LEARNING TRAJECTORIES OF INCLUSIVE LEARNERS IN AN INTENSIVE PEER-TO-PEER LEARNING ENVIRONMENT: POOL-TO-MAIN-TRACK TRANSITION AND PERSISTENCE
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.23218662Abstract
This article examines the learning trajectories of inclusive learners in an intensive digital learning environment based on peer-to-peer interaction, project-based progression, and the absence of traditional instructors. The study covers the period from November 2024 to May 2026 and includes 24 learners identified by the campus as belonging to the inclusive group, together with non-inclusive peers from the same pool and main-track cohorts. The quantitative phase of a sequential explanatory mixed-methods design integrates administrative pool snapshots, main-track rosters, and platform profile data. Pool-to-main-track transition rates were compared using Fisher’s exact test; proportions were reported with Wilson 95% confidence intervals; and within-group platform indicators for inclusive learners were examined using the Mann–Whitney U test. The aggregate transition rate was 54.5% for inclusive learners and 74.7% for non-inclusive peers, representing a statistically significant difference (p = 0.046). Main-track deactivation rates did not differ significantly between the groups (23.1% vs. 16.5%; p = 0.46). The findings indicate that meaningful inclusion in intensive peer-driven education requires not only open access but also accessible peer-review channels, inclusive group interaction, and flexible learning design.Keywords
inclusive education, peer-to-peer learning, coding bootcamp, learning trajectories, main track, Fisher’s exact test, Universal Design for Learning, persistenceReferences
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2019). Reflecting on reflexive thematic analysis. Qualitative Research in Sport, Exercise and Health, 11(4), 589–597. DOI: 10.1080/2159676X.2019.1628806.
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2021). One size fits all? What counts as quality practice in (reflexive) thematic analysis? Qualitative Research in Psychology, 18(3), 328–352. DOI: 10.1080/14780887.2020.1769238.
CAST. (2018). Universal Design for Learning Guidelines version 2.2. Wakefield, MA: CAST.
Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2018). Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods Research (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
Hattie, J. (2009). Visible Learning: A Synthesis of Over 800 Meta-Analyses Relating to Achievement. London: Routledge. 392 p. book/9780415476188
Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T., & Smith, K. A. (2014). Cooperative learning: Improving university instruction by basing practice on validated theory. Journal on Excellence in College Teaching, 25(3–4), 85–118.
Meyer, A., Rose, D. H., & Gordon, D. (2014). Universal Design for Learning: Theory and Practice. Wakefield, MA: CAST Professional Publishing. 200 p. ISBN: 978-0-9898674-0-5.
Salleh, N., Mendes, E., & Grundy, J. (2011). Empirical studies of pair programming for CS/SE teaching in higher education: A systematic literature review. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 37(4), 509–525. DOI: 10.1109/TSE.2010.59.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 MUHANDISLIK VA IQTISODIYOT

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

