Vusal Maharram Karimli
Department of Business Management, Azerbaijan State University of Economics (UNEC), Istiqlaliyyat 6, Baku AZ 1096, Azerbaijan
Tehrana Sayyad Khudaverdiyeva
English and Translation Department, Nakhchivan State University, University Campus, Khatai, Nakhchivan AZ 7012, Azerbaijan
Farida Huseynova
General Pedagogy Department, Azerbaijan State Pedagogical University, Uzeyir Hajibeyli St 68, Baku AZ 1000, Azerbaijan
Fatima Zahid İsmayilli
English and Translation Department, Nakhchivan State University, University Campus, Khatai, Nakhchivan AZ 7012, Azerbaijan
Khadija Mohsum Aliyeva
Foreign Languages Department, Mingachevir State University, D. Aliyeva St 21, Mingachevir AZ 4500, Azerbaijan
Nigar Namig Aliyarova
Department of Foreign Languages and Literature, Baku Eurasian University, Ak. Hasan Aliyev St 135A, Baku AZ 1110, Azerbaijan
Khazangul Süleyman Babayeva
Department of Economics and Management, Azerbaijan State University of Economics (UNEC), Azizbeyov Street, Zagatala 4 AZ 6225, Azerbaijan
Nazli Ahmed Bayramova
Department of Economics and Management, Azerbaijan State University of Economics (UNEC), Azizbeyov Street, Zagatala 4 AZ 6225, Azerbaijan
Vid S. Honfi
Department of Informatics, Milton Friedman University, Kelta u. 2, Budapest 1139, Hungary
Venkata Siva Kumari Narayana
Department of Engineering English, K L Deemed to be University, Green Fields, Vaddeswaram, Andhra Pradesh 533296, India
Mobile computing has revolutionized educational assessment, particularly for English Language Learners (ELLs), by enabling personalized, adaptive testing. Traditional standardized assessments often fail to accommodate the diverse linguistic competencies of ELLs, leading to inaccurate evaluations of their knowledge and skills. The integration of artificial intelligence and mobile computing has given rise to adaptive testing, which dynamically adjusts the difficulty level of test items in real-time, based on a student’s responses. This approach enhances assessment accuracy, fosters engagement, and provides educators with actionable insights through real-time data analytics. Moreover, mobile computing facilitates accessibility, ensuring that students can participate in assessments from any location, using devices such as smartphones and tablets. However, challenges such as the digital divide, data privacy concerns, and the need for teacher training pose obstacles to the widespread implementation of mobile-based adaptive testing. This research paper provides an in-depth exploration of the role of mobile computing in adaptive testing for ELLs, analysing its benefits, limitations, and future directions. Extensive research, case studies, and data-driven insights illustrate how mobile computing can transform assessments, making them more inclusive, equitable, and effective. Infographics and tables are included to provide a comprehensive visual representation of key findings and trends in adaptive testing. Inculcation of qualitative methodology enhances the authenticity of this research, and the results prove that the research withstands the needs of the evolving era.
[1] Martin, F., Chen, Y., Moore, R.L., et al., 2020. Systematic review of adaptive learning research designs, context, strategies, and technologies from 2009 to 2018. Educational Technology Research and Development. 68(4), 1903–1929. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-020-09793-2
[2] Walkington, C., Bernacki, M.L., 2020. Appraising research on personalized learning: Definitions, theoretical alignment, advancements, and future directions. Journal of Research on Technology in Education. 52(3), 235–252. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2020.1747757
[3] Wolfe, R.E., Poon, J.D., 2015. Educator competencies for personalized, learner-centered teaching. Jobs for the Future: Boston, MA, USA. Available from: http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED560785.pdf (cited 22 April 2025).
[4] Yang, J., 2013. Mobile assisted language learning: Review of the recent applications of emerging mobile technologies. English Language Teaching. 6(7), 19–25.
[5] Xing, Y., Wang, X., Qiu, C., et al., 2022. Research on opinion polarization by big data analytics capabilities in online social networks. Technology in Society. 68, 101902.
[6] Roschelle, J., Feng, M., Murphy, R.F., et al., 2016. Online mathematics homework increases student achievement. AERA Open. 2(4), 2332858416673968. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/2332858416673968
[7] Hsu, C.K., Hwang, G.J., Chang, Y.T., et al., 2013. Effects of video caption modes on English listening comprehension and vocabulary acquisition using handheld devices. Educational Technology & Society. 16(1), 403–414.
[8] Yarandi, M., Tawil, A.R., Jahankhani, H., 2012. Ontologies for personalised adaptive learning. Proceedings of the Advances in Computing & Technology; 2012; London, UK.
