Home⇛Psychology and Education: A Multidisciplinary Journal⇛vol. 40 no. 3 (2025)

Development and Assessment of Alternative Learning System Learners’ Performance Tracker

Ruth Emeterio | Francis Kenneth Canono

Discipline: Education

 

Abstract:

The main purpose of this study was to develop and assess the Alternative Learning System (ALS) learners’ performance tracker for the teachers in Davao del Norte. It aimed to propose an intervention program based on the acceptability of the developed system. The researcher employed the quantitative approach, specifically the descriptive research design guided by the Agile software development process model. The study involved 155 Alternative Learning System teachers and implementers from the Division of Davao del Norte, specifically in the Municipality of Sto. Tomas. Through a methodical design, the newly developed tracker includes key features and capabilities such as the Dashboard, Files tab, Student Selection page, Student Data page, Least Learned Competencies page, Learner Score Sheet tab, and Feedback page. Furthermore, this investigation used the adapted survey questionnaire with three indicators: perceived utility, ease of use, and perceived impact. Statistical tools such as mean and standard deviation were used to analyze data. The final analysis revealed that the level of acceptability of the alternative learning system learners’ performance tracker is very high. Furthermore, it was revealed that the teachers had very high perceived utility, ease of use, and perceived impact. The findings imply that the performance tracker has strong potential for widespread adoption, as its design and functionality effectively support teachers in enhancing student assessment and instructional decision-making.



References:

  1. Abdullah, F., Ward, R., & Ahmed, E. (2020). Investigating the influence of the most commonly used external variables of TAM on students’ perceived ease of use (PEOU) and perceived usefulness (PU) of e-portfolios. Computers in Human Behavior, 63, 75-90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2020.04.024
  2. Ancho, I. V., & Pateña, A. R. D. (2022). Flexible learning and its implication to academic engagement and performance. International Journal of Educational Management, 36(3), 401–415. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJEM-0 8-2021-0342
  3. Andres, K. M., & Cruz, L. R. (2023). Empowering educators through learning analytics: Enhancing teaching effectiveness in alternative education. Journal of Educational Technology and Innovation, 5(2), 54–66.
  4. Bautista, R. C., & Torres, E. L. (2021). Leveraging digital tools to identify learning gaps in alternative learning systems. Philippine Journal of Alternative Education, 8(1), 22–33.
  5. Beck, K., Beedle, M., van Bennekum, A., Cockburn, A., Cunningham, W., Fowler, M., Grenning, J., Highsmith, J., Hunt, A., Jeffries, R., Kern, J., Marick, B., Martin, R. C., Mellor, S., Schwaber, K., Sutherland, J., & Thomas, D. (2001). Manifesto for agile software development. Agile Alliance. https://agilemanifesto.org/
  6. Bernardo, A. B. I., Calleja, M. C., & Resurreccion, K. F. (2020). Understanding inclusive education in the Philippines: Policies and practices in Alternative Learning System (ALS). Asia Pacific Education Review, 21(1), 23–36. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12564-019-09614-8
  7. Bowen, G. A. (2009). Document analysis as a qualitative research method.
  8. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2013). Successful qualitative research: A practical guide for beginners. Sage.
  9. Brown, M., Hughes, H., & Ruhl, S. (2019). Digital learner engagement: A framework for measuring the impact of technology on learning. Journal of Educational Technology Research and Development, 67(3), 345-360. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-019-09689-7
  10. Bustamante, M. A., Alayon, S. E., & Ruiz, R. J. (2021). Use of digital learning platforms in alternative learning systems during the pandemic. Journal of Educational Research and Technology, 16(2), 112–125.
  11. Cabardo, J. R. (2020). Differentiated instruction in the Alternative Learning System: Basis for an instructional delivery plan. International Journal of Educational Management and Development Studies, 1(1), 28–43.
  12. Cahapay, M. B. (2020). The role of technology in reshaping teaching and learning in the 21st century. Education and Information Technologies, 25(4), 3033–3055. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-019-10368-3
  13. Cao, L., & Zhang, Z. (2020). The impact of technology on teaching and learning: Improving academic outcomes with educational tools. Educational Technology Research & Development, 68(2), 451–468. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-019-09791-4
  14. Chang, Y., & Kim, D. (2016). Community engagement in FLT programs: A path to enhanced resources and support. Journal of Community Literacy, 11(2), 76- 88.
