Personalized System of Instruction in Higher Education: A Systematic Review
Saved in:
| Title: | Personalized System of Instruction in Higher Education: A Systematic Review |
|---|---|
| Language: | English |
| Authors: | Arlene Mannion (ORCID |
| Source: | Journal of Behavioral Education. 2025 34(2):330-370. |
| Availability: | Springer. Available from: Springer Nature. One New York Plaza, Suite 4600, New York, NY 10004. Tel: 800-777-4643; Tel: 212-460-1500; Fax: 212-460-1700; e-mail: customerservice@springernature.com; Web site: https://link.springer.com/ |
| Peer Reviewed: | Y |
| Page Count: | 41 |
| Publication Date: | 2025 |
| Document Type: | Journal Articles Information Analyses |
| Education Level: | Higher Education Postsecondary Education |
| Descriptors: | Individualized Instruction, Higher Education, Teaching Methods, Educational Research |
| DOI: | 10.1007/s10864-023-09530-8 |
| ISSN: | 1053-0819 1573-3513 |
| Abstract: | Personalized System of Instruction (PSI), also known as the Keller method, is a specific instructional design. There has been limited research focused on how this method has been used in teaching in higher education. The aim of this systematic review is to focus on how PSI has been applied to teaching in higher education in the last 20 years. Searches were conducted on the following databases: Educational Resources Information Center (ERIC), Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection (EBSCO), PsycINFO, Scopus and Web of Science. Hand searches were also conducted on a number of journals. Inclusion criteria were that articles (a) included the use of the PSI and (b) included university students as participants. It was found that 27 studies met the inclusion criteria. Studies were divided into themes. Results were discussed in terms of how PSI can be used in teaching and learning, similarities between PSI and other approaches, and the ways PSI could be incorporated with other teaching approaches. Finally, future directions were given for the use of PSI in the area of teaching and learning in higher education. |
| Abstractor: | As Provided |
| Entry Date: | 2025 |
| Accession Number: | EJ1485452 |
| Database: | ERIC |
|
Full text is not displayed to guests.
Login for full access.
|
|
| FullText | Links: – Type: pdflink Url: https://content.ebscohost.com/cds/retrieve?content=AQICAHj0k_4E0hTGH8RJwT4gCJyBsGNe_WN95AvKlDbXJGqwxwFuGlvWaYfTyqBYV5Kbag3aAAAA4zCB4AYJKoZIhvcNAQcGoIHSMIHPAgEAMIHJBgkqhkiG9w0BBwEwHgYJYIZIAWUDBAEuMBEEDP2-znbI1ISYkuen8wIBEICBm4i5wfy0---ljUqAitFd1V-du5FcoXNehmM5nMP79U4z1t6WX5hOX0nPvmiAuMd2FUiCeTl4HDY9HMuUytk17bmFx_Ksfa164NlP2qOsOm8Q-PBJlPxMnLnlYx3Rv7yFBozOm2nxA2CTaLjtQPgM02fKgSkl97kyt-hqGF87Zzen8Cs3HTekYNFgYLLEKFN2FXypg4I5s-joX5yL Text: Availability: 1 Value: <anid>AN0186622212;41z01jun.25;2025Jul16.03:38;v2.2.500</anid> <title id="AN0186622212-1">Personalized System of Instruction in Higher Education: A Systematic Review </title> <p>Personalized System of Instruction (PSI), also known as the Keller method, is a specific instructional design. There has been limited research focused on how this method has been used in teaching in higher education. The aim of this systematic review is to focus on how PSI has been applied to teaching in higher education in the last 20 years. Searches were conducted on the following databases: Educational Resources Information Center (ERIC), Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection (EBSCO), PsycINFO, Scopus and Web of Science. Hand searches were also conducted on a number of journals. Inclusion criteria were that articles (a) included the use of the PSI and (b) included university students as participants. It was found that 27 studies met the inclusion criteria. Studies were divided into themes. Results were discussed in terms of how PSI can be used in teaching and learning, similarities between PSI and other approaches, and the ways PSI could be incorporated with other teaching approaches. Finally, future directions were given for the use of PSI in the area of teaching and learning in higher education.</p> <p>Keywords: Personalized System of Instruction; Keller method; Higher education; University; Education Curriculum and Pedagogy Specialist Studies In Education</p> <p>Copyright comment Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.</p> <hd id="AN0186622212-2">Introduction</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0186622212-3">Personalized System of Instruction</hd> <p>Personalized System of Instruction is also known as PSI or the Keller method. Fred Keller designed PSI and outlined five key features of the methodology in the seminal article on the procedure, which was Keller ([<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref1">19</reflink>]). First, students may go at their own pace. This was described as permitting a student to "move through the course at a speed commensurate with his ability and other demands upon his time" (Keller, [<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref2">19</reflink>], p. 83). Second, a unit perfection requirement is in place to advance through the course. This was described as letting students "go ahead to new material only after demonstrating mastery of that which preceded" (Keller, [<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref3">19</reflink>], p. 83). Third, lectures and demonstrations were used as "vehicles of motivation, rather than sources of critical information" (Keller, [<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref4">19</reflink>], p. 83). Fourth, there was a focus on "the written word in teacher-student communication" (Keller, [<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref5">19</reflink>], p. 83). Finally, the use of proctors was a key feature, "which permits repeated testing, immediate scoring, almost unavoidable tutoring, a marked enhancement of the personal-social aspect of the educational process" (Keller, [<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref6">19</reflink>], p. 83). Keller defined proctors to his students as "undergraduate who has been chosen for his mastery of the course content and orientation, for his maturity of judgement, for his understanding of the special problems that will confront you as a beginner, and for his willingness to assist" (Keller, [<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref7">19</reflink>], p. 81). A key focus of Keller ([<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref8">19</reflink>]) was that the student is always right.</p> <p>Kulik et al. ([<reflink idref="bib20" id="ref9">20</reflink>]) conducted a meta-analysis of outcome studies of PSI, which included 75 studies. It was found that overall students received a grade of 8% higher in examinations for those enrolled in PSI classes, in comparison with traditional classes. This meant that there was an increase in the final examination score where students would on average be in the 50th percentile, and after PSI were in the 70<sups>th</sups> percentile. The effects of PSI procedures lasted after the intervention was over. There was a gain of 14% in examination scores when examinations were administered several months after the course was completed. PSI also received higher student ratings in comparison with traditional lectures. It was found that PSI did not affect course withdrawal or the time students spent studying for these courses.</p> <p>Sherman ([<reflink idref="bib32" id="ref10">32</reflink>]) outlined two problems with PSI. The first problem was in the definition of PSI where Sherman ([<reflink idref="bib32" id="ref11">32</reflink>]) discussed how too broad a definition of PSI can make it too inclusive so that studies could be considered PSI that are not PSI at all. The second problem was the lack of dissemination. Sherman ([<reflink idref="bib32" id="ref12">32</reflink>]) discussed how the number of research articles declined due to the lack of a dedicated PSI journal. Sherman ([<reflink idref="bib32" id="ref13">32</reflink>]) also made the point that in some universities, lecturers were required to lecture for a certain percentage of the time, which removed the self-paced element of PSI.</p> <p>Grant and Spencer ([<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref14">16</reflink>]) discussed how PSI can be applied to distance education and outlined some of the key features of PSI that could be useful for distance education. These are as follows: (<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref15">1</reflink>) PSI as an Integrated Foundation for Distance Courses; (<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref16">2</reflink>) Prominence of the Written Word in PSI and Distance Instruction; (<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref17">3</reflink>) PSI's Flexibility for Distance Learners; (<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref18">4</reflink>) Technology in PSI and Distance Education, and (<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref19">5</reflink>) The Model of the Teacher–Researcher in PSI and in Distance Education.</p> <p>Eyre ([<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref20">12</reflink>]) outlined the history of PSI and discussed how PSI fell out of favour. One of the reasons was the time-intensive nature of PSI due to the development of learning objectives, a study guide, multiple versions of tests, and the training and supervision of proctors. Eyre ([<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref21">12</reflink>]) also discussed the positive impact that the internet has made to PSI courses. Recent PSI research was identified as being within four themes: (<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref22">1</reflink>) Procrastination and Pacing, (<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref23">2</reflink>) Mastery Criteria, (<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref24">3</reflink>) Proctor Feedback, and (<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref25">4</reflink>) Other areas of research (Eyre, [<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref26">12</reflink>]). Future possibilities were identified for PSI including the application of PSI to distance education, the incorporation of programmed instruction into PSI courses, and the incorporations of computers programmes to PSI courses (Eyre, [<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref27">12</reflink>]). The authors commented that "We will see in another decade or so if this resurgence of interest blossoms into a full-scale revival or was simply a fleeting fancy" (Eyre, [<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref28">12</reflink>], p. 321). The current systematic review aims to provide information as to the research that has been conducted in PSI in the past 20 years in order to determine where the literature currently stands in relation to PSI.</p> <hd id="AN0186622212-4">Aim of the Current Study</hd> <p>The aim of the current paper is to conduct a systematic review on how PSI has been used in higher education in the past 20 years. Similarities between PSI and other teaching and learning approaches can then be addressed, including how PSI can be incorporated with other approaches and future directions for research will be suggested.</p> <hd id="AN0186622212-5">Methodology</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0186622212-6">Research Design and Rationale</hd> <p>A systematic review was conducted given the novel nature of the topic. As no literature reviews existed on PSI in higher education, it was important to determine what literature has been conducted on the topic in order for future research to be conducted in the area. The rationale is that it is necessary to provide a broad overview of the topic as literature reviews have not been conducted on this topic. The aim of the systematic review is to introduce the area of PSI to researchers interested in teaching and learning in higher education, as well as to provide researchers with an overview of how they could expand their research interests to include researching the use of PSI in higher education.</p> <hd id="AN0186622212-7">Ethical Issues</hd> <p>As the study did not involve humans or animals, there were no ethical issues or concerns. Ethical approval did not need to be applied for in the current study.</p> <hd id="AN0186622212-8">Search Strategy</hd> <p>The search strategy included searching the following databases: Educational Resources Information Center (ERIC), Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection (EBSCO), PsycINFO, Scopus and Web of Science. The key search terms were "Personalized System of Instruction" OR "Personalised System of Instruction", OR "Mastery-Learning", OR "Self-paced instruction" AND "Higher education" OR "University" OR "Third level education" OR "college" OR "college students" OR "college teaching" OR "distance education" OR "computer-based instruction" OR "tutoring". These search terms are shown in Table 1.</p> <p>Table 1 Search terms used for Personalized System of Instruction search strategy</p> <p> <ephtml> &lt;table frame="hsides" rules="groups"&gt;&lt;thead&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;th align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;List of Key Words 1&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/th&gt;&lt;th align="left" /&gt;&lt;th align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;List of Key Words 2&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/th&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;/thead&gt;&lt;tbody&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Personalized System of Instruction&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;AND&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Higher Education&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;OR&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left" /&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;OR&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Personalised System of Instruction&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left" /&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;University&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;OR&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left" /&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;OR&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Mastery-learning&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left" /&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Third level education&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;OR&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left" /&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;OR&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Self-paced instruction&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left" /&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;College&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left" /&gt;&lt;td align="left" /&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;OR&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left" /&gt;&lt;td align="left" /&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;College students&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left" /&gt;&lt;td align="left" /&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;OR&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left" /&gt;&lt;td align="left" /&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;College teaching&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left" /&gt;&lt;td align="left" /&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;OR&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left" /&gt;&lt;td align="left" /&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Distance education&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left" /&gt;&lt;td align="left" /&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;OR&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left" /&gt;&lt;td align="left" /&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Computer-based instruction&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left" /&gt;&lt;td align="left" /&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;OR&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left" /&gt;&lt;td align="left" /&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Tutoring&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;/tbody&gt;&lt;/table&gt; </ephtml> </p> <p>A year limit of 2000–present was included. Hand searches were conducted of the following journals <emph>Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis</emph>, <emph>European Journal of Behavior Analysis, Journal of Behavioral Education, Teaching in Higher Education, Higher Education, Active Learning in Higher Education,</emph> and <emph>Journal of Higher Education.</emph> Zotero software was used to gather and organise the articles.</p> <hd id="AN0186622212-9">Inclusion Criteria</hd> <p>Only peer-reviewed journal articles were included. All articles were published in the English language. Inclusion criteria were that articles (a) included the use of Personalized System of Instruction procedures and (b) included university students as participants.</p> <hd id="AN0186622212-10">Exclusion Criteria</hd> <p>Studies were excluded if they were (a) conference presentations, (b) unpublished theses or dissertations, (c) not published in the English language, (d) did not use personalized system of instruction procedures, and (e) included participants that were not University students (i.e. staff members, adults in general, etc.).