QUALITY ASSESSMENT CRITERIA FOR PERSONALIZED TEACHING   IN INTER-LEVEL SCHOOLS WITHIN DIGITAL EDUCATION ECOSYSTEMS

Dang Minh Phuong; Kieu Thu Linh; Tran Bich Hang; Tran Thi Lan; Ho Thi Thu Huong

Kieu Thu Linh*	linhkt@gesd.edu.vn	Vietnam Education Strategy and Policy Institute 101 Tran Hung Dao, Cua Nam ward, Hanoi, Vietnam
Tran Thi Lan	lantt@gesd.edu.vn	Vietnam Education Strategy and Policy Institute 101 Tran Hung Dao, Cua Nam ward, Hanoi, Vietnam
Tran Bich Hang	huonght@gesd.edu.vn	Vietnam Education Strategy and Policy Institute 101 Tran Hung Dao, Cua Nam ward, Hanoi, Vietnam
Ho Thi Thu Huong	huonght@gesd.edu.vn	Vietnam Education Strategy and Policy Institute 101 Tran Hung Dao, Cua Nam ward, Hanoi, Vietnam
Dang Minh Phuong	phuongdm@gesd.edu.vn	Vietnam Education Strategy and Policy Institute 101 Tran Hung Dao, Cua Nam ward, Hanoi, Vietnam

Summary:

This study develops a quality assessment framework for personalized teaching in inter-level schools within a digital education ecosystem, aiming to address the research gap regarding the lack of instruments to measure data interoperability and the effectiveness of personalized learning pathways. By using a systematic research approach combined with theoretical modeling and pedagogical simulation, the research establishes an evaluation framework at the intersection of Learning Analytics and the Zone of Proximal Development. The study proposes five core groups of criteria: 1) Digital education ecosystem infrastructure and interoperability; 2) Data-informed teaching governance; 3) Implementation of personalized teaching; 4) 12-year educational continuity; and 5) Competency growth and digital culture, accompanied by a detailed quality assessment rubric. These findings provide a vital foundation for educational administrators to invest in longitudinal data infrastructure to preserve and leverage students’ accumulated learning histories. Ultimately, the research contributes to shifting the assessment paradigm from a ‘one-size-fits-all’ approach to empathetic digital companionship, fostering the sustainable progress and well-being of every student.

View file

Keywords:

Inter-level schools

digital education ecosystem

data interoperability

personalized teaching.

Refers:

[1] Bộ Giáo dục và Đào tạo. (2018). Chương trình Giáo dục phổ thông môn Toán (Ban hành kèm theo Thông tư số 32/2018/TT-BGDĐT).

[2] Bộ Giáo dục và Đào tạo. (2020). Thông tư số 32/2020/ TT-BGDĐT ban hành Điều lệ trường trung học cơ sở, trường trung học phổ thông và trường phổ thông có nhiều cấp học.

[3] Brusilovsky, P. (2016). Adaptive hypermedia. User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction, 11(1–2), pp.87–110. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1011143116306.

[4] Gašević, D., Dawson, S. & Siemens, G. (2015). Let’s not forget: Learning analytics are about learning. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 16(1), pp.64–71. https://doi. org/10.19173/irrodl.v16i1.2073.

[5] Gummer, E. S. & Mandinach, E. B. (2015). Building a conceptual framework for data literacy. Teachers College Record, 117(4), pp.1–22.

[6] Ifenthaler, D.& Yau, J. Y.-K. (2020). Utilising learning analytics for study success: Reflections on current empirical findings. Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning, 15(1), pp.1–17. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41039- 020-00135-x.

[7] Hattie, J. & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), pp.81-112.

[8] Kim, B. & Reeves, T. C. (2022). Reframing educational technology as a digital ecosystem. Educational Technology Research and Development, 70(4), pp.1977 - 1995. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-022 10132-0.

[9] Lê Anh Vinh & Nguyễn Thúy Hồng. (2021). Chuyển đổi số trong giáo dục phổ thông: Từ khung lí thuyết đến thực tiễn triển khai tại Việt Nam. Tạp chí Khoa học Giáo dục Việt Nam, 45, tr.1–8.

[10] Luckin, R., Holmes, W., Griffiths, M. & Forcier, L. B. (2016). Intelligence unleashed: An argument for AI in education. Pearson.

[11] Nguyễn Hữu Cương. (2021). Đảm bảo chất lượng giáo dục trong bối cảnh chuyển đổi số: Một số vấn đề lí luận và thực tiễn. Tạp chí Quản lí Giáo dục, 13(7), tr.15–22.

[12] Nguyễn Ngọc Giang. (2022). Xây dựng hệ sinh thái giáo dục số trong các trường phổ thông tại Việt Nam: Cơ hội và thách thức. Tạp chí Giáo dục, 22(12), tr.10–15.

[13] OECD. (2020). Back to the Future of Education: OECD Scenarios for Schooling. OECD Publishing. https:// doi.org/10.1787/178efab0-en.

[14] OECD. (2023). Digital education outlook 2023: Towards an effective digital education ecosystem. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/bf34fe66-en.

[15] Pelánek, R. (2017). Bayesian knowledge tracing, logistic models, and behavioral dynamics. In Proceedings of the Fourth ACM Conference on Learning @ Scale, pp.85–94. ACM. https://doi. org/10.1145/3051457.3053986.

[16] Redecker, C. (2017). European framework for the digital competence of educators: DigCompEdu. Publications Office of the European Union. https://doi. org/10.2760/159770.

[17] Sclater, N., Peasgood, A. & Mullan, J. (2016). Learning analytics in higher education. Jisc.

[18] Siemens, G. (2013). Learning analytics: The emergence of a discipline. American Behavioral Scientist, 57(10), pp.1380–1400. https://doi.org/ 10.1177/0002764213498851.

[19] Trần Kiều. (2006). Đổi mới giáo dục phổ thông Việt Nam. NXB Giáo dục, Hà Nội.

[20] UNESCO. (2021). Reimagining our futures together: A new social contract for education. UNESCO Publishing.

[21] Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.

[22] Walkington, C. & Bernacki, M. L. (2020). Appraising research on personalized learning in the 21st century. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 52(3), pp.235-252. https://doi.org/10.10 80/15391523.2020.1744747.

Journal:

No. 9, September 2026

VIETNAM JOURNAL OF EDUCATIONAL SCIENCES

THE VIETNAM NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF EDUCATIONAL SCIENCES

QUALITY ASSESSMENT CRITERIA FOR PERSONALIZED TEACHING IN INTER-LEVEL SCHOOLS WITHIN DIGITAL EDUCATION ECOSYSTEMS