The Impact of Pearson MyLab Math on Precalculus Performance and Test-Taking Preferences

The Impact of Pearson MyLab Math on Precalculus Performance and Test-Taking Preferences | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Research Article The Impact of Pearson MyLab Math on Precalculus Performance and Test-Taking Preferences Russina Eltoum, Hanadi Abdelsalam This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-6046706/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract This case study explores the impact of Pearson MyLab Math, an online learning platform, on the learning outcomes of students enrolled in a Precalculus course at Prince Mohammed Bin Fahd University (PMU). Using a mixed-method approach, the study examines how the integration of MyLab Math influences students’ understanding of key Precalculus concepts, their engagement with course materials, and overall academic performance. Data was collected through interviews, focus groups, and analysis of student performance metrics. Findings suggest that while Pearson MyLab Math provides valuable resources, its effectiveness is contingent on student engagement and the alignment of platform resources with course objectives. Applied Mathematics Educational Psychology Assessment Format STEM Pearson MyLab Math Education Technology Students Preference Student Satisfaction 1. Introduction Precalculus is vital as a foundational course for students entering various STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics) fields. It reinforces essential mathematical concepts and equips students with critical problem-solving skills necessary for advanced study. Mastery of Precalculus is often a prerequisite for higher-level courses in calculus and other related subjects, making it essential for academic success in these areas (Hurdle et al., 2022). With the rapid advancement of technology in education, there is an increasing trend towards web-based learning technology and platforms, such as Pearson MyLab Math (Ajaz, 2020). These platforms are designed to enhance the learning experience by offering a range of interactive and engaging tools. For instance, MyLab Math features interactive exercises that allow students to practice problems in real-time, promoting active learning and retention of concepts. Moreover, Pearson MyLab Math provides personalized learning pathways tailored to individual student needs. This adaptive approach helps identify areas where students may struggle, allowing for targeted practice and improvement. Immediate feedback on exercises further enhances this learning process, enabling students to understand their mistakes and learn from them instantly. By integrating these technological tools, MyLab Math supports students in developing a deeper understanding of mathematical concepts, ultimately preparing them for success in their academic and professional pursuits within the STEM fields. This study advances the field of mathematics education by investigating the impact of web-based learning platforms, particularly Pearson MyLab Math, on students' comprehension, engagement, and academic success in Precalculus. As technology increasingly influences education, evaluating the effectiveness of these digital tools in enhancing student learning is essential. By concentrating on Precalculus—a key course for STEM students—this research offers important insights into how interactive and adaptive learning platforms affect student outcomes. The results will assist educators in making informed choices about incorporating technology into mathematics instruction, ultimately enhancing teaching methods and promoting student achievement in STEM disciplines. Furthermore, this study fills a gap in the existing literature by providing empirical evidence regarding the effects of MyLab Math in Precalculus, setting the stage for further research on digital learning solutions in mathematics education. Although MyLab Math is widely used, there is limited research on its specific impact on student learning in Precalculus courses. This study seeks to address this gap by investigating the influence of MyLab Math use on students' understanding, engagement, and academic performance in a Precalculus setting. This research aims to answer the following questions: How does the use of Pearson MyLab Math impact students' understanding of Precalculus concepts? What effect does Pearson MyLab Math have on student engagement in the learning process? How does Pearson MyLab Math influence students' academic performance in a Precalculus course? 2. Literature Review 2.1 The Role of Technology in Mathematics Education Technology has transformed mathematics education by offering digital tools that enhance both teaching and learning (Raja & Nagasubramani, 2018; Ziatdinov & Cilliers, 2022; Viberg et al., 2023; Mukul & Büyüközkan, 2023). Educational platforms, apps, and online resources have revolutionized traditional learning methods, making mathematics more interactive and accessible (Bond et al., 2020). These digital tools help students overcome conceptual difficulties, reinforce problem-solving skills, and correct misconceptions, thereby fostering a culture of independent and lifelong learning. Additionally, technology facilitates differentiated instruction, allowing students to learn at their own pace and according to their unique needs (Zhang et al., 2020). Beyond improving accessibility, digital learning tools promote active engagement and deeper conceptual understanding. Studies suggest that integrating technology into mathematics instruction encourages students to take a more participatory role in their learning process, increasing motivation and retention (Kholid et al., 2021). Interactive presentations, games, and simulations make abstract mathematical ideas more tangible, aiding comprehension and skill development. Furthermore, technology enables educators to create a more inclusive and adaptive learning environment, catering to diverse learning styles and abilities while maintaining instructional rigor (Jaafar, 2022). Despite its advantages, the integration of technology in mathematics education is not without challenges. Research highlights issues such as digital distractions, disparities in access to technology, and varying levels of digital literacy among students and educators (Raines, 2016). Therefore, while technology has the potential to enhance mathematical learning, its effectiveness depends on thoughtful implementation, proper training, and alignment with pedagogical objectives. 2.2 Overview of Pearson MyLab Math Pearson MyLab Math is a widely used online learning platform designed to support mathematics instruction by offering personalized, interactive learning experiences. Developed by Pearson Education, MyLab Math is aligned with its published textbooks and incorporates digital tools to enhance comprehension and assessment in mathematics courses (Ajaz, 2020). The platform employs adaptive learning pathways, which adjust content based on student performance, ensuring targeted reinforcement of concepts where students struggle (Wang, 2023). Key features of MyLab Math include interactive assignments, immediate feedback, and multimedia resources such as instructional videos and step-by-step problem-solving tutorials (Pangburn, 2020). These features help students visualize complex mathematical ideas and engage with course material in a more structured and interactive manner. Additionally, the platform includes online assessments, a gradebook for tracking student progress, and integration with Learning Management Systems (LMS), allowing for seamless access to assignments and grades (Olsen, 2020). Despite its benefits, MyLab Math has certain limitations. Technical issues, such as platform glitches and connectivity problems, can disrupt the learning process. The rigid structure of automated grading sometimes fails to recognize alternative correct answers, frustrating students and limiting instructional flexibility. Additionally, the platform can be costly, posing a financial barrier for some students (Ajaz, 2020). Moreover, while MyLab Math provides adaptive learning, its effectiveness depends on how well it aligns with course objectives and the extent to which instructors integrate it into their teaching strategies (Wang, 2023). 2.3 Previous Research on MyLab Math and Student Learning Empirical research has examined the impact of MyLab Math on student learning, engagement, and academic performance. Several studies indicate that MyLab Math enhances student understanding by offering structured practice opportunities before formal assessments (Ahmadi et al., 2019; Ajaz, 2020; Olsen, 2020; Wang, 2023). The platform's diverse tools, such as Practice, QuizMe, Homework, Quiz, and Test , provide students with multiple opportunities to reinforce key mathematical concepts and track their progress. However, despite its popularity, MyLab Math is not universally effective for all students. Research highlights significant disparities in student experiences based on factors such as prior mathematical proficiency, familiarity with digital learning platforms, and individual learning preferences. Raines (2016) found that while some students appreciated MyLab Math’s instant feedback and structured learning paths, others experienced frustration due to technical difficulties and a lack of flexibility in the platform’s design. Similarly, Olsen (2020) reported that nontraditional students, particularly those returning to education after a long hiatus, struggled with the platform’s navigation and required additional support to engage effectively with its features. Further studies emphasize that the effectiveness of MyLab Math is contingent on instructional integration. Instructors who actively incorporate MyLab Math into their teaching—through guided practice sessions, structured feedback, and supplementary materials—tend to see greater student engagement and improved learning outcomes (Ajaz, 2020). Conversely, students who use the platform in isolation without proper instructional support often encounter difficulties in applying learned concepts to more complex mathematical problems. Additionally, the platform’s assessment formats have been a point of contention. Research comparing paper-based and MyLab Math-based assessments suggests that students often perform better on traditional exams than on platform-based tests. Factors such as interface discomfort, test anxiety related to digital environments, and the rigid grading system contribute to lower scores on online assessments (Wang, 2023). These findings highlight the need for careful consideration when using MyLab Math as an assessment tool, emphasizing the importance of balancing digital and traditional testing formats to ensure equitable evaluation of student learning. The existing research underscores both the advantages and limitations of MyLab Math in mathematics education. While the platform provides valuable tools for interactive learning, adaptive practice, and structured assessments, its effectiveness varies based on factors such as student engagement, instructor integration, and assessment format. The findings suggest that while MyLab Math can enhance student learning and performance in Precalculus, further investigation is needed to address technical challenges, optimize instructional strategies, and ensure fair assessment methods. This study aims to fill these gaps by exploring the specific impact of MyLab Math on students’ comprehension, engagement, and academic success in a Precalculus course. 3. Methodology This study employed a case study design to examine the impact of Pearson MyLab Math on student performance, focusing on a specific group of students at Prince Mohammed Bin Fahd University (PMU). The group included two Precalculus classes, totaling 28 students. The participants of this study are all female, aged 19–22, at the preparatory level for enrollment in a STEM program. The majority of the participants are Saudi nationals. The decision to conduct this study as a case study with a smaller sample size of 28 participants stems from the unique benefits and focus of a case study approach, particularly when examining user experiences and preferences. A case study allows for depth over breadth, enabling a detailed exploration of participants’ perspectives, challenges, and specific experiences with Pearson MyLab Math. Given that this research aims to uncover nuanced insights into how users perceive and interact with the platform, a case study is an ideal approach to capture these subjective, qualitative aspects. Additionally, the representativeness of the participant group—which includes varied levels of familiarity with and use of Pearson MyLab Math—supports a meaningful analysis of common issues and preferences among different types of users. This diversity within a smaller, focused group enhances the validity of the insights gained, as it reflects a range of user experiences while remaining manageable for in-depth analysis. Moreover, qualitative validity is prioritized over statistical generalizability in this study. While the findings may not be broadly generalizable due to the smaller sample size, the rich data obtained from detailed participant responses is valuable for identifying key themes, trends, and potential areas for improvement in the platform. By capturing these detailed perspectives, the study can offer actionable insights that may not emerge in larger, more generalized quantitative studies. Finally, acknowledging limitations regarding generalizability further strengthens the rationale for a case study approach. This methodology allows the study to remain focused on the specific experiences of a sample group, providing concentrated insights that may serve as a foundation for future research with larger samples. In summary, the case study approach is well-suited to this research because it prioritizes depth and detail, supports a focused exploration of diverse user experiences, and enables meaningful insights within the study’s scope and objectives The study employed multiple data collection methods, including interviews, focus groups, and performance data analysis. The interviews were designed to explore students' experiences with the platform and gain deeper insights into how MyLab Math was utilized by the participants during the study. The focus groups aimed to examine specific aspects of students' learning experiences closely. Additionally, performance data were gathered from coursework and assessments to evaluate academic outcomes. To assess differences in student performance across testing methods, a t-test was conducted to evaluate whether the variation in students’ results between the paper-based and platform-based tests was statistically significant. This analysis aimed to determine which testing method was more effective in enhancing student achievement. Additionally, to examine the impact of the intervention on students’ learning outcomes, a t-test was employed to compare pre-test and post-test scores, identifying whether the observed differences were statistically significant. These methods were integrated to complement one another, ensuring the findings and conclusions were reliable and valid. 4. Findings The students began engaging with the platform at the start of the semester, intending to fully integrate it into the course. They used the platform to access the textbook, complete assignments, and utilize various learning resources provided by MyLab Math to support their learning. It is worth noting that all the students had previously used the platform in other courses. Initially, the plan was to conduct assessments on the platform as well. However, after the first test, students provided strong feedback highlighting significant drawbacks of using the platform for testing. As a result, it was decided to repeat the test on paper to compare outcomes and evaluate whether future assessments should be conducted on the platform or paper. This also provided an opportunity to better understand students’ perspectives on both paper-based and MyLab Math testing methods. 4.1 Paper-Based vs. Platform-Based Testing Two sources of data were used to gather insights into students' preferences regarding testing methods: a survey and a statistical significance analysis. 4.1.1 Student Test Preferences Survey To better understand their perspectives and preferences on this issue, a survey (Appendix A) was conducted following the first test to learn about students’ experiences with platform-based testing. The survey data provides insights into students’ preferences and experiences with Pearson MyLab Math versus traditional paper-based math tests, revealing several key trends. Most students reported using Pearson MyLab Math "sometimes" or "rarely," with approximately 50% indicating occasional use and 21% stating they use it infrequently (Chart 1). Only about 28% of students reported using the platform "always." These results may reflect limited integration of Pearson MyLab Math in their coursework or a preference for alternative assessment formats. The ratings for Pearson MyLab Math were highly polarized, with about 43% of students rating it as "very poor" (1) and another 28.6% giving it an "excellent" (5). The remaining 21.3% of students provided ratings between 2 and 4, suggesting a range of moderate satisfaction (Chart 2). Common criticisms included technical issues, a lack of flexibility in answer formatting, and perceived unfairness in grading. In contrast, paper-based tests received more consistently favorable ratings, with approximately 39.3% of students assigning a rating of "excellent" (5). Only 10% rated paper-based tests as "very poor" (1), and 60% offered mixed ratings between 2 and 4 (Chart 3). Students highlighted the familiarity of the format, ease of showing work, reduced screen time, and a less distracting environment as contributing factors to their preference. This data reflects a mixed experience, with a considerable divide between those who find paper-based tests effective versus those who do not. A significant majority of students (approximately 82%) expressed a preference for paper-based tests (Chart 4). About 18% favored Pearson MyLab Math. The reasons for these preferences varied. Paper-based tests were valued for their ability to facilitate detailed, step-by-step work, reduce distractions, and minimize screen time. In contrast, students who preferred Pearson MyLab Math appreciated features such as immediate feedback, interactivity, and flexibility. For those favoring Pearson MyLab Math, approximately 43% cited immediate feedback as a key advantage and 18% appreciated its flexibility and interactivity (Chart 5). However, 82% of students who preferred paper-based tests emphasized the familiar format, ease of showing work, and reduced distractions (53.6%). Additionally, 43% specifically highlighted the reduction in screen time as a significant benefit of paper-based assessments Most students (around 68%) believed they performed better on paper-based tests (Chart 6), attributing this to the ease of showing their work and the opportunity to receive partial credit (93%). Furthermore, approximately 14.3% of students indicated no difference in performance between formats, while only 7% felt they performed better on Pearson MyLab Math due to its structured feedback and flexible access (Chart 7). When asked about their preferred format for future tests, 78.6% of students strongly preferred more paper-based tests. Additionally, the data indicates a strong preference for paper-based tests among respondents, with the majority expressing a desire for more such assessments (Chart 8). Specifically, "More paper-based tests" was the most frequently chosen option, suggesting that students may feel more comfortable or confident with traditional testing methods. Additionally, a smaller portion of respondents indicated "No preference" or a desire for a mix of both formats, highlighting some variability in preferences but reinforcing the dominance of the preference for paper-based testing. Overall, this analysis suggests that implementing more paper-based assessments could align well with student preferences. Many comments emphasized that paper-based tests felt fairer, particularly concerning partial credit for problem-solving methods. Approximately 40% of students provided additional comments, many of which expressed frustrations with Pearson MyLab Math. Complaints centered on strict answer formatting, which often led to full mark losses over minor errors, and technical issues, such as lagging and problems with saving progress. These issues were reported to disrupt the testing experience and increase stress levels. The survey findings suggest that while Pearson MyLab Math offers advantages like immediate feedback and interactivity, the majority of students prefer paper-based tests due to their ease of use, reduced distractions, and perceived fairness. A balanced approach that integrates both formats may better meet student needs, leveraging the benefits of technology while retaining the advantages of traditional assessment methods. 4.1.2 Comparing Student Performance: Paper-Based vs. Platform-Based Testing To gain deeper insights, a t-test was conducted to determine whether there was a statistically significant difference between students’ results on the paper-based test and the platform-based test (Table 1). The analysis aimed to identify which testing method yielded better results in terms of student achievement. Specifically, students' scores on the first test conducted on paper were compared to their scores on a similar test conducted on the platform. Table 1. Students’ Performance Comparison t-Test: Paired Two Sample for Means Paper-based Test Scores Platform-based Test Scores Mean 62.71429 51.33143 Variance 466.368 280.0784 Observations 28 28 Pearson Correlation 0.635324 Hypothesized Mean Difference 0 df 27 t Stat 3.554061 P(T<=t) one-tail 0.000711 t Critical one-tail 1.703288 P(T<=t) two-tail 0.001421 t Critical two-tail 2.051831 The test results show a statistically significant difference between the means of students’ scores on the paper-based test (mean: 62.7) and platform-based test (mean: 51.3) at both one-tailed and two-tailed significance levels. This suggests that the mean of paper-based testing is significantly higher than the mean of platform-based testing. This suggests that the testing method may have a notable impact on students' ability to demonstrate their knowledge. While students had prior experience using the platform, the lower performance in platform-based testing could indicate challenges such as discomfort with the interface, technical difficulties, or a lack of alignment between the platform’s testing format and students’ learning styles. Gathering detailed feedback from students about their experiences during the platform-based test could provide further insights, which was already done via the previously mentioned survey. These findings also suggest the need for more test design consideration, which can be done by the platform to adjust and improve its effectiveness. Furthermore, platform-based testing needs to ensure that no technical or accessibility issues disproportionately affect certain students. For instance, internet connectivity or device quality could have influenced performance on the platform test. For future testing, it is recommended to prioritize paper-based tests for high-stakes assessments to support better student outcomes, as indicated by the results. If platform-based testing is necessary, efforts should focus on improving its usability and aligning it more closely with paper-based formats. Further research, such as qualitative studies or focus groups, is essential to understand why students performed better on paper-based tests. Additionally, a hybrid approach could be explored, combining both methods to leverage their respective benefits while providing training and support to enhance performance in platform-based testing over time. 4.2 Interview Responses The participants were interviewed to explore aspects of their experiences with the platform and to assess the impact of MyLab Math on students’ understanding of Precalculus concepts, in order to address the first research question: How does the use of Pearson MyLab Math impact students' understanding of Precalculus concepts? A thematic analysis of the students' responses to their experience with Pearson MyLab Math in learning precalculus identifies several recurring themes that encapsulate their overall experiences. These themes provide insight into the platform’s strengths and weaknesses as perceived by the students. The first two interview questions (Appendix B) were designed to collect information about the students’ general perception pf Pearson MyLab Math. The summary of themes that emerged from the students’ responses was the following: Supportive Learning Features: 64% of students appreciated the platform's structured resources, interactive exercises, and immediate feedback. Technical Challenges and Navigation Difficulties: 46% expressed frustration with technical glitches and navigation issues. Limitations During Exams: 14% were dissatisfied with the inability to show work or provide reasoning. Mixed User Experience: 18% described their experience as both helpful and frustrating, citing areas for improvement. Adaptability and Growth Over Time: 11% noted that familiarity with the platform improved their experience over time. High Expectations and Disappointment: 14% reported that the platform did not meet their expectations due to usability and technical shortcomings. The analysis highlights that while supportive learning features are a major strength, the platform faces significant challenges with technical issues, navigation difficulties, and rigid exam formats. Addressing these concerns could improve the overall user experience and better meet students' expectations. A thematic analysis of students’ responses to how Pearson MyLab has impacted their understanding of precalculus concepts reveals key themes. These themes were identified based on recurring patterns in the responses, with percentages calculated to highlight their prevalence: Enhanced Understanding Through Step-by-Step Explanations and Feedback: 56% reported that step-by-step solutions and immediate feedback significantly improved their comprehension of precalculus concepts. Increased Confidence Through Practice: 44% highlighted the value of extensive practice problems in building confidence and preparing for exams. Accessibility and Interactive Learning Tools: 36% appreciated features like hints, visual aids, and instructional videos that made learning more engaging and accessible. Challenges with Clarity and Sufficiency: 20% expressed concerns about unclear explanations and insufficient support for understanding complex concepts. Reinforcement of Classroom Learning: 16% noted that the platform primarily reinforced classroom learning rather than introducing new understanding. Limited Impact on Understanding: 12% felt that Pearson MyLab Math had minimal impact on their comprehension, serving more as a practice tool than a learning resource. The analysis indicates that Pearson MyLab Math is generally effective in enhancing students’ understanding of precalculus through its step-by-step guidance, immediate feedback, and ample practice opportunities. However, issues like unclear explanations and a limited independent impact point to areas for improvement. These findings suggest that while Pearson MyLab Math serves as a valuable supplementary resource, its effectiveness could be increased by addressing clarity concerns and offering more comprehensive conceptual support. With respect to the analysis focuses on data derived from interview questions 3 and 4, which explore students’ perceptions of specific precalculus concepts and the ways these concepts were reinforced through Pearson MyLab. Question 3 examines the particular mathematical topics that students felt were most effectively reinforced, while Question 4 delves into the tools, features, and methods that supported their understanding. By analyzing responses to these questions, this report aims to highlight common themes, identify effective strategies, and uncover areas where improvements might be needed to enhance the learning experience. The findings of these questions were summarized in Table 2. Table 2. Specific Concepts and Reinforcement Core Strengths Areas for Improvement Pearson MyLab is effective for reinforcing key precalculus concepts, particularly functions and graphing (73%), trigonometry (40%), and solving equations (30%). Tools like graphing features (50%), step-by-step solutions (43%), and repetition (40%) were highly valued for solidifying understanding. 10–23% of respondents felt the platform lacked clarity for challenging concepts or relied too heavily on repetitive practice without deeper insight. This data shows that Pearson MyLab is an effective tool for most users but has room for improvement to address advanced topics and enhance clarity for struggling learners. Regarding whether Pearson MyLab clarified challenging precalculus concepts and how it did so, this analysis identifies key areas of difficulty, evaluates the platform’s tools and features, and highlights themes to assess its effectiveness and potential areas for improvement. The findings were summarized in Table 3. Table 3. Precalculus Conceptual Challenges Themes Percentages Dominant Challenging Concepts The most challenging concepts were limits (20%), graphing transformations (20%), and trigonometry (17%), where students consistently cited specific tools that helped clarify these areas. Tools that Enhanced Understanding Step-by-step solutions (50%) and interactive graphing tools (30%) were the most effective in helping students overcome difficulties. Areas for Improvement A minority of respondents (10%) expressed that the platform did not provide sufficient depth for complex topics or lacked comprehensive explanations in certain areas. This analysis highlights that Pearson MyLab is effective in addressing many challenging precalculus concepts, especially when leveraging features like detailed explanations and visual tools. However, there is room to improve the depth of resources for more complex topics. In regards to the interview questions that are related to the features and tools of the platform, the thematic analysis of students' responses about Pearson MyLab highlights several key features and their effectiveness in supporting learning as summarized in Table 4. Table 4. Features and Tools of Pearson MyLab Math Themes Percentages Hints in Pearson MyLab The majority of students (40%) value the step-by-step guidance provided by hints, which help them solve problems incrementally. Hints are also appreciated for breaking down complex problems (25%) and encouraging independent problem-solving without directly giving away answers (20%). A smaller portion of students (10%) reported limited or no use of hints, while 5% highlighted hints as enhancing critical thinking. Situations Where Hints Were Helpful Many students (35%) recalled instances where hints provided specific problem-solving guidance, such as factoring polynomials or isolating variables. Hints clarifying formulas or properties were noted by 30%, while 20% mentioned general support in understanding concepts. A small group (15%) did not recall specific instances. Step-by-Step Solutions Feature Nearly half the students (45%) praised this feature for breaking down complex problems into manageable steps. Many (35%) found it highly effective in improving understanding and problem-solving skills. Engagement with the feature was mixed, with 10% expressing general satisfaction and another 10% stating it did not increase their engagement. Immediate Feedback on Answers Immediate feedback is considered highly effective by 50% of respondents, who noted its role in identifying and correcting mistakes. Feedback was also valued for clarifying the correct approach (25%) and improving understanding (15%). However, 10% expressed frustrations with occasional errors in feedback evaluation. Overall, the findings emphasize the effectiveness of Pearson MyLab Math’s tools in providing structured guidance, promoting independent learning, and offering immediate feedback, all of which support problem-solving and concept understanding. However, a minority reported limited engagement or issues with the feedback system. In regards to how the interactive features and user interface of MyLab Math impact students' engagement and learning experience in precalculus. It highlights supportive tools, user preferences, and areas for improvement based on student feedback, the findings were summarized to these themes: Enhanced Engagement: 80% of students reported that the interactive features of Pearson MyLab, such as dynamic graphs, quizzes, and hands-on practice, made learning more engaging and enjoyable. Graphing Tools and Practice Quizzes: 70% highlighted the graphing tool as particularly helpful for visualizing transformations, while 40% found practice quizzes effective for reinforcing understanding. Instant Feedback and Videos: 30% appreciated the instant feedback for correcting mistakes and 20% valued explanation videos for reviewing concepts at their own pace. Hands-On Learning: 35% noted that the platform’s hands-on approach helped them grasp mathematical concepts more effectively. Technical Challenges and Navigation Difficulties: 10% mentioned that the system’s complexity and navigation issues detracted from the learning experience, with suggestions for simplifying the interface. User Interface Usability: While 60% found the interface intuitive and conducive to learning, 25% suggested improvements in navigation and layout to enhance the user experience. Overall, Pearson MyLab’s interactive features significantly enhance engagement and understanding of precalculus material, particularly through tools like graphing and quizzes. However, addressing navigation challenges and simplifying the interface could further improve the user experience. Regarding the challenges students face while using Pearson MyLab and their suggestions for improving the platform’s effectiveness in teaching precalculus. Feedback highlights issues related to technical glitches, navigation difficulties, and a need for clearer explanations, as well as proposed solutions to enhance the user experience. Challenges with Explanations and Feedback: 55% of students reported that explanations were overly technical, vague, or lacked sufficient detail, making it difficult to understand mistakes and concepts. Technical Glitches and Navigation Issues: 40% experienced occasional system glitches, such as slow responses or loading errors, while 25% found the interface unintuitive, particularly when working with graphing tools or locating specific resources. Repetitiveness and Monotony: 15% noted that the repetitive nature of some questions reduced engagement, with suggestions for more varied and interactive exercises. Graphing Tool Difficulties: 20% mentioned challenges with the graphing tool, citing its lack of user-friendliness and the need for tutorials to improve usability. While Pearson MyLab provides a useful platform for learning precalculus, students face challenges with explanations, technical issues, and navigation. Addressing these concerns by improving explanations, enhancing graphing tools, diversifying content, and refining the interface could significantly improve the learning experience and user satisfaction. Additionally, the findings from student feedback on Pearson MyLab's effectiveness and usability in supporting precalculus learning are summarized. The analysis highlights key strengths of the platform, areas for improvement, and how it compares to other digital tools. The analysis of the findings resulted in these themes: 4.2.1. Structured and Comprehensive Learning Key Finding: Pearson MyLab Math is valued for its structured approach, detailed assignments, and instant feedback, making learning more effective. Evidence: 58% of respondents highlighted that MyLab Math provides a more comprehensive and organized learning experience compared to other tools. 4.2.2 Comparison with Other Platforms Key Finding: While Pearson MyLab Math is recognized for its structured assignments and progress tracking, it was noted to be less intuitive and engaging compared to platforms like Khan Academy and Desmos. Evidence: 39% of respondents mentioned that other platforms, such as Khan Academy and Desmos, were more flexible, visually engaging, and intuitive, but Pearson MyLab Math’s structured design was appreciated. 4.2.3. Usability Challenges Key Finding: Some users experienced difficulties with Pearson MyLab Math’s usability, particularly with graphing tools, navigation, and occasional technical glitches. Evidence: 35% of participants reported frustrations with the graphing interface, navigation issues, and occasional technical errors (e.g., slow loading times, system glitches). 4.2.4. Complementing Classroom Instruction Key Finding: Pearson MyLab Math was found to complement classroom instruction well by providing additional practice and reinforcing key concepts. However, it cannot fully replace the value of teacher-led explanations. Evidence: 72% of respondents indicated that MyLab Math helped reinforce classroom learning but still relied on teachers for more complex explanations. 4.2.5. Suggestions for Improvement Key Finding: Users suggested improvements including clearer explanations, enhanced graphing tools, and more video tutorials. Evidence: 47% of respondents recommended improvements such as more detailed explanations, interactive content, and better graphing tools to enhance the learning experience. 4.2.6. Overall Conclusion Key Finding: Pearson MyLab Math is generally effective in supporting precalculus learning, particularly through structured assignments and immediate feedback, but improvements in usability and additional instructional support could enhance its effectiveness. Evidence: 63% of respondents expressed satisfaction with the platform’s structure and feedback, but emphasized the need for better usability and enhanced instructional content. The thematic analysis reveals that while Pearson MyLab Math is valued for its structure, feedback, and ability to complement classroom learning, usability challenges and a lack of intuitive design limit its effectiveness. Addressing these areas and incorporating student recommendations could significantly enhance the platform's overall user experience. 4.3 Findings from the Student Engagement Survey The survey (Appendix C) aimed to gather insights into students' engagement levels with MyLab Math, the effectiveness of various features, and areas for improvement. The outcomes were used to answer the second research question: What effect does Pearson MyLab Math have on student engagement in the learning process? In relation to usage frequency, the majority of respondents use Pearson MyLab 1-2 times a week (approximately 40%). The summary of the findings related to the frequency are listed in Chart 9. The findings on usage frequency of Pearson MyLab Math reveal that 37.04% of students use the platform 1-2 times a week, indicating moderate engagement, while 22.22% are daily users, suggesting a highly engaged subgroup. However, 18.52% use it less than once a week, pointing to a potential lack of awareness or motivation among some students. The equal percentage of 3-4 times a week users suggests opportunities for increasing frequency among moderately engaged students. To enhance overall engagement, targeted outreach and gamification strategies could be implemented to encourage less frequent users, while gathering feedback from daily users could help enrich their experience further. Regarding the session duration, most students reported spending less than 15 minutes to 30-60 minutes per session, indicating that sessions are generally brief. Chart 10 summarizes the findings related to this part of the analysis. Respondents rated their overall engagement as moderate to high as demonstrated in Chart 11. However, there was a notable spread in ratings, indicating varying experiences among students. These findings indicate that while many students engage moderately or highly with Pearson MyLab Math, there are significant opportunities to deepen this engagement and support all students in maximizing their learning experience. The distribution suggests a balanced spread across levels, with room to shift more participants toward higher engagement through targeted strategies. Additionally, many students found the exercises somewhat motivating, but a significant number expressed feelings of low motivation, particularly those who used the platform less frequently (Chart 12). The data on motivation levels shows that the majority of respondents (37.50%) perceive the environment or factors as somewhat motivating, while a combined 54.17% find it either very motivating or extremely motivating, indicating a generally positive motivational atmosphere. However, 33.33% of respondents fall into the lower motivation categories, with 12.50% not motivated at all and 20.83% not very motivated, highlighting a need for improvement to fully engage all participants. Efforts to enhance motivation could focus on addressing the factors contributing to low and moderate perceptions to elevate overall motivation levels further. Based on the data regarding the level of interest in Pearson MyLab Math's content and problems, 41.67% of responses were "Neutral," indicating that a significant portion of participants neither strongly liked nor disliked the material. 16.67% found the content "Interesting," while 12.50% rated it as "Very Interesting," showing that 29.17% of respondents found the material engaging. Conversely, 12.50% described the content as "Uninteresting," and 16.67% rated it "Very Uninteresting," resulting in 29.17% expressing dissatisfaction. This distribution highlights a balance between engaged and disengaged participants, with the largest group remaining indifferent, suggesting an opportunity to enhance the content to better capture interest. This analysis (Table 5) evaluates user engagement with key features in Pearson MyLab Math, including hints, step-by-step solutions, interactive components, and immediate feedback, using a 0–5 scale. The results highlight varying levels of engagement, with some features performing better than others. Table 5. Average Ratings Feature Average Rating (0-5) Hints 3.04 Step-by-Step Solution 3.46 Interactive Components 3.23 Immediate Feedback 3.46 These averages suggest that while the step-by-step solution and immediate feedback features are slightly more engaging, all features show room for improvement to better engage users. The boxplot above shows the distribution of engagement ratings (on a scale of 0–5) for various Pearson MyLab features (Chart 13). The responses to whether Pearson MyLab encourages active participation in learning are varied but generally positive. The breakdown is as follows: Agree: 9 responses (36%) Neutral: 9 responses (36%) Strongly Agree: 4 responses (16%) Disagree: 3 responses (12%) Strongly Disagree: 1 response (4%) The majority of respondents (52%) either "Agree" or "Strongly Agree" that Pearson MyLab Math encourages active participation, indicating a positive overall perception. However, an equal percentage of "Neutral" responses (36%) suggests that a significant portion of users remain ambivalent about its effectiveness. Meanwhile, 16% of respondents expressed dissatisfaction ("Disagree" or "Strongly Disagree"), signaling an area for potential improvement. In regards to the content relevance and challenge level of the exercises in MyLab Math. The majority of respondents (88%) find the exercises at least sometimes relevant to the Precalculus coursework, with 52% indicating "Always" or "Often," showing a generally positive perception of the relevance of exercises to precalculus coursework (Table 6). Table 6. Content Relevance and Challenge Level Aspect Category Percentage Observation Relevance Always 20% Exercises are frequently relevant to coursework Often 32% Sometimes 36% Rarely 4% A small minority finds them rarely relevant Never 4% Challenge Level Appropriately Challenging 68% Most participants find the exercises appropriately challenging Too Challenging 28% A notable portion struggles with the difficulty level Too Easy 4% Only a small fraction feels the exercises are too easy The exercises in Pearson MyLab are generally perceived as relevant and appropriately challenging, with 52% finding them "Always" or "Often" relevant and 68% rating them as appropriately difficult. That indicated that MyLab Math aligns well with their academic needs. However, there is room for improvement, as 28% of respondents find the exercises "Too Challenging," which could hinder learning for some users. Balancing the difficulty level and ensuring consistent relevance could further enhance user satisfaction. Additionally, the analysis reveals that users find several aspects of Pearson MyLab highly engaging (Chart 14). Approximately 40% of responses highlight interactive and personalized learning features, such as quizzes, simulations, and learning paths, as the most engaging elements. Another 30% emphasize the value of immediate feedback and step-by-step solutions, which help reinforce understanding and offer targeted support. Additionally, 15% of users appreciate the practice questions and opportunities for repeated attempts to improve their performance. Features like graph-related exercises and user-friendly tools were also mentioned by 10%, showcasing the platform’s ability to provide dynamic and hands-on learning experiences. On the other hand, 25% of responses point to challenges with overly difficult or repetitive exercises, which some users find unhelpful or disengaging. Technical issues, including glitches and slow loading times, were reported by 20%, disrupting the learning process. Graph-related questions were identified as problematic by 10% of users due to their impact on grades and difficulty level. Additionally, 10% of responses cited complex explanations and hints after incorrect answers as areas needing improvement. Addressing these concerns and refining these aspects could significantly enhance user satisfaction and engagement (Chart 15). It was essential to ask the students to provide suggestions to improve the platform. The feedback provided suggests various ways to enhance the engagement level of Pearson MyLab. These suggestions can be categorized into the following themes: Interactivity and Gamification : Many users recommended adding interactive activities, such as games, puzzles, simulations, and group discussions. Suggestions also included incorporating progress milestones like badges and creating educational videos to explain problem-solving methods (mentioned in approximately 30% of responses). Improved Flexibility and Accuracy : Around 25% of respondents emphasized the need for greater flexibility in answer validation. For example, responses should not be marked incorrect due to syntax or formatting issues, such as decimals, bullet points, or specific phrasing. Enhanced User-Friendliness : Approximately 20% suggested making Pearson MyLab more user-friendly by improving its design and ensuring it works across all search engines. Suggestions also included simplifying the interface and making questions clearer and easier to understand. Better Programming and Functionality : About 15% of feedback focused on improving the platform’s programming. Users noted issues with answer validation, glitches, and difficulty navigating the platform. Additional Features : A smaller subset of users (10%) recommended including clear examples or tutorials for harder questions, more practice opportunities with instant feedback, and making all exercises multiple-choice to simplify the answering process. The survey results indicate that while Pearson MyLab Math is a widely used tool that offers valuable features for precalculus learning, there are areas that require attention to enhance student engagement and satisfaction. By addressing the feedback regarding user experience, feature effectiveness, and content delivery, Pearson MyLab Math can improve its platform and better support student learning outcomes. 4.4 Effect on Academic Performance This part of the analysis aims to assess the impact of Pearson MyLab Math on students' academic performance in a Precalculus course and answer the third research question: How does Pearson MyLab Math influence students' academic performance in a Precalculus course? As online learning tools have become increasingly prevalent in education, understanding their effectiveness in improving student outcomes is crucial. Pearson MyLab Math is a widely used platform designed to support learning in mathematics through interactive exercises and personalized feedback. By comparing academic performance before and after using the tool, this study seeks to determine whether MyLab Math has a significant influence on students' grades and overall learning experience. The results of a paired two-sample t-test will help to identify whether any differences in performance can be attributed to the use of the platform, providing insight into its potential benefits for student success in Precalculus. The descriptive statistics for the post- and pre- test data are listed in Tables 7 and 8 as demonstrated below. Table 7. Pre-test Descriptive Statistics Pre-test Mean 45.43478 Standard Error 3.118846 Median 42.3913 Mode 41.30435 Standard Deviation 17.08262 Sample Variance 291.816 Kurtosis -0.04903 Skewness 0.646926 Range 63.04348 Minimum 21.73913 Maximum 84.78261 Sum 1363.043 Count 30 These descriptive statistics provide a general overview of the pre-test data, showing moderate variation in performance with a slight positive skew, meaning that most students scored on the lower end, but there were a few higher scores that pulled the average up. Table 8. Post-test Descriptive Statistics Post-test Mean 71.36429 Standard Error 2.341645 Median 71.625 Mode 73 Standard Deviation 12.39082 Sample Variance 153.5324 Kurtosis -0.04966 Skewness 0.066383 Range 52.25 Minimum 43.5 Maximum 95.75 Sum 1998.2 Count 28 Furthermore, these descriptive statistics suggest that the post-test data show improved performance, with less variation and a more symmetrical distribution of scores compared to the pre-test. This indicates that students' performance became more consistent and shifted toward higher scores after the intervention. To better understand the differences between the pre-test and post-test scores, a t-test was conducted to determine whether the variation in students’ scores between the two tests was statistically significant (Table 9). Table 9. t-Test: Paired Two Sample for Means Post-test Pre-test Mean 71.5069 45.65217 Variance 148.6389 300.7696 Observations 29 29 Pearson Correlation 0.226763 Hypothesized Mean Difference 0 df 28 t Stat 7.405162 P(T<=t) one-tail 2.3E-08 t Critical one-tail 1.701131 P(T<=t) two-tail 4.59E-08 t Critical two-tail 2.048407 The results indicate that there is a statistically significant difference between the two variables (Variable 1-Post-test and Variable 2-Pre-test). The p-values are extremely small, suggesting the observed difference is unlikely to be due to chance. Post-test has a significantly higher mean than the pre-test, and the correlation between the two variables is weak, meaning their relationship is not very strong (Table 6). 5. Discussion The findings of this study provide valuable insights into students' experiences and performance with Pearson MyLab Math compared to traditional paper-based testing methods. Several key themes emerged, highlighting the strengths and limitations of the platform, as well as student preferences and academic performance outcomes. 5.1 Student Preferences and Perceptions The survey results indicate a strong preference for paper-based testing, with 82% of students favoring it over Pearson MyLab Math. The primary reasons cited for this preference include the familiarity of the format, ease of showing work, reduced distractions, and the perceived fairness of grading. In contrast, students who favored the platform highlighted advantages such as immediate feedback, interactivity, and flexibility. These findings suggest that while digital platforms offer certain benefits, traditional assessment methods remain more aligned with students' learning styles and comfort levels. The polarized ratings of Pearson MyLab Math further underscore the mixed experiences among students. Technical challenges, strict answer formatting, and grading inflexibility were common concerns that contributed to dissatisfaction with the platform. These findings suggest a need for improvements in the user experience to enhance its effectiveness and acceptance among students. 5.2 Performance Comparisons The results of the paired t-test analysis revealed a statistically significant difference in student performance between the two testing formats. Students achieved higher scores on the paper-based test (mean: 62.7) compared to the platform-based test (mean: 51.3), indicating that the traditional format may better support their ability to demonstrate knowledge. This discrepancy could be attributed to several factors, including students' familiarity with paper-based tests, reduced anxiety, and the ability to receive partial credit for their work. The lower performance on platform-based tests suggests that challenges such as interface usability, technical difficulties, and the lack of alignment with students' learning styles may hinder their performance. These results highlight the importance of addressing these issues to improve the effectiveness of digital assessments. 5.3 Engagement and Usability Challenges Student engagement with Pearson MyLab Math was found to be moderate, with most students using the platform 1-2 times per week. While the interactive features, such as step-by-step solutions and immediate feedback, were appreciated by many, a significant portion of students expressed concerns regarding the platform's usability. Technical glitches, navigation difficulties, and unclear explanations were identified as barriers to engagement and effective learning. The analysis of engagement levels further revealed that motivation varied among students, with a notable proportion expressing low motivation levels. This finding suggests that additional support and improvements in the platform's interactivity, such as gamification and personalized learning pathways, could enhance student engagement and satisfaction. 5.4 Impact on Academic Performance The significant improvement in post-test scores compared to pre-test scores suggests that Pearson MyLab Math can be an effective tool for supporting student learning when used consistently. The structured assignments and immediate feedback provided by the platform appear to contribute to improved understanding and performance. However, the findings also indicate that the platform cannot fully replace traditional teaching methods, as students continue to rely on classroom instruction for complex concepts. Despite its positive impact on performance, the study highlights the need for continuous improvements in the platform's usability and instructional design. Ensuring that content aligns with students' learning needs and addressing technical challenges will be crucial in maximizing the platform's effectiveness. 5.5 Recommendations for Improvement Based on the findings, several recommendations can be made to enhance the effectiveness of Pearson MyLab Math: User Experience Enhancements: Address technical issues, improve navigation, and provide clearer answer formatting guidelines to reduce frustration and enhance usability. Hybrid Assessment Approach: Consider a blended approach that integrates both paper-based and digital assessments to cater to diverse student preferences. Increased Training and Support: Provide students with additional training on using the platform effectively to maximize its benefits. Gamification and Personalization: Introduce features that enhance engagement, such as progress tracking, badges, and tailored learning pathways. Regular Feedback Mechanisms: Implement ongoing feedback channels to identify and address student concerns promptly. In conclusion, while Pearson MyLab Math offers valuable features that can support student learning, traditional paper-based tests continue to hold significant advantages in terms of student comfort and performance outcomes. A balanced approach that leverages the strengths of both methods may be the most effective way to enhance student learning and achievement. 6. Limitations One limitation of this research is that it is a case study with a relatively small sample size of 30 students in the pre-test and 28 in the post-test. While this sample size is acceptable for a case study, it limits the ability to generalize the findings to a larger population. The results are more reflective of the specific group of students studied, and variations in performance may not be applicable to all students using Pearson MyLab Math. In future studies with broader samples, more diverse student populations could be considered to assess the platform's effectiveness across various academic backgrounds. Additionally, the study only measures the immediate impact of Pearson MyLab Math on academic performance without assessing long-term retention or learning outcomes. The improvements seen in the post-test scores may not be sustained over time, and without follow-up assessments, it is difficult to determine if the platform's benefits are lasting. Another limitation is the reliance on pre-test and post-test scores alone, which do not capture the full range of student engagement or experience with the platform. More qualitative data, such as student feedback or surveys, would provide a deeper understanding of how MyLab Math influences students' learning experiences beyond just test performance. 7. Conclusion The findings of this study provide clear evidence of the significant role Pearson MyLab Math plays in shaping students’ learning experiences in a Precalculus course. The platform’s interactive features—step-by-step solutions, immediate feedback, and adaptive learning pathways—enhance student comprehension and engagement. However, challenges such as unclear explanations, technical glitches, and difficulties with complex topics highlight the need for continued improvements to optimize its educational value. The statistical analysis underscores MyLab Math’s positive impact on academic performance, with a significant increase in post-test scores (mean: 71.51) compared to pre-test scores (mean: 45.65). This substantial improvement indicates that consistent use of the platform contributes to stronger mathematical proficiency. Additionally, the reduced variance in post-test scores suggests that MyLab Math helps standardize learning outcomes among students. However, the weak positive correlation between platform use and performance suggests that additional factors—such as student motivation, instructor support, and prior knowledge—also influence success, warranting further investigation. A notable finding of this study is the discrepancy between students' performance on paper-based tests (mean: 62.7) and platform-based tests (mean: 51.3), highlighting how assessment format impacts student achievement. Factors such as test interface design, digital literacy, and exam stress may contribute to these differences. These results emphasize the need for careful test design and enhanced usability to ensure that online assessments accurately reflect students’ knowledge and abilities. To maximize the benefits of MyLab Math, this study recommends using a hybrid assessment approach that leverages both paper-based and platform-based testing while addressing usability concerns. High-stakes assessments should prioritize paper-based formats to ensure fairness, while MyLab Math can serve as an effective tool for formative assessments, practice exercises, and supplemental learning. If platform-based testing is necessary, improvements should focus on refining test formats, minimizing technical issues, and enhancing accessibility to provide a more seamless user experience. Future research should explore qualitative insights from students and instructors to better understand the nuances of engagement and learning experiences with MyLab Math. Additionally, investigating long-term retention, performance across different STEM courses, and the impact of instructor-led integration strategies will be critical for further refining the use of digital learning platforms in mathematics education. By addressing these key areas, educators and developers can ensure that MyLab Math continues to evolve as a powerful tool for enhancing student success in Precalculus and beyond. This study contributes to mathematics education by highlighting the benefits and limitations of digital learning tools, informing best practices for their integration, and emphasizing the importance of balancing technology with traditional assessment methods to support diverse student needs. Declarations Consent to participate: Participant Consent Statement: All students who participated in the study "The Impact of Pearson MyLab Math on Precalculus Performance and Test-Taking Preferences" were notified about the study and its purpose. They understood that participation was voluntary and provided their consent to participate. Additionally, they consented to the publication of the study findings while ensuring participant confidentiality. Competing Interests: The authors declare that they have no competing interests. Funding: This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors. Authors' Contributions: Russina A Eltoum and Hanadi M Abdelsalam conceptualized the study and designed the methodology. Russina A Eltoum collected and analyzed the data. All authors contributed to writing and reviewing the manuscript and have approved the final version. Acknowledgements: The authors wish to thank the students and faculty of Prince Mohammed Bin Fahd University (PMU) for their participation and valuable insights. We also acknowledge the support of our colleagues who provided feedback on the study design and manuscript preparation. Availability of Data and Material: The datasets generated and analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request. References Ahmadi, M., Dileepan, P., & Wheatley, K. (2019). Teaching Quantitative Courses Online: Are Learning Tools Offered by Publishers Effective?. Journal of Educators Online , 16 (2), n2. Ajaz, A. (2020). Analyzing the Effects of MyMathLab on Undergraduate College Students Achievement in Pre-calculus Mathematics I (Doctoral dissertation, Southern University and Agricultural and Mechanical College). Al Madhoun, W. (2016). BLENDED LEARNING AND USING MYMATHLAB IN TEACHING AND LEARNING MATHEMATICS. In ICERI2016 Proceedings (pp. 8187-8196). IATED. Bond, M., Bedenlier, S., Buntins, K., Kerres, M., & Zawacki-Richter, O. (2020). Facilitating student engagement in higher education through educational technology: A narrative systematic review in the field of education. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education , 20 (2), 315-368. Hurdle, Z. B., & Mogilski, W. (2022). The Impact of Prerequisites for Undergraduate Calculus I Performance. International Electronic Journal of Mathematics Education , 17 (3). Jaafar, N., Nor, S. R. M., Norrulashikin, S. M., Kamisan, N. A. B., & Mohamad, A. Q. (2022). Increase students’ understanding of mathematics learning using the technology-based learning. International Journal of Advanced Research in Future Ready Learning and Education , 28 (1), 24-29. Kholid, M. N., Imawati, A., Swastika, A., Maharani, S., & Pradana, L. N. (2021, February). How are Students’ Conceptual Understanding for Solving Mathematical Problem?. In Journal of Physics: Conference Series (Vol. 1776, No. 1, p. 012018). IOP Publishing. Mukul, E., & Büyüközkan, G. (2023). Digital transformation in education: A systematic review of education 4.0. Technological forecasting and social change , 194 , 122664. Olsen, L. S. (2020). MyMathLab and Nontraditional Students’ Attitudes Toward Technology in Mathematics (Doctoral dissertation, Walden University). Pangburn, A. C. (2020). Helping College Mathematics Students Facilitate Their Self-Regulated Learning Skills and Mathematics Self-Efficacy While Using MyMathLab (Doctoral dissertation, University of South Carolina). Raja, R., & Nagasubramani, P. C. (2018). Impact of modern technology in education. Journal of Applied and Advanced Research , 3 (1), 33-35. Raines, J. (2016). Student perceptions on using MyMathLab to complete homework online. Journal of Student Success and Retention Vol , 3 (1). Viberg, O., Grönlund, Å., & Andersson, A. (2023). Integrating digital technology in mathematics education: a Swedish case study. Interactive Learning Environments , 31 (1), 232-243. Wang, M. (2023). Meta-Analysis of the Effectiveness of MyMathLab in College Algebra (Doctoral dissertation, Texas A&M University-Kingsville). Zhang, L., Basham, J. D., & Yang, S. (2020). Understanding the implementation of personalized learning: A research synthesis. Educational research review , 31 , 100339. Ziatdinov, R., & Cilliers, J. (2022). Generation Alpha: Understanding the next cohort of university students. arXiv preprint arXiv:2202.01422 . Charts Charts 1 to 15 are available in the Supplementary Files section. Additional Declarations The authors declare no competing interests. Supplementary Files Appendix.docx Chart1to15.docx Cite Share Download PDF Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-6046706","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Research Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":416810184,"identity":"bc760345-b212-4f92-ab28-597147a19986","order_by":0,"name":"Russina Eltoum","email":"","orcid":"https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0383-1662","institution":"Prince Mohammed Bin Fahd University","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"Russina","middleName":"","lastName":"Eltoum","suffix":""},{"id":416810185,"identity":"57b7a9a4-5999-4400-b195-15de8b816e03","order_by":1,"name":"Hanadi Abdelsalam","email":"","orcid":"https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2591-4661","institution":"Prince Mohammed Bin Fahd University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Hanadi","middleName":"","lastName":"Abdelsalam","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2025-02-17 09:59:58","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":{"humanSubjects":true,"vertebrateSubjects":false,"conflictsOfInterestStatement":false,"humanSubjectEthicalGuidelines":true,"humanSubjectConsent":true,"humanSubjectClinicalTrial":true,"humanSubjectCaseReport":true,"vertebrateSubjectEthicalGuidelines":false},"doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-6046706/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-6046706/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":77411011,"identity":"b95d3806-7513-47c4-9273-a8ac5cc03188","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-02-28 10:17:23","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":1690162,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6046706/v1/5004a18f-f621-41de-984c-948d27777412.pdf"},{"id":77408101,"identity":"379cbe99-b1fb-4698-b191-f8277e2cc9e1","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-02-28 09:45:23","extension":"docx","order_by":1,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"supplement","size":77885,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"Appendix.docx","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6046706/v1/9ebb4ea73502d4d9dfa20522.docx"},{"id":77408103,"identity":"e1dfdbc8-260d-4315-b473-db9f4aba4524","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-02-28 09:45:23","extension":"docx","order_by":2,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"supplement","size":897371,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"Chart1to15.docx","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6046706/v1/b3f776fa28520de3244eb6fa.docx"}],"financialInterests":"The authors declare no competing interests.","formattedTitle":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eThe Impact of Pearson MyLab Math on Precalculus Performance and Test-Taking Preferences\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","fulltext":[{"header":"1. Introduction","content":"\u003cp\u003ePrecalculus is vital as a foundational course for students entering various STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics) fields. It reinforces essential mathematical concepts and equips students with critical problem-solving skills necessary for advanced study. Mastery of Precalculus is often a prerequisite for higher-level courses in calculus and other related subjects, making it essential for academic success in these areas (Hurdle et al., 2022).\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWith the rapid advancement of technology in education, there is an increasing trend towards web-based learning technology and platforms, such as Pearson MyLab Math (Ajaz, 2020).\u0026nbsp;These platforms are designed to enhance the learning experience by offering a range of interactive and engaging tools. For instance, MyLab Math features interactive exercises that allow students to practice problems in real-time, promoting active learning and retention of concepts.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eMoreover, Pearson MyLab Math provides personalized learning pathways tailored to individual student needs. This adaptive approach helps identify areas where students may struggle, allowing for targeted practice and improvement. Immediate feedback on exercises further enhances this learning process, enabling students to understand their mistakes and learn from them instantly. By integrating these technological tools, MyLab Math supports students in developing a deeper understanding of mathematical concepts, ultimately preparing them for success in their academic and professional pursuits within the STEM fields.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis study advances the field of mathematics education by investigating the impact of web-based learning platforms, particularly Pearson MyLab Math, on students\u0026apos; comprehension, engagement, and academic success in Precalculus. As technology increasingly influences education, evaluating the effectiveness of these digital tools in enhancing student learning is essential. By concentrating on Precalculus\u0026mdash;a key course for STEM students\u0026mdash;this research offers important insights into how interactive and adaptive learning platforms affect student outcomes. The results will assist educators in making informed choices about incorporating technology into mathematics instruction, ultimately enhancing teaching methods and promoting student achievement in STEM disciplines.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eFurthermore, this study fills a gap in the existing literature by providing empirical evidence regarding the effects of MyLab Math in Precalculus, setting the stage for further research on digital learning solutions in mathematics education. Although MyLab Math is widely used, there is limited research on its specific impact on student learning in Precalculus courses. This study seeks to address this gap by investigating the influence of MyLab Math use on students\u0026apos; understanding, engagement, and academic performance in a Precalculus setting. This research aims to answer the following questions:\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003col\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eHow does the use of Pearson MyLab Math impact students\u0026apos; understanding of Precalculus concepts?\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u0026nbsp;What effect does Pearson MyLab Math have on student engagement in the learning process?\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eHow does Pearson MyLab Math influence students\u0026apos; academic performance in a Precalculus course?\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003c/ol\u003e"},{"header":"2. Literature Review","content":"\u003ch2\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e2.1 The Role of Technology in Mathematics Education\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/h2\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTechnology has transformed mathematics education by offering digital tools that enhance both teaching and learning (Raja \u0026amp; Nagasubramani, 2018; Ziatdinov \u0026amp; Cilliers, 2022; Viberg et al., 2023; Mukul \u0026amp; B\u0026uuml;y\u0026uuml;k\u0026ouml;zkan, 2023). Educational platforms, apps, and online resources have revolutionized traditional learning methods, making mathematics more interactive and accessible (Bond et al., 2020). These digital tools help students overcome conceptual difficulties, reinforce problem-solving skills, and correct misconceptions, thereby fostering a culture of independent and lifelong learning. Additionally, technology facilitates differentiated instruction, allowing students to learn at their own pace and according to their unique needs (Zhang et al., 2020).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eBeyond improving accessibility, digital learning tools promote active engagement and deeper conceptual understanding. Studies suggest that integrating technology into mathematics instruction encourages students to take a more participatory role in their learning process, increasing motivation and retention (Kholid et al., 2021). Interactive presentations, games, and simulations make abstract mathematical ideas more tangible, aiding comprehension and skill development. Furthermore, technology enables educators to create a more inclusive and adaptive learning environment, catering to diverse learning styles and abilities while maintaining instructional rigor (Jaafar, 2022).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eDespite its advantages, the integration of technology in mathematics education is not without challenges. Research highlights issues such as digital distractions, disparities in access to technology, and varying levels of digital literacy among students and educators (Raines, 2016). Therefore, while technology has the potential to enhance mathematical learning, its effectiveness depends on thoughtful implementation, proper training, and alignment with pedagogical objectives.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch2\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e2.2 Overview of Pearson MyLab Math\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/h2\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ePearson MyLab Math is a widely used online learning platform designed to support mathematics instruction by offering personalized, interactive learning experiences. Developed by Pearson Education, MyLab Math is aligned with its published textbooks and incorporates digital tools to enhance comprehension and assessment in mathematics courses (Ajaz, 2020). The platform employs adaptive learning pathways, which adjust content based on student performance, ensuring targeted reinforcement of concepts where students struggle (Wang, 2023).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eKey features of MyLab Math include interactive assignments, immediate feedback, and multimedia resources such as instructional videos and step-by-step problem-solving tutorials (Pangburn, 2020). These features help students visualize complex mathematical ideas and engage with course material in a more structured and interactive manner. Additionally, the platform includes online assessments, a gradebook for tracking student progress, and integration with Learning Management Systems (LMS), allowing for seamless access to assignments and grades (Olsen, 2020).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eDespite its benefits, MyLab Math has certain limitations. Technical issues, such as platform glitches and connectivity problems, can disrupt the learning process. The rigid structure of automated grading sometimes fails to recognize alternative correct answers, frustrating students and limiting instructional flexibility. Additionally, the platform can be costly, posing a financial barrier for some students (Ajaz, 2020). Moreover, while MyLab Math provides adaptive learning, its effectiveness depends on how well it aligns with course objectives and the extent to which instructors integrate it into their teaching strategies (Wang, 2023).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch2\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e2.3 Previous Research on MyLab Math and Student Learning\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/h2\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eEmpirical research has examined the impact of MyLab Math on student learning, engagement, and academic performance. Several studies indicate that MyLab Math enhances student understanding by offering structured practice opportunities before formal assessments (Ahmadi et al., 2019; Ajaz, 2020; Olsen, 2020; Wang, 2023). The platform\u0026apos;s diverse tools, such as\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ePractice, QuizMe, Homework, Quiz, and Test\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e,\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eprovide students with multiple opportunities to reinforce key mathematical concepts and track their progress.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eHowever, despite its popularity, MyLab Math is not universally effective for all students. Research highlights significant disparities in student experiences based on factors such as prior mathematical proficiency, familiarity with digital learning platforms, and individual learning preferences. Raines (2016) found that while some students appreciated MyLab Math\u0026rsquo;s instant feedback and structured learning paths, others experienced frustration due to technical difficulties and a lack of flexibility in the platform\u0026rsquo;s design. Similarly, Olsen (2020) reported that nontraditional students, particularly those returning to education after a long hiatus, struggled with the platform\u0026rsquo;s navigation and required additional support to engage effectively with its features.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eFurther studies emphasize that the effectiveness of MyLab Math is contingent on instructional integration. Instructors who actively incorporate MyLab Math into their teaching\u0026mdash;through guided practice sessions, structured feedback, and supplementary materials\u0026mdash;tend to see greater student engagement and improved learning outcomes (Ajaz, 2020). Conversely, students who use the platform in isolation without proper instructional support often encounter difficulties in applying learned concepts to more complex mathematical problems.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAdditionally, the platform\u0026rsquo;s assessment formats have been a point of contention. Research comparing paper-based and MyLab Math-based assessments suggests that students often perform better on traditional exams than on platform-based tests. Factors such as interface discomfort, test anxiety related to digital environments, and the rigid grading system contribute to lower scores on online assessments (Wang, 2023). These findings highlight the need for careful consideration when using MyLab Math as an assessment tool, emphasizing the importance of balancing digital and traditional testing formats to ensure equitable evaluation of student learning.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe existing research underscores both the advantages and limitations of MyLab Math in mathematics education. While the platform provides valuable tools for interactive learning, adaptive practice, and structured assessments, its effectiveness varies based on factors such as student engagement, instructor integration, and assessment format. The findings suggest that while MyLab Math can enhance student learning and performance in Precalculus, further investigation is needed to address technical challenges, optimize instructional strategies, and ensure fair assessment methods. This study aims to fill these gaps by exploring the specific impact of MyLab Math on students\u0026rsquo; comprehension, engagement, and academic success in a Precalculus course.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"3. Methodology","content":"\u003cp\u003eThis study employed a case study design to examine the impact of Pearson MyLab Math on student performance, focusing on a specific group of students at Prince Mohammed Bin Fahd University (PMU). The group included two Precalculus classes, totaling 28 students. The participants of this study are all female, aged 19\u0026ndash;22, at the preparatory level for enrollment in a STEM program. The majority of the participants are Saudi nationals.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe decision to conduct this study as a case study with a smaller sample size of 28 participants stems from the unique benefits and focus of a case study approach, particularly when examining user experiences and preferences. A case study allows for depth over breadth, enabling a detailed exploration of participants\u0026rsquo; perspectives, challenges, and specific experiences with Pearson MyLab Math. Given that this research aims to uncover nuanced insights into how users perceive and interact with the platform, a case study is an ideal approach to capture these subjective, qualitative aspects.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAdditionally, the representativeness of the participant group\u0026mdash;which includes varied levels of familiarity with and use of Pearson MyLab Math\u0026mdash;supports a meaningful analysis of common issues and preferences among different types of users. This diversity within a smaller, focused group enhances the validity of the insights gained, as it reflects a range of user experiences while remaining manageable for in-depth analysis.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eMoreover, qualitative validity is prioritized over statistical generalizability in this study. While the findings may not be broadly generalizable due to the smaller sample size, the rich data obtained from detailed participant responses is valuable for identifying key themes, trends, and potential areas for improvement in the platform. By capturing these detailed perspectives, the study can offer actionable insights that may not emerge in larger, more generalized quantitative studies. Finally, acknowledging limitations regarding generalizability further strengthens the rationale for a case study approach.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis methodology allows the study to remain focused on the specific experiences of a sample group, providing concentrated insights that may serve as a foundation for future research with larger samples. In summary, the case study approach is well-suited to this research because it prioritizes depth and detail, supports a focused exploration of diverse user experiences, and enables meaningful insights within the study\u0026rsquo;s scope and objectives\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe study employed multiple data collection methods, including interviews, focus groups, and performance data analysis. The interviews were designed to explore students' experiences with the platform and gain deeper insights into how MyLab Math was utilized by the participants during the study. The focus groups aimed to examine specific aspects of students' learning experiences closely. Additionally, performance data were gathered from coursework and assessments to evaluate academic outcomes.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eTo assess differences in student performance across testing methods, a t-test was conducted to evaluate whether the variation in students\u0026rsquo; results between the paper-based and platform-based tests was statistically significant. This analysis aimed to determine which testing method was more effective in enhancing student achievement. Additionally, to examine the impact of the intervention on students\u0026rsquo; learning outcomes, a t-test was employed to compare pre-test and post-test scores, identifying whether the observed differences were statistically significant. These methods were integrated to complement one another, ensuring the findings and conclusions were reliable and valid.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"4. Findings","content":"\u003cp\u003eThe students began engaging with the platform at the start of the semester, intending to fully integrate it into the course. They used the platform to access the textbook, complete assignments, and utilize various learning resources provided by MyLab Math to support their learning. It is worth noting that all the students had previously used the platform in other courses. \u0026nbsp; Initially, the plan was to conduct assessments on the platform as well. However, after the first test, students provided strong feedback highlighting significant drawbacks of using the platform for testing. As a result, it was decided to repeat the test on paper to compare outcomes and evaluate whether future assessments should be conducted on the platform or paper. This also provided an opportunity to better understand students\u0026rsquo; perspectives on both paper-based and MyLab Math testing methods.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch2\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e4.1\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ePaper-Based vs.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ePlatform-Based Testing\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/h2\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTwo sources of data were used to gather insights into students\u0026apos; preferences regarding testing methods: a survey and a statistical significance analysis.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e4.1.1 Student Test Preferences Survey\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTo better understand their perspectives and preferences on this issue, a survey (Appendix A) was conducted following the first test to learn about students\u0026rsquo; experiences with platform-based testing. The survey data provides insights into students\u0026rsquo; preferences and experiences with Pearson MyLab Math versus traditional paper-based math tests, revealing several key trends.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eMost students reported using Pearson MyLab Math \u0026quot;sometimes\u0026quot; or \u0026quot;rarely,\u0026quot; with approximately 50% indicating occasional use and 21% stating they use it infrequently (Chart 1). Only about 28% of students reported using the platform \u0026quot;always.\u0026quot; These results may reflect limited integration of Pearson MyLab Math in their coursework or a preference for alternative assessment formats.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe ratings for Pearson MyLab Math were highly polarized, with about 43% of students rating it as \u0026quot;very poor\u0026quot; (1) and another 28.6% giving it an \u0026quot;excellent\u0026quot; (5). The remaining 21.3% of students provided ratings between 2 and 4, suggesting a range of moderate satisfaction (Chart 2). Common criticisms included technical issues, a lack of flexibility in answer formatting, and perceived unfairness in grading.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn contrast, paper-based tests received more consistently favorable ratings, with approximately 39.3% of students assigning a rating of \u0026quot;excellent\u0026quot; (5). Only 10% rated paper-based tests as \u0026quot;very poor\u0026quot; (1), and 60% offered mixed ratings between 2 and 4 (Chart 3). Students highlighted the familiarity of the format, ease of showing work, reduced screen time, and a less distracting environment as contributing factors to their preference. This data reflects a mixed experience, with a considerable divide between those who find paper-based tests effective versus those who do not.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eA significant majority of students (approximately 82%) expressed a preference for paper-based tests (Chart 4). About 18% favored Pearson MyLab Math. The reasons for these preferences varied. Paper-based tests were valued for their ability to facilitate detailed, step-by-step work, reduce distractions, and minimize screen time. In contrast, students who preferred Pearson MyLab Math appreciated features such as immediate feedback, interactivity, and flexibility.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eFor those favoring Pearson MyLab Math, approximately 43% cited immediate feedback as a key advantage and 18% appreciated its flexibility and interactivity (Chart 5).\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eHowever, 82% of students who preferred paper-based tests emphasized the familiar format, ease of showing work, and reduced distractions (53.6%). Additionally, 43% specifically highlighted the reduction in screen time as a significant benefit of paper-based assessments\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eMost students (around 68%) believed they performed better on paper-based tests (Chart 6), attributing this to the ease of showing their work and the opportunity to receive partial credit (93%).\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eFurthermore, approximately 14.3% of students indicated no difference in performance between formats, while only 7% felt they performed better on Pearson MyLab Math due to its structured feedback and flexible access (Chart 7). When asked about their preferred format for future tests, 78.6% of students strongly preferred more paper-based tests. \u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAdditionally, the data indicates a strong preference for paper-based tests among respondents, with the majority expressing a desire for more such assessments (Chart 8). Specifically, \u0026quot;More paper-based tests\u0026quot; was the most frequently chosen option, suggesting that students may feel more comfortable or confident with traditional testing methods. Additionally, a smaller portion of respondents indicated \u0026quot;No preference\u0026quot; or a desire for a mix of both formats, highlighting some variability in preferences but reinforcing the dominance of the preference for paper-based testing. Overall, this analysis suggests that implementing more paper-based assessments could align well with student preferences.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eMany comments emphasized that paper-based tests felt fairer, particularly concerning partial credit for problem-solving methods. Approximately 40% of students provided additional comments, many of which expressed frustrations with Pearson MyLab Math. Complaints centered on strict answer formatting, which often led to full mark losses over minor errors, and technical issues, such as lagging and problems with saving progress. These issues were reported to disrupt the testing experience and increase stress levels.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe survey findings suggest that while Pearson MyLab Math offers advantages like immediate feedback and interactivity, the majority of students prefer paper-based tests due to their ease of use, reduced distractions, and perceived fairness. A balanced approach that integrates both formats may better meet student needs, leveraging the benefits of technology while retaining the advantages of traditional assessment methods.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e4.1.2 Comparing Student Performance: Paper-Based vs. Platform-Based Testing\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTo gain deeper insights, a t-test was conducted to determine whether there was a statistically significant difference between students\u0026rsquo; results on the paper-based test and the platform-based test (Table 1). The analysis aimed to identify which testing method yielded better results in terms of student achievement. Specifically, students\u0026apos; scores on the first test conducted on paper were compared to their scores on a similar test conducted on the platform.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTable\u0026nbsp;1. Students\u0026rsquo; Performance Comparison\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable border=\"0\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\" width=\"361\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"3\" valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 361px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003et-Test: Paired Two Sample for Means\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 192px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 85px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePaper-based Test Scores\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 84px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePlatform-based Test Scores\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 192px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMean\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 85px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e62.71429\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 84px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e51.33143\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 192px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eVariance\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 85px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e466.368\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 84px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e280.0784\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 192px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eObservations\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 85px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e28\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 84px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e28\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 192px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePearson Correlation\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 85px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.635324\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 84px;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 192px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eHypothesized Mean Difference\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 85px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 84px;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 192px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003edf\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 85px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e27\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 84px;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 192px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003et Stat\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 85px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.554061\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 84px;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 192px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eP(T\u0026lt;=t) one-tail\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 85px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.000711\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 84px;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 192px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003et Critical one-tail\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 85px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.703288\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 84px;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 192px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eP(T\u0026lt;=t) two-tail\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 85px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.001421\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 84px;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 192px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003et Critical two-tail\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 85px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2.051831\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 84px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe test results show a statistically significant difference between the means of students\u0026rsquo; scores on the paper-based test (mean: 62.7) and platform-based test (mean: 51.3) at both one-tailed and two-tailed significance levels. This suggests that the mean of paper-based testing is significantly higher than the mean of platform-based testing. This suggests that the testing method may have a notable impact on students\u0026apos; ability to demonstrate their knowledge.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWhile students had prior experience using the platform, the lower performance in platform-based testing could indicate challenges such as discomfort with the interface, technical difficulties, or a lack of alignment between the platform\u0026rsquo;s testing format and students\u0026rsquo; learning styles. Gathering detailed feedback from students about their experiences during the platform-based test could provide further insights, which was already done via the previously mentioned survey.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThese findings also suggest the need for more test design consideration, which can be done by the platform to adjust and improve its effectiveness. Furthermore, platform-based testing needs to ensure that no technical or accessibility issues disproportionately affect certain students. For instance, internet connectivity or device quality could have influenced performance on the platform test.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eFor future testing, it is recommended to prioritize paper-based tests for high-stakes assessments to support better student outcomes, as indicated by the results. If platform-based testing is necessary, efforts should focus on improving its usability and aligning it more closely with paper-based formats. Further research, such as qualitative studies or focus groups, is essential to understand why students performed better on paper-based tests. Additionally, a hybrid approach could be explored, combining both methods to leverage their respective benefits while providing training and support to enhance performance in platform-based testing over time.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch2\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e4.2 Interview Responses\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/h2\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe participants were interviewed to explore aspects of their experiences with the platform and to assess the impact of MyLab Math on students\u0026rsquo; understanding of Precalculus concepts, in order to address the first research question: How does the use of Pearson MyLab Math impact students\u0026apos; understanding of Precalculus concepts?\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eA thematic analysis of the students\u0026apos; responses to their experience with Pearson MyLab Math in learning precalculus identifies several recurring themes that encapsulate their overall experiences. These themes provide insight into the platform\u0026rsquo;s strengths and weaknesses as perceived by the students.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe first two interview questions (Appendix B) were designed to collect information about the students\u0026rsquo; general perception pf Pearson MyLab Math. The summary of themes that emerged from the students\u0026rsquo; responses was the following:\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cul\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eSupportive Learning Features:\u003c/strong\u003e 64% of students appreciated the platform\u0026apos;s structured resources, interactive exercises, and immediate feedback.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTechnical Challenges and Navigation Difficulties:\u003c/strong\u003e 46% expressed frustration with technical glitches and navigation issues.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eLimitations During Exams:\u003c/strong\u003e 14% were dissatisfied with the inability to show work or provide reasoning.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eMixed User Experience:\u003c/strong\u003e 18% described their experience as both helpful and frustrating, citing areas for improvement.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAdaptability and Growth Over Time:\u003c/strong\u003e 11% noted that familiarity with the platform improved their experience over time.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eHigh Expectations and Disappointment:\u003c/strong\u003e 14% reported that the platform did not meet their expectations due to usability and technical shortcomings.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003c/ul\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe analysis highlights that while supportive learning features are a major strength, the platform faces significant challenges with technical issues, navigation difficulties, and rigid exam formats. Addressing these concerns could improve the overall user experience and better meet students\u0026apos; expectations.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eA thematic analysis of students\u0026rsquo; responses to how Pearson MyLab has impacted their understanding of precalculus concepts reveals key themes. These themes were identified based on recurring patterns in the responses, with percentages calculated to highlight their prevalence:\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cul\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eEnhanced Understanding Through Step-by-Step Explanations and Feedback:\u003c/strong\u003e 56% reported that step-by-step solutions and immediate feedback significantly improved their comprehension of precalculus concepts.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eIncreased Confidence Through Practice:\u003c/strong\u003e 44% highlighted the value of extensive practice problems in building confidence and preparing for exams.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAccessibility and Interactive Learning Tools:\u003c/strong\u003e 36% appreciated features like hints, visual aids, and instructional videos that made learning more engaging and accessible.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eChallenges with Clarity and Sufficiency:\u003c/strong\u003e 20% expressed concerns about unclear explanations and insufficient support for understanding complex concepts.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eReinforcement of Classroom Learning:\u003c/strong\u003e 16% noted that the platform primarily reinforced classroom learning rather than introducing new understanding.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eLimited Impact on Understanding:\u003c/strong\u003e 12% felt that Pearson MyLab Math had minimal impact on their comprehension, serving more as a practice tool than a learning resource.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003c/ul\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe analysis indicates that Pearson MyLab Math is generally effective in enhancing students\u0026rsquo; understanding of precalculus through its step-by-step guidance, immediate feedback, and ample practice opportunities. However, issues like unclear explanations and a limited independent impact point to areas for improvement. These findings suggest that while Pearson MyLab Math serves as a valuable supplementary resource, its effectiveness could be increased by addressing clarity concerns and offering more comprehensive conceptual support.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWith respect to the analysis focuses on data derived from interview questions 3 and 4, which explore students\u0026rsquo; perceptions of specific precalculus concepts and the ways these concepts were reinforced through Pearson MyLab. Question 3 examines the particular mathematical topics that students felt were most effectively reinforced, while Question 4 delves into the tools, features, and methods that supported their understanding. By analyzing responses to these questions, this report aims to highlight common themes, identify effective strategies, and uncover areas where improvements might be needed to enhance the learning experience. The findings of these questions were summarized in Table 2.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTable\u0026nbsp;2. Specific Concepts and Reinforcement\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable border=\"1\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 312px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCore Strengths\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 312px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAreas for Improvement\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 312px;\"\u003e\n \u003cul type=\"disc\"\u003e\n \u003cli\u003ePearson MyLab is effective for reinforcing key precalculus concepts, particularly functions and graphing (73%), trigonometry (40%), and solving equations (30%).\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003c/ul\u003e\n \u003cul\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eTools like graphing features (50%), step-by-step solutions (43%), and repetition (40%) were highly valued for solidifying understanding.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003c/ul\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 312px;\"\u003e\n \u003cul\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e10\u0026ndash;23% of respondents felt the platform lacked clarity for challenging concepts or relied too heavily on repetitive practice without deeper insight.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003c/ul\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis data shows that Pearson MyLab is an effective tool for most users but has room for improvement to address advanced topics and enhance clarity for struggling learners.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRegarding whether Pearson MyLab clarified challenging precalculus concepts and how it did so, this analysis identifies key areas of difficulty, evaluates the platform\u0026rsquo;s tools and features, and highlights themes to assess its effectiveness and potential areas for improvement. The findings were summarized in Table 3.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTable 3. Precalculus Conceptual Challenges\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable border=\"1\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 312px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eThemes\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 312px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ePercentages\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 312px;\"\u003e\n \u003col start=\"1\" type=\"1\"\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eDominant Challenging Concepts\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003c/ol\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 312px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe most challenging concepts were limits (20%), graphing transformations (20%), and trigonometry (17%), where students consistently cited specific tools that helped clarify these areas.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 312px;\"\u003e\n \u003col start=\"2\" type=\"1\"\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTools that Enhanced Understanding\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003c/ol\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 312px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eStep-by-step solutions (50%) and interactive graphing tools (30%) were the most effective in helping students overcome difficulties.