Exploring Adaptive, Adaptable, Mixed, and Static Arabic Rule-Based Chatbot Effects on Usability, Learning Success, and Engagement
Source abstract
Abstract
Personalized e-learning emphasizes a learner-centered instruction approach by adapting educational content to individual needs. This study empirically evaluates three personalization methods (adaptive, adaptable, and mixed) alongside a non-personalized static method, implemented within Moalemy, an Arabic rule-based educational chatbot. A 4 × 3 within-subjects experiment involving 52 students across three levels of task difficulty (easy, medium, and hard) was performed to examine usability, learner engagement, and learning outcomes as key indicators of user experience in educational chatbots. Results showed no statistically significant differences in learning gain or relative learning gain across the four methods, indicating comparable effectiveness in supporting learning success. Engagement differed significantly by method, with the adaptable approach obtaining the highest scores. Descriptive usability results further suggested that the adaptable method achieved numerically higher scores in SUS, efficiency, and effectiveness under lower task difficulty, while static and adaptive showed comparatively stronger tendencies at higher levels. However, these patterns represent exploratory trends rather than statistically confirmed performance advantages. This study provides a controlled comparison of system-driven, learner-driven, shared-control, and non-personalization strategies in an Arabic e-learning context, offering empirical insights into how different learning methods influence usability, learning success, and engagement within Arabic educational chatbots.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: AI in Service Interactions · Intelligent Tutoring Systems and Adaptive Learning · Innovative Teaching and Learning Methods
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Department of Information Systems, Faculty of Computing and Information Technology, King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah 21589, Saudi Arabia
References (58)
Show source-provided references
1. Christodoulou, A., and Angeli, C. (2022). Adaptive Learning Techniques for a Personalized Educational Software in Developing Teachers’ Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge. Front. Educ., 7.10.3389/feduc.2022.789397 ↗
2. Systematic Review of Adaptive Learning Technology for Learning in Higher Education
3. Acuna, G.E., Alvarez, L.A., Miraflores, J., and Samonte, M.J. (2021, January 4–7). Towards the Development of an Adaptive E-Learning System with Chatbot Using Personalized E-Learning Model. Proceedings of the 2021 the 7th International Conference on Frontiers of Educational Technologies, Bangkok, Thailand.10.1145/3473141.3473236 ↗
4. Adaptive E-Learning AI-Powered Chatbot Based on Multimedia Indexing
5. Bio-Inspiring Learning Style Chatbot Inventory Using Brain Computing Interface to Increase the Efficiency of E-Learning10.1109/ACCESS.2020.2984591 ↗
6. Blas, N.D., Lodi, L., Paolini, P., Pernici, B., Renzi, F., and Rooein, D. (2019, January 16–19). Data Driven Chatbots: A New Approach to Conversational Applications. Proceedings of the 27th Italian Symposium on Advanced Database, Castiglione della Pescaia, Italy.
7. Implementation of an Educational Chatbot Using Rasa Framework10.35940/ijitee.G9189.0811922 ↗
8. Intelligent and Interactive Chatbot Based on the Recommendation Mechanism to Reach Personalized Learning10.4018/IJICTE.315596 ↗
9. Ruan, S., Willis, A., Xu, Q., Davis, G.M., Jiang, L., Brunskill, E., and Landay, J.A. (2019, January 24–25). BookBuddy: Turning Digital Materials Into Interactive Foreign Language Lessons Through a Voice Chatbot. Proceedings of the Sixth (2019) ACM Conference on Learning @ Scale, Chicago, IL, USA.10.1145/3330430.3333643 ↗
10. Wambsganss, T., Kueng, T., Soellner, M., and Leimeister, J.M. (2021, January 8–13). ArgueTutor: An Adaptive Dialog-Based Learning System for Argumentation Skills. Proceedings of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Yokohama, Japan.10.1145/3411764.3445781 ↗
11. Ruan, S., Jiang, L., Xu, Q., Liu, Z., Davis, G.M., Brunskill, E., and Landay, J.A. (2021, January 14–17). EnglishBot: An AI-Powered Conversational System for Second Language Learning. Proceedings of the 26th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces, College Station, TX, USA.10.1145/3397481.3450648 ↗
12. Vladova, G., Rüdian, L.S., Haase, J., and Pinkwart, N. (2019, January 11). Educational Chatbot with Learning Avatar for Personalization. Proceedings of the AMCIS 2019, Cancun, Mexico.