[9] Joseph, S.R.H., Uther, M., 2009. Mobile devices for language learning: multimedia approaches. Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning. 4(1), 7–32. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1142/S179320680900060X
[10] Reber, R., Hetland, H., Chen, W., et al., 2009. Effects of example choice on interest, control, and learning. Journal of the Learning Sciences. 18(4), 509–548.
[11] Youngblood, J.P., Webb, E.A., Gin, L.E., et al., 2022. Anatomical self-efficacy of undergraduate students improves during a fully online biology course with at-home dissections. Advances in Physiology Education. 46(1), 125–139.
[12] Halverson, R., 2019. Taking a learning sciences perspective to understand personalized learning in schools. Proceedings of the 2019 Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association; 5–9 April 2019; Toronto, Canada. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3102/1446111
[13] Hooshyar, D., Pedaste, M., Yang, Y., et al., 2020. From gaming to computational thinking: An adaptive educational computer game-based learning approach. Journal of Educational Computing Research. 59(3), 383–409. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0735633120965919
[14] Fraenkel, J.R., Norman, E.W., 2006. How to design and evaluate research in education. McGraw-Hill: New York, NY, USA.
[15] Peng, P., Fu, W., 2022. A pattern recognition method of personalized adaptive learning in online education. Mobile Networks and Applications. 27(3), 1186–1198.
[16] Ready, D., Conn, K., Bretas, S., 2019. Final impact results from the i3 implementation of teach to one: math. Consortium for Policy Research in Education: Columbia University, New York, NY, USA. Available from: https://www.newclassrooms.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/Final-Impact-Results-i3-TtO.pdf (cited 22 May 2025).
[17] Ortagus, J.C., 2017. From the periphery to prominence: An examination of the changing profile of online students in American higher education. The Internet and Higher Education. 32, 47–57.
[18] Cavanagh, T., Chen, B., Lahcen, R.A.M., et al., 2020. Constructing a design framework and pedagogical approach for adaptive learning in higher education: A practitioner’s perspective. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning. 21(1), 173–197.
[19] Supriyadi, E., Indro, H.Y., Priyanto, E., et al., 2020. Students’ evaluation on teaching in vocational and technical schools. International Journal of Instruction. 13(2), 621–636.
[20] Rogowsky, B.A., Calhoun, B.M., Tallal, P., 2015. Matching learning style to instructional method: Effects on comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology. 107(1), 64–78.
[21] Canales, A., Peredo, R., 2009. Adaptive and intelligent agents applied in the taking of decisions inside of a Web-based education system. In: Nguyen, N.T., Jain, L.C. (eds.). Intelligent agents in the evolution of web and applications. Studies in computational intelligence. Springer-Verlag: Berlin, Heidelberg, Germany. pp. 87–112.
[22] Kruger, D., 2020. Adaptive learning technology to enhance self-directed learning. In: Self-directed multi-modal learning in higher education. In: Olivier, J. (ed.). Self-directed multimodal learning in higher education (NWU Self Directed Learning Series Volume 5). AOSIS: Cape Town, WC, South Africa. pp. 93–116. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4102/aosis.2020.BK210.03
[23] Enyedy, N., 2014. Personalized instruction: new interest, old rhetoric, limited results, and the need for a new direction for computer-mediated learning. National Education Policy Center: Boulder, CO, USA.
[24] Baley, A., Vaduganathan, N., Henry, T., et al., 2018. Making digital work: Success strategies from six leading universities and community colleges. The Boston Consulting Group: Boston, Massachusetts, USA. Available from: https://edplus.asu.edu/sites/default/files/BCG-Making-Digital-Learning-Work-Apr-2018%20.pdf (cited 3 February 2025).
[25] O’Sullivan, P., Voegele, J.D.C., Buchan, T., et al., 2020. Adaptive courseware implementation: investigating alignment, course redesign, and the student experience. Current Issues in Emerging eLearning. 7(1), 101–137.
[26] Wilson, M., 2014. Personalization: It’s anything but personal. Educational Leadership. 71(6), 73–77.
[27] Dron, J., 2018. Smart learning environments, and not so smart learning environments: a systems view. Smart Learning Environments. 5(1), 25. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-018-0075-9
Copyright © 2025 Vusal Maharram Karimli, Tehrana Sayyad Khudaverdiyeva, Farida Huseynova, Fatima Zahid İsmayilli, Khadija Mohsum Aliyeva, Nigar Namig Aliyarova, Khazangul Süleyman Babayeva, Nazli Ahmed Bayramova, Vid S. Honfi, Venkata Siva Kumari Narayana
This is an open access article under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0) License.