</p> <hd id="AN0186622212-11">Flow Diagram of Included/Excluded Articles</hd> <p>In Fig. 1 is a flow diagram showing included/excluded studies based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA; Moher et al., [<reflink idref="bib24" id="ref29">24</reflink>]).</p> <p>Graph: Fig. 1 Flow diagram showing inclusion/exclusion of Personalized System of Instruction studies identified during database search process</p> <p>In total, after excluding papers that did not meet the inclusion criteria, and removing duplicates, 27 articles were included in the review. These papers were divided into appropriate themes during the qualitative synthesis, and these themes and the papers are included and discussed in detail below.</p> <hd id="AN0186622212-12">Inter-Observer Agreement (IOA)</hd> <p>Calculation of Cohen's kappa statistic for Inter-Observer Agreement (IOA) indicated that there was a 87.5% level of agreement among reviewers regarding eligibility of studies (<emph>k</emph> =0.52).</p> <hd id="AN0186622212-13">Results</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0186622212-14">Summary of Studies</hd> <p>A summary of the studies is given in Table 2. This includes information on the number of participants, their age and gender, population, the subject area, PSI components, control group information, assessment, duration, results, and overall findings.</p> <p>Table 2 Summary of PSI research studies included in the current systematic review</p> <p> <ephtml> &lt;table frame="hsides" rules="groups"&gt;&lt;thead&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;th align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Author/s&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/th&gt;&lt;th align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;italic&gt;N&lt;/italic&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/th&gt;&lt;th align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Gender/age&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/th&gt;&lt;th align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Population&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/th&gt;&lt;th align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Subject&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/th&gt;&lt;th align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;PSI components&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/th&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;/thead&gt;&lt;tbody&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Brinkman et al. (&lt;xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr3"&gt;2007&lt;/xref&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;353 (&lt;italic&gt;N&lt;/italic&gt; = 176 in 2004 and &lt;italic&gt;N&lt;/italic&gt; = 177 in 2005)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Academic year 2004 (73% male, 27% female)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Academic year 2005 (79% male, 21% female)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;First year students at the School of Information Systems, Computing and Mathematics, Brunel University, UK&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Discrete mathematics course (Foundations of Computing)&amp;#8212;taught over two terms&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;1st term Computer-Aided-PSI (CAPSI):&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;Written material divided in 4 modules, each module including 5 learning units&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;Instructors (graduate teaching assistants)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;Lectures were mainly motivational&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;PSI modified to take advantage of an Online learning environment (OLE):&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;Videos&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;Online self-tests&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;Discussion boards&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;Lecture notes&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Brothen and Wambach (&lt;xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr4"&gt;2000&lt;/xref&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;136&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Not reported&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;First quarter developmental students&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;5 sections of introductory psychology course&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;Computer based exercises facilitate students' mastery (reached 80% mastery)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;Printed study guide (819 study questions)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;Factual study questions (= students wrote answers and turned in during class to be corrected&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;immediately)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;Students turned in their completed study questions twice a week. Each chapter worth 2 points (of 441 points)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Buzhardt and Semb (&lt;xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr5"&gt;2002&lt;/xref&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;150&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;70% female 30% male; &lt;italic&gt;M &lt;/italic&gt;age = 20 years&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Students enrolled in six groups of an undergraduate course in the USA&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Introduction to Child Development and Behavior&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Students were assigned to one of three conditions: feedback at the end of the quiz, feedback after each item with the option to skip questions, or feedback after each item with no option to skip&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Chase and Houmanfar (&lt;xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr6"&gt;2009&lt;/xref&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Experimental Group (EG, &lt;italic&gt;n&lt;/italic&gt; = 102)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Control Group (CG, &lt;italic&gt;n&lt;/italic&gt; = 108)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Equal gender split Freshman students (18&amp;#8211;19 years of age)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Freshman students (18&amp;#8211;19 years of age) in a PSI-type course at a Northwestern university in Nevada&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Introductory psychology course&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Elaborate feedback (EF) (written, verbal feedback delivered electronically) following the submission of each quiz and exam&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;All course content was presented by six instructors in the same order and within the same time frame (e.g. one chapter per week)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Crone-Todd et al. (&lt;xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr7"&gt;2007&lt;/xref&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;14&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Females (&lt;italic&gt;n&lt;/italic&gt; = 12)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Males (&lt;italic&gt;n&lt;/italic&gt; = 2)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Undergraduate Psychology students at Delta State University&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Increase reading and writing skills at a Senior-level Applied Behaviour Analysis course&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;CAPSI-self-paced&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;15-unit tests&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;Peer reviewing&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;Feedback&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;A decline in unit test writing was observed, so "conditional pass" (near mastery level) was incorporated&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;DeVoe et al. (&lt;xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr9"&gt;2007&lt;/xref&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;13&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Not reported&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;First-year medical students considered to be "at risk" of academic difficulty defined as those starting medical school with an MCAT composite score of 24 or below, and/or 7 or below on any section of the test&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;3 subject blocks, each lasting 6&amp;#8211;12 weeks&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;Human Structure Function and Development&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;Mechanisms of Disease&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;Neurosciences&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;Medical Education Apprenticeship Program (MEAP) structured study groups that were facilitated by 7 upper-level medical students (proctors)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;The at-risk students took short multiple-choice quizzes and discussed major concepts&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;students did not achieve 80% or better on the quizzes, they were required to take a second quiz to demonstrate mastery&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Ee et al. (&lt;xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr10"&gt;2018&lt;/xref&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;PSI (&lt;italic&gt;N&lt;/italic&gt; = 265)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Learning for Mastery (LFM) (&lt;italic&gt;N&lt;/italic&gt; = 395)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;PSI:&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Females (&lt;italic&gt;n&lt;/italic&gt; = 118)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Males (&lt;italic&gt;n&lt;/italic&gt; = 147)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;On-Campus (&lt;italic&gt;n&lt;/italic&gt; = 191)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Off-campus (&lt;italic&gt;n&lt;/italic&gt; = 74)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;LFM:&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Females (&lt;italic&gt;n&lt;/italic&gt; = 188)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Males (&lt;italic&gt;n&lt;/italic&gt; = 207)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;On-Campus (&lt;italic&gt;n&lt;/italic&gt; = 296)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Off-campus (&lt;italic&gt;n&lt;/italic&gt; = 99)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Postgraduate students at an Australian University&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Postgraduate finance course&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;PSI (single due date)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;Single due date at the end of the semester&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;Freedom to decide when to complete the quizzes&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Blended learning mode: substantial parts of the teaching and learning activities taking place in an online learning environment&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Eppler and Ironsmith (&lt;xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr11"&gt;2004&lt;/xref&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;814&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Not reported&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Students enrolled in 14 sections of a Developmental Psychology Course across four semesters&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Developmental Psychology Course&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Web PSI course:&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;1st semester completely self-paced but it was changed due to procrastination and consequently switched to firm deadlines. Students could accumulate credits that could be used to buy "back" one missed deadline at the end of the semester&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;On campus quizzes&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;Undergraduate proctors&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Fike et al. (&lt;xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr13"&gt;2011&lt;/xref&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;86&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Fall semester (&lt;italic&gt;n&lt;/italic&gt; = 47) and spring semester (&lt;italic&gt;n&lt;/italic&gt; = 39)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Females (&lt;italic&gt;n&lt;/italic&gt; = 52)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Males (&lt;italic&gt;n&lt;/italic&gt; = 34)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Age not reported&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Third-year Doctoral Pharmacy students at a public, urban university in the southwest United States&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Prescription Practice course within a Doctor of Pharmacy program&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;7 learning modules ("top 400" drugs")&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Per each module:&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;Comprehensive instructional materials via online course management system&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;In-class activities&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;Self-paced&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Foss et al. (&lt;xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr14"&gt;2014&lt;/xref&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Not reported&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Not reported&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Upper-division major students and freshman-level undergraduates&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Rhetorical Theory and Public Speaking&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Four core PSI components: reading the textbook alone, using the study guide to identify key ideas, discussing the ideas with a classmate, and applying their knowledge to a short-answer essay quiz. Students had a choice of which grade they wanted to work towards&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Gaheen et al. (&lt;xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr15"&gt;2021&lt;/xref&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;240&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Not reported&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Not reported&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;An unspecified Arabic course&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;An optimisation algorithm (e-Jaya)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Hu and Pear (&lt;xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr17"&gt;2016&lt;/xref&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;12&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Not reported&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;University students. 9 undergraduates and 3 postgraduates/masters. 