW Government: The United States Studies Centre at The University of Sydney.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gamrat, C., Zimmerman, H. T., Dudek, J., & Peck, K. (2014). Personalized workplace learning: An exploratory study on digital badging within a teacher professional development program. British Journal of Educational Technology, 45(6), 1136–1148.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garrick, B., Pendergast, D., & Geelan, D. (2017a). Introduction to the philosophical arguments underpinning personalised Education. In Theorising Personalised Education. Singapore: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garrick, B., Pendergast, D., & Geelan, D. (2017b). Personalised learning, pedagogy, and E-mediated tools. In Theorising personalised Education (pp. 27–46). Singapore: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garrison, D. R., & Kanuka, H. (2004). Blended learning: Uncovering its transformative potential in higher education. Internet and Higher Education, 7, 95–105. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2004.02.001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gebhardt, K. (2018). Adaptive learning courseware as a tool to build foundational content mastery: Evidence from principles of microeconomics. Current Issues in Emerging ELearning, 5(1), 2.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gibson, D., Ostashewski, N., Flintoff, K., Grant, S., & Knight, E. (2013). Digital badges in education. Education and Information Technologies, 20(2), 403–410.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grant, P., & Basye, D. (2014). Personalized learning: A guide for engaging students withtechnology. Eugene, OR: International Society for Technology in Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guskey, T. R. (2007). Closing achievement gaps: revisiting Benjamin S. Bloom's Learning for Mastery. Journal of Advanced Academics, 19(1), 8–31.

    Google Scholar 

  • IMS Global Learning Consortium. (2020, January 01). Retrieved June 14, 2020, from https://www.imsglobal.org/

  • Plass, J. L., & Pawar, S. (2020). Toward a taxonomy of adaptivity for learning. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 52(3), 275–300. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2020.1719943.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, D., & Samora, D. (2016). The potential transformation of higher Education through computer-based adaptive learning systems. Global Education Journal, 1.

  • Johnson, C. (2016). Adaptive learning platforms: Creating a path for success. Retrieved from https://er.educause.edu/articles/2016/3/adaptive-learning-platforms-creatinga-path-for-success.

  • Jirgensons, M., & Kapenieks, J. (2018). Blockchain and the future of digital learning credential assessment and management. Journal of Teacher Education for Sustainability, 20(1), 145–156.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnstone, S. M., & Soares, L. (2014). Principles for developing competency-based education programs. Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning, 46(2), 12–19.

    Google Scholar 

  • Voorhees, J. E., & Paulson, K. (2002). Defining and Assessing Learning: Exploring Competency Based Initiatives. In Report of the National Post Secondary Education Cooperative Working Group on Competency Based Initiatives in Post Secondary Education, for the Council of the National Post Secondary Education Cooperative (NPEC).

    Google Scholar 

  • Kakish, K., & Pollacia, L. (2018). Adaptive learning to improve student success and instructor efficiency in introductory computing course. In Proceedings of the Information Systems Education Conference.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kara, N., & Sevim, N. (2013). Adaptive learning systems: Beyond teaching machines. Contemporary Educational Technology, 4(2), 108–120.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kinshuk. (2016). Designing adaptive and personalized learning environments (1st ed.). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kirkwood, A., & Price, L. (2014). Technology-enhanced learning and teaching in higher education: What is ‘enhanced’ and how do we know? A critical literature review. Learning, Media and Technology, 39(1), 6–36. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2013.770404.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lesser, M. (2016). Why we badge: The potential for digital credentials. Education Digest, 81(5), 43–48.

    Google Scholar 

  • Liu, M., McKelroy, E., Corliss, S. B., & Carrigan, J. (2017). Investigating the effect of an adaptive learning intervention on students’ learning. Educational Technology Research and Development, 1–21.

  • Long, P., Siemens, G. (2011 September/October), Penetrating the fog: Analytics in learning and education. Educause Review, 46(5), 31–40.

