The effect of adaptive versus static practicing on student learning - evidence from a randomized field experiment

Chris Klaveren, Sebastiaan Vonk and Ilja Cornelisz

Economics of Education Review, 2017, vol. 58, issue C, 175-187

Abstract: Schools and governments are increasingly investing in adaptive practice software. To date, the evidence whether adaptivity improves learning outcomes is limited and mixed. A large-scale randomized control trial is conducted in Dutch secondary schools to evaluate the effectiveness of an adaptive practice program relative to a static program. Learning theories predict that adaptive practicing is more effective, but this experimental evaluation provides a more nuanced picture. Relative to the static software environment, students working in the adaptive software environment receive more difficult exercises, practice longer and answer fewer questions correctly. Takeup and usage of the software program is, overall, modest, but varies considerably within and between classrooms. The outcome differences between both environments are more pronounced in classrooms with higher practice intensity. On average, no test score effects are found, but static practicing does improve test scores for higher ability students (0.08σ). Caution is thus warranted when adaptive practice software is implemented to address individual learning needs, as static formative test preparation can be more effective in improving test scores.

Keywords: Personalized education; Adaptive practice software; Field experiment (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: A20 I21 L86 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2017
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (4)

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0272775716303387
Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:eee:ecoedu:v:58:y:2017:i:c:p:175-187

DOI: 10.1016/j.econedurev.2017.04.003

Access Statistics for this article

Economics of Education Review is currently edited by E. Cohn

More articles in Economics of Education Review from Elsevier
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Catherine Liu ().