  15. Chen, Y. (2016). Resource scarcity and its impact on FLT outcomes in ALS. Journal of Adult Education, 45(2), 113-129.
  16. Cohn, M. (2005). Agile estimating and planning. Prentice Hall.
  17. Creswell, J. W. (2018). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (4th ed.). Sage Publications.
  18. Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2017). Designing and conducting mixed methods research (3rd ed.). Sage Publications.
  19. Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2018). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches. Sage Publications.
  20. Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319-340.
  21. Davis, F. D., & Venkatesh, V. (2020). Extending the technology acceptance model: The influence of perceived ease of use on consumer acceptance of internet banking. Internet Research, 30(6), 154-174. https://doi.org/10.1108/IntR-05-2019-0203
  22. Dela Cruz, A. (2018). Enhancing accountability in alternative learning system: The role of performance tracker systems. Journal of Non-Formal Education, 24(2), 45-58.
  23. Dela Cruz, J. (2022). Pilot Study on the Use of Basic Digital Trackers in ALS Centers in Davao Del Norte. Unpublished manuscript.
  24. Dela Cruz, M. (2023). Local Challenges in ALS Implementation: The Case of Davao Region. Davao Research Foundation.
  25. Delacruz, M. J., & Ramos, P. L. (2020). Integrating technology in alternative learning systems: Usability and implementation challenges. Journal of Philippine Educational Technology, 9(2), 15–25.
  26. Delos Santos, M. D., & Javier, R. A. (2020). Utilization of learning analytics for instructional planning in alternative learning systems. Philippine Journal of Education, Arts and Sciences, 14(2), 42–50.
  27. Department of Agriculture. (2021). Agricultural Statistics of Davao del Norte [Report]. Retrieved from https://www.agriculture.gov.ph/
  28. Department of Public Works and Highways. (2020). Infrastructure Development Plan for Davao Region [Report]. Retrieved from https://www.dpwh.gov.ph/
  29. Dizon, G. C., Cruz, R. L., & Tameta, A. C. (2021). Innovative teaching strategies in ALS: Enhancing engagement and performance through technology integration. ALS Educators Journal, 5(2), 45–57.
  30. Engeström, Y. (1987). Learning by expanding: An activity-theoretical approach to developmental research. Helsinki: Orienta-Konsultit.
  31. Fernandez, J., & Li, M. (2015). Challenges in delivering FLT programs in under- resourced settings. Literacy and Development Review, 31(4), 250-265.
  32. Fernandez, M., & Rivera, L. (2019). Integrating diverse learning needs in FLT programs: Strategies and outcomes. Journal of Innovative Education Strategies, 12(3), 175-190.
  33. Fernandez, S., & Martinez, L. (2017). Enhancing assessment in alternative learning system: The role of adaptive tools. Journal of Educational Technology, 19(3), 56-71.
  34. Fernandez, S., & Santos, J. (2019). Training and support mechanisms for integrating performance tracker systems in alternative learning system: A qualitative study. Journal of Educational Technology, 21(2), 87-102.
  35. Finkelstein, J., & Silverman, R. (2020). Teacher acceptance of learning management systems: The role of perceived utility and ease of use. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 58(7), 1154–1173. https://doi.org/10.1177/0735633119877746
  36. Flores, J. M., & Medina, S. D. (2020). Data-informed teaching practices and their impact on learning outcomes in flexible education settings. International Journal of Educational Policy Research and Review, 7(4), 89–97.
  37. Garcia, R., & Santos, M. (2022). Effectiveness of digital performance trackers in Cebu’s ALS programs. Cebu Education Review, 38(2), 67-82.
  38. Garcia, R., et al. (2019). Real-time data analytics in alternative learning system: Implications for performance tracking. Educational Technology Research and Development, 67(2), 189-204.
  39. Gikas, J., & Grant, M. M. (2013). Mobile computing devices in higher education: Student perspectives on learning with cellphones, smartphones & social media. Internet and Higher Education, 19, 18-26.
  40. Goh, C. F., & Lim, L. H. (2019). Enhancing teaching practices through educational technology: The role of usability and perceived utility in teacher adoption. Computers & Education, 135, 10–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.03.009
  41. Gomez, E. (2024). Towards Effective FLT Integration: A Qualitative Exploration. Innovative Education Solutions.
  42. Gupta, A., & Singh, D. (2021). The challenge of assessment validity in functional literacy tests within ALS. Educational Assessment Review, 5(2), 88-104.