  • Mah, D. K. (2016). Learning analytics and digital badges: Potential impact on student retention in higher education. Technology, Knowledge and Learning, 21(3), 285–305.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mampadi, F., Chen, S. Y. H., Ghinea, G., & Chen, M. P. (2011). Design of adaptive hypermedia learning systems: A cognitive style approach. Computers & Education, 56(4), 1003–1011.

    Google Scholar 

  • McDonald, K., & Smith, C. M. (2013). The flipped classroom for professional development: Part I. benefits and strategies. The Journal of Continuing Education in Nursing, 44(10), 437–438.

    Google Scholar 

  • McGraw-Hill Education (2016). The impact of connect on student success. Columbus, OH: Retrieved from https://www.mheducation.com/highered/platforms/connect/connect-impact.html

  • Merrill, M. D. (1983). Component display theory. In C. M. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructionaldesign theories and models: An overview of their current status. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mohd, C. K., Shahbodin, F., & Pee, N. C. (2014). Exploring the potential technology in personalized learning environment (PLE). Journal of Applied Science and Agriculture, 9(18), 61–65.

    Google Scholar 

  • Murray, M. C., & Pérez, J. (2015). Informing and performing: A study comparing adaptive learning to traditional learning. Informing Science, 18, 111–125.

    Google Scholar 

  • Murphy, M., Redding, S., & Twyman, J. (Eds.). (2016). Handbook on personalized learning for states, districts, and schools. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nakic, J., Granic, A., & Glavinic, V. (2015). Anatomy of student models in adaptive learning systems: A systematic literature review of individual differences from 2001 to 2013. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 51(4), 459–489. https://doi.org/10.2190/EC.51.4.e.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nedungadi, P., & Raman, R. (2012). A new approach to personalization: Integrating e-learning and m-learning. Educational Technology Research and Development, 60(4), 659–678.

    Google Scholar 

  • Newby, T., Wright, C., Besser, E., & Beese, E. (2016). Passport to designing, developing and issuing digital instructional badges. In Foundation of Digital Badges and Micro-Credentials (pp. 179–201). Springer international publishing.

  • New Media Consortium (2015). NMC Horizon Report: 2015. Higher Education Edition.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ossiannilsson, E., & Creelman, A. (2012). From proprietary to personalized higher education-how OER takes universities outside the comfort zone. Journal of E-Learning and Knowledge Society, 8(1), 9–22.

    Google Scholar 

  • Park, O., & Lee, J. (2007). Adaptive instructional systems. In J. Spector, M. Merril, J. Van Merrienboer, & M. Driscoll (Eds.), Handbook of research for educational communications and technology (pp. 66–664). New York: Macmillian.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pearson. (2013). Open Badges for Higher Education (1st ed.). Retrieved from https://www.pearsoned.com/wp-content/uploads/Open-Badges-for-Higher-Education.pdf

  • Petegem, W. V. (2008, June). From learning over e-learning to MyLearning. In Paper presented at the ITI 2008-30th international conference on information technology interfaces. Dubrovnik: Croatia. https://doi.org/10.1109/ITI.2008.4588380.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Phelps, L. E. (2019). Ready, set, go: A case study of adaptive learning technology implementation (order no. 13901458). Available from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global. (2302688377). Retrieved from https://search-proquest-com.sdl.idm.oclc.org/docview/2302688377?accountid=142908

  • PLATO Offers Students Pearsonalized Learning. (2017, Mar). 31. Including US State News: US Fed News Service Retrieved from https://search.proquest.com/docview/1882633776?accountid=13360.

  • Randall, D. L., Harrison, J. B., & West, R. E. (2013). Giving credit where credit is due: Designing open badges for a technology integration course. TechTrends, 57(6), 88–95.