50% enrolled in Psychology classes&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Teaching the Assessment of Basic Learning Abilities (ABLA)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;(a) studying the ABLA using a self-instructional manual (SIM), (b) working on the manual, combined with passing unit tests delivered via a comput-er-aided personalized system of instruction (CAPSI) program, and (c) watching demonstration videos&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Ironsmith and Eppler (&lt;xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr18"&gt;2007&lt;/xref&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;576 (&lt;italic&gt;N&lt;/italic&gt; = 298 PSI and &lt;italic&gt;N&lt;/italic&gt; = 278 lecture)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Females (83%)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Males (17%)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Undergraduate students&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Lecture vs. PSI. Students did not&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;differ at the beginning of the course on GPA&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;or learning goals&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Three GPA categories:&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt; (a) low-aptitude group (bottom third of sample)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt; (b) middle-aptitude&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;(Middle third)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt; (c) high aptitude group (top third)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Developmental psychology course&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;PSI:&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;13 study modules covering approximately one chapter each&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;Modules consisted of: learning objectives, questions on material from the textbook, and supplemental information&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;-Students proctors provided immediate feedback and answered questions&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;Requirement: 90% mastery criterion across a maximum of four attempts&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Lanter et al. (&lt;xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr21"&gt;2020&lt;/xref&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;35&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Control group (6 females, 12 male)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Experimental Group (3 females, 14 male)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Final Sample:&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Control group (10)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Experimental group (9)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Students enrolled in activity course "Free Weights and Machines" at a university&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Control group mean of experience in strength training of 40.4 months whereas the experimental group mean was 22.39 months (&lt;italic&gt;SD&lt;/italic&gt; = 5.10). The experimental group mean for the duration of a typical strength training session was 75.22 min (&lt;italic&gt;SD&lt;/italic&gt; = 5.03), whereas the control group mean was 57.3 min (&lt;italic&gt;SD&lt;/italic&gt; = 4.52)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Two introductory-level university strength training activity courses&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;-Personalized feedback to the experimental group at high rate&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;-Instructor assisted in adapting exercises to meet students' abilities and preferences&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;-Students developing their workouts with assistance and guidance from the instructor, which followed a student-centered approach&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;-Variations of workouts tailored to the individual within the experimental group were created&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Martin et al. (&lt;xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr22"&gt;2002a&lt;/xref&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;33&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Not reported&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Undergraduate students who completed psychology course at the University of Manitoba&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Proctor accuracy&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;CAPSI:&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;101-unit tests (19.3% of the total 523-unit tests from the course)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Martin et al. (&lt;xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr23"&gt;2002b&lt;/xref&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;33&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;6 male and 6 female. 5 age ranged 16&amp;#8211;20. 4 age ranged 21&amp;#8211;25. 2 age ranged 26&amp;#8211;30. 1 over 36 years old&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;24 students enrolled in "Principles of Behavior Modification," anundergraduate psychology course at the University of Manitoba&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Undergraduate behaviour modification course&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;CAPSI program assigned two proctors (students who had previously passed that unit) to mark each test and pro-vide written feedback to the student taking the test&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Ocorr and Osgood (&lt;xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr25"&gt;2003&lt;/xref&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;400&amp;#8211;700 per academic year&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Not reported&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Students ranging in experience from firstsemester sophomores to final-semester seniors and postbaccalaureate&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Almost all students were biology majors or preparing for medical or other health professional school&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Introductory Biochemistry course, Biology 310 (Standard lecture-based and discussion-section, SLB)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Introductory biochemistry course, Biology 311 (PSI course)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;Self-pacing&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;Mastery&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;Proctors&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;Printed guides&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;Limited lectures&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Oliveira et al. (&lt;xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr26"&gt;2012&lt;/xref&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;4&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;EG (&lt;italic&gt;N&lt;/italic&gt; = 2)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;CG (&lt;italic&gt;N&lt;/italic&gt; = 2)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Not reported&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Undergraduate second-year students enrolled in an education psychology course at the University of Manitoba&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;No previous experience with MTS&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Matching-to-Sample (MTS) Training to teach reading&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Manual plus CAPSI:&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;The manual contained five chapters, and each chapter had an associated unit test delivered through&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;CAPSI.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;The unit tests consisted of three questions randomly selected by the system.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;Participants were able to proceed to the next unit test only if their current unit test was marked as demonstrating mastery of the tested material&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Paiva et al. (&lt;xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr27"&gt;2017&lt;/xref&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;72&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Experimental Group (&lt;italic&gt;n&lt;/italic&gt; = 35):&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Males &lt;italic&gt;(n&lt;/italic&gt; = 17)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Females (&lt;italic&gt;n&lt;/italic&gt; = 18)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Average age 18.5&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Control Group (&lt;italic&gt;n&lt;/italic&gt; = 37):&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Males &lt;italic&gt;(n&lt;/italic&gt; = 18)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Females (&lt;italic&gt;n&lt;/italic&gt; = 19)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Average age 18.4&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Undergraduate Marketing students at ESTG&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Quantitative methods course&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;PSI model of Mastery Learning&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;7 levels of Tutoring system (TS)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;(advance to the next level after getting a grade not less than 60%)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;Small self-paced modularized units of education contents&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;30 video lectures&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;119 step-by-step tutorial videos of exercises&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;Theoretical notes&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;7 STACK (= computer-aided assessment package for mathematics) formative e-assessment&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;Personalized feedback&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Pear and Crone-Todd (&lt;xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr28"&gt;2002&lt;/xref&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;24&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Not reported&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;33 University of Manitoba students who completed an undergraduate behaviour modification course taught using CAPSI&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Social constructivism in CAPSI model&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;CAPSI&amp;#8212;(1) randomly generate a unit test, (2) assign marker(s) (3) deliver the completed test to the selected marker(s), (4) deliver the test back to the student with written feedback (5) advance the student one unit in the course if pass test, (6) assign credit (7) deduct points for late marking, (8) process appeals, (9) administer midterm and final exams (10) record all transactions in the course&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Pritchard et al. (&lt;xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr29"&gt;2012&lt;/xref&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;22&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Females (&lt;italic&gt;n&lt;/italic&gt; = 5)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Males (&lt;italic&gt;n&lt;/italic&gt; = 17)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Age range of 18&amp;#8211;48&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Physical Activity University students at a University located in the southeastern United States&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Beginner weight training course&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;PSI weight training course:&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;Self-pacing&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;12 learning modules&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;Progression from module to module involved completing readiness drills, comprehension tasks, criterion tasks, and quizzes&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Purao et al. (&lt;xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr30"&gt;2016&lt;/xref&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;60&amp;#8211;80 per year (5 years)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Profile of a typical class: Females (&lt;italic&gt;n&lt;/italic&gt; = 8)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Males (&lt;italic&gt;n&lt;/italic&gt; = 65)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Average age 23&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Traditional students (many directly from high school), a few whose trajectory was interrupted by military service between high school and university, and a few older students with work experience&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Introductory programming course at a Scandinavian University&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;PSI with variations aimed to overcome procrastination:&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;Buddy system&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;Rightsizing-modules&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;Encouraging pacing&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;Alternative targets&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;Intermediate milestones&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;Active coaching&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;Time management&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Rae and Samuels (&lt;xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr31"&gt;2011&lt;/xref&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Case study 1: 3486 (Brunel University)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Case study 2: Conventry University&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Not reported&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Large classes of Computer Science students at two UK higher education institutions both with whole cohorts and 'at risk' groups of students&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Introductory discrete mathematics&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Web-based Personalized System of Instruction-&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Virtual learning environment&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;Short video clips&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;Online formative tests&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;Assessment management system&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Springer and Pear (&lt;xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr33"&gt;2008&lt;/xref&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;97&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Not reported.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;University Undergraduates from four undergraduate psychology courses&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Exam Performance measures using CAPSI&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;CAPSI&amp;#8212;The data analyzed in this study consisted of the progress score of the students, the amount of peer reviewing each student did, and each student's objectively rescored final exam result&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Steel et al. (&lt;xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr34"&gt;2001&lt;/xref&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;152&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Not reported&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;University undergraduate students&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;This study addressed this situation by creating scales based on both observed behaviours and atheoretical self-reports, and using these scales to determine procrastination's performance, mood, and personality correlates&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Students can use the campus computer lab or the classroom where instructors and teaching assistants are available to help&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;Independently completed computerized vocabulary exercises, read the text&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;Students wrote answers to study questions&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;Students completed the computerized pre-tests&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Svenningsen and Pear (&lt;xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr35"&gt;2011&lt;/xref&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Exp 1 (&lt;italic&gt;N&lt;/italic&gt; = 364)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Exp 2 (&lt;italic&gt;N&lt;/italic&gt; = 276)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Not reported&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;University of Manitoba students who had completed less than 12 credit hours&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Introduction to University (Study and Critical Thinking in College)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Exp 1:&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Two CAPSI sections:&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;8 lab sections accompanied each lecture section&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;-All students and Teaching Assistants (TAs) as part of the same large class&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;Access to program from the first week of classes&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Exp 2:&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;One CAPSI section&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;8 lab sections as separate classes (each lab section was a separate CAPSI class)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;TAs assessed answers from students in their lab section&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;students were able to take unit tests only in the last third of the academic term&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Zaragova Scherman et al. (&lt;xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr36"&gt;2015&lt;/xref&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;7&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Not reported&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;University students&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Assessment of self-teaching manual supported by the online to teach Discrete Trials Teaching (DTT) to university students&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Study questions&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;Unit tests on CAPSI&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;Re-taking unit tests when the mastery criterion was not reached&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;Peer reviewing&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;The self-practice exercises&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;/tbody&gt;&lt;/table&gt; </ephtml> </p> <p> <ephtml> &lt;table frame="hsides" rules="groups"&gt;&lt;thead&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;th align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Author/s&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/th&gt;&lt;th align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Control