13. Personalization of E-Learning Process Using AI-Powered Chatbot Integration10.1007/978-3-030-58124-4_20 ↗
14. Al Faia, D., and Alomar, K. (2025). Evaluating Learning Success, Engagement, and Usability of Moalemy: An Arabic Rule-Based Chatbot. Future Internet, 17.10.3390/fi17100449 ↗
15. Al-Omar, K., and Rigas, D. (2009, January 28–30). Static, Adaptive, Adaptable, and Mixed-Initiative Approaches in e- Commerce: Controllability and Customisation. Proceedings of the 11th WSEAS International Conference on Mathematical Methods and Computational Techniques in Electrical Engineering, Athens, Greece.
16. Aziz, A.S., Taie, S.A., and El-Khoribi, R.A. (2020, January 8–9). The Relation Between the Learner Characteristics and Adaptation Techniques in the Adaptive E-Learning Systems. Proceedings of the 2020 International Conference on Innovative Trends in Communication and Computer Engineering (ITCE), Aswan, Egypt.10.1109/ITCE48509.2020.9047766 ↗
17. Systematic Review of Adaptive Learning Research Designs, Context, Strategies, and Technologies from 2009 to 201810.1007/s11423-020-09793-2 ↗
18. Personalized Adaptive Learning in Higher Education: A Scoping Review of Key Characteristics and Impact on Academic Performance and Engagement10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e39630 ↗
19. The Relationship between System-Provided Learner Control and Maintained Situational Interest Within e-Learning Courses10.1108/ITSE-12-2017-0062 ↗
20. The Impact of an Adaptive E-Course on Students’ Achievements Based on the Students’ Prior Knowledge10.1007/s10639-020-10125-3 ↗
21. Using Chatbots to Support Student Goal Setting and Social Presence in Fully Online Activities: Learner Engagement and Perceptions10.1007/s12528-022-09338-x ↗
22. LANA-I: An Arabic Conversational Intelligent Tutoring System for Children with ASD10.1007/978-3-030-22871-2_34 ↗
23. An Adaptation Algorithm for an Intelligent Natural Language Tutoring System10.1016/j.compedu.2013.09.014 ↗
24. Online Chat and Chatbots to Enhance Mature Student Engagement in Higher Education10.1080/02601370.2022.2066213 ↗
25. School Engagement: Potential of the Concept, State of the Evidence10.3102/00346543074001059 ↗
26. Measuring Student Engagement in Technology-Mediated Learning: A Review10.1016/j.compedu.2015.09.005 ↗
27. Experimentation for Chatbot Usability Evaluation: A Secondary Study10.1109/ACCESS.2022.3145323 ↗
28. Usability Meanings and Interpretations in ISO Standards10.1023/A:1025869312943 ↗
29. Radziwill, N., and Benton, M. (2017). Evaluating Quality of Chatbots and Intelligent Conversational Agents. arXiv.
30. (2018). Ergonomics of Human-System Interaction. Part 11: Usability: Definitions and Concepts (Standard No. ISO 9241-11: 2018).
31. Alabbas, A., and Alomar, K. (2025). A Weighted Composite Metric for Evaluating User Experience in Educational Chatbots: Balancing Usability, Engagement, and Effectiveness. Future Internet, 17.10.3390/fi17020064 ↗
32. Hobert, S. (2019). How Are You, Chatbot? Evaluating Chatbots in Educational Settings—Results of a Literature Review, Gesellschaft für Informatik e.V.