    Google Scholar 

  • Redding, S. (2014). Personal competencies: A conceptual framework. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University, Center on Innovations in Learning.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reigeluth, C. M., Aslan, S., Chen, Z., Dutta, P., Huh, Y., Lee, D., et al. (2015). Personalized integrated educational system: Technology functions for the learner-centered paradigm of education. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 53(3), 459–496.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reimers, G., & Neovesky, A. (2015). Student focused dashboards—An analysis of current student dashboards and what students really want. In Paper presented at the 7th International Conference on Computer Supported Education (CSEDU) (pp. 399–404).

    Google Scholar 

  • Roberts, L. D., Howell, J. A., & Seaman, K. (2017). Give me a customizable dashboard: Personalized learning analytics dashboards in higher education. Technology, Knowledge and Learning. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-017-9316-1.

  • Rovai, A. P., & Jordan, H. (2004). Blended learning and sense of community: A comparative analysis with traditional and fully online graduate courses. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 5(2).

  • Rubel, A., & Jones, K. M. (2016). Student privacy in learning analytics: An information ethics perspective. The Information Society. https://doi.org/10.1080/01972243.2016.1130502.

  • Sharma, S. K., Palvia, S. C. J., & Kumar, K. (2017). Changing the landscape of higher education: From standardized learning to customized learning. Journal of Information Technology Case and Application Research, 19(2), 75–80.

    Google Scholar 

  • Siemens, G. (2012). Learning analytics: Envisioning a research discipline and a domain of practice. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Learning Analytics and Knowledge (pp. 4–8). ACM.

  • Spoelstra, H., Stoyanov, S., Burgoyne, L., Bennett, D., Sweeney, C., Drachsler, H., et al. (2014). Convergence and translation: Attitudes to inter-professional learning and teaching of creative problem-solving among medical and engineering students and staff. BMC Medical Education, 14(1), 14.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spruel, L. (2020). The impact of adaptive learning technology on academic achievement in a stem course at an HBCU institution (order no. 27961513). Available from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global. (2406478616). Retrieved from https://search-proquest-com.sdl.idm.oclc.org/docview/2406478616?accountid=142908

  • Sturgis, C., Patrick, S., & Pittenger, L. (2011). It's Not a Matter of Time: Highlights from the 2011 Competency-Based Summit. In International association for K-12 online learning.

    Google Scholar 

  • Svenningsen, L., Bottomley, S., & Pear, J. J. (2018). Personalized learning and online instruction. In Digital Technologies and Instructional Design for Personalized Learning (pp. 164–190). IGI global.

  • Technavio: Competency-based platforms market for higher education in the US to surge. (2016). Entertainment Close - Up, Retrieved from https://search.proquest.com/docview/1828129921?accountid=13360

  • Twyman, J. S. (2014a). Envisioning Education 3.0: The fusion of behavior analysis, learning science and technology. In Revista Mexicana de Análisis de la Conducta, Septiembre-sin mes (pp. 20–38).

    Google Scholar 

  • Twyman, J.S. (2014b). Competency-based education: Supporting personalized learning. Connect: Making Learning Personal. Retrieved from http://www.centeril.org/connect/resources/Connect_CB_Education_Twyman-2014_11.12.pdf.

  • Tyton Partners, (2016). Learning to adapt 2.0: The evolution of adaptive learning in higher Education (2016, April 18). Newman, a., Bryant, G., Fleming, B., and Sarkisian, L. 46 p. Retrieved from http://tytonpartners.com/library/learning-to-adapt-2-0-the-evolution-ofadaptive-learning-in-higher-education/

  • U.S. Department of Education. (2016). Future ready learning: Reimagining the role of Technology in Education. Washington, D.C.: Office of Educational Technology Retrieved from http://tech.ed.gov/files/2015/12/NETP16.pdf.