group&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/th&gt;&lt;th align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Assessment&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/th&gt;&lt;th align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Duration&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/th&gt;&lt;th align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Results&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/th&gt;&lt;th align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Overall findings&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/th&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;/thead&gt;&lt;tbody&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Brinkman et al. (&lt;xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr3"&gt;2007&lt;/xref&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;2nd Term (Traditional lecture course):&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;Weekly 2-h lecture that covered all material&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Each learning unit had a related OLE-based self-test:&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8722;Multiple-choice type questions&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;A mixed methodology approach, including in-depth interviews (&lt;italic&gt;n&lt;/italic&gt; = 9), controlled laboratory&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Observations (&lt;italic&gt;n&lt;/italic&gt; = 8), surveys (&lt;italic&gt;n&lt;/italic&gt; = 243), diary studies (&lt;italic&gt;n&lt;/italic&gt; = 10), classroom observations, recording online usage behaviour and learning assessments&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;2 terms in academic year 2004 and 2 terms in academic year 2005&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Marks for the CAPSI taught term were higher than those for the traditionally taught term&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Students were more positive about the CAPSI-based term than the traditionally taught term. They also found facilities used in the CAPSI term such as the printed material, video, online self-test and the discussion board useful&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;The principles of PSI can effectively be used in an online learning environment, creating higher marks and students' appreciation&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Brothen and Wambach (&lt;xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr4"&gt;2000&lt;/xref&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Not reported&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;Computer-based 10 item multiple-choice chapter quizzes&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;Students'&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Best quiz scores out of five tries counted toward their grades&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;1 term (Fall Term)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;Students completed 96% of the study question assignments&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;Pre-test performance (students' best scores) was very good. The grand mean of pre-test scores was 9.59 (of 10)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;Overall, quiz performance (students' best scores) was also very good&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;The median scores on the 19 chapters quizzes ranged from 7&amp;#8211;9 (15 Were 8)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Instructors who want students to learn the course material need to find ways to get students to read their books carefully. It was found that factual study questions accomplish&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;this task nicely. Students received points for completing the study questions and found that doing them is helpful for the later, higher point activities of pre-test and chapter quiz&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Buzhardt and Semb (&lt;xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr5"&gt;2002&lt;/xref&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Not reported&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;15-item multiple choice true-false questions, assessing each unit from the core textbook. Students could take the test three times, with their highest score counting towards the final grade&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Duration of one college semester&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Students who received feedback after each item with an option to skip and those who received end-of-test feedback performed the same. 65% of students preferred the former condition&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Item-by-item feedback with the option to skip questions decreases the workload for teaching staff, and is favoured by students&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Chase and Houmanfar (&lt;xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr6"&gt;2009&lt;/xref&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Basic feedback (BF) (numeric feedback) was provided to participants in this condition&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;-Ten, multiple choice question quizzes for each chapters&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;60-question&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;120-question final exam&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Primary measures:&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;Accuracy&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;Grade&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;Course survey&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Fall 2003 through 2005&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;-Improvement was observed on next Attempts&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;Elaborate feedback = Significant difference in performance and learning gain&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;Elaborate feedback = improved performance on the easier questions&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;Elaborate feedback = top&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Quartile of the most-difficult questions&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;Elaborate feedback = higher on grade distribution&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;A significant positive difference between performance based on elaborate or basic feedback. Elaborate = better results&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Crone-Todd et al. (&lt;xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr7"&gt;2007&lt;/xref&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Not reported&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Weekly measures of the number of:&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;Unit tests requested&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;The number of unit tests cancelled&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;Informal Student feedback&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;15 weeks (1 term)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;For 11 of the Students, that there was a statistically significant increase (&lt;italic&gt;t&lt;/italic&gt; = 3.03, &lt;italic&gt;p&lt;/italic&gt; &amp;#60;.005) in the number of tests requested after the conditional was introduced, when compared earlier (&lt;italic&gt;M&lt;/italic&gt; = 2.57, &lt;italic&gt;SD&lt;/italic&gt; = 2.31)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;After introduction of conditional pass, students started to report liking the program better. Test-taking increased&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;The quantitative and qualitative results suggest that the use of a conditional decision may be an effective tool for helping students provide mastery-level answers in higher education courses&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Devoe et al. (&lt;xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr9"&gt;2007&lt;/xref&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Same-sized group of medical students from the previous year who had comparable MCAT scores but who did not have access to structured, proctor-led study groups&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Academic effectiveness on the basis of student summative exam scores in each of the three subject blocks&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;6-months pilot intervention. Groups met twice weekly for up to two hours each time&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;No significant differences in scores were seen between the MEAP students when compared to the matched pre-MEAP students&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Study group intervention was not successful in improving the at-risk students' academic performance however :&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;Students perceived the study groups as a good learning strategy&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Ee et al. (&lt;xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr10"&gt;2018&lt;/xref&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;LFM (periodic due dates)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Final examination: 60% Written assignment: 20%&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Online quizzes: 20%&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;13 days after each quiz opened&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;PSI&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Final examination: 70%&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Written assignment: 20%&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Online quizzes: 10%&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Two-stage learning-analytics approach&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;LFM: Implemented in semester 1 of 2012&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;PSI: Implemented in semester 2 of 2011&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;The performance of the summative assessment for&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;The cohort for which the LFM strategy was adopted was higher than the cohort for&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Which the PSI strategy was applied&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;LFM increased&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;The final-examination score by 2.87 points, compared with PSI (&lt;italic&gt;p &amp;#60; &lt;/italic&gt;.0001)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;Imposition of instructional time constraint within the LFM&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Setting does affect students' learning behaviour and leads to better academic performance.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;Facilitators should be encouraged to implement an instructional time constraint when adopting an OML approach&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Eppler and Ironsmith (&lt;xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr11"&gt;2004&lt;/xref&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Conventional lecture-based instruction&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;Course withdrawal and failure rates&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;Course grades&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;Performance on the comprehensive final examination,&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;student opinion of instruction ratings&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;2 instructors:&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;8 Web PSI sections total (a Web PSI section taught by each instructor all four semesters)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;6 lecture sections total (two lecture for the first two semesters and instructors alternated for the next two semesters)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;20% lecture vs. 26% Web PSI did not successfully complete the course&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;Course grades higher for Web PSI students (&lt;italic&gt;p &amp;#60; &lt;/italic&gt;.002)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;Final exam scores higher for Web PSI (&lt;italic&gt;p &amp;#60; &lt;/italic&gt;.009)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;74% lecture and 93% of Web PSI students rated the textbook positively&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Satisfaction with instructor feedback (85% vs 67%)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;(87% vs 75%) instructor availability&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;(82% vs 72%) instructor helpfulness&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;(88% vs 81%) challenged to learn course material&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;Web PSI students rated course more demanding (63% vs 47%), but they didn't perceive the course to be overly difficult (35% vs 42%)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Web PSI students surpassed lecture students on almost every outcome measure. Combination of PSI and Web-based instruction fits needs education and non-traditional college students&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Fike et al. (&lt;xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr13"&gt;2011&lt;/xref&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Not reported&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;Multiple choice&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;Matching&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;Open-entry questions&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;Test questions&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;Exams that assessed competency (10 questions)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;Student course evaluations&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Outcome&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Variables:&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;Gain score (= difference between the student's best (final) score and first attempt (baseline) score)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Fall and Spring semesters of the 2008&amp;#8211;2009 academic year&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;White students had higher first attempt scores than non-whites (&lt;italic&gt;p&lt;/italic&gt; = 0.011), lower best scores&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;than non-Whites (&lt;italic&gt;p&lt;/italic&gt; = 0.006), and lower gain&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Scores than non-whites (&lt;italic&gt;p&lt;/italic&gt; = 0.001)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;White students had learning gains of 23.22 + 18.88 (mean + &lt;italic&gt;SD&lt;/italic&gt;),&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Whereas non-Whites had gains of 37.92 +21.60; &lt;italic&gt;t&lt;/italic&gt;(600) = &amp;#8722;3.932, &lt;italic&gt;p &amp;#60; &lt;/italic&gt; 0.001&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Students of colour who under-performed at baseline achieved learning gains on instructional modules Learning gains for minority students = 15 points greater than White students&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Most students favoured the Keller method. Feedback from students = enjoyed learning at own pace, and the repetitive nature of the Keller method&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Race/ethnicity was significantly associated with first attempt (baseline) scores, best (final) scores, and gain scores&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Foss et al. (&lt;xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr14"&gt;2014&lt;/xref&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Not reported&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Short-answer essay quiz requiring application of concepts. Students had to answer six out of the eight questions to progress&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Over the course of a week, from 08.30&amp;#8211;15.30 from a Saturday to the following Friday&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Students appreciated the freedom offered by the PSI components, and greater engagement between students and instructors was observed. Rhetorical Theory was rated 5.9/6.0 on a satisfaction scale and Public Speaking was rated 6.0&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;PSI helped students to improve their time management skills and promoted positive student-faculty relations. However, PSI may not be appropriate for all situations and teaching styles&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Gaheen et al. (&lt;xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr15"&gt;2021&lt;/xref&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Not reported&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Root mean square error (RMSE), Mean Absolute Error (MAE), Mean Absolute Relative Error (MARE), and Coefficient of Determination (R2)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Not reported.