The study focused on adult evening school learners in Macau, a population that has been largely invisible in educational research, which tends to privilege full-time students in universities or younger children in formal schooling. Evening school art learners face a distinctive set of pressures. They juggle jobs, family responsibilities, and fatigue, and they often begin their artistic training with limited prior experience. Understanding what helps them engage in class and believe in their own abilities is therefore not just an academic question. It speaks to a growing global trend of adults seeking creative education outside traditional daytime institutions, often supported by the vast ecosystem of online art resources that has exploded over the past decade.

Methodologically, the research stands out for its two-stage design. Wu adopted an exploratory sequential mixed-methods approach, which means the qualitative work came first and shaped the quantitative phase that followed. In the first stage, twenty adult learners took part in semi-structured interviews, and the transcripts were analyzed using thematic analysis, the widely used qualitative technique developed by Virginia Braun and Victoria Clarke. The interviews revealed four central themes. Online resources, it turned out, primarily served to reduce uncertainty at the moment of task initiation, helping learners feel prepared before they attempted something new in class. Classroom engagement was shaped by personal interest, the quality of guidance received, the overall classroom climate, and the demands of adult life pressing in from outside. Art self-efficacy, the belief in one’s own capacity to produce art, developed through the experience of completing works, through problem solving when things went wrong, and through specific, targeted feedback from instructors. Finally, the perceived outcomes of learning extended well beyond technical skill, encompassing persistence and even emotional regulation.

These qualitative insights then informed the second stage, a large-scale survey of 276 adult learners. The questionnaires measured four constructs: use of online art learning resources, classroom engagement, art self-efficacy, and perceived visual art learning outcomes. Wu subjected the data to factor analysis to confirm that the survey items reliably captured each construct, and then to structural equation modeling, a statistical framework that allows researchers to test networks of relationships among multiple variables simultaneously. The measurement model was rigorous, built from 41 indicators across the four constructs, with all standardized loadings statistically significant and ranging from a low of 0.517 to a high of 0.806, indicating that the survey items were strongly tied to the underlying psychological dimensions they were designed to measure.

The structural model told a coherent story. Online resource use was positively associated with classroom engagement, meaning that learners who drew on digital materials outside class tended to participate more fully once they were in the room. Classroom engagement, in turn, was positively associated with art self-efficacy, and art self-efficacy was positively associated with perceived visual art learning outcomes. In other words, the digital and the physical were not competing modes of learning but sequential stages of a single process. Watching a tutorial or studying reference images at home did not replace the classroom; it primed learners to engage with it, and that engagement built the confidence that carried through to artistic achievement.

To probe this chain more deeply, Wu conducted a supplementary serial mediation analysis using standardized composite scores. The technique, based on 10,000 bias-corrected bootstrap samples, tested whether the connection between online resource use and learning outcomes flowed specifically through the two intermediate psychological states: engagement and self-efficacy. The results supported this indirect pathway, with an indirect association of 0.221 and a 95 percent bias-corrected confidence interval ranging from 0.162 to 0.297. Because that interval does not include zero, the finding suggests a reliable indirect association, one in which the effect of digital preparation on perceived outcomes is carried by the combined action of classroom engagement and growing artistic confidence.

The theoretical backbone of the study is Albert Bandura’s concept of self-efficacy, the well-established psychological principle that people’s beliefs in their own capabilities shape how much effort they invest, how they respond to setbacks, and ultimately what they achieve. The interviews provided a vivid, ground-level account of how self-efficacy forms in an art studio. Learners described how finishing a drawing or a painting, however imperfect, generated a sense of accomplishment that made the next attempt feel possible. They described solving problems on their own, such as fixing a proportion or recovering from a smeared wash, as moments of growing competence. And they described the outsized role of specific feedback, in which an instructor pointed to a concrete strength or a concrete fix rather than offering vague praise. These are precisely the sources of efficacy information that Bandura’s theory predicts, observed here in the particular context of adult creative education.

The study is careful about the limits of its evidence. Because the data are cross-sectional and self-reported, collected at a single point in time through questionnaires and interviews, the pathways cannot be interpreted as causal effects. It is possible, for example, that more confident learners are simply more inclined to seek out online resources, rather than the resources building confidence. The author explicitly frames the results as theoretically informed associations, and this honesty matters in a field where online learning research is often oversold. Still, the alignment between the qualitative themes and the quantitative paths gives the findings unusual credibility. The interviews suggested a mechanism, the survey data were consistent with it, and the joint display linking themes, constructs, and inferences shows the integration that mixed-methods researchers strive for.

