Non-traditional learners, often balancing employment, caregiving, and academic responsibilities, now constitute a growing majority of students in higher education (National Center for Education Statistics, 2024). Although their persistence and retention are central to institutional effectiveness, the evidence base informing institutional responses remains fragmented and unevenly conceptualized. Guided by the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) framework for scoping reviews, this study synthesized empirical and conceptual literature published between 2013 and 2025 to map how persistence and retention among non-traditional students are defined, examined, and measured in online higher education (Hadie, 2024). Findings indicate a strong reliance on age- and employment-based definitions of non-traditional status, frequent use of composite outcome measures centered on persistence and institutional retention, and limited differentiation between student-level continuation and institution-level metrics. Analysis identified five interrelated thematic domains spanning instructional, learner, and institutional levels, with an emergent emphasis on technology- and AI-mediated practices. By producing a comprehensive evidence map, this review clarifies dominant patterns, methodological tendencies, and persistent gaps in the literature, offering direction for future research and institutional practice aimed at advancing educational equity and student success in online higher education. Keywords: Non-traditional students; online higher education; persistence and retention; scoping review; conceptualization and measurement; institutional practices; adult learners
This scoping review aims to provide an overview of the integration of generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) in tertiary health education, including its practical applications in tertiary health education programs and how these applications are perceived by stakeholders. A literature search was conducted in five databases, including Ovid Medline, Ovid Emcare, Scopus, CINAHL, and ERIC. Articles integrating GenAI in tertiary health disciplines were included. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews checklist was followed in the reporting of results. Overall, 20 studies were included and three categories were identified: 1) application of GenAI in tertiary health education, 2) perceptions of GenAI use in health education, and 3) ethical and responsible use of GenAI in health education. Currently, GenAI is being integrated as a complementary tool to automate academic tasks and improve the critical thinking skills of tertiary health students through optimizing class designs. Although GenAI applications were well-received by students due to high accessibility, concerns over misinformation, over-reliance, and data confidentiality were consistently flagged. The review identified a lack of formal AI literacy training, highlighting the need for structured AI literacy training modules and clear ethical guidelines to support tertiary health students in using GenAI. GenAI applications are being rapidly integrated into tertiary health education, primarily for automated grading/feedback and improvement of learning outcomes. Future research is recommended to investigate the long-term impacts of GenAI and how to implement AI literacy training in current tertiary health education programs.
This study explores different techniques for managing overlaps in second-order systematic reviews to highlight promising practices for open, distance, and digital education (ODDE) research. Second-order reviews, also known as overviews, provide unique evidence to better describe mean effects and assess their variability, but they also introduce new methodological challenges for quality control due to overlapping primary studies. Recent efforts to categorize and evaluate best practices for managing overlaps in other disciplines highlight significant inconsistencies in practice. As the frequency of ODDE systematic reviews and meta-analyses grows, there is a need to produce high-quality second-order studies to ensure policy makers can properly translate evidence into practice. Several leading overlap management methods are examined, including visualization tools such as citation matrices, bipartite citation networks, stacked bar charts, and intersection heatmaps; quantification tools such as corrected covered area (CCA), adjusted CCA and weighted CCA; decision-based and researcher-based approaches for resolving overlap. These approaches, largely developed in healthcare contexts, are illustrated using an existing dataset from a recent overview (Sun et al., 2025). CCA quantifies the degree of overlap among primary studies, while adjusted CCA further accounts for structural missingness arising when particular primary studies could not have been included in certain reviews because of differences in eligibility or timing. Although wCCA incorporates primary-study sample size into the assessment of overlap, it may be difficult to apply when information is unavailable. Existing thresholds for managing overlaps are largely based on practical guidance, lacking empirical evidence supporting specific cut-offs as decision thresholds.
Generative AI performs the analytical and evaluative tasks previously managed by learners, and the field has responded by designing scaffolds that restore monitoring. However, whether monitoring represents the primary site of regulatory failure remains untested. To address this, we conducted a systematic review and Epistemic Network Analysis (ENA) of 65 empirical studies (2022–2026). Using the published study as the unit of analysis, we examined the relational structures connecting instructional designs and regulatory processes rather than how often each is reported. The findings reveal three critical structural insights. First, no study taught learners the criteria required to evaluate AI outputs. While interventions frequently prompted learners to pause or explain, none provided evaluative standards, reflecting an implicit assumption that learners already possess adequate evaluation skills. Second, monitoring and evaluation are reported in 94% of studies, and in those reporting metacognitive laziness they are reported together with AI delegation while planning is reported apart from it. Planning is reported in most studies in both outcome groups, so the difference lies in which processes co-occur rather than in whether planning is reported at all. We describe this configuration as verification without criteria. Third, structural configurations vary by intervention timing. Instructor mediation, implemented prior to the first query, anchors delegation within a planning-oriented network, whereas in-task prompting alone isolates delegation from planning. We argue that the placement of friction rather than its amount determines whether verification has a standard, and that evaluative criteria should be established before the first AI query, a proposition this corpus has not tested.
This systematic review examines how learning in online environments and using online tools foster critical consciousness. A key tenet of critical and liberatory pedagogy - critical consciousness includes developing the skills to think critically about and take action to address structural inequities. Student participation in activities that foster critical consciousness are associated with higher academic, socio-emotional, and citizenship outcomes. However, there is limited documentation of critical consciousness raising online. Further, there is a risk that technology exacerbates rather than mitigates the long-standing inequities for individuals belonging to marginalized groups through embedded normative assumptions, algorithmic biases, and surveillance practices. Grounded in critical theory, we fill that gap and examine the strategies and components of critical consciousness fostered in online and blended learning environments across 96 studies published between 2010 and 2023. The most frequently observed critical consciousness raising strategy was students’ engagement with power, and the least documented one was enactment of change inside and outside the classroom. The online environments and tools provided several unique affordances and advantages to fostering critical consciousness online including digital content creation and sharing, critical media inquiry, online advocacy and community participation, digital cultural repositories simulations, and cross-cultural collaborations. Findings from this systematic review study highlight best practices within online teacher training, professional development, instructional design, and policy to support the enactment of liberatory pedagogy online that both inspires the mind and transforms communities.