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;The eJaya-NN outperformed all compared algorithms and achieved the best values. It achieved a strong correlation with human experts (&lt;italic&gt;r &lt;/italic&gt; = 0.92)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;This proposed method produces acceptable scores for Arabic essays compared to human experts, and can increase the features of personalised systems of instruction&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Hu and Pear (&lt;xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr17"&gt;2016&lt;/xref&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;SIM alone (Compared to SIM plus CAPSI)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Participants asked to study content then tested on memory 2&amp;#8211;8 days later. Participants experienced either SIM. CAPSI or SIM. Assessments were repeated until participants passed each phase. 3&amp;#8211;12 another test on declarative knowledge om material. Shown demo-video and then tested again&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Post-training measurements (2&amp;#8211;8 day and 10min test).SIM OR CAPSI training (15min test). Post-training measurements (3&amp;#8211;12 days later).&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Training SIM PLUS CAPSI (2 hours). Post-training SIM and CAPSI assessment (2&amp;#8211;9 days later). 40 min video. Post-video assessment (1&amp;#8211;9 days later)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Eleven students after receiving CAPSI training accuracy or higher on declarative knowledge performance. Watching demonstration videos about the ABLA after the SIM and CAPSI training increased procedural knowledge performance for 10 students&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;SIM training alone may produce suboptimal results. CAPSI training achieved moderate success. Demo-video improved procedural knowledge&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Ironsmith and Eppler (&lt;xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr18"&gt;2007&lt;/xref&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Lecture students attended class meetings covering four or five chapters.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;-After each study module, students took a self-graded practice quiz&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;-20-item mastery quiz&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;Cumulative final examination counting 25% of the final grade&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;6 semesters&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;2 (instructional methods) X 3 (aptitude) ANOVA:&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;-PSI students' final examination scores were higher than lecture students' scores &lt;italic&gt;F&lt;/italic&gt; (1, 570) = 101.53, &lt;italic&gt;p&lt;/italic&gt; &amp;#60;.0001, &lt;italic&gt;&amp;#951;&lt;/italic&gt;&lt;sup&gt;2&lt;/sup&gt; =.15&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;Students' exam scores varied directly with aptitude, &lt;italic&gt;F&lt;/italic&gt;(2,&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;570) = 77.05,&lt;italic&gt; p&lt;/italic&gt; &amp;#60;.0001, &lt;italic&gt;&amp;#951;&lt;/italic&gt;&lt;sup&gt;2&lt;/sup&gt; =.21&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;PSI students = higher final examination scores than lecture students&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Benefits of PSI greatest for students with lowest GPAs. --PSI = greater change in learning goals, but only for low-aptitude group&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;Academic performance and&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Learning goals of Low GPA PSI students approached those of lecture students with the highest GPAs.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Lanter et al. (&lt;xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr21"&gt;2020&lt;/xref&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Traditional activity course instruction with direct instruction to the whole group (teacher being in control)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;workouts prepared for the collective group&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;Pre, post, and 1-month post through a survey assessing students' perceptions of self-efficacy and knowledge of strength training&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;Pre- and post-tests on fitness measures. The fitness measures included the push-up and curl-up tests from Fitnessgram, as well as a flexed-arm hang and a wall sit&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;85 min twice a week for 15 weeks (27 total meetings)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;The control group entered the course in stronger muscular condition, but the experimental group progressed at a significantly greater rate for the push-up, curl-up, and flexed-arm hang tests. The experimental group progressed in each measure, whereas the control group experienced no growth within the push-up test&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Strength training program with PSI-like instruction can yield significant gains in student knowledge, fitness, and adherence to a strength training plan&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Martin et al. (&lt;xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr22"&gt;2002a&lt;/xref&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Not reported&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;The study questions in the first 15 chapters of the textbook (G.L. Martin and Pear, 1996) are divided into 10 study units. While each student was working on these units, the CAPSI program was randomly generated:&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;Short composition tests&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;Markers are assigned to each unit test completed&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;The test was returned to the student electronically with written feedback&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Not reported&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;It was found that the officials were biased towards marking the answers correctly. This bias may have reflected: skill shortages (for example, practitioners had trouble spotting mistakes), motivational factors, or both&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;There is a paucity of data on the accuracy and effectiveness of feedback in postsecondary courses. This study helped to fill this gap and provides a methodology that could lead to enhanced feedback in various course procedures, especially those involving online teaching&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Martin et al. (&lt;xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr23"&gt;2002b&lt;/xref&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Not reported&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;The course was divided into 10 study units, with about 20&amp;#8211;30 short-essay or short answer study-questions for each unit&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Test questions came from undergraduate class material book. IOF's (feedback) was analysed and tested for accuracy. Observers decided if student complied with IOF&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Not reported&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;PROCTOR: IOF accuracy was 87%. IOFs were complied with fully in 55% of instances. 61% of IOFs (155) were complied with at least partially. INSTRUCTOR: 63% full compliance with IOF&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Use of Proctors can be relatively equivalent to Instructor Feedback in teaching&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Ocorr and Osgood (&lt;xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr25"&gt;2003&lt;/xref&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;3 h/week of lecture by the instructor and 1.5 h of discussion with graduate student teaching assistants&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;25 multiple choice questions as part of the midterm exam&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Student satisfaction &amp;#8211; end-of-course evaluation&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;8 years&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;GPA was not significantly different for any semester except for the juniors in Winter 2002 (increase of 4.6% in mean exam scores for students in the PSI course)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;SLB course had a slightly higher GPA but performed less well on the test questions&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;PSI students reported slightly greater satisfaction (4.2) than SLB course (4.1), but the difference was not significant&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;PSI format works as well as or better than the SLB model when the student groups were well matched, the content material and texts were the same, and the instructors were in close communication and emphasized similar concepts&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Oliveira et al. (&lt;xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr26"&gt;2012&lt;/xref&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Manual alone:&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Participants were given the same materials (a hard copy of the 27-page manual, CD-Room, 16-page description for its use) were asked to study the manual and answer the study questions&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Accuracy in conducting MTS training was assessed during baseline and post-training&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Three weeks&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Baseline and post-training combined scores for control and experimental groups were 72.5% and&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;100%, and 72.7% and 95%, respectively. Results showed that the manual and the manual-plus-CAPSI packages produced&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Similar effects in delivering knowledge in MTS training&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;"Manual alone" and "manual plus CAPSI"&amp;#8212; produced similar effects in the control and experimental groups' post-training performance accuracy in conducting automated MTS training to teach reading&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Paiva et al. (&lt;xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr27"&gt;2017&lt;/xref&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;CG students did not have any restrictions on the access to content but received the same study recommendations and were recommended to obtain a grade not less than 60% in the formative tests at the end of the levels&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Prior to ST:&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;Survey to measure the student level on math (SLM) and demographic characteristics&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;Inventory of metacognitive&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;perceptions using the MAI instrument&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;Students' engagement on TS:&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;Clicks on the contents and grades of 7 formative e-assessments&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;2 summative e-assessments 1 written exam&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;-Survey to gather student's opinions about TS:&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt; 1. Positive aspects on learning&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt; 2.positive aspects on motivation&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt; 3. Positive aspects on performance&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt; 4. Web design&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;First semester of the academic year 2014/2015&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;CG and EG are statistically homogeneous in SLM (&lt;italic&gt;p&lt;/italic&gt; = 0.93) and MAI (&lt;italic&gt;p&lt;/italic&gt; = 0.51)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Students' engagement:&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;Number of clicks higher in the EG (&lt;italic&gt;M&lt;/italic&gt; = 1002.36), than in CG (&lt;italic&gt;M&lt;/italic&gt; = 757.92)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;Average grade for 7 assessments: EG average grade significantly higher than CG (&lt;italic&gt;p &amp;#60; &lt;/italic&gt;0.0001)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;Summative assessments: EG higher than in CG (&lt;italic&gt;p &amp;#60; &lt;/italic&gt;0.05)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;38% EG students needed to repeat exam to reach mastery criterion&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;Nearly half of CG didn't reach mastery&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;TS contributed to learning and engagement with the discipline&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;ML teaching-learning methodology successful (imposition of restrictions on the advance to the next level by a mastery criterion) lead to a significant improvement in student's engagement and performance&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Pear and Crone-Todd (&lt;xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr28"&gt;2002&lt;/xref&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Teacher/Instructor Feedback&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;(1) randomly generate a unit test, (2) assign marker(s) (3) deliver the completed test to the selected marker(s), (4) deliver the test back to the student with written feedback (5) advance the student one unit in the course if pass test&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;A 24-h time limit on marking unit tests ensured that students received feedback promptly&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Students in a CAPSI-taught course receive and give a large amount of substantive feedback&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;The high amount of feedback and the low amount of instructor monitoring is consistent with social constructivism. The knowledge built by students in this course is not highly controlled by any one person, including the instructor; rather, it develops as a function of many transactions with other students&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Pritchard et al. (&lt;xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr29"&gt;2012&lt;/xref&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Not reported&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;FITNESSGRAM fitness course-50-question knowledge test before and after training course&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;15-week training (twice per week for 50 minutes each meeting)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;PSI Course promoted student learning, improved weight training related Knowledge and slightly improved select metrics of physical Fitness&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Significant increase from pretest scores to posttest scores for the knowledge, /(21) = &amp;#8722;7.247, &lt;italic&gt;p&lt;/italic&gt; &amp;#60;.007&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;Significant increases in the curl-up test, push-up test,&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;and knowledge test and a significant decrease in percentage body fat&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;PSI is an ideal instructional model for fitness and weight training courses&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Purao et al. (&lt;xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr30"&gt;2016&lt;/xref&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Not reported&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Written exam at the end of the semester&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Multiple assignments before the students are allowed to take the exam&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Survey&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;5 years (from 2011 to 2015)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;Long-term engagement with PSI achieved more effective learning outcomes&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;Higher motivation levels may be a prerequisite for PSI The students were ambivalent about whether they&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Liked PSI compared to traditional lectures (32%)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;But believed that they learned more with PSI (42%)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Lessons learned to prevent procrastination:&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;Balancing a Buddy System Against Individual Learning&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;Rightsizing and Logically Linking the Modules&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;Encouraging Pacing and Ownership&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;Setting Alternative targets&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;Introducing Intermediate Milestones&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;Active coaching&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;Organizing Work and Time Management&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Rae and Samuels (&lt;xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr31"&gt;2011&lt;/xref&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Not