For educators and institutions, the practical implications are striking. Adult art programs may gain more by treating online resources as a formal part of the learning architecture rather than as an informal supplement. Instructors could curate tutorial videos and reference collections that reduce uncertainty before each new technique is introduced, knowing that this preparation appears to feed directly into classroom engagement. Feedback practices could be sharpened to emphasize specific, actionable observations, since that is what learners themselves identified as the fuel of self-efficacy. And classroom climates that welcome interest and accommodate the realities of adult life, from childcare schedules to work fatigue, may do more for engagement than any single technological tool. As creative education continues to migrate toward hybrid formats, this study of Macau’s evening school learners suggests that the screen and the studio are not rivals. They are links in a chain, and the strength of that chain may determine whether adult learners not only finish their coursework but also come to see themselves as artists.

Subject of Research: Self-efficacy and classroom engagement in online-supported adult visual art education

Article Title: Self-efficacy and classroom engagement in relation to online art learning resources and visual art learning outcomes among adult evening school learners: an exploratory sequential mixed-methods study

Article References: Wu, O. (2026). Self-efficacy and classroom engagement in relation to online art learning resources and visual art learning outcomes among adult evening school learners: an exploratory sequential mixed-methods study. Current Psychology, 45(20), Article 1599. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-026-10133-5

Image Credits: AI Generated

DOI: 10.1007/s12144-026-10133-5

Keywords: art self-efficacy, adult learners, online learning resources, classroom engagement, visual art education, mixed methods, structural equation modeling, Macau, evening school, thematic analysis, serial mediation, Current Psychology

The study, titled “Strategic Integration or Skill Compensation? Understanding GenAI Use in Online Higher Education,” was published on June 30, 2026, in the journal Artificial Intelligence in Education, appearing in volume 2, issue 1, on pages 205 through 223. It was conducted by Jessica Sylvester, Melinda Kulick and Leonidas Maganares, all holding doctorates of education, along with Stella Smith, PhD, associate university research chair. All four are fellows or scholars affiliated with the university’s Center for Educational and Instructional Technology Research, known as CEITR, which is housed within the University of Phoenix College of Doctoral Studies and supports research on teaching, learning, educational technology and institutional practice.

The research team surveyed 491 non-traditional undergraduate students enrolled in online general education courses at the university. Non-traditional students, broadly defined, are typically older than the conventional college-age cohort and often balance coursework with jobs, family obligations and other responsibilities, making them a population of particular interest as universities grapple with how artificial intelligence is reshaping learning. Of the 491 students surveyed, 43.2 percent, or 212 students, reported using generative AI tools in their coursework, a figure that indicates the technology has moved well past the novelty stage and into routine academic life for nearly half of the online learners surveyed.

To understand what drove that use, the researchers turned to multiple regression analysis, a statistical technique that allows investigators to assess the independent contribution of several predictor variables to a single outcome while holding the others constant. The analysis identified exactly two statistically significant predictors of how frequently students used generative AI. The first was grade point average: students with stronger academic performance reported using generative AI tools more often. The second was technology confidence: students who expressed greater confidence in their own technical abilities also reported more frequent engagement with the tools. Both associations point in a direction that challenges the compensation narrative that has dominated much of the public conversation about AI in higher education.

Just as revealing was what did not predict use. Confidence in reading, writing and mathematics, the core academic skills that many observers assumed would push struggling students toward AI assistance, showed no statistically significant relationship with how often students turned to generative tools. Nor did time pressure: the number of hours students spent studying, working or meeting family responsibilities was not significantly related to generative AI use. In other words, neither a deficit in foundational academic skills nor a crunch on available time, the two most commonly cited explanations for why students might lean on AI, emerged as a meaningful driver of behavior in this sample.

The performance data among users add further texture to the picture. Among the 212 students who reported using generative AI in their coursework, 91.1 percent held a GPA of 3.0 or higher, and 68.9 percent earned a perfect 4.0 grade in the specific course in which they reported using the technology. Whatever generative AI is doing in the lives of these learners, the study’s authors argue, the tools appear to be concentrated among students who are already performing well and who feel comfortable navigating digital environments, rather than among those who are falling behind.

“These findings complicate the assumption that students primarily turn to generative AI because they are struggling academically or simply looking to save time,” said Jessica Sylvester, senior manager of College Operations at University of Phoenix and lead author of the study. “Instead, we found GenAI use associated with stronger academic performance and digital confidence. That points to an important opportunity for higher education to help all learners develop the digital fluency, critical judgment and ethical awareness needed to engage with AI effectively.” Her remarks frame the results less as a celebration of AI adoption than as a signal that institutions may need to actively teach the skills that make AI use productive rather than substitutive.