33. Brooke, J. (1996). SUS—A Quick and Dirty Usability Scale, CRC Press.
34. Mining LMS Data to Develop an “Early Warning System” for Educators: A Proof of Concept10.1016/j.compedu.2009.09.008 ↗
35. Exploring Indicators of Engagement in Online Learning as Applied to Adolescent Health Prevention: A Pilot Study of REAL Media10.1007/s11423-020-09813-1 ↗
36. Adaptive E-Learning Environment Based on Learning Styles and Its Impact on Development Students’ Engagement10.1186/s41239-021-00289-4 ↗
37. A Model of Adaptive E-Learning in an ODL Environment10.22581/muet1982.1802.13 ↗
38. The Design and Implementation of an Educational Chatbot with Personalized Adaptive Learning Features for Project Management Training10.1007/s10758-024-09807-5 ↗
39. Development of an artificial intelligence-supported chatbot as an interactive learning platform in stem education: Exploring usability and student experience10.33225/jbse/25.24.878 ↗
40. NgodingSeru.Com: An Adaptive e-Learning System with Gamification to Enhance Programming Problem-Solving Skills for Vocational High School Students10.1007/s44217-025-00581-9 ↗
41. Generative AI Chatbots in Higher Education: A Review of an Emerging Research Area10.1007/s10734-024-01288-w ↗
42. Role of AI Chatbots in Education: Systematic Literature Review10.1186/s41239-023-00426-1 ↗
43. Brookhart, S.M., and McMillan, J.H. (2019). Classroom Assessment and Educational Measurement, Routledge. [1st ed.].10.4324/9780429507533 ↗
44. Crocker, L., and Algina, J. (1986). Introduction to Classical and Modern Test Theory.
45. Sample Size in Usability Studies10.1145/2133806.2133824 ↗
46. Caine, K. (2016, January 7). Local Standards for Sample Size at CHI. Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, San Jose, CA, USA.10.1145/2858036.2858498 ↗
47. Within-Subjects Designs: To Use or Not To Use?10.1037/0033-2909.83.2.314 ↗
48. Alvarez, L., Carrupt, R., Audrin, C., and Gay, P. (2022). Self-Reported Flow in Online Learning Environments for Teacher Education: A Quasi-Experimental Study Using a Counterbalanced Design. Educ. Sci., 12.10.3390/educsci12050351 ↗
49. The Interplay of Beauty, Goodness, and Usability in Interactive Products10.1207/s15327051hci1904_2 ↗
50. Current Practice in Measuring Usability: Challenges to Usability Studies and Research10.1016/j.ijhcs.2005.06.002 ↗
51. Latham, A.M. (2011). Personalising Learning with Dynamic Prediction and Adaptation to Learning Styles in a Conversational Intelligent Tutoring System. [Ph.D. Thesis, Manchester Metropolitan University].
52. The Relative Effectiveness of Human Tutoring, Intelligent Tutoring Systems, and Other Tutoring Systems10.1080/00461520.2011.611369 ↗
53. Artificial Intelligence in Education: An Automatic Rule-Based Chatbot to Generate Guidance from Lecture Recordings
54. Belfer, R., Kochmar, E., and Serban, I.V. (2022). Raising Student Completion Rates with Adaptive Curriculum and Contextual Bandits, Springer.10.1007/978-3-031-11644-5_74 ↗
55. Wu, Y., Edwards, J., Cooney, O., Bleakley, A., Doyle, P.R., Clark, L., Rough, D., and Cowan, B.R. (2020, January 22). Mental Workload and Language Production in Non-Native Speaker IPA Interaction. Proceedings of the 2nd Conference on Conversational User Interfaces, Bilbao, Spain.10.1145/3405755.3406118 ↗
56. You Talkin’ to Me? A Practical Attention-Aware Embodied Agent10.1007/978-3-030-29387-1_44 ↗
57. Artificial Intelligence Chatbot for Depression: Descriptive Study of Usage10.2196/17065 ↗
58. Advantages and Constraints of a Hybrid Model K-12 E-Learning Assistant Chatbot10.1109/ACCESS.2020.2988252 ↗