A new open-access article has been published, titled “Personalization is no miracle cure: evaluation of a technology-enhanced self-regulated learning intervention for continuing education” in the domain of educational technology and organizational learning. 📖
Fromm, Y., Ifenthaler, D., & Rasch, J. (2026). Personalization is no miracle cure: Evaluation of a technology-enhanced self-regulated learning intervention for continuing education. Computers & Education Open, 10, 100352. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeo.2026.100352
In cognitive psychology and the learning sciences, personalised dashboards and goal-setting tools are frequently championed as panaceas for supporting self-regulated learning (SRL) in online continuing education. However, empirical evidence suggests we must adopt a more critically reflective stance toward these technology-enhanced interventions (TEPSIs). 💻
Using a robust mixed-methods research design, this study evaluated a TEPSI through:
1️⃣ An experimental study (N = 146 ) across three self-paced professional learning paths (Agile Management, Data Reporting, and Leadership in Practice) over a 12-week period.
2️⃣ A qualitative think-aloud interview study (N = 20 ) to scrutinize user experience, perceived usefulness, and ease of use.
💡This research serves as a critical reminder for instructional designers and educational technologists: personalisation without rigorous, user-centred pedagogical alignment can hinder, rather than facilitate, cognitive offloading and self-regulation.
📚 Read the full paper to explore the design implications for your own organizational learning systems: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666557326000236?via%3Dihub
Self-regulated learning (SRL) has been considered essential for learning success in continuing education (CE), especially in online learning settings. This paper employs a mixed-methods approach to evaluate a technology-enhanced personalized SRL intervention (TEPSI) that provides a goal-setting functionality, a personalized learning plan, and a personalized dashboard to support SRL in CE. We conducted an experimental study in which participants (N = 146) could choose one of three self-paced online learning paths (Agile Management, Data Reporting, or Leadership in Practice) and were asked to complete this learning path within a 12-week learning period. Participants were randomly assigned to an intervention condition, in which the TEPSI was available, and a control condition, in which the TEPSI was not available. The availability of the TEPSI positively affected learners’ self-reported time and study environment in the Data Reporting learning path. Still, it did not affect learning processes in the other two learning paths. Further analyses revealed that interacting with the TEPSI could also negatively affect SRL. Moreover, we conducted a qualitative interview study (N = 20) using the think-aloud method to gain deeper insights into the benefits and weaknesses of the TEPSI. We identified several issues regarding learners’ perceived ease of use and usefulness of the intervention. Our findings show that personalization is no miracle cure and may have negative side effects when not implemented properly. The findings provide several implications for designing TEPSIs for CE.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666557326000236?via%3Dihub