Open-ended survey responses from the 212 students who reported using generative AI offered a more granular view of how the technology is actually woven into coursework. Three themes dominated. The most prominent was using AI to improve understanding and clarify complex concepts, suggesting that many students treat the tools as a personalized explainer rather than a text generator. The second theme cast generative AI as a “thinking partner,” a learning aid for brainstorming and organizing ideas before or during the writing process. The third was efficiency: students reported that the tools helped them work faster and be more productive on academic tasks. Taken together, the qualitative responses sketch a portrait of AI as an amplifier of existing study strategies rather than a replacement for them, at least among these high-performing online learners.

The students themselves were not uncritical enthusiasts. Alongside their enthusiasm, respondents raised concerns about the accuracy and originality of AI-generated content, worried about preserving their individual academic voice, and expressed uncertainty about what constitutes appropriate use under their institutions’ academic integrity policies. That last concern is a recurring tension in higher education, where policies on generative AI have often lagged behind adoption, leaving students to navigate ambiguous rules on their own. The researchers argue that this uncertainty itself is a problem worth solving, and that the findings support a shift away from approaches centered primarily on restricting AI and toward clearer guidance that cultivates generative AI literacy, critical evaluation skills, and transparent and ethical use.

The study carries specific practical recommendations for institutions. The authors suggest incorporating AI literacy across academic disciplines rather than confining it to technology courses, designing assignments that encourage students to critique and reflect on AI-generated information, and providing consistent institutional guidance about acceptable use. The rationale is straightforward: if the students most likely to engage with generative AI are those with the strongest grades and the greatest technology confidence, then leaving AI skills to develop informally risks widening a digital fluency gap between confident and hesitant learners, precisely the outcome an equitable higher education system would want to avoid.

The authors are careful to flag the limits of what their data can show. The research used a cross-sectional, correlational design and drew a non-probability sample from a single online university, which means the findings cannot establish that generative AI use causes stronger academic performance, and they should not be generalized to all college students. It is equally plausible that higher-performing, more tech-confident students are simply more willing to adopt the tools, or that the direction of the relationship runs the other way, or that unmeasured factors influence both use and performance. To untangle those possibilities, the authors recommend longitudinal and multi-institutional studies that track how patterns of generative AI use evolve over time and whether AI-supported learning affects longer-term academic outcomes.

Even with those caveats, the study arrives at a consequential moment. Universities worldwide are revising integrity policies, redesigning assessments and debating the role of AI in classrooms as adoption accelerates among students of every description. Evidence that frequent use among adult online learners is associated with stronger rather than weaker performance cuts against both alarmist bans and complacent embrace, and instead supports the more demanding path the authors propose: teaching students to use these tools thoughtfully, critically and ethically. Sylvester and Kulick previously presented findings from this research at the 2025 Association for Educational Communications and Technology International Convention, and a summary of that presentation, “Transforming Higher Education: Harnessing Generative AI for Student Engagement,” was subsequently published in The Journal of Applied Instructional Design, reflecting the team’s sustained effort to move the conversation about generative AI from panic and prohibition toward evidence-informed pedagogy. As the technology continues to evolve, studies of this kind, grounded in the actual behaviors of the students most affected, will be essential to ensuring that institutional policy keeps pace with classroom reality.

Subject of Research: Generative AI use and its association with academic performance and technology confidence among non-traditional undergraduate students in online higher education

Article Title: University of Phoenix study finds GenAI use among online adult learners associated with academic performance and technology confidence

Article References: University of Phoenix study finds GenAI use among online adult learners associated with academic performance and technology confidence. (n.d.). Original publication

Image Credits: AI Generated

DOI: Not provided

Keywords: generative AI, online education, adult learners, academic performance, technology confidence, AI literacy, academic integrity, higher education, non-traditional students, University of Phoenix, ChatGPT, educational technology

In the 2025 U.S. News rankings, UTA’s online master’s in education program stands out, achieving an impressive 15th position out of 313 educational institutions. This remarkable ranking sheds light on the university’s straightforward focus on elevating educational standards and its commitment to supporting various student demographics. Notably, programs designed specifically for military veterans and military-connected students witnessed significant improvement, rising to the fifth position, a notable leap from the previous year’s tenth position. This consistent success exemplifies how UTA is actively cultivating an inclusive environment for learners from diverse backgrounds.