reported&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;1-h written tests to assess whether students understood basic concepts&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;25 years (1983&amp;#8211;2005)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;4 years (2006&amp;#8211;2010)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;-This method is promoted as particularly helpful to students who do not&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;adopt a deep approach to learning as many students fail to do&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;-"At risk" students using this method (&lt;italic&gt;n&lt;/italic&gt; = 71) demonstrated an average Glass effect of 0.83 compared with other "at risk" students who did not (&lt;italic&gt;n&lt;/italic&gt; = 35)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;This pedagogy is promoted as an effective approach to teaching in higher education, especially the teaching of cognitive skills to diverse cohorts of students on foundation level modules&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Springer and Pear (&lt;xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr33"&gt;2008&lt;/xref&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Students who did not complete all units&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;The material for each course was divided into ten units, with 98 days of the course available to complete allunits. Students proceeded through the units at their own pace, writing brief essay-type unit tests based onstudy questions. An online program, CAPSI, provided unit tests&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;98 days&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;There was a strong positive cor-relation (&lt;italic&gt;r&lt;/italic&gt; =.68, &lt;italic&gt;p&lt;/italic&gt; &amp;#60;.01) between rate of progress and the amount of peer reviewing students did&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;The evidence of the present research suggests that allowing students to progress at their own pace is not detrimental to their final performance. Final exam scores suggest beginning work early and doing more peer reviewing improves the overall performance&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Steel et al. (&lt;xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr34"&gt;2001&lt;/xref&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Not reported&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;Supervised computerized department exams&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;Psychological tests were also applied with computers&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;Divided into 6-time frames in which students completed all personality measurements during the first week&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;11 weeks&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Procrastination research may benefit from the continued use of a computerized PSI environment&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;A computerized PSI setting allows the precise assessment of several observed behaviors for a large number of subjects for practitioners&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;A computerized PSI setting involved important performance criteria (e.g., course grade), and is of high press, clearly allowing the voluntary delay of behaviour to a less opportune time.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Work behavior claries the relationship between procrastination and performance&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Svenningsen and Pear (&lt;xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr35"&gt;2011&lt;/xref&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Exp 1:&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;Two non-CAPSI sections&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;8 lab sections accompanied each lecture section&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Assessment:&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;Write three&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;APA-formatted essays (roughly 1000 words each) as a part of&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Course requirement&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Exp 2:&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;1 non-CAPSI section&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Assessment:&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;Three 1000-word APA-styled essay&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;The Applied critical thinking measure (ACTM)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Exp 1:&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;-Complete two APA-formatted essays (roughly&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;1000 words each) and a CAPSI assignment&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;Final Exam (same as non CAPSI sections)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;Questions on course content&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;ACTM&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Exp 2:&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;Two 1,000-word APA style Essays&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;CAPSI as a required assignment&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;ACTM prior to the beginning of the CAPSI assignment and at the end of the term&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Exp 1: 13-week academic term Fall 2006&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Exp 2: 13-week academic term Fall 2007&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Exp 1&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Final Exam: The CAPSI sections scored higher than the non-CAPSI sections&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;-Critical thinking: CAPSI sections was higher (&lt;italic&gt;M&lt;/italic&gt; = 28.25) than the non-CAPSI sections (&lt;italic&gt;M&lt;/italic&gt; = 26.74)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;-Course content: The CAPSI sections scored higher than the non-CAPSI sections&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;ACTM: CAPSI sections scored higher than the non-CAPSI sections&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;(&lt;italic&gt;M&lt;/italic&gt; = 9.33 vs. 8.62)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Exp 2:&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;CAPSI was effective in increasing critical thinking skills&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;While students in both lecture sections did show an increase in critical thinking ability, the CAPSI section showed greater improvement than the non-CAPSI section&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;The positive outcomes in both experiments indicate that CAPSI&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Is an effective component for developing critical thinking and course knowledge in blended designs&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Zaragova Scherman et al. (&lt;xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr36"&gt;2015&lt;/xref&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Not reported&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Baseline, self-practice, and post-training sessions took place. Participants studied the manual Participants received points towards their course grade for participating in the study&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;55 days&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;#8211;The experimenter time is 10 h in total for all participants&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Five of the seven participants completed the study&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;The study the self-instructional manual in combination with CAPSI improved overall DTT performance significantly&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Training effects for each task were also analysed. These results indicated that studying the self-instructional manual in combination with CAPSI improved DTT performance significantly for teaching all three tasks&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;/tbody&gt;&lt;/table&gt; </ephtml> </p> <hd id="AN0186622212-15">Use of PSI in Higher Education</hd> <p>In what follows, the use of PSI in higher education will be discussed. The included 27 papers met the inclusion criteria of (a) including the use of PSI procedures and (b) including University students as participants. A qualitative synthesis was conducted where papers were divided into appropriate themes or headings based on the area of research that the paper was about. The 12 themes identified are as follows: (<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref30">1</reflink>) Computer-Aided and Web-based PSI, (<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref31">2</reflink>) Teaching Psychology Students, (<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref32">3</reflink>) Teaching Medical Students, (<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref33">4</reflink>) Teaching Biochemistry Students, (<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref34">5</reflink>) Teaching Mathematics, (<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref35">6</reflink>) Teaching Computer Programming, (<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref36">7</reflink>) Teaching Physical Activity, (<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref37">8</reflink>) Teaching Minority Students, (<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref38">9</reflink>) Teaching Languages, (<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref39">10</reflink>) Feedback, (<reflink idref="bib11" id="ref40">11</reflink>) Time Constraint, and (<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref41">12</reflink>) Retention. These themes are discussed below.</p> <hd id="AN0186622212-16">Computer-Aided and Web-Based PSI</hd> <p>Computer-Aided and Web-based PSI is popular recent modifications to PSI. Steel et al. ([<reflink idref="bib34" id="ref42">34</reflink>]) investigated the relationship between procrastination and personality, mood, and performance in undergraduate psychology students in a computer-aided PSI (CAPSI) course. Relationships were found between the course grade students received and their self-reported procrastination levels. The relationships between procrastination and both mood and personality were less clear, and this is an area which requires future research. Martin et al. ([<reflink idref="bib22" id="ref43">22</reflink>]) analysed proctor accuracy in a CAPSI course for psychology students. The results suggested that proctors were biased towards marking answers as correct. The research found that accuracy increased with answers was corrected by more than one answer. Martin et al. ([<reflink idref="bib23" id="ref44">23</reflink>]) found that the accuracy of student-provided feedback was 87% and students complied with 61% of the feedback.</p> <p>Rae and Samuels ([<reflink idref="bib31" id="ref45">31</reflink>]) discussed two case studies: (<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref46">1</reflink>) the use of Web-based PSI (WPSI) with a whole cohort at Brunel University and (<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref47">2</reflink>) the use of a variant of WPSI with "at risk" students in Coventry University. WPSI was considered to be a good method for students to succeed who do not adopt a deep approach for learning. There were considerable benefits found for "at risk" students who engaged with this method, in comparison with "at risk" students who did not.</p> <p>Pear and Crone-Todd ([<reflink idref="bib28" id="ref48">28</reflink>]) used CAPSI with 24 psychology students and found that CAPSI was consistent with a social constructivist model as feedback comes from another person. Springer and Pear ([<reflink idref="bib33" id="ref49">33</reflink>]) found that there was a strong correlation between rate of progress and the amount of peer reviewing students did. There was a moderate correlation between progress rate and final examination performance, and there was a moderate correlation between the amount of peer reviewing students did and their final examination performance.</p> <p>Svenningsen and Pear ([<reflink idref="bib35" id="ref50">35</reflink>]) used CAPSI to evaluate knowledge acquisition and critical thinking skills in blended learning courses. The CAPSI sections outperformed non-CAPSI sections, demonstrating the effectiveness of CAPSI. Oliveira et al. ([<reflink idref="bib26" id="ref51">26</reflink>]) compared different methods to teach matching-to-sample training, which presents a stimulus as a sample, followed by stimuli called comparisons, from which the participant must choose one comparison that matches the sample stimuli presented. The comparison was between "Manual Alone" and "Manual-plus-CAPSI", where the control group received a manual and the experimental group received both the manual and CAPSI. At baseline, both the control group and experimental group received similar scores, with the average for the control group being 72.5% and the average for the experimental group being 72.7%. Post-training, the score for the control group was 95% and the score for the experimental group was 100%. Therefore, both the experimental and control groups were similar in scores for delivering matching-to-sample training. Hu and Pear ([<reflink idref="bib17" id="ref52">17</reflink>]) compared (a) the use of a self-instructed manual to (b) the use of the manual combined with CAPSI and to (c) watching demonstration videos. It was found that the use of the manual combined with CAPSI was more effective in declarative knowledge acquisition.</p> <p>Zaragoza Scherman et al. ([<reflink idref="bib36" id="ref53">36</reflink>]) used CAPSI with psychology students to teach them how to administer Discrete-Trials Teaching. Discrete-Trials Teaching is a commonly used teaching approach to teach individuals with autism spectrum disorder (ASD)-specific skills. Results showed a 30% improvement from baseline to post-training with the use of CAPSI. Zaragoza Scherman et al. ([<reflink idref="bib36" id="ref54">36</reflink>]) commented on how useful CAPSI is from a time and cost-efficient perspective.</p> <hd id="AN0186622212-17">Teaching Psychology Students</hd> <p>Brothen and Wambach ([<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref55">4</reflink>]) investigated the effectiveness of factual study questions in 136 students enrolled in a modified PSI introductory psychology course. The study guide used 819 study questions. Relationships were found between study question completion and quiz performance. The authors recommended the addition of study questions to PSI courses.</p> <p>Eppler and Ironsmith ([<reflink idref="bib11" id="ref56">11</reflink>]) combined PSI with a distance learning approach to 814 students in a developmental psychology course and compared web-based PSI to traditional lectures. Web-based PSI students achieved higher results than traditionally lecture-based students. Ironsmith and Eppler ([<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref57">18</reflink>]) investigated the effects of PSI in low-aptitude students in comparison with lecture students in a developmental psychology course. Aptitude was compared across three levels of grade point averages (GPAs), which were high, medium, and low. Students who were enrolled in the PSI course had significantly higher final grades than those who participated in lectures. The benefits of PSI were greater for students with the lowest GPAs. The authors discussed how PSI could be very suitable for students with low aptitudes.</p> <hd id="AN0186622212-18">Teaching Medical Students</hd> <p>DeVoe et al. ([<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref58">9</reflink>]) used PSI with 13 medical students deemed to be "at risk" of academic difficulties. The study used a pre-emptive intervention using peer-led study groups and used PSI procedures. Students met twice a week and completed a multiple-choice quiz at the start of the session. The remainder of the session was focused on discussion of major concepts and study skills. Sessions were facilitated by senior student proctors. Results found that participation in structured proctor-led study groups was not effective in improving examination performance, in comparison with the matched control group. However, both proctors and students provided feedback on the benefits of the study groups.</p> <hd id="AN0186622212-19">Teaching Biochemistry Students</hd> <p>Ocorr and Osgood ([<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref59">25</reflink>]) compared a self-paced, non-lecture PSI course in biochemistry to a standard lecture-based and discussion-section course. There were no required lectures, but an optional weekly hour-long lecture was offered by the instructor to motivate students. Students worked their way through an assigned text in a series of learning units and completed unit quizzes to demonstrate mastery of the material. Proctors were university teaching assistants, who set and graded the quizzes. Differences between examination scores were monitored for the courses over three semesters. In two semesters, no significant differences were found. In one semester, a small significant difference was found between PSI students and traditional lecture-based students on test performance, with both junior and senior PSI groups scoring 10 points higher on average. The PSI group also expressed greater satisfaction with the course than did the standard lecture-based group.