"...learning issues such as motivation, engagement, retention, learning performance and the problem with one-size-fits-all that can place students at risk require a solution to solve them."
Research conducted at Universiti Teknologi Malaysia sought to determine, through a case study of 50 undergards, if LA could provide meaningful intervention in areas of motivation, academic achievement, cognitive engagement and retention. The interventions were geared toward specific learning styles. They concluded that, when e-learning courses prioritize sound course design and structure and intervention is applied early for at-risk students (also identified through LA), the research is favorable across all measures.
"The walls bore cards for each student, with color codes and stickers, and some writing, that indicated demographic and academic information, such as gender, race, test scores, special education services and whether they had transferred schools."
In 2014 a school district in Topeka, KS (USD 501) was collecting data to determine how much of the student body qualified for free and reduced lunch. This is a data set required by law and the National School Lunch Act places heavy restrictions on who can access this data; many times, principals and teachers are denied this information on a student to student basis. The district gave some teachers and principals access to the confidential information and compiled it on notecards affixed to walls. The notecards were color coded to track other sensitive information including students' race and test scores. The school claimed this helped provide a snapshot of the student body.