![](bg7.png)
small-scale randomized controlled experiments that
aimed at establishing the promise of the YiXue
system. Overall, the results of the experiments
suggest that the YiXue adaptive learning system has
promise for improving student learning outcomes
effectively and efficiently. The studies did have
limitations; the sample sizes were small, the duration
was short, the focus was on only selected ELA topics,
and we were not able to use an external standardized
outcome measure. Thus, further research is warranted
to examine the efficacy of the YiXue adaptive
learning system. We are in the process of examining
the features of the systems used in the studies and
student’s learning activities during the experiment to
better understand what might have led to the
difference in learning outcomes and how the learning
outcome differs across students of different incoming
knowledge, or students of different self-efficacy in
math (a question in the student survey). We are
analysing student learning log data to investigate the
relationship between learning process and the
learning outcome, as well as how YiXue can be
improved to better facilitate learning. For instance,
analysis is being conducted to see if higher learning
gains in YiXue is associated with longer learning time,
better performance within the system, or longer
engagement time with videos. We are also planning
on more randomized controlled experiments with
larger sample size, longer duration to further evaluate
the efficacy of YiXue in other subjects, including
mathematics and physics. In the meantime, the
development team at YiXue is focusing on enhancing
the system’s adaptivity and effectiveness through
profiling students (Bouchet et al., 2013), attending to
student engagement level (Baker & Ocumpaugh,
2015) and cognitive styles (Yang et al., 2013), and
more accurately tracking student’s progress on fine-
grained knowledge points using state-of-art
algorithms and data-intensive modelling approaches.
As stated above, many randomized trials and
other sound studies of adaptive learning systems have
been conducted in the United States, but very few
rigorous experimental studies have been done in
China. With many schools in China introducing
online learning systems, there is broad interest in how
to select and use such systems and whether they lead
to improvement. With these studies, we have the
opportunity to contribute to much-needed knowledge
about online learning and adaptive learning in K–12
instruction, esp. in China. We expect the results of the
studies reported here to be meaningful to teachers,
educators, and parents.
REFERENCES
Anderson, J. R., 2000. Learning and memory: An
integrated approach (2nd ed.). New York: John Wiley
and Sons, Inc.
Baker, R.S.J.d., Ocumpaugh, J., 2015. Interaction-Based
Affect Detection in Educational Software. In R.A.
Calvo, S.K. D’Mello, J. Gratch, A. Kappas (Eds.),
Handbook of Affective Computing. Oxford, UK: Oxford
University Press.
Black, P., & Wiliam, D., 1998a. Assessment and classroom
learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy
and Practice, 5, 7–74.
Black, P., & Wiliam, D., 1998b. Inside the black box:
Raising standards through classroom assessment. Phi
Delta Kappan, 80(2), 139–149.
Bomash, I., & Kish, C., 2015. The improvement index:
Evaluating academic gains in college students using
adaptive lessons. New York, NY: Knewton.
Bouchet, F., Harley, J.m, Trevors, G.J., & Azevedo, R.
(2013). Clustering and Profiling Students According to
their Interactions with an Intelligent Tutoring System
Fostering Self-Regulated Learning. Journal of
Educational Data Mining, v(5), Issue 1, April 2013.
China Internet Network Information Center., 2017.
Statistical survey report on Internet development in
China. Retrieved March 15, 2017 from http://www.
cnnic.cn/hlwfzyj/hlwxzbg/hlwtjbg/201701/P02017012
3364672657408.pdf
Guskey, T. R., & Gates, S., 1986. Synthesis of research on
the effects of mastery learning in elementary and
secondary classrooms. Educational Leadership, 43,
73–80.
Hattie, J., & Timperley, H., 2007. The power of feedback.
Review of Educational Research, 77, 88–112.
Heritage, M., & Popham, W. J., 2013. Formative
assessment in practice: A process of inquiry and action.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.
Kluger, A. N., & deNisi, A., 1996. The effects of feedback
interventions on performance: A historical review, a
meta-analysis, and a preliminary feedback intervention
theory. Psychological Bulletin, 119(2), 254–284.
Koedinger, K., & Aleven, V., 2007. Exploring the
assistance dilemma in experiments with Cognitive
Tutors. Educational Psychology Review, 19, 239–264.
Kulik, C., Kulik, J., & Bangert-Drowns, R., 1990.
Effectiveness of mastery learning programs: A meta-
analysis. Review of Educational Research, 60(2), 265–
306.
Speece, D. L., Molloy, D. E., & Case, L. P., 2003.
Responsiveness to general education instruction as the
first gate to learning disabilities identification. Learning
Disabilities: Research & Practice, 18(3), 147–156.
Roediger, H., III., & Karpicke, J. D., 2006. Test-enhanced
learning: Taking memory tests improves long-term
retention, Psychological Science, 17(3), 249–255.
Subban, P., 2006. Differentiated instruction: A research
basis. International Education Journal, 7(7), 935–947.
Tomlinson, C. A., & McTighe, J., 2006. Integrating
differentiated instruction and understanding by design.
Yixue Adaptive Learning System and Its Promise on Improving Student Learning
51