  43. Harrison, T. M., & Stephen, A. (2017). Teaching and learning in digital environments: The resurgence of resource-based learning. Educational Technology Research and Development, 65(4), 1015-1036.
  44. Hernandez, J., & Li, Q. (2017). ALS teachers’ perceptions of FLT systems: A qualitative study. Teachers and Teaching, 23(4), 451-467.
  45. Hernandez, L., & Patel, S. (2014). Effective teacher training for FLT integration: Insights from ALS educators. Journal of Education and Training, 6(3), 234- 247.
  46. Highsmith, J. (2002). Agile software development ecosystems. Addison-Wesley.
  47. Hodges, C., Moore, S., Lockee, B., Trust, T., & Bond, A. (2020). The difference between emergency remote teaching and online learning. Educause Review, 27(1), 1-12.
  48. Hodges, C., Moore, S., Lockee, B., Trust, T., & Bond, A. (2020). The difference between emergency remote teaching and online learning. Educause Review, 27(1), 1-12.
  49. Hsu, C. K., & Ching, Y. H. (2021). Exploring teachers’ acceptance of educational technology: The role of ease of use and confidence in technology. Educational Technology Research and Development, 69(1), 203–220. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-021-09958-5
  50. Huang, F., Teo, T., & Zhou, M. (2020). Factors affecting university students’ use of a mobile learning management system in an Australian university. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 36(2), 116-129. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.5552
  51. Ifenthaler, D., & Schweinbenz, V. (2019). The acceptance of tablet-PCs in classroom instruction: The teachers’ perspectives. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(3), 525-534. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2019.01.001
  52. Ifenthaler, D., & Yau, J. Y. (2021). Utilising learning analytics to support study success in higher education: A systematic review. Educational Technology & Society, 24(1), 15-29. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-020-09890-8
  53. Johnson, A., & Smith, B. (2016). Personalized learning pathways in alternative learning system: A qualitative study on teachers’ perspectives. Journal of Non-Formal Education, 30(4), 123-138.
  54. Johnson, A., & Smith, B. (2020). Perceived benefits and drawbacks of performance tracker systems in alternative learning system: A qualitative study. Educational Practice and Research, 34(3), 156-171.
  55. Jones, A., Williams, P., & Brown, L. (2020). The impact of advanced performance tracking software on student engagement and dropout rates in the United Kingdom. British Journal of Educational Technology, 51(3), 456-472.
  56. Jones, R., & Kim, S. (2019). Overcoming digital divides in ALS FLT integration: A case study approach. Technology in Education Journal, 7(1), 45-59.
  57. Kim, D., & Park, H. (2019). The role of feedback in enhancing FLT materials: Insights from educators and learners. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 26(1), 84-101.
  58. Kim, H. J., & Lee, J. S. (2022). Investigating the relationship between usability and teacher satisfaction with educational tools. International Journal of Educational Technology, 18(4), 52–68. https://doi.org/10.4018/IJET.2022040104
  59. Kim, J., & Park, H. (2022). A critique of standardized FLT assessments: A call for reform. International Journal of Literacy Studies, 39(3), 207-223.
  60. Klein, J. T. (2015). Interdisciplinarity: History, theory, and practice. Wayne State University Press.
  61. Krueger, R. A., & Casey, M. A. (2015). Focus groups: A practical guide for applied research (5th ed.). Sage Publications.
  62. Larman, C., & Basili, V. R. (2003). Iterative and incremental development: A brief history.  IEEE Computer, 36(6), 47–56. https://doi.org/10.1109/MC.2003.1204375
  63. Lee, A., & Chen, B. (2015). The motivational impact of FLT participation on adult learners. Adult Learning Journal, 26(1), 34-45.
  64. Lee, A., & Zhang, B. (2017). The impact of culturally relevant FLT materials on learner engagement. Multicultural Education Review, 9(4), 231-246.
  65. Lee, K. C., & Martin, F. (2020). The role of feedback in digital learning: Enhancing perceived impact and learner engagement. Educational Technology & Society, 23(2), 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-019-09730-9
  66. Lee, K. C., Lau, T. M., & Yuen, A. H. K. (2021). User acceptance of internet-based learning medium: The role of extrinsic and intrinsic motivation. Information & Management, 58(1), 103-119. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2020.103119
  67. Lee, S. (2022). The impact of culturally relevant FLT content on learner engagement in ALS. Journal of Multicultural Education, 19(4), 289-305.