    Google Scholar 

  • U.S. Department of Education (USDOE). (2019). Competency-based learning or personalized learning. Retrieved from http://www.ed.gov/oii-news/competency-based-learning-or-personalized-learning

  • Voorhees, R. A., & Bedard-Voorhees, A. (2017). Principles for competency-based Education. In C. M. Reigeluth, B. J. Beatty, & R. D. Myers (Eds.), Instructional-design theories and models, The learner-centered paradigm of Education (Vol. IV, pp. 33–63). New York, NY: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walkington, C., & Bernacki, M. L. (2018). Personalization of instruction: Design dimensions and implications for cognition. The Journal of Experimental Education, 86(1), 50–68.

    Google Scholar 

  • Watson, W. R., & Watson, S. L. (2017). Principles for personalized instruction. In C. M. Reigeluth, B. J. Beatty, & R. D. Myers (Eds.), Instructional-design theories and models, The learner-centered paradigm of Education (Vol. IV, pp. 93–120). New York, NY: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Watson, W. R., Watson, S. L., & Reigeluth, C. M. (2012). A systemic integration of technology for new-paradigm Education. Educational Technology, 52(5), 25–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wesselink, R., Dekker-Groen, A. M., Biemans, H. J., & Mulder, M. (2010). Using an instrument to analyse competence-based study programmes: Experiences of teachers in Dutch vocational education and training. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 42(6), 813–829.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams, M., Moser, T., Youngblood II, J., & Singer, M. (2015). Competency-based learning: Proof of professionalism. Academy of Business Journal, 17, 150–161.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, M. (2007). Adaptive learning for e-learning: Principles and case studies of an emerging field. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 58(14), 2295–2309.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wolf, M. (2010). Innovate to education: System [re]design for personalized learning. A report from the 2010 symposium. Washington, DC: Software & Information Industry Association. Retrieved from http://siia.net/pli/ presentations/PerLearnPaper.Pdf.

  • Wolper, J. (2016). Student-driven personalized learning is trending in higher Education. Talent Development,70(11), 64-65.

  • Wozniak, K., Lilly, C., Hambrock, H., Richter, R., & Reiseck, C. (2016, November). Designing an adaptive learning experience in higher Education: A critical perspective. In E-Learn: World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education (pp. 517–521). Association for the Advancement of computing in Education (AACE).

  • Xie, H., Chu, H. C., Hwang, G. J., & Wang, C. C. (2019). Trends and development in technology-enhanced adaptive/personalized learning: A systematic review of journal publications from 2007 to 2017. Computers & Education, 140, 103599.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yang, T.-C., Hwang, G.-J., & Yang, S. J.-H. (2013). Development of an adaptive learning system with multiple perspectives based on students' learning styles and cognitive styles. Educational Technology & Society, 16(4), 185–200.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yang, Y.-T. C., Gamble, J. H., Hung, Y.-W., & Lin, T.-Y. (2014). An online adaptive learning environment for critical-thinking-infused English literacy instruction. British Journal of Educational Technology, 45(4), 723–747. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12080.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • You, J. W., & Kang, M. (2014). The role of academic emotions in the relationship between perceived academic control and self-regulated learning in online learning. Computers and Education, 77, 125–133.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank the Research Center for the Humanities, Deanship of Scientific Research at King Saud University, Saudi Arabia, for funding this research: Group No. RG-1441-345.

Funding

This study did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. College of Education, Educational Technology Department, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

    Hamdan A. Alamri

  2. Learning Design and Technology, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN, USA

    Sunnie Watson & William Watson

Authors
  1. Hamdan A. Alamri
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Sunnie Watson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. William Watson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hamdan A. Alamri.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

There are no conflicts of interest.

Research Involving Human Participants and/or Animals

There are on participants in this research.

Informed Consent

There are no participants in this review of literature, therefore, no informed consent were needed for this study.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Alamri, H.A., Watson, S. & Watson, W. Learning Technology Models that Support Personalization within Blended Learning Environments in Higher Education. TechTrends 65, 62–78 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-020-00530-3

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-020-00530-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation