Education Sciences

Learning analytics enables the collection of behavioural trace data from digital learning environments, providing objective records of learners’ interactions. However, the educational interpretation of these traces remains underdeveloped, particularly in augmented reality (AR) learning environments, where little is known about their relationship with pupils’ behavioural engagement. This study examined the relationships between gameplay-derived behavioural trace indicators and five dimensions of pupils’ behavioural engagement in an AR learning environment. A quantitative, non-experimental correlational design involved 63 primary school pupils. Gameplay Duration, Gameplay Score, Total Clicks and Distance Moved were automatically captured across three gameplay sessions using the Falling Leaves AR learning application developed by the research team. Behavioural engagement was measured using the Motivation and Engagement Scale-Junior School (MES-JS), comprising Planning, Task Management, Persistence, Self-Sabotage and Disengagement. Five exploratory multiple linear regression models were estimated to examine the associations between gameplay-derived behavioural trace indicators and the five engagement dimensions. Gameplay Score remained significantly associated with all five engagement dimensions after the Benjamini–Hochberg correction, while Gameplay Duration remained significant only for Planning and Disengagement. Total Clicks and Distance Moved showed no statistically significant associations in the regression models. These findings suggest that selected gameplay-derived behavioural trace indicators may provide complementary information about pupils’ behavioural engagement, although interpretation remains subject to measurement limitations and the exploratory nature of the analysis.

Growing concern for the wellbeing of students has sparked the development of many wellbeing initiatives within higher education institutions (HEIs). Irish and international policies are calling for curricular approaches to student wellbeing as part of the response. While some research has been conducted on student perceptions and experiences of such wellbeing programmes, less is known about the experiences of educators who facilitate these. This research explores the experiences of academic staff in Irish HEIs in delivering wellbeing programmes for students within or alongside the curriculum. A qualitative exploratory study design was employed. Data from semi-structured interviews with 12 educators were analysed thematically. Four themes were generated: (1) Educators must navigate various understandings of wellbeing; (2) The relationships between wellbeing, educators and their programmes are symbiotic; (3) Programme success relies on pedagogical approaches and institutional supports; and (4) Embedding wellbeing in the curriculum requires balancing access, academic integrity and safe practice. Findings capture educators’ desire for embedding wellbeing programmes and highlight the importance of legitimising and normalising wellbeing education in HEIs. Participant experiences can guide future development and facilitation of similar wellbeing programmes.

Adaptive assessment systems promise to diagnose each learner’s gaps and respond with targeted tasks and feedback, yet trials rarely show that they improve independently measured conceptual understanding beyond what equal time on conventional digital practice achieves. This protocol describes a two-arm cluster-randomised trial in schools that follow the Cambridge Lower Secondary Mathematics framework. Grade 8 mathematics teachers will be randomised within schools to AIMAS-8, a system that combines a concept-level dynamic Bayesian learner model, prerequisite-aware item selection and expert-authored misconception feedback, or to the same items delivered in a fixed order with worked solutions. Both arms receive twelve 30 min sessions on linear relationships. The primary outcome is an independently developed conceptual mastery test at week 7; secondary outcomes are transfer, retention at week 11 and moderation by baseline achievement. Design checks are reported: 46 recruited teacher clusters (approximately 41 expected to remain after cluster attrition) and about 1500 expected analysed students provide 80% power for a 0.25 SD difference under the stated planning assumptions; preliminary simulation checks retained a nominal Type I error of 0.050 and recovered known effects without appreciable bias; and the learner model did not classify mastery more accurately than a fixed sequence, which led to a coverage safeguard. The planning sequence is approximately 2300 students invited, 85% consent, 15% student-level attrition and 10% teacher-cluster attrition. No participant data have been collected.