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 312px;\"\u003e\n \u003col start=\"3\" type=\"1\"\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAreas for Improvement\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003c/ol\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 312px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eA minority of respondents (10%) expressed that the platform did not provide sufficient depth for complex topics or lacked comprehensive explanations in certain areas.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis analysis highlights that Pearson MyLab is effective in addressing many challenging precalculus concepts, especially when leveraging features like detailed explanations and visual tools. However, there is room to improve the depth of resources for more complex topics.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn regards to the interview questions that are related to the features and tools of the platform, the thematic analysis of students\u0026apos; responses about Pearson MyLab highlights several key features and their effectiveness in supporting learning as summarized in Table 4.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTable 4.\u0026nbsp;Features and Tools of Pearson MyLab Math\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable border=\"1\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 312px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThemes\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 312px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePercentages\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 312px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eHints in Pearson MyLab\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 312px;\"\u003e\n \u003cul\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eThe majority of students (40%) value the step-by-step guidance provided by hints, which help them solve problems incrementally.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003c/ul\u003e\n \u003cul type=\"disc\"\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eHints are also appreciated for breaking down complex problems (25%) and encouraging independent problem-solving without directly giving away answers (20%).\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eA smaller portion of students (10%) reported limited or no use of hints, while 5% highlighted hints as enhancing critical thinking.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003c/ul\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 312px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eSituations Where Hints Were Helpful\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 312px;\"\u003e\n \u003cul type=\"disc\"\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eMany students (35%) recalled instances where hints provided specific problem-solving guidance, such as factoring polynomials or isolating variables.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eHints clarifying formulas or properties were noted by 30%, while 20% mentioned general support in understanding concepts.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eA small group (15%) did not recall specific instances.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003c/ul\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 312px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eStep-by-Step Solutions Feature\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 312px;\"\u003e\n \u003cul type=\"disc\"\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eNearly half the students (45%) praised this feature for breaking down complex problems into manageable steps.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eMany (35%) found it highly effective in improving understanding and problem-solving skills.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eEngagement with the feature was mixed, with 10% expressing general satisfaction and another 10% stating it did not increase their engagement.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003c/ul\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 312px;\"\u003e\n \u003cul type=\"disc\"\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eImmediate Feedback on Answers\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003c/ul\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 312px;\"\u003e\n \u003cul type=\"disc\"\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eImmediate feedback is considered highly effective by 50% of respondents, who noted its role in identifying and correcting mistakes.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eFeedback was also valued for clarifying the correct approach (25%) and improving understanding (15%).\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003c/ul\u003e\n \u003cul\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eHowever, 10% expressed frustrations with occasional errors in feedback evaluation.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003c/ul\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eOverall, the findings emphasize the effectiveness of Pearson MyLab Math\u0026rsquo;s tools in providing structured guidance, promoting independent learning, and offering immediate feedback, all of which support problem-solving and concept understanding. However, a minority reported limited engagement or issues with the feedback system.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn regards to how the interactive features and user interface of MyLab Math impact students\u0026apos; engagement and learning experience in precalculus. It highlights supportive tools, user preferences, and areas for improvement based on student feedback, the findings were summarized to these themes:\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cul\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eEnhanced Engagement:\u003c/strong\u003e 80% of students reported that the interactive features of Pearson MyLab, such as dynamic graphs, quizzes, and hands-on practice, made learning more engaging and enjoyable.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eGraphing Tools and Practice Quizzes:\u003c/strong\u003e 70% highlighted the graphing tool as particularly helpful for visualizing transformations, while 40% found practice quizzes effective for reinforcing understanding.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eInstant Feedback and Videos:\u003c/strong\u003e 30% appreciated the instant feedback for correcting mistakes and 20% valued explanation videos for reviewing concepts at their own pace.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eHands-On Learning:\u003c/strong\u003e 35% noted that the platform\u0026rsquo;s hands-on approach helped them grasp mathematical concepts more effectively.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTechnical Challenges and Navigation Difficulties:\u003c/strong\u003e 10% mentioned that the system\u0026rsquo;s complexity and navigation issues detracted from the learning experience, with suggestions for simplifying the interface.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eUser Interface Usability:\u003c/strong\u003e While 60% found the interface intuitive and conducive to learning, 25% suggested improvements in navigation and layout to enhance the user experience.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003c/ul\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eOverall, Pearson MyLab\u0026rsquo;s interactive features significantly enhance engagement and understanding of precalculus material, particularly through tools like graphing and quizzes. However, addressing navigation challenges and simplifying the interface could further improve the user experience.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRegarding the challenges students face while using Pearson MyLab and their suggestions for improving the platform\u0026rsquo;s effectiveness in teaching precalculus. Feedback highlights issues related to technical glitches, navigation difficulties, and a need for clearer explanations, as well as proposed solutions to enhance the user experience.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cul\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eChallenges with Explanations and Feedback:\u003c/strong\u003e 55% of students reported that explanations were overly technical, vague, or lacked sufficient detail, making it difficult to understand mistakes and concepts.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTechnical Glitches and Navigation Issues:\u003c/strong\u003e 40% experienced occasional system glitches, such as slow responses or loading errors, while 25% found the interface unintuitive, particularly when working with graphing tools or locating specific resources.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eRepetitiveness and Monotony:\u003c/strong\u003e 15% noted that the repetitive nature of some questions reduced engagement, with suggestions for more varied and interactive exercises.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eGraphing Tool Difficulties:\u003c/strong\u003e 20% mentioned challenges with the graphing tool, citing its lack of user-friendliness and the need for tutorials to improve usability.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003c/ul\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWhile Pearson MyLab provides a useful platform for learning precalculus, students face challenges with explanations, technical issues, and navigation. Addressing these concerns by improving explanations, enhancing graphing tools, diversifying content, and refining the interface could significantly improve the learning experience and user satisfaction.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAdditionally, the findings from student feedback on Pearson MyLab\u0026apos;s effectiveness and usability in supporting precalculus learning are summarized. The analysis highlights key strengths of the platform, areas for improvement, and how it compares to other digital tools. The analysis of the findings resulted in these themes:\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e4.2.1. Structured and Comprehensive Learning\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cul type=\"disc\"\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eKey Finding:\u003c/strong\u003e Pearson MyLab Math is valued for its structured approach, detailed assignments, and instant feedback, making learning more effective.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eEvidence:\u003c/strong\u003e 58% of respondents highlighted that MyLab Math provides a more comprehensive and organized learning experience compared to other tools.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003c/ul\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e4.2.2 Comparison with Other Platforms\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cul type=\"disc\"\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eKey Finding:\u003c/strong\u003e While Pearson MyLab Math is recognized for its structured assignments and progress tracking, it was noted to be less intuitive and engaging compared to platforms like Khan Academy and Desmos.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eEvidence:\u003c/strong\u003e 39% of respondents mentioned that other platforms, such as Khan Academy and Desmos, were more flexible, visually engaging, and intuitive, but Pearson MyLab Math\u0026rsquo;s structured design was appreciated.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003c/ul\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e4.2.3. Usability Challenges\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cul type=\"disc\"\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eKey Finding:\u003c/strong\u003e Some users experienced difficulties with Pearson MyLab Math\u0026rsquo;s usability, particularly with graphing tools, navigation, and occasional technical glitches.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eEvidence:\u003c/strong\u003e 35% of participants reported frustrations with the graphing interface, navigation issues, and occasional technical errors (e.g., slow loading times, system glitches).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003c/ul\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e4.2.4. Complementing Classroom Instruction\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cul type=\"disc\"\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eKey Finding:\u003c/strong\u003e Pearson MyLab Math was found to complement classroom instruction well by providing additional practice and reinforcing key concepts. However, it cannot fully replace the value of teacher-led explanations.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eEvidence:\u003c/strong\u003e 72% of respondents indicated that MyLab Math helped reinforce classroom learning but still relied on teachers for more complex explanations.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003c/ul\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e4.2.5. Suggestions for Improvement\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cul type=\"disc\"\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eKey Finding:\u003c/strong\u003e Users suggested improvements including clearer explanations, enhanced graphing tools, and more video tutorials.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eEvidence:\u003c/strong\u003e 47% of respondents recommended improvements such as more detailed explanations, interactive content, and better graphing tools to enhance the learning experience.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003c/ul\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e4.2.6. Overall Conclusion\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cul type=\"disc\"\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eKey Finding:\u003c/strong\u003e Pearson MyLab Math is generally effective in supporting precalculus learning, particularly through structured assignments and immediate feedback, but improvements in usability and additional instructional support could enhance its effectiveness.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eEvidence:\u003c/strong\u003e 63% of respondents expressed satisfaction with the platform\u0026rsquo;s structure and feedback, but emphasized the need for better usability and enhanced instructional content.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003c/ul\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe thematic analysis reveals that while Pearson MyLab Math is valued for its structure, feedback, and ability to complement classroom learning, usability challenges and a lack of intuitive design limit its effectiveness. Addressing these areas and incorporating student recommendations could significantly enhance the platform\u0026apos;s overall user experience.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch2\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e4.3 Findings from the Student Engagement Survey\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/h2\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe survey (Appendix C) aimed to gather insights into students\u0026apos; engagement levels with MyLab Math, the effectiveness of various features, and areas for improvement. The outcomes were used to answer the second research question: What effect does Pearson MyLab Math have on student engagement in the learning process?\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;In relation to usage frequency, the majority of respondents use Pearson MyLab 1-2 times a week (approximately 40%). The summary of the findings related to the frequency are listed in Chart 9.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe findings on usage frequency of Pearson MyLab Math reveal that 37.04% of students use the platform 1-2 times a week, indicating moderate engagement, while 22.22% are daily users, suggesting a highly engaged subgroup. However, 18.52% use it less than once a week, pointing to a potential lack of awareness or motivation among some students. The equal percentage of 3-4 times a week users suggests opportunities for increasing frequency among moderately engaged students. To enhance overall engagement, targeted outreach and gamification strategies could be implemented to encourage less frequent users, while gathering feedback from daily users could help enrich their experience further.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRegarding the session duration, most students reported spending less than 15 minutes to 30-60 minutes per session, indicating that sessions are generally brief. Chart 10 summarizes the findings related to this part of the analysis.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRespondents rated their overall engagement as moderate to high as demonstrated in Chart 11. However, there was a notable spread in ratings, indicating varying experiences among students. These findings indicate that while many students engage moderately or highly with Pearson MyLab Math, there are significant opportunities to deepen this engagement and support all students in maximizing their learning experience. The distribution suggests a balanced spread across levels, with room to shift more participants toward higher engagement through targeted strategies.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAdditionally, many students found the exercises somewhat motivating, but a significant number expressed feelings of low motivation, particularly those who used the platform less frequently (Chart 12).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe data on motivation levels shows that the majority of respondents (37.50%) perceive the environment or factors as somewhat motivating, while a combined 54.17% find it either very motivating or extremely motivating, indicating a generally positive motivational atmosphere. However, 33.33% of respondents fall into the lower motivation categories, with 12.50% not motivated at all and 20.83% not very motivated, highlighting a need for improvement to fully engage all participants. Efforts to enhance motivation could focus on addressing the factors contributing to low and moderate perceptions to elevate overall motivation levels further.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eBased on the data regarding the level of interest in Pearson MyLab Math\u0026apos;s content and problems, 41.67% of responses were \u0026quot;Neutral,\u0026quot; indicating that a significant portion of participants neither strongly liked nor disliked the material. 16.67% found the content \u0026quot;Interesting,\u0026quot; while 12.50% rated it as \u0026quot;Very Interesting,\u0026quot; showing that 29.17% of respondents found the material engaging. Conversely, 12.50% described the content as \u0026quot;Uninteresting,\u0026quot; and 16.67% rated it \u0026quot;Very Uninteresting,\u0026quot; resulting in 29.17% expressing dissatisfaction. This distribution highlights a balance between engaged and disengaged participants, with the largest group remaining indifferent, suggesting an opportunity to enhance the content to better capture interest.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis analysis (Table 5) evaluates user engagement with key features in Pearson MyLab Math, including hints, step-by-step solutions, interactive components, and immediate feedback, using a 0\u0026ndash;5 scale. The results highlight varying levels of engagement, with some features performing better than others.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTable 5.\u0026nbsp;Average Ratings\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable border=\"1\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 312px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eFeature\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 312px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAverage Rating (0-5)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 312px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eHints\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 312px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.04\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 312px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eStep-by-Step Solution\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 312px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.46\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 312px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eInteractive Components\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 312px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.23\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 312px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eImmediate Feedback\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 312px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.46\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThese averages suggest that while the step-by-step solution and immediate feedback features are slightly more engaging, all features show room for improvement to better engage users.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe boxplot above shows the distribution of engagement ratings (on a scale of 0\u0026ndash;5) for various Pearson MyLab features (Chart 13).