  68. Leont’ev, A. N. (1978). Activity, consciousness, and personality. Prentice-Hall.
  69. Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Sage Publications.
  70. Liu, Y., & Li, S. (2021). Usability and perceived utility of digital assessment tools in education: A study of teachers’ adoption. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 50(2), 170–188. https://doi.org/10.1177/00472395211018984
  71. Llego, M. A. (2023). Data-driven tools for improving learner outcomes in Philippine non-formal education. Philippine Journal of Educational Policy and Innovation, 11(1), 67–79.
  72. Lopez, A., & Fernandez, J. (2023). Reducing dropout rates in Mindanao’s ALS through digital tracking systems. Mindanao Journal of Educational Technology, 52(1), 123-138.
  73. Lopez, R. S., & Hernandez, K. M. (2023). Teacher confidence and usability perceptions in adopting digital tools in flexible learning. Southeast Asian Journal of Educational Research and Technology, 3(1), 34–45.
  74. Martin, F., Polly, D., Coles, S., & Wang, C. (2020). Examining higher education faculty use of current digital technologies: Importance, competence, and motivation. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 32(1), 73-86.
  75. Martin, R. C. (2003). Agile software development: Principles, patterns, and practices. Prentice Hall.
  76. Martinez, A., & Rivera, C. (2019). Addressing learner diversity in ALS FLT programs. Adult Education Quarterly, 69(2), 101-117.
  77. Martinez, B., & Rivera, J. (2020). Cultural and linguistic challenges in FLT: A qualitative analysis. Multicultural Education Review, 8(4), 213-230.
  78. Martínez, C. A., & Cruz, A. (2022). Exploring the effectiveness of digital performance tracking tools in modern classrooms. Journal of Educational Research, 115(1), 34–50. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220671.2022.2027452
  79. Martinez, E., & Gomez, L. (2020). Tracing the long-term outcomes of FLT program respondents: A longitudinal analysis. Lifelong Learning Studies, 17(3), 213- 229.
  80. Martinez, J., & Gonzalez, R. (2019). Building resilience: The role of teacher support networks in ALS. Teacher Professional Development Journal, 15(1), 112- 130.
  81. Martinez, L., & Garcia, R. (2019). Leveraging technology in alternative learning system: A qualitative study on teachers’ perspectives. International Journal of Educational Technology, 15(3), 123-137.
  82. Martinez, L., et al. (2017). Exploring the acceptability of performance tracker systems among alternative learning system teachers. Journal of Non- Formal Education, 33(1), 45-60.
  83. Miller, A. D., & Wang, H. (2022). Exploring the impact of performance tracking systems on teaching and learning outcomes in K-12 education. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 25(3), 139–152. https://doi.org/10.2307/27892240
  84. Murphy, A., & Chan, E. (2020). Bridging the gap: Enhancing digital literacy in ALS through FLT programs. Journal of Digital Learning and Literacy, 11(2), 134- 150.
  85. National Commission on Indigenous Peoples. (2019). Indigenous Peoples in Davao del Norte [Webpage]. Retrieved from https://www.ncip.gov.ph/
  86. Nguyen, H., & Lee, W. (2021). Advocating for ALS: Policy changes to support FLT integration. Educational Policy Analysis and Strategic Research, 16(2), 88- 104.
  87. Nguyen, T. (2021). Adapting FLT materials for cultural and linguistic diversity in ALS programs. Cultural and Linguistic Education Journal, 15(2), 117-132.
  88. Nguyen, T., & Nguyen, T. (2021). Examining the effects of teachers’ technology acceptance on their use of digital tools for student assessment. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 24(2), 91–104. https://doi.org/10.2307/27889846
  89. Norman, D. A. (2013). The design of everyday things: Revised and expanded edition. Basic Books.
  90. Ocampo, L. (2021). Assessing Literacy: A Cross-Cultural Analysis. Global Education Publishers.
  91. Ocampo, Y. (2023). Policy inconsistencies and FLT implementation: An exploratory study in the Philippine ALS context. Policy Studies in Education, 21(1), 31-47.
  92. O’Connor, M., & Li, W. (2024). The gap between policy and practice in ALS FLT integration. Policy and Practice in Education, 30(1), 56-72.