</p> <hd id="AN0186622212-20">Teaching Mathematics</hd> <p>Brinkman et al. ([<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref60">3</reflink>]) adapted PSI to a web-based approach to teach mathematics to university students. A mixed methodology approach was used, including in-depth interviews, controlled laboratory observations, surveys, diary studies, classroom observations, online usage behaviour, and learning assessments. Student performance was significantly higher in the Computer-Aided PSI than for traditionally taught materials.</p> <p>Paiva et al. ([<reflink idref="bib27" id="ref61">27</reflink>]) divided 72 Marketing students from a Quantitative Methods course into an experimental and a control group. The study evaluated the effectiveness of a tutoring system based on PSI and consisted small self-paced units, including tutorial videos, notes, and formative e-assessment with personalised feedback. Mastery had to be reached on a unit before progression to the next unit. Significant improvements were found in student engagement and performance.</p> <hd id="AN0186622212-21">Teaching Computer Programming</hd> <p>Purao et al. ([<reflink idref="bib30" id="ref62">30</reflink>]) discussed a multi-year implementation of PSI procedures to teach introductory computer programming across five years. Purao et al. ([<reflink idref="bib30" id="ref63">30</reflink>]) outlined that procrastination is a barrier for the effective implementation of PSI and identified a number of strategies to deal with this. Purao et al. ([<reflink idref="bib30" id="ref64">30</reflink>]) identified a number of lessons learned, which were (a) balancing a buddy system against individual learning, (b) rightsizing and logically linking the modules, (c) encouraging pace and ownership, (d) setting alternative targets, (e) introducing immediate milestones, (f) active coaching, (g) organising work and time management.</p> <hd id="AN0186622212-22">Teaching Physical Activity</hd> <p>Pritchard et al. ([<reflink idref="bib29" id="ref65">29</reflink>]) investigated the use of PSI in teaching physical activity to 22 university students enrolled in a 15-week weight training course. Following the PSI intervention, students had significant increases in their fitness skills, such as curl-up test, push-up test, as well as increases in their knowledge test, and decreases in their percentage body fat. The authors concluded that PSI is an ideal instructional model for fitness and weight training courses.</p> <p>Lanter et al. ([<reflink idref="bib21" id="ref66">21</reflink>]) investigated PSI in a university strength training activity course, with the final sample being 9 university students in the experimental group and 10 students in the control group. The PSI group had significant progressions for the push-up, curl-up, and flexed-arm hang tests. Lanter et al. ([<reflink idref="bib21" id="ref67">21</reflink>]) expanded on Pritchard et al. ([<reflink idref="bib29" id="ref68">29</reflink>]) and reduced PSI from module production, which was more time-consuming, to an individualized approach focused on extensive feedback on student's fitness plan.</p> <hd id="AN0186622212-23">Teaching Minority Students</hd> <p>Fike et al. ([<reflink idref="bib13" id="ref69">13</reflink>]) used PSI techniques for 86 pharmacy students in a Prescription Practice course, at a Historical Black Colleges and Universities (HBCU), where the majority of students were Asian (48%), African-American (40%), and female (61%). At baseline levels, Asian and African-American students under-performed compared to white students. After receiving the PSI intervention, Asian and African-American students scored significantly higher than white students, with results of on average 15 points greater. Both staff and students perceived PSI to be beneficial.</p> <hd id="AN0186622212-24">Teaching Languages</hd> <p>Gaheen et al. ([<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref70">15</reflink>]) conducted a study on how automatic grading could be used for Arabic essays for a PSI study. The essays were also scored by two human experts. Very high correlations were found between the essay grading algorithm and both the first human expert and the second human expert. This use of automating the feedback component of PSI could make it more accessible for more educators to implement in their classrooms.</p> <hd id="AN0186622212-25">Feedback</hd> <p>Buzhardt and Semb ([<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref71">5</reflink>]) compared the following feedback conditions: (a) end-of-test, (b) item-by-item with the option to skip questions during the test, and (c) item-by-item without the option to skip questions during the test. Students performed the same on the item-by-item feedback with the option to skip questions, and 65% of students preferred this type of feedback. The authors concluded that this type of feedback decreased the workload on teaching staff.</p> <p>Crone-Todd et al. ([<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref72">7</reflink>]) used computer-aided PSI (CAPSI) with 14 undergraduate psychology students. Previously in CAPSI, grades had been in the form of a pass or a restudy. Restudy allowed students to revise the material in order to achieve mastery. However, there were low levels of student persistence as it appeared that restudy was serving to be punishing to students. Changes were made in how this feedback was provided by sending a submitted test anonymously to two peer reviewers, who had to independently agree that the test was a pass. On the eleventh week of 15 units, there was a decline in unit test writing, so a "conditional pass" was given to students who were near mastery. This additional of a conditional pass resulted in an increase in test taking activity, reduced cancelled tests, and positive self-reports. Therefore, by adjusting the feedback given on a PSI course, student engagement was increased.</p> <p>Chase and Houmanfar ([<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref73">6</reflink>]) compared elaborate feedback to basic feedback on student performance for students in a modified PSI introductory psychology course. Elaborate feedback included two components, specific feedback and general feedback, and was defined as "written verbal feedback delivered electronically after the submission of each quiz" (Chase &amp; Houmanfar, [<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref74">6</reflink>], p. 251). Basic feedback was defined as "numeric feedback (i.e. 100 or 0%) as to whether participants answered a given question correctly" (Chase &amp; Houmanfar, [<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref75">6</reflink>], p. 252). It was found that there was a significant difference in performance and learning gain for students who received elaborate feedback.</p> <hd id="AN0186622212-26">Time Constraint</hd> <p>Ee et al. ([<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref76">10</reflink>]) examined the effect of time constraint for students in a postgraduate finance course. PSI with a single due date was compared to Learning for Mastery with periodic due dates. It was found that imposing an instructional time constraint led to better academic performance. Therefore, an instructional time constraint can be a useful modification and addition to PSI courses.</p> <hd id="AN0186622212-27">Retention</hd> <p>Foss et al. ([<reflink idref="bib14" id="ref77">14</reflink>]) implemented PSI in order to increase college retention on two courses; Rhetorical Theory and Public Speaking and incorporated the perspectives of the following stakeholders: administrators, faculty, and students. A number of benefits were found for all stakeholders in the use of PSI, and it was found to be an effective tool in order to increase college retention. In both of the courses, there was only one student in each course who withdrew from the course. The research found that PSI contributed to student choice, with students choosing when to engage with material and when to attend class.</p> <hd id="AN0186622212-28">Discussion</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0186622212-29">How Can PSI be Used for Teaching and Learning in Higher Education?</hd> <p>As demonstrated by the systematic review conducted, the technique of PSI is very useful with regard to teaching and learning in higher education. PSI has been successfully used with to teach psychology, medicine, biochemistry, mathematics, computer programming, and physical activity, as well as teaching minority students. PSI has been integrated with computer programmes to become Computer-Aided and Web-based PSI. Studies have also focused on how PSI can be improved, including the use of feedback and the use of time constraint.</p> <hd id="AN0186622212-30">Similarities Between PSI and Other Teaching Approaches</hd> <p>PSI could be considered similar to the flipped classroom. Brame ([<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref78">2</reflink>]) indicated that the key elements of the flipped classroom are as follows: (<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref79">1</reflink>) provide an opportunity for students to gain exposure prior to class, (<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref80">2</reflink>) provide an incentive for students to prepare for class, (<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref81">3</reflink>) provide a mechanism to assess student understanding, and (<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref82">4</reflink>) provide in-class activities that focus on higher-level cognitive activities. PSI provides students with an opportunity to gain exposure prior to class and provides an incentive for students to prepare for class. It also provides a mechanism to assess student understanding through the use of quizzes. In PSI, classes are used for increasing student motivation. Similarly, in the flipped classroom, classes are used to focus on higher-level cognitive activities, rather than the dissemination of more basic knowledge.</p> <p>PSI could also be considered similar to online teaching and to distance learning as the focus is on the student to acquire knowledge through the course material independently. Grant and Spencer ([<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref83">16</reflink>]) discussed PSI's suitability to distance learning. Many of the PSI articles discussed how procrastination is a major difficulty with PSI courses. This is similar to the difficulties that are encountered in online teaching and distance learning. Eyre ([<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref84">12</reflink>]) summarised the types of interventions that have been used in PSI courses in an attempt to decrease procrastination. These include the use of behavioural contracts, bonus points for early completion, allowing students to set the deadlines, and the use of consequences for failing to complete units by a target date. However, by placing restrictions on self-pacing, this violates a key element of PSI courses.</p> <p>Purao et al. ([<reflink idref="bib30" id="ref85">30</reflink>]) discussed how students found self-pacing to be challenging, and that there was demand for some regular lectures. In these sessions, instructors reintroduced and delivered short talks on requested topics and work sessions where students worked together. Purao et al. ([<reflink idref="bib30" id="ref86">30</reflink>]) discussed how this demonstrated a need to design alternatives to increase student motivation in the use of PSI courses.</p> <hd id="AN0186622212-31">How Can PSI be Incorporated with Other Teaching Approaches?</hd> <p>Crone-Todd and Pear ([<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref87">8</reflink>]) discussed how Bloom's ([<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref88">1</reflink>]) Taxonomy could be applied to Computer-Aided PSI (CAPSI). The paper illustrated how Knowledge, Comprehension, Application, Analysis, Synthesis and Evaluation could be used in a psychology CAPSI course. Pear and Crone-Todd ([<reflink idref="bib28" id="ref89">28</reflink>]) discussed how by including student markers, these students engaged in the highest level of thinking in Bloom's Taxonomy, which is evaluation. Pear and Crone-Todd ([<reflink idref="bib28" id="ref90">28</reflink>]) also discussed how CAPSI can be used with other approaches such as lectures, discussion groups, website postings, and multimedia presentations.</p> <p>Crone-Todd and Pear ([<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref91">8</reflink>]) identified a number of questions that arose from their research: "Are the categories truly hierarchical? For example, must one demonstrate skill in (at least verbally) applying concepts or procedures prior to analysing them? Similarly, must one be able to analyse concepts or procedures prior to synthesizing or evaluating them? Can higher-level thinking skills be taught in a way that makes generalization to other learning environments more likely? Teachers often claim that they teach higher-order or critical thinking; however, this does not appear evident in the skills that many university students display. Hence, we must assume that these skills have not been sufficiently trained to promote generalization within the university setting." (p. 208).</p> <hd id="AN0186622212-32">Future Directions</hd> <p>In their analyses of time constraint, Ee et al. ([<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref92">10</reflink>]) discussed how future studies are needed to replicate their findings. The authors suggested that future research could investigate other types of student digital footprints, such as the number of attempts made by a student to answer a question and the use of hints. In their use of PSI in a university strength training activity course, Lanter et al. ([<reflink idref="bib21" id="ref93">21</reflink>]) suggested that future research could investigate the use of PSI to teach physical education to high school students and adult populations, and to use larger sample sizes. The authors also suggested that individualized binders be provided to all students, and that multiple skills tests should be administered to students. Similarly, Pritchard et al. ([<reflink idref="bib29" id="ref94">29</reflink>]) recommended that future PSI studies are conducted on teaching weight training to students.</p> <p>In their analyses of Computer-Aided PSI (CAPSI), Oliveira et al. ([<reflink idref="bib26" id="ref95">26</reflink>]) outlined how future studies could minimise the aversive features of PSI by providing smaller units of material, by including practical components as well as written material, or including video demonstrations. The authors also suggested future research to evaluate the peer reviewing component. Zaragoza Scherman et al. ([<reflink idref="bib36" id="ref96">36</reflink>]) suggested adjustments that could be made to CAPSI including incorporation of self-practice sessions, which were used to practice behavioural skills, into CAPSI for peer reviewing. Zaragoza Scherman et al. ([<reflink idref="bib36" id="ref97">36</reflink>]) also suggested that CAPSI could be used to teach other clinical skills such as mindfulness training. Springer and Pear ([<reflink idref="bib33" id="ref98">33</reflink>]) discussed how research is needed that directly manipulates the base at which students progress through the course through the imposition of deadlines, and that manipulates the rate of peer reviewing and the amount of course credit available for reviewing. Springer and Pear ([<reflink idref="bib33" id="ref99">33</reflink>]) also suggested that relationships should be examined between grade point average and final examination performance. Springer and Pear ([<reflink idref="bib33" id="ref100">33</reflink>]) also suggested that more research is needed on self-pacing to determine the conditions where self-pacing is appropriate.</p> <hd id="AN0186622212-33">Strengths and Limitations of the Current Study</hd> <p>The current systematic review had many strengths. Sources were searched for using a systematic method and incorporated a PRISMA flow diagram. The search strategy included clear inclusion and exclusion criteria and could therefore easily be replicated in the future. A number of studies were found, which could be considered a strength. Limitations of the area of research in general are that the majority of studies included students of psychology and applied behaviour analysis. Future empirical studies are needed to determine whether results of the studies included generalise to other student populations.</p> <hd id="AN0186622212-34">Conclusion</hd> <p>In conclusion, this systematic review provided an overview of the use of PSI in higher education and demonstrated the variety of literature on this technique. PSI has the potential to be very useful, especially in the pivot to online teaching due to the current COVID-19 pandemic. It is an approach that had been utilised more commonly in previous decades, but perhaps a revival is approaching due to the need for newer teaching technologies in the current pandemic rather than the traditional dialectic teaching approach. Therefore, the current systematic review has implications for the recent move to online teaching as these techniques may prove to be very useful.