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe responses to whether Pearson MyLab encourages active participation in learning are varied but generally positive. The breakdown is as follows:\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cul type=\"disc\"\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eAgree: 9 responses (36%)\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eNeutral: 9 responses (36%)\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eStrongly Agree: 4 responses (16%)\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eDisagree: 3 responses (12%)\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eStrongly Disagree: 1 response (4%)\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003c/ul\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe majority of respondents (52%) either \u0026quot;Agree\u0026quot; or \u0026quot;Strongly Agree\u0026quot; that Pearson MyLab Math encourages active participation, indicating a positive overall perception. However, an equal percentage of \u0026quot;Neutral\u0026quot; responses (36%) suggests that a significant portion of users remain ambivalent about its effectiveness. Meanwhile, 16% of respondents expressed dissatisfaction (\u0026quot;Disagree\u0026quot; or \u0026quot;Strongly Disagree\u0026quot;), signaling an area for potential improvement.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn regards to the content relevance and challenge level of the exercises in MyLab Math. The majority of respondents (88%) find the exercises at least sometimes relevant to the Precalculus coursework, with 52% indicating \u0026quot;Always\u0026quot; or \u0026quot;Often,\u0026quot; showing a generally positive perception of the relevance of exercises to precalculus coursework (Table 6).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTable 6. Content Relevance and Challenge Level\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable border=\"1\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\" width=\"625\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 156px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAspect\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 150px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCategory\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 96px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ePercentage\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 222px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eObservation\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 156px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eRelevance\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 150px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAlways\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 96px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e20%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 222px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eExercises are frequently relevant to coursework\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 156px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 150px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOften\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 96px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e32%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 222px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 156px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 150px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSometimes\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 96px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e36%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 222px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 156px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 150px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eRarely\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 96px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 222px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eA small minority finds them rarely relevant\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 156px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 150px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNever\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 96px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 222px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 156px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eChallenge Level\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 150px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAppropriately Challenging\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 96px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e68%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 222px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMost participants find the exercises appropriately challenging\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 156px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 150px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eToo Challenging\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 96px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e28%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 222px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eA notable portion struggles with the difficulty level\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 156px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 150px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eToo Easy\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 96px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 222px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOnly a small fraction feels the exercises are too easy\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe exercises in Pearson MyLab are generally perceived as relevant and appropriately challenging, with \u003cstrong\u003e52%\u003c/strong\u003e finding them \u0026quot;Always\u0026quot; or \u0026quot;Often\u0026quot; relevant and \u003cstrong\u003e68%\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003erating them as appropriately difficult. That indicated that MyLab Math aligns well with their academic needs.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eHowever, there is room for improvement, as 28% of respondents find the exercises \u0026quot;Too Challenging,\u0026quot; which could hinder learning for some users. Balancing the difficulty level and ensuring consistent relevance could further enhance user satisfaction. \u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAdditionally, the analysis reveals that users find several aspects of Pearson MyLab highly engaging (Chart 14). Approximately 40% of responses highlight interactive and personalized learning features, such as quizzes, simulations, and learning paths, as the most engaging elements. Another 30% emphasize the value of immediate feedback and step-by-step solutions, which help reinforce understanding and offer targeted support. Additionally, 15% of users appreciate the practice questions and opportunities for repeated attempts to improve their performance. Features like graph-related exercises and user-friendly tools were also mentioned by 10%, showcasing the platform\u0026rsquo;s ability to provide dynamic and hands-on learning experiences.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eOn the other hand, 25% of responses point to challenges with overly difficult or repetitive exercises, which some users find unhelpful or disengaging. Technical issues, including glitches and slow loading times, were reported by 20%, disrupting the learning process. Graph-related questions were identified as problematic by 10% of users due to their impact on grades and difficulty level. Additionally, 10% of responses cited complex explanations and hints after incorrect answers as areas needing improvement. Addressing these concerns and refining these aspects could significantly enhance user satisfaction and engagement (Chart 15).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIt was essential to ask the students to provide suggestions to improve the platform. The feedback provided suggests various ways to enhance the engagement level of Pearson MyLab. These suggestions can be categorized into the following themes:\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cul type=\"disc\"\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eInteractivity and Gamification\u003c/strong\u003e:\u003cbr\u003e\u0026nbsp;Many users recommended adding interactive activities, such as games, puzzles, simulations, and group discussions. Suggestions also included incorporating progress milestones like badges and creating educational videos to explain problem-solving methods (mentioned in approximately 30% of responses).\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eImproved Flexibility and Accuracy\u003c/strong\u003e: Around 25% of respondents emphasized the need for greater flexibility in answer validation. For example, responses should not be marked incorrect due to syntax or formatting issues, such as decimals, bullet points, or specific phrasing.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eEnhanced User-Friendliness\u003c/strong\u003e: Approximately 20% suggested making Pearson MyLab more user-friendly by improving its design and ensuring it works across all search engines. Suggestions also included simplifying the interface and making questions clearer and easier to understand.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eBetter Programming and Functionality\u003c/strong\u003e: About 15% of feedback focused on improving the platform\u0026rsquo;s programming. Users noted issues with answer validation, glitches, and difficulty navigating the platform.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAdditional Features\u003c/strong\u003e: A smaller subset of users (10%) recommended including clear examples or tutorials for harder questions, more practice opportunities with instant feedback, and making all\u0026nbsp;exercises multiple-choice to simplify the answering process.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003c/ul\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe survey results indicate that while Pearson MyLab Math is a widely used tool that offers valuable features for precalculus learning, there are areas that require attention to enhance student engagement and satisfaction. By addressing the feedback regarding user experience, feature effectiveness, and content delivery, Pearson MyLab Math can improve its platform and better support student learning outcomes.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch2\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e4.4 Effect on Academic Performance\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/h2\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis part of the analysis aims to assess the impact of Pearson MyLab Math on students\u0026apos; academic performance in a Precalculus course and answer the third research question: How does Pearson MyLab Math influence students\u0026apos; academic performance in a Precalculus course?\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAs online learning tools have become increasingly prevalent in education, understanding their effectiveness in improving student outcomes is crucial. Pearson MyLab Math is a widely used platform designed to support learning in mathematics through interactive exercises and personalized feedback. By comparing academic performance before and after using the tool, this study seeks to determine whether MyLab Math has a significant influence on students\u0026apos; grades and overall learning experience. The results of a paired two-sample t-test will help to identify whether any differences in performance can be attributed to the use of the platform, providing insight into its potential benefits for student success in Precalculus.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe descriptive statistics for the post- and pre- test data are listed in Tables 7 and 8 as demonstrated below.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTable 7. Pre-test Descriptive Statistics\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable border=\"0\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\" width=\"202\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 202px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ePre-test\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 128px;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 128px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMean\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e45.43478\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 128px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eStandard Error\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.118846\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 128px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMedian\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e42.3913\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 128px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMode\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e41.30435\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 128px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eStandard Deviation\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e17.08262\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 128px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSample Variance\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e291.816\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 128px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eKurtosis\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.04903\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 128px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSkewness\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.646926\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 128px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eRange\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e63.04348\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 128px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMinimum\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e21.73913\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 128px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMaximum\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e84.78261\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 128px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSum\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1363.043\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 128px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eCount\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e30\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThese descriptive statistics provide a general overview of the pre-test data, showing moderate variation in performance with a slight positive skew, meaning that most students scored on the lower end, but there were a few higher scores that pulled the average up.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTable 8. Post-test Descriptive Statistics\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable border=\"0\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\" width=\"202\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 202px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ePost-test\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 128px;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 128px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMean\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e71.36429\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 128px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eStandard Error\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2.341645\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 128px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMedian\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e71.625\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 128px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMode\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e73\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 128px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eStandard Deviation\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e12.39082\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 128px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSample Variance\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e153.5324\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 128px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eKurtosis\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.04966\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 128px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSkewness\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.066383\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 128px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eRange\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e52.25\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 128px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMinimum\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e43.5\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 128px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMaximum\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e95.75\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 128px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSum\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1998.2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 128px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eCount\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e28\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eFurthermore, these descriptive statistics suggest that the post-test data show improved performance, with less variation and a more symmetrical distribution of scores compared to the pre-test. This indicates that students\u0026apos; performance became more consistent and shifted toward higher scores after the intervention.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTo better understand the differences between the pre-test and post-test scores, a t-test was conducted to determine whether the variation in students\u0026rsquo; scores between the two tests was statistically significant (Table 9).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTable 9. t-Test: Paired Two Sample for Means\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable border=\"0\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\" align=\"\" width=\"341\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 192px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ePost-test\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ePre-test\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 192px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMean\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e71.5069\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e45.65217\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 192px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eVariance\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e148.6389\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e300.7696\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 192px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eObservations\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e29\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e29\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 192px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePearson Correlation\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.226763\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 192px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eHypothesized Mean Difference\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 192px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003edf\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e28\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 192px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003et Stat\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e7.405162\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 192px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eP(T\u0026lt;=t) one-tail\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2.3E-08\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 192px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003et Critical one-tail\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.701131\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 192px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eP(T\u0026lt;=t) two-tail\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.59E-08\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 192px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003et Critical two-tail\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2.048407\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe results indicate that there is a statistically significant difference between the two variables (Variable 1-Post-test and Variable 2-Pre-test). The p-values are extremely small, suggesting the observed difference is unlikely to be due to chance. Post-test has a significantly higher mean than the pre-test, and the correlation between the two variables is weak, meaning their relationship is not very strong (Table 6).