The personalization of learning and teaching processes represents an advanced approach to education that adapts content, pace, and teaching methods to the individual needs and preferences of students. This approach relies on analyzing diverse student characteristics, such as their knowledge level, progress, learning style, and interests. Achieving these goals is significantly supported by the use of information and communication technology, which facilitates and enhances the implementation of personalization in technology-enhanced learning (TEL). The primary objective of personalization is to increase student engagement, motivation, and support in achieving learning outcomes through individualized learning paths, real-time progress tracking, and feedback. This systematic literature review examines existing personalization approaches in secondary and higher education, supported by technology. The study investigates their effectiveness and provides recommendations for future research. Results reveal that personalized teaching methods—primarily through recommender systems, adaptive learning platforms, and algorithm-driven models—are effective in tailoring educational experiences by leveraging diverse student data, such as demographics, prior achievements, learning styles, and digital engagement. The review shows a predominant focus on higher education, particularly in subjects related to computer science and digital technologies. Quantitative evaluations complemented by qualitative insights, consistently indicate that personalization enhances content mastery, motivation, and overall satisfaction, with no significant negative effects identified.

This study aimed to develop and validate a comprehensive core competency assessment instrument specifically designed for undergraduate students at a research-focused university. Despite growing emphasis on competency-based education (CBE), there are limited psychometrically sound tools tailored to evaluate students’ level of core competencies in research-intensive universities. The current study proceeded in three phases: (a) development of a conceptual framework comprising six core competencies: Integrated Thinking, Knowledge Inquiry, Creative Integration, Global Citizenship, Communication & Collaboration, and Self-Management; (b) item generation and expert validation; and (c) validation through exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses. The final instrument included 77 items across the six competencies. CFA confirmed adequate model fit (CFI = .934–.957; RMSEA = .057–.088). The results showed that the validated instrument can provide a reliable and comprehensive assessment for students' core competencies in research-oriented university settings. This instrument can provide guidelines for developing competency-based education (CBE) curricula in higher education, as well as criteria for evaluating and refining existing CBE programs. This instrument functions as both a psychometrically robust assessment tool and a practical guide for institutional enhancement. It enables precise measurement of students’ core competencies, offering evidence that can inform curriculum design, academic advising, and policy development. In addition, the validated framework lays a strong groundwork for future research to investigate the long-term effects of competency-based education on student achievement, career readiness, and personal development across various higher education settings.

Educational researchers, as well as researchers in other disciplines, often work with ordinal data, such as Likert item responses and test item scores. Critical questions arise when researchers attempt to implement statistical models to analyse ordinal data, given that many statistical techniques assume the data analysed to be continuous. Could ordinal data be treated as continuous data, that is, assuming the ordinal data to be continuous and then applying statistical techniques as if analysing continuous data? Why and why not? Focusing on structural equation models (SEMs), particularly confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), this article discusses an ongoing debate on the treatment of ordinal data and reports a short review on the practices of conducting and reporting SEMs, in the context of mathematics education research. The author reviewed 70 publications in mathematics education research that reported a study involving SEMs to analyse ordinal data, but less than half discussed how data were treated or guided readers through the analysis; it is therefore harder to repeat such an analysis and evaluate the results. This article invites methodological discussions on SEMs with ordinal variables in the practices of educational research. Subsequently, a standard for reporting SEMs with ordinal data is proposed, followed by an example. This standard contributes to educational research by enabling researchers (self and others) to evaluate SEMs reported. The example demonstrates, using real-life research data, how two different approaches for analysing ordinal data (as continuous or as a product of discretisation from some continuous distributions) can lead to results that disagree.

Analysis of student grades and demographic data to understand the effects of modality and Covid-19 on academic performance is important for universities to understand the impact these factors may have on course grades. This study analyzes all the 615,964 complete undergraduate student-course records from Kennesaw State University (KSU) spanning from 2015 to 2024 to examine the impact of course modality and the Covid-19 pandemic on academic performance. The population dataset includes student demographics (e.g., sex, age, ethnicity), prior GPA, and course characteristics (e.g., department, modality). Descriptive statistics and trend analyses were employed to evaluate grade outcomes across in-person, online, and hybrid modalities over the 9-year period. Results indicate a temporary increase in mean course grades during the Covid-19 period, followed by a return to the pre-pandemic upward trend. Hybrid courses consistently exhibited the highest mean grades throughout the study period. However, consistent patterns across modalities, demographics, and academic units suggest that these factors have limited influence on grade outcomes. These findings raise questions about the reliability of GPA and course grades as indicators of learning success across different instructional contexts and student populations.