  93. O’Connor, P., & Zhang, S. (2021). Policy support for FLT systems: Identifying key success factors. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 29, 112.
  94. OECD. (2013). OECD Skills Outlook 2013: First Results from the Survey of Adult Skills. OECD Publishing.
  95. Palinkas, L. A., Horwitz, S. M., Green, C. A., Wisdom, J. P., Duan, N., & Hoagwood, K. (2015). Purposeful sampling for qualitative data collection and analysis in mixed method implementation research. Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research, 42(5), 533- 544.
  96. Patel, A., & Lee, Y. (2022). Learner feedback on FLT experiences: Implications for adult literacy education. Journal of Educational Research, 115(2), 142-156.
  97. Patel, B., & Kumar, S. (2023). *Stakeholder engagement in FLT programs: Challenges and opportunities.
  98. Patel, R., & Kumar, S. (2014). Evaluating the alignment of FLT assessments with learner needs. Journal of Literacy and Adult Education, 29(3), 207-222.
  99. Patel, V., & Gomez, F. (2018). Professional development for ALS teachers: Impact on FLT integration efforts. Adult Learning and Development Journal, 22(3), 142-158.
  100. Patton, M. Q. (2015). Qualitative research & evaluation methods: Integrating theory and practice (4th ed.). Sage Publications.
  101. Philippine Statistics Authority. (2020). Davao del Norte Provincial Profile [Report]. Retrieved from https://www.psa.gov.ph/ Qualitative Research Journal, 9(2), 27-40.
  102. Reyes, J. P., Santos, R. G., & Alvarez, M. L. (2021). Data-driven decision-making and its impact on learner performance in flexible learning environments. Asia Pacific Journal of Multidisciplinary Research, 9(1), 75–83.
  103. Reyes, M. (2023). Impact of Mobile Learning Applications on ALS Student Engagement and Dropout Rates in Tagum City. Journal of Alternative Learning, 15(2), 45-60.
  104. Reyes, M., & Fernandez, S. (2020). Addressing learner diversity in alternative learning system: Insights from ALS teachers. Educational Practice and Research, 32(4), 89-104.
  105. Rivera, A., & Lopez, B. (2020). Discrepancies in Functional Literacy Integration: An ALS Perspective. Manila Academic Press.
  106. Robinson, C., & Patel, D. (2022). Continuous learning for ALS educators: Adapting to change in FLT methodologies. Lifelong Learning in Education, 18(3), 142-159.
  107. Rogers, E. M. (2003). Diffusion of innovations (5th ed.). Free Press.
  108. Santos, E. F., & Valdez, J. M. (2021). The role of user-friendly platforms in enhancing technology integration in non-formal education programs. International Journal of Educational Innovation and Research, 5(4), 67–76.
  109. Santos, J., et al. (2016). Peer networks and social dynamics in alternative learning system: Implications for the acceptability of performance tracker systems. International Journal of Educational Technology, 22(4), 189-204.
  110. Santos, J., et al. (2017). Exploring the socio-emotional impacts of performance tracker systems in alternative learning system. Journal of Educational Psychology, 42(1), 67-82.
  111. Santos, J., et al. (2020). Fostering collaboration in alternative learning system: Insights from educators. International Journal of Educational Technology, 24(1), 89-104.
  112. Santos, L. (2021). Effectiveness of Community-Based Learning Hubs in Panabo City for ALS Learners. Alternative Learning Studies, 12(4), 112-130.
  113. Santos, R. (2022). The State of Functional Literacy in the Philippines: An Analysis. Philippine Educational Society.
  114. Schoonenboom, J., & Johnson, R. B. (2017). How to construct a mixed methods research design. Kölner Zeitschrift für Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie, 69(2), 107-131.
  115. Schwaber, K., & Sutherland, J. (2017). The Scrum guide: The definitive guide to Scrum: The rules of the game. Scrum.Org. https://www.scrumguides.org/
  116. Singh, H. (2017). Exploring ALS teacher preparedness for FLT system integration. Journal of Adult and Continuing Education, 23(1), 58-76.
  117. Singh, L., & Patel, V. (2018). Cultural and linguistic adaptation in FLT materials: Toward inclusive literacy practices. Multicultural Education Review, 10(2), 95-110.
  118. Smith, A., & Johnson, B. (2019). Functional Literacy in Adult Education: An International Review. Educational Insights Press.