\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"5. Discussion","content":"\u003cp\u003eThe findings of this study provide valuable insights into students\u0026apos; experiences and performance with Pearson MyLab Math compared to traditional paper-based testing methods. Several key themes emerged, highlighting the strengths and limitations of the platform, as well as student preferences and academic performance outcomes.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e5.1 Student Preferences and Perceptions\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe survey results indicate a strong preference for paper-based testing, with 82% of students favoring it over Pearson MyLab Math. The primary reasons cited for this preference include the familiarity of the format, ease of showing work, reduced distractions, and the perceived fairness of grading. In contrast, students who favored the platform highlighted advantages such as immediate feedback, interactivity, and flexibility. These findings suggest that while digital platforms offer certain benefits, traditional assessment methods remain more aligned with students\u0026apos; learning styles and comfort levels.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe polarized ratings of Pearson MyLab Math further underscore the mixed experiences among students. Technical challenges, strict answer formatting, and grading inflexibility were common concerns that contributed to dissatisfaction with the platform. These findings suggest a need for improvements in the user experience to enhance its effectiveness and acceptance among students.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e5.2 Performance Comparisons\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe results of the paired t-test analysis revealed a statistically significant difference in student performance between the two testing formats. Students achieved higher scores on the paper-based test (mean: 62.7) compared to the platform-based test (mean: 51.3), indicating that the traditional format may better support their ability to demonstrate knowledge. This discrepancy could be attributed to several factors, including students\u0026apos; familiarity with paper-based tests, reduced anxiety, and the ability to receive partial credit for their work.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe lower performance on platform-based tests suggests that challenges such as interface usability, technical difficulties, and the lack of alignment with students\u0026apos; learning styles may hinder their performance. These results highlight the importance of addressing these issues to improve the effectiveness of digital assessments.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e5.3 Engagement and Usability Challenges\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eStudent engagement with Pearson MyLab Math was found to be moderate, with most students using the platform 1-2 times per week. While the interactive features, such as step-by-step solutions and immediate feedback, were appreciated by many, a significant portion of students expressed concerns regarding the platform\u0026apos;s usability. Technical glitches, navigation difficulties, and unclear explanations were identified as barriers to engagement and effective learning.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe analysis of engagement levels further revealed that motivation varied among students, with a notable proportion expressing low motivation levels. This finding suggests that additional support and improvements in the platform\u0026apos;s interactivity, such as gamification and personalized learning pathways, could enhance student engagement and satisfaction.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e5.4 Impact on Academic Performance\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe significant improvement in post-test scores compared to pre-test scores suggests that Pearson MyLab Math can be an effective tool for supporting student learning when used consistently. The structured assignments and immediate feedback provided by the platform appear to contribute to improved understanding and performance. However, the findings also indicate that the platform cannot fully replace traditional teaching methods, as students continue to rely on classroom instruction for complex concepts.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eDespite its positive impact on performance, the study highlights the need for continuous improvements in the platform\u0026apos;s usability and instructional design. Ensuring that content aligns with students\u0026apos; learning needs and addressing technical challenges will be crucial in maximizing the platform\u0026apos;s effectiveness.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e5.5 Recommendations for Improvement\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eBased on the findings, several recommendations can be made to enhance the effectiveness of Pearson MyLab Math:\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cul type=\"disc\"\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eUser Experience Enhancements:\u003c/strong\u003e Address technical issues, improve navigation, and provide clearer answer formatting guidelines to reduce frustration and enhance usability.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eHybrid Assessment Approach:\u003c/strong\u003e Consider a blended approach that integrates both paper-based and digital assessments to cater to diverse student preferences.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eIncreased Training and Support:\u003c/strong\u003e Provide students with additional training on using the platform effectively to maximize its benefits.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eGamification and Personalization:\u003c/strong\u003e Introduce features that enhance engagement, such as progress tracking, badges, and tailored learning pathways.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eRegular Feedback Mechanisms:\u003c/strong\u003e Implement ongoing feedback channels to identify and address student concerns promptly.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003c/ul\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn conclusion, while Pearson MyLab Math offers valuable features that can support student learning, traditional paper-based tests continue to hold significant advantages in terms of student comfort and performance outcomes. A balanced approach that leverages the strengths of both methods may be the most effective way to enhance student learning and achievement.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"6. Limitations","content":"\u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"BlockQuote\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOne limitation of this research is that it is a case study with a relatively small sample size of 30 students in the pre-test and 28 in the post-test. While this sample size is acceptable for a case study, it limits the ability to generalize the findings to a larger population. The results are more reflective of the specific group of students studied, and variations in performance may not be applicable to all students using Pearson MyLab Math. In future studies with broader samples, more diverse student populations could be considered to assess the platform's effectiveness across various academic backgrounds.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAdditionally, the study only measures the immediate impact of Pearson MyLab Math on academic performance without assessing long-term retention or learning outcomes. The improvements seen in the post-test scores may not be sustained over time, and without follow-up assessments, it is difficult to determine if the platform's benefits are lasting. Another limitation is the reliance on pre-test and post-test scores alone, which do not capture the full range of student engagement or experience with the platform. More qualitative data, such as student feedback or surveys, would provide a deeper understanding of how MyLab Math influences students' learning experiences beyond just test performance.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"7. Conclusion","content":"\u003cp\u003eThe findings of this study provide clear evidence of the significant role Pearson MyLab Math plays in shaping students\u0026rsquo; learning experiences in a Precalculus course. The platform\u0026rsquo;s interactive features\u0026mdash;step-by-step solutions, immediate feedback, and adaptive learning pathways\u0026mdash;enhance student comprehension and engagement. However, challenges such as unclear explanations, technical glitches, and difficulties with complex topics highlight the need for continued improvements to optimize its educational value.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe statistical analysis underscores MyLab Math\u0026rsquo;s positive impact on academic performance, with a significant increase in post-test scores (mean: 71.51) compared to pre-test scores (mean: 45.65). This substantial improvement indicates that consistent use of the platform contributes to stronger mathematical proficiency. Additionally, the reduced variance in post-test scores suggests that MyLab Math helps standardize learning outcomes among students. However, the weak positive correlation between platform use and performance suggests that additional factors\u0026mdash;such as student motivation, instructor support, and prior knowledge\u0026mdash;also influence success, warranting further investigation.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eA notable finding of this study is the discrepancy between students' performance on paper-based tests (mean: 62.7) and platform-based tests (mean: 51.3), highlighting how assessment format impacts student achievement. Factors such as test interface design, digital literacy, and exam stress may contribute to these differences. These results emphasize the need for careful test design and enhanced usability to ensure that online assessments accurately reflect students\u0026rsquo; knowledge and abilities.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eTo maximize the benefits of MyLab Math, this study recommends using a hybrid assessment approach that leverages both paper-based and platform-based testing while addressing usability concerns. High-stakes assessments should prioritize paper-based formats to ensure fairness, while MyLab Math can serve as an effective tool for formative assessments, practice exercises, and supplemental learning. If platform-based testing is necessary, improvements should focus on refining test formats, minimizing technical issues, and enhancing accessibility to provide a more seamless user experience.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFuture research should explore qualitative insights from students and instructors to better understand the nuances of engagement and learning experiences with MyLab Math. Additionally, investigating long-term retention, performance across different STEM courses, and the impact of instructor-led integration strategies will be critical for further refining the use of digital learning platforms in mathematics education.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eBy addressing these key areas, educators and developers can ensure that MyLab Math continues to evolve as a powerful tool for enhancing student success in Precalculus and beyond. This study contributes to mathematics education by highlighting the benefits and limitations of digital learning tools, informing best practices for their integration, and emphasizing the importance of balancing technology with traditional assessment methods to support diverse student needs.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Declarations","content":"\u003ch2\u003e\u003cspan\u003eConsent to participate:\u0026nbsp;\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/h2\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cspan\u003eParticipant Consent Statement: All students who participated in the study \u0026quot;The Impact of Pearson MyLab Math on Precalculus Performance and Test-Taking Preferences\u0026quot; were notified about the study and its purpose. They understood that participation was voluntary and provided their consent to participate. Additionally, they consented to the publication of the study findings while ensuring participant confidentiality.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch2\u003eCompeting Interests:\u003c/h2\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe authors declare that they have no competing interests.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch2\u003eFunding:\u003c/h2\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch2\u003eAuthors\u0026apos; Contributions:\u003c/h2\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRussina A Eltoum and Hanadi M Abdelsalam conceptualized the study and designed the methodology. Russina A Eltoum collected and analyzed the data. All authors contributed to writing and reviewing the manuscript and have approved the final version.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch2\u003eAcknowledgements:\u003c/h2\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe authors wish to thank the students and faculty of Prince Mohammed Bin Fahd University (PMU) for their participation and valuable insights. We also acknowledge the support of our colleagues who provided feedback on the study design and manuscript preparation.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch2\u003eAvailability of Data and Material:\u003c/h2\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe datasets generated and analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eAhmadi, M., Dileepan, P., \u0026amp; Wheatley, K. (2019). Teaching Quantitative Courses Online: Are Learning Tools Offered by Publishers Effective?. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Educators Online\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e16\u003c/em\u003e(2), n2.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eAjaz, A. (2020). \u003cem\u003eAnalyzing the Effects of MyMathLab on Undergraduate College Students\u003c/em\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;Achievement in Pre-calculus Mathematics I\u003c/em\u003e (Doctoral dissertation, Southern University and Agricultural and Mechanical College).\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eAl Madhoun, W. (2016). BLENDED LEARNING AND USING MYMATHLAB IN TEACHING AND LEARNING MATHEMATICS. In \u003cem\u003eICERI2016 Proceedings\u003c/em\u003e (pp. 8187-8196). IATED.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eBond, M., Bedenlier, S., Buntins, K., Kerres, M., \u0026amp; Zawacki-Richter, O. (2020). Facilitating student engagement in higher education through educational technology: A narrative systematic review in the field of education. \u003cem\u003eContemporary Issues in Technology and\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e\u003cem\u003eTeacher Education\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e20\u003c/em\u003e(2), 315-368.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eHurdle, Z. B., \u0026amp; Mogilski, W. (2022). The Impact of Prerequisites for Undergraduate Calculus I Performance. \u003cem\u003eInternational Electronic Journal of Mathematics Education\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e17\u003c/em\u003e(3).\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eJaafar, N., Nor, S. R. M., Norrulashikin, S. M., Kamisan, N. A. B., \u0026amp; Mohamad, A. Q. (2022). Increase students\u0026rsquo; understanding of mathematics learning using the technology-based learning. \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Advanced Research in Future Ready Learning and\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e\u003cem\u003eEducation\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e28\u003c/em\u003e(1), 24-29.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eKholid, M. N., Imawati, A., Swastika, A., Maharani, S., \u0026amp; Pradana, L. N. (2021, February). How are Students\u0026rsquo; Conceptual Understanding for Solving Mathematical Problem?. In \u003cem\u003eJournal\u003c/em\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;of Physics: Conference Series\u003c/em\u003e (Vol. 1776, No. 1, p. 012018). IOP Publishing.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eMukul, E., \u0026amp; B\u0026uuml;y\u0026uuml;k\u0026ouml;zkan, G. (2023). Digital transformation in education: A systematic review of education 4.0. \u003cem\u003eTechnological forecasting and social change\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e194\u003c/em\u003e, 122664.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eOlsen, L. S. (2020). \u003cem\u003eMyMathLab and Nontraditional Students\u0026rsquo; Attitudes Toward Technology in\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e\u003cem\u003eMathematics\u003c/em\u003e (Doctoral dissertation, Walden University).\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003ePangburn, A. C. (2020). \u003cem\u003eHelping College Mathematics Students Facilitate Their Self-Regulated\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e\u003cem\u003eLearning Skills and Mathematics Self-Efficacy While Using MyMathLab\u003c/em\u003e (Doctoral dissertation, University of South Carolina).\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eRaja, R., \u0026amp; Nagasubramani, P. C. (2018). Impact of modern technology in education. \u003cem\u003eJournal of\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e\u003cem\u003eApplied and Advanced Research\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e3\u003c/em\u003e(1), 33-35.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eRaines, J. (2016). Student perceptions on using MyMathLab to complete homework online. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Student Success and Retention Vol\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e3\u003c/em\u003e(1).\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eViberg, O., Gr\u0026ouml;nlund, \u0026Aring;., \u0026amp; Andersson, A. (2023). Integrating digital technology in mathematics education: a Swedish case study. \u003cem\u003eInteractive Learning Environments\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e31\u003c/em\u003e(1), 232-243.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eWang, M. (2023). \u003cem\u003eMeta-Analysis of the Effectiveness of MyMathLab in College\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e\u003cem\u003eAlgebra\u003c/em\u003e (Doctoral dissertation, Texas A\u0026amp;M University-Kingsville).\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eZhang, L., Basham, J. D., \u0026amp; Yang, S. (2020). Understanding the implementation of personalized learning: A research synthesis. \u003cem\u003eEducational research review\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e31\u003c/em\u003e, 100339.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eZiatdinov, R., \u0026amp; Cilliers, J. (2022). Generation Alpha: Understanding the next cohort of university students. \u003cem\u003earXiv preprint arXiv:2202.01422\u003c/em\u003e.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003c/ol\u003e"},{"header":"Charts","content":"\u003cp\u003eCharts 1 to 15 are available in the Supplementary Files section.\u003c/p\u003e"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":true,"hideJournal":true,"highlight":"","institution":"Prince Mohammed Bin Fahd University","isAcceptedByJournal":false,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true},"keywords":"Assessment Format, STEM, Pearson MyLab Math, Education Technology, Students Preference, Student Satisfaction","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-6046706/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-6046706/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003cp\u003eThis case study explores the impact of Pearson MyLab Math, an online learning platform, on the learning outcomes of students enrolled in a Precalculus course at Prince Mohammed Bin Fahd University (PMU). Using a mixed-method approach, the study examines how the integration of MyLab Math influences students\u0026rsquo; understanding of key Precalculus concepts, their engagement with course materials, and overall academic performance. Data was collected through interviews, focus groups, and analysis of student performance metrics. Findings suggest that while Pearson MyLab Math provides valuable resources, its effectiveness is contingent on student engagement and the alignment of platform resources with course objectives.\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"The Impact of Pearson MyLab Math on Precalculus Performance and Test-Taking Preferences","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2025-02-28 09:45:18","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-6046706/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"1241c26e-3c6c-49a3-86b8-73ff1d007ec9","owner":[],"postedDate":"February 28th, 2025","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"posted","subjectAreas":[{"id":44438608,"name":"Applied Mathematics"},{"id":44438609,"name":"Educational Psychology"}],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2025-02-28T09:45:18+00:00","versionOfRecord":[],"versionCreatedAt":"2025-02-28 09:45:18","video":"","vorDoi":"","vorDoiUrl":"","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-6046706","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-6046706","identity":"rs-6046706","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"8U1c8b4HqxoKbykW_rLl7","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}