Moreover, the College of Nursing and Health Innovation (CONHI) at UTA has also shown remarkable progress, with its online master’s in nursing programs climbing from 83rd to 65th place among 198 institutions. This advancement not only showcases the efficacy of UTA’s curriculum but also amplifies the college’s mission to prepare competent healthcare professionals to meet the demands of a dynamic healthcare landscape. CONHI’s nursing programs dedicated to veterans even climbed one position, securing the 18th rank, which reflects UTA’s ongoing commitment to support those who have served in the military.

UTA President Jennifer Cowley expressed pride in these rankings, highlighting them as a testament to the university’s unwavering dedication to academic excellence, innovation, and accessible education. She stated that the nursing and education programs are vital in fostering skilled professionals in Texas and beyond, thus addressing urgent workforce needs in the fields of education and healthcare. These achievements are indicative of UTA’s strategic initiatives to continuously enhance the quality of its online programs.

The design of UTA’s online educational offerings emphasizes flexibility, an important factor for many adult learners navigating complex life circumstances, such as careers and family obligations. By providing various online modalities, UTA empowers students at all stages of their educational journey to pursue their academic goals, accommodating their diverse lifestyles without requiring them to compromise other responsibilities. This strategic approach is vital, especially as the demand for skilled professionals in both education and healthcare continues to rise.

Furthermore, UTA’s College of Nursing and Health Innovation has solidified its reputation as a leader in online nursing education, with a history of excellence in producing well-prepared registered nurses. The college is recognized nationally for its size and impact, previously being designated as a National League for Nursing Center of Excellence several times. This accolade is awarded to institutions that display exceptional commitment to high-quality nursing education, underscoring the caliber of instruction delivered at UTA.

In remarks from Tamara L. Brown, provost and senior vice president for academic affairs, the importance of a world-class education was reiterated. She emphasized that UTA’s programs are meticulously crafted to cater to students’ needs, equipping them with the necessary knowledge and skills for leadership in their chosen fields. This is not merely an institutional mission; it is a heartfelt priority that resonates deeply within the academic and administrative community at UTA.

Situated in the bustling Dallas-Fort Worth Metroplex, the University of Texas at Arlington boasts a diverse student body of approximately 41,000 students. This demographic composition fosters a rich learning environment, combining various perspectives and experiences that enrich the educational experience. UTA is recognized not only for its academic prowess but also for its commitment to research and public service, making significant contributions to knowledge creation and dissemination.

Designated as a Carnegie R-1 institution with “Very High Research Activity,” UTA consistently strives for academic excellence while addressing pressing societal challenges. In addition, UTA has earned recognition as a Hispanic Serving Institution and an Asian American Native American Pacific Islander-Serving Institution, highlighting its dedication to promoting diversity and inclusion. Such distinctions highlight the university’s aim to further Latino student success, reflecting a broader commitment to serving a diverse student population.

The impact of UTA extends beyond its academic contributions; its approximately 270,000 alumni are making significant waves in various leadership roles across numerous Fortune 500 companies headquartered in North Texas. This extensive network demonstrates the university’s powerful role in shaping the future workforce, further contributing to the state’s thriving economy, estimated at an impact of $28.8 billion annually. Educational investments at UTA thus yield substantial dividends for both graduates and the broader community.

As UTA continues to innovate and enhance its online educational offerings, it sets a benchmark for other institutions aiming to provide quality education in an increasingly digitized world. By remaining attuned to the needs of its students, UTA showcases a model that harmonizes academic rigor with accessibility and support. The university’s achievements in the online arena are not just a reflection of current successes but a foundation for future growth and improvement that is poised to influence the higher education landscape for years to come.

In conclusion, UTA’s advancements in the 2025 U.S. News Rankings showcase the institution’s ongoing commitment to educational excellence and accessibility, particularly for online learners. As it continues to break barriers and set new standards in online education, UTA will undoubtedly remain a vital contributor to the academic and professional communities it serves. The focused attention on nurturing talent through innovative online education reflects wider trends towards flexibility and inclusivity in higher education—a critical evolution for educational institutions navigating the complexities of modern life.

Subject of Research: Online Education Advancements
Article Title: UTA Rises in Online Education Rankings
News Publication Date: October 2023
Web References: Not Available
References: Not Available
Image Credits: Photo courtesy UT Arlington

Keywords: Online education, UTA, nursing programs, education rankings, veterans education, higher education, academic excellence.