</p> <hd id="AN0186622212-35">Acknowledgements</hd> <p>Thank you to Dr. Jan White in the Centre for Excellence in Learning and Teaching (CELT) in University of Galway for her assistance in shaping this paper and for all her support throughout the MA in Academic Practice.</p> <hd id="AN0186622212-36">Declarations</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0186622212-37">Conflicts of Interest</hd> <p>The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.</p> <hd id="AN0186622212-38">Publisher's Note</hd> <p>Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.</p> <ref id="AN0186622212-39"> <title> References </title> <blist> <bibl id="bib1" idref="ref15" type="bt">1</bibl> <bibtext> Bloom B. Taxonomy of educational objectives; Handbook 1, cognitive domain. 1956: New York; David McKay</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib2" idref="ref16" type="bt">2</bibl> <bibtext> Brame, C. (2013). Flipping the classroom. Vanderbilt University Center for Teaching [ONLINE] Available at https://cft.vanderbilt.edu/guides-sub-pages/flipping-the-classroom/. Accessed 1 Dec 2020.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib3" idref="ref17" type="bt">3</bibl> <bibtext> Brinkman WP, Rae A, Dwivedi YK. Web-based implementation of the Personalised System of Instruction: A case study of teaching mathematics in an online learning environment. International Journal of Web-Based Learning and Teaching Technologies (IJWLTT). 2007; 2; 1: 39-69</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib4" idref="ref18" type="bt">4</bibl> <bibtext> Brothen T, Wambach C. Using factual study questions to guide reading and promote mastery learning by developmental students in an introductory psychology course. Journal of College Reading and Learning. 2000; 30; 2: 158-166</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib5" idref="ref19" type="bt">5</bibl> <bibtext> Buzhardt J, Semb GB. Item-by-item versus end-of-test feedback in a computer-based PSI course. Journal of Behavioral Education. 2002; 11; 2: 89-104</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib6" idref="ref35" type="bt">6</bibl> <bibtext> Chase JA, Houmanfar R. The differential effects of elaborate feedback and basic feedback on student performance in a modified, personalized system of instruction course. Journal of Behavioral Education. 2009; 18; 3: 245-265</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib7" idref="ref36" type="bt">7</bibl> <bibtext> Crone-Todd DE, Eyre HL, Hutchens SA, Jones JR, Pear JJ. The effect of changing grading criteria on student writing. The Behavior Analyst Today. 2007; 8; 1: 35-42</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib8" idref="ref37" type="bt">8</bibl> <bibtext> Crone-Todd DE, Pear JJ. Application of Bloom's taxonomy to PSI. The Behavior Analyst Today. 2001; 2; 3: 204-210</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib9" idref="ref38" type="bt">9</bibl> <bibtext> DeVoe P, Niles C, Andrews N, Benjamin A, Blacklock L, Brainard A, Colombo E, Dudley B, Koinis C, Osgood M. Lessons learned from a study-group pilot program for medical students perceived to be 'at risk'. Medical Teacher. 2007; 29; 2–3: e37-e40. 17701607</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ee MS, Yeoh W, Boo YL, Boulter T. Examining the effect of time constraint on the online mastery learning approach towards improving postgraduate students' achievement. Studies in Higher Education. 2018; 43; 2: 217-233</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Eppler MA, Ironsmith M. PSI and distance learning in a developmental psychology course. Teaching of Psychology. 2004; 31; 2: 131-134</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Eyre HL. Keller's personalized system of instruction: Was it a fleeting fancy or is there a revival on the horizon?. The Behavior Analyst Today. 2007; 8; 3: 317-324</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Fike DS, McCall KL, Estes FG, Ndefo UA, Raehl CL, Lockman PR. Promoting minority student learning gains in a prescription practice course. Currents in Pharmacy Teaching and Learning. 2011; 3; 1: 17-22</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Foss KA, Foss SK, Paynton S, Hahn L. Increasing college retention with a personalized system of instruction: A case study. Journal of Case Studies in Education. 2014; 5: 20-40</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Gaheen MM, ElEraky RM, Ewees AA. Automated students arabic essay scoring using trained neural network by e-jaya optimization to support personalized system of instruction. Education and Information Technologies. 2021; 26; 1: 1165-1181</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Grant LK, Spencer RE. The personalized system of instruction: Review and applications to distance education. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning. 2003; 4; 2: 1-17</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hu L, Pear JJ. Effects of a self-instructional manual, computer-aided personalized system of instruction, and demonstration videos on declarative and procedural knowledge acquisition of the assessment of basic learning abilities. Journal on Developmental Disabilities. 2016; 22; 2: 64-79</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ironsmith M, Eppler MA. Mastery learning benefits low-aptitude students. Teaching of Psychology. 2007; 34; 1: 28-31</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Keller FS. Good-bye, teacher.... Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis. 1968; 1; 1: 79-89. 16795164. 1310979</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kulik JA, Kulik CLC, Cohen PA. A meta-analysis of outcome studies of Keller's personalized system of instruction. American Psychologist. 1979; 34; 4: 307-318</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Lanter J, Layne TE, Irwin CC. Analysis of instruction on a university strength training activity course. Physical Educator. 2020; 77; 4: 743-759</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Martin TL, Pear JJ, Martin GL. Analysis of proctor marking accuracy in a computer-aided personalized system of instruction course. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis. 2002; 35; 3: 309-312. 12365747. 1284392</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Martin TL, Pear JJ, Martin GL. Feedback and its effectiveness in a computer-aided personalized system of instruction course. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis. 2002; 35; 4: 427-430. 12555917. 1284408</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DGThe PRISMA Group. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement. PLoS Medicine. 2009; 6; 7: e1000097. 19621072. 2707599</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ocorr K, Osgood MP. Self or help? A comparison of a personalized system of instruction biochemistry class to a standard lecture-based biochemistry class. Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education. 2003; 31; 5: 308-312</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Oliveira M, Goyos C, Pear J. A pilot investigation comparing instructional packages for MTS training:" Manual alone" vs" manual-plus-computer-aided personalized system of instruction. The Behavior Analyst Today. 2012; 13; 3–4: 20-26</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Paiva RC, Ferreira MS, Frade MM. Intelligent tutorial system based on personalized system of instruction to teach or remind mathematical concepts. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning. 2017; 33; 4: 370-381</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Pear JJ, Crone-Todd DE. A social constructivist approach to computer-mediated instruction. Computers &amp; Education. 2002; 38; 1–3: 221-231</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Pritchard T, Penix K, Colquitt G, McCollum S. Effects of a weight training personalized system of instruction course on fitness levels and knowledge. Physical Educator. 2012; 69; 4: 342-359</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Purao S, Sein M, Nilsen H, Larsen EÅ. Setting the pace: Experiments with Keller's PSI. IEEE Transactions on Education. 2016; 60; 2: 97-104</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Rae A, Samuels P. Web-based Personalised System of Instruction: An effective approach for diverse cohorts with virtual learning environments?. Computers &amp; Education. 2011; 57; 4: 2423-2431</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Sherman JG. Reflections on PSI: Good news and bad. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis. 1992; 25; 1: 59-64. 16795772. 1279650</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Springer CR, Pear JJ. Performance measures in courses using computer-aided personalized system of instruction. Computers &amp; Education. 2008; 51; 2: 829-835</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Steel P, Brothen T, Wambach C. Procrastination and personality, performance, and mood. Personality and Individual Differences. 2001; 30; 1: 95-106</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Svenningsen L, Pear JJ. Effects of computer-aided personalized system of instruction in developing knowledge and critical thinking in blended learning courses. The Behavior Analyst Today. 2011; 12; 1: 34-40</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Zaragoza Scherman A, Thomson K, Boris A, Dodson L, Pear JJ, Martin G. Online training of discrete-trials teaching for educating children with autism spectrum disorders: A preliminary study. Journal on Developmental Disabilities. 2015; 21; 1: 22-33</bibtext> </blist> </ref> <aug> <p>By Arlene Mannion; Rory Coyne; Chiara Ferrari; Melike Neşeli; Ciara McGee; Sumeyye Mollaoglu and Geraldine Leader</p> <p>Reported by Author; Author; Author; Author; Author; Author; Author</p> </aug> <nolink nlid="nl1" bibid="bib19" firstref="ref1"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl2" bibid="bib20" firstref="ref9"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl3" bibid="bib32" firstref="ref10"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl4" bibid="bib16" firstref="ref14"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl5" bibid="bib12" firstref="ref20"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl6" bibid="bib24" firstref="ref29"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl7" bibid="bib10" firstref="ref39"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl8" bibid="bib11" firstref="ref40"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl9" bibid="bib34" firstref="ref42"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl10" bibid="bib22" firstref="ref43"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl11" bibid="bib23" firstref="ref44"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl12" bibid="bib31" firstref="ref45"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl13" bibid="bib28" firstref="ref48"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl14" bibid="bib33" firstref="ref49"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl15" bibid="bib35" firstref="ref50"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl16" bibid="bib26" firstref="ref51"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl17" bibid="bib17" firstref="ref52"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl18" bibid="bib36" firstref="ref53"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl19" bibid="bib18" firstref="ref57"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl20" bibid="bib25" firstref="ref59"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl21" bibid="bib27" firstref="ref61"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl22" bibid="bib30" firstref="ref62"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl23" bibid="bib29" firstref="ref65"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl24" bibid="bib21" firstref="ref66"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl25" bibid="bib13" firstref="ref69"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl26" bibid="bib15" firstref="ref70"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl27" bibid="bib14" firstref="ref77"></nolink> |
|---|---|
| Header | DbId: eric DbLabel: ERIC An: EJ1485452 AccessLevel: 3 PubType: Academic Journal PubTypeId: academicJournal PreciseRelevancyScore: 0 |
| IllustrationInfo | |
| Items | – Name: Title Label: Title Group: Ti Data: Personalized System of Instruction in Higher Education: A Systematic Review – Name: Language Label: Language Group: Lang Data: English – Name: Author Label: Authors Group: Au Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Arlene+Mannion%22">Arlene Mannion</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9755-7152">0000-0001-9755-7152</externalLink>)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Rory+Coyne%22">Rory Coyne</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Chiara+Ferrari%22">Chiara Ferrari</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Melike+Neseli%22">Melike Neseli</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Ciara+McGee%22">Ciara McGee</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Sumeyye+Mollaoglu%22">Sumeyye Mollaoglu</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Geraldine+Leader%22">Geraldine Leader</searchLink> – Name: TitleSource Label: Source Group: Src Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SO" term="%22Journal+of+Behavioral+Education%22"><i>Journal of Behavioral Education</i></searchLink>. 2025 34(2):330-370. – Name: Avail Label: Availability Group: Avail Data: Springer. Available from: Springer Nature. One New York Plaza, Suite 4600, New York, NY 10004. Tel: 800-777-4643; Tel: 212-460-1500; Fax: 212-460-1700; e-mail: customerservice@springernature.com; Web site: https://link.springer.com/ – Name: PeerReviewed Label: Peer Reviewed Group: SrcInfo Data: Y – Name: Pages Label: Page Count Group: Src Data: 41 – Name: DatePubCY Label: Publication Date Group: Date Data: 2025 – Name: TypeDocument Label: Document Type Group: TypDoc Data: Journal Articles<br />Information Analyses – Name: Audience Label: Education Level Group: Audnce Data: <searchLink fieldCode="EL" term="%22Higher+Education%22">Higher Education</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="EL" term="%22Postsecondary+Education%22">Postsecondary Education</searchLink> – Name: Subject Label: Descriptors Group: Su Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Individualized+Instruction%22">Individualized Instruction</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Higher+Education%22">Higher Education</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Teaching+Methods%22">Teaching Methods</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Educational+Research%22">Educational Research</searchLink> – Name: DOI Label: DOI Group: ID Data: 10.1007/s10864-023-09530-8 – Name: ISSN Label: ISSN Group: ISSN Data: 1053-0819<br />1573-3513 – Name: Abstract Label: Abstract Group: Ab Data: Personalized System of Instruction (PSI), also known as the Keller method, is a specific instructional design. There has been limited research focused on how this method has been used in teaching in higher education. The aim of this systematic review is to focus on how PSI has been applied to teaching in higher education in the last 20 years. Searches were conducted on the following databases: Educational Resources Information Center (ERIC), Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection (EBSCO), PsycINFO, Scopus and Web of Science. Hand searches were also conducted on a number of journals. Inclusion criteria were that articles (a) included the use of the PSI and (b) included university students as participants. It was found that 27 studies met the inclusion criteria. Studies were divided into themes. Results were discussed in terms of how PSI can be used in teaching and learning, similarities between PSI and other approaches, and the ways PSI could be incorporated with other teaching approaches. Finally, future directions were given for the use of PSI in the area of teaching and learning in higher education. – Name: AbstractInfo Label: Abstractor Group: Ab Data: As Provided – Name: DateEntry Label: Entry Date Group: Date Data: 2025 – Name: AN Label: Accession Number Group: ID Data: EJ1485452 |
| PLink | https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=eric&AN=EJ1485452 |
| RecordInfo | BibRecord: BibEntity: Identifiers: – Type: doi Value: 10.1007/s10864-023-09530-8 Languages: – Text: English PhysicalDescription: Pagination: PageCount: 41 StartPage: 330 Subjects: – SubjectFull: Individualized Instruction Type: general – SubjectFull: Higher Education Type: general – SubjectFull: Teaching Methods Type: general – SubjectFull: Educational Research Type: general Titles: – TitleFull: Personalized System of Instruction in Higher Education: A Systematic Review Type: main BibRelationships: HasContributorRelationships: – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Arlene Mannion – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Rory Coyne – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Chiara Ferrari – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Melike Neseli – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Ciara McGee – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Sumeyye Mollaoglu – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Geraldine Leader IsPartOfRelationships: – BibEntity: Dates: – D: 01 M: 06 Type: published Y: 2025 Identifiers: – Type: issn-print Value: 1053-0819 – Type: issn-electronic Value: 1573-3513 Numbering: – Type: volume Value: 34 – Type: issue Value: 2 Titles: – TitleFull: Journal of Behavioral Education Type: main |
| ResultId | 1 |