  119. Smith, J. A., Flowers, P., & Larkin, M. (2009). Interpretative phenomenological analysis: Theory, method and research. Sage.
  120. Smith, J., & Johnson, M. (2018). Towards flexible FLT assessment: Meeting the diverse needs of ALS learners. Assessment and Evaluation in Adult Education, 23(2), 195-211.
  121. Smith, J., & Robertson, M. (2019). Enhancing adult literacy with performance tracking technology. Journal of Adult Education Technology, 24(2), 134-150. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaet.2019.07.004
  122. Sun, Y., & Gao, F. (2021). Exploring the impact of perceived ease of use on continuous intention to use in the context of mobile learning. Education and Information Technologies, 26(3), 1-18. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-020-10433-1
  123. Tanaka, H., & Garcia, R. (2018). Organizational culture and leadership support in alternative learning system: Influences on the acceptability of performance tracker systems. Educational Technology Research and Development, 66(3), 267-282.
  124. Tanaka, H., & Yamamoto, K. (2018). User-friendly design in alternative learning system: A qualitative study on teachers’ preferences. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 28(3), 345-360.
  125. Tanaka, Y., & Watanabe, H. (2021). AI-driven performance trackers in Japanese high school curriculums: Educational outcomes and teacher workload. Asian Journal of Education and Technology, 29(4), 210-225.
  126. Taylor, K., & Singh, L. (2020). Integrating FLT with vocational training: A holistic approach to adult literacy. Vocational Education and Training Journal, 21(4), 307-325.
  127. Thompson, L., & Lee, M. (2020). Inclusive strategies for diverse learners in ALS FLT programs. Journal of Inclusive Education, 24(5), 520-536.
  128. UNESCO. (2017). Second Chance Education: Unlocking the Potential of Out-of- School Youth. UNESCO Publishing.
  129. University of the Philippines. (2021). Digital divide in education: Embracing technology in the Philippine education system. UP Center for Educational Research and Development.
  130. Valenzuela, C. M., & Garcia, T. L. (2022). Challenges in the integration of data systems in alternative education programs: A case study in Southern Philippines. International Journal of Educational Management and Development Studies, 3(4), 29–43.
  131. Van der Kleij, F. M., Eggen, T. J. H. M., & Timmers, C. F. (2019). The effect of feedback on learning from performance assessments. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 26(4), 467-485. https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2019.1644332
  132. van Manen, M. (2016). Researching lived experience: Human science for an action sensitive pedagogy. Left Coast Press.
  133. Venkatesh, V., Thong, J. Y., & Xu, X. (2012). Consumer acceptance and use of information technology: Extending the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology. MIS Quarterly, 36(1), 157-178.
  134. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.
  135. Wang, T., & Yu, Z. (2021). Personalizing learning through technology: The role of performance tracking systems in differentiated instruction. Computers & Education, 172, 104246. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2021.104246
  136. Wong, A., & Chen, X. (2023). Monitoring and evaluating FLT programs: Strategies for continuous improvement. Journal of Literacy Research, 25(1), 58-73.
  137. Wong, C., & Kim, J. (2023). A comparative analysis of FLT approaches: Digital versus traditional assessments. Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education, 39(1), 25-39.
  138. Wong, F., & Nguyen, M. (2016). Exploring the potential of online FLT resources in adult literacy education. Technology in Education Journal, 12(2), 58-72.
  139. Wong, L., & Liu, M. (2015). Mobile learning in FLT: Bridging the digital divide in ALS. Journal of Educational Technology in Adult Learning, 12(2), 89-105.
  140. Yu, J. (2018, July). Research process on software development model. In IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering (Vol. 394, No. 3, p. 032045). IOP Publishing
  141. Zhang, L., & Chen, X. (2020). Teacher adoption of educational technology: The role of perceived ease of use and intuitive design. Journal of Educational Technology Development & Exchange, 13(2), 37–52. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40510-020-00088-w
  142. Zimmerman, B. J., & Kitsantas, A. (2020). The role of self-regulated learning in performance tracking: A framework for evaluating digital learning tools. Journal of Learning Analytics, 7(2), 45-60. https://doi.org/10.18608/jla.2020.12.2.3

Tools


Copyright © 2025  KITE Digital Educational Solutions |  Exclusively distributed by CE-Logic