211 Research Article 2023 41(2): 211-232 https://doi.org/10.38140/pie.v41i2.7088 Published by the UFS http://journals.ufs.ac.za/index.php/pie © Creative Commons With Attribution (CC-BY) Technology-mediated advising for student success: Exploring self- mediated academic support for undergraduate students using AutoScholar Advisor System Abstract This article explores the use of the AutoScholar Advisor System (Auto-Ad) to provide useful learning support analytics for self- mediated student academic support. The study is part of a pilot project for enhancing student success in a four-year undergraduate degree (BEd) programme. Adopting students’ self-authorship as an organising framework and using the Auto-Ad implemented on the learning management platform, the study involved 200 high- performing undergraduate students (cum laude or summa cum laude trajectory) in a School of Education at one university. A mixed-methods approach was used to collect and analyse the data. Quantitative data were analysed based on the students’ interaction with the Auto-Ad as academic learning support tool to enhance their performance through automated advising. Qualitative open-ended comments allowing in-depth insight into the students’ perceptions of their performance were also analysed. The students considered knowledge, self, and relationship to be important for achieving high performance and success. The strongest correlated factors were choice of degree, motivation, study habits, family, and relationships. Implications of these findings within the current student support systems at South African universities are discussed. 1. Introduction Digital technology applications create possibilities for supporting students beyond traditional learning support boundaries. Learning support involves using resources and appropriate strategies to aid student learning. Support practices, including academic support, can shift to acknowledge increasingly students’ active agency in their learning. Academic support refers broadly to strategies educational institutions use to increase student academic achievement, particularly for those who are at risk of poor performance (Peterson, O’Connor & Strawhun, 2014). To inform this shift in learning support and to understand and AUTHOR: Samukelisiwe Khumalo1 Randhir Rawatlal1 Victor Nnadozie1 Ashnie Mahadew1 Cedric Bheki Mpungose1 Phakamile Mazibuko1 AFFILIATION: 1University of KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa DOI: https://doi.org/10.38140/ pie.v41i2.7088 e-ISSN 2519-593X Perspectives in Education 2023 41(2): 211-232 PUBLISHED: 30 June 2023 RECEIVED: 19 May 2022 ACCEPTED: 18 May 2023 https://doi.org/10.38140/pie.v41i2.7088 http://www.statssa.gov.za/?p=11341 http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/530481521735906534/Overcoming-Poverty-and-Inequality-in-South-Africa-An-Assessment-of-Drivers-Constraints-and-Opportunities http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/530481521735906534/Overcoming-Poverty-and-Inequality-in-South-Africa-An-Assessment-of-Drivers-Constraints-and-Opportunities http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/530481521735906534/Overcoming-Poverty-and-Inequality-in-South-Africa-An-Assessment-of-Drivers-Constraints-and-Opportunities https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1568-2652 https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8866-9678 https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8707-8403 https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5014-7890 https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9828-8599 https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0393-5448 https://doi.org/10.38140/pie.v41i2.7088 2122023 41(2): 212-232 https://doi.org/10.38140/pie.v41i2.7088 Perspectives in Education 2023: 41(2) enhance student success better, there is a need for the adoption of multi-modal (Blikstein & Worsley, 2016) and academic (Schumacher & Ifenthaler, 2018; Ifenthaler, 2017; 2015; Siemens & Long, 2011) learning analytics by the university. However, there is a need for caution in implementing learning analytics data in higher education (Larrabee Sønderlund, Hughes & Smith, 2019). The notion of student success in higher education is complex (Kuh et al., 2006; Scott, 2018; Tinto, 2012; Tiroyabone & Strydom, 2021; Kahu & Nelson, 2018), and therefore context-nuanced academic support strategies are needed to target outcomes in student success metrics better, namely self-efficacy, academic performance, persistence, retention, and completion (Soika, 2021). In South Africa, universities face significant shortfalls in achieving student success (Mabokela & Mlambo, 2017). There is, therefore, a growing emphasis nationally (Bokana & Tewari, 2014) and within individual institutions on understanding the context and complexity of the student success problem, to support student experiences, and to enhance student success in their programmes of study (Tiroyabone & Strydom, 2021; Fataar, 2018; USAf, 2018; Dhunpath & Subbaye, 2018; Strydom, Kuh & Mentz, 2010). In addition, the issues of inclusion (Kruss, 2017) and equity gaps in students’ education, experiences, and outcomes need to be addressed (Cosser, 2018; Notshulwana, 2011). The view of student success in the current study is informed by the position of the Council on Higher Education (CHE) as it involves enhancement of student learning to increase the “number of graduates that are personally, professionally, and socially valuable” (CHE, 2014: 1). In this article, we approach student success from the perspective of academic support and aim to assess in order to understand how students engage and the positive outcomes of such engagement (Soika, 2021). Two definitions were proposed for the study. Initially, cum laude and summa cum laude students were identified. These are students in the programme who have completed at least their first year and have not failed any examination or failed to achieve progression requirements, while maintaining a cumulative aggregate of at least 75% in all registered modules. Then, because this definition delimits a relatively small group of students, it evolved to include improvement in the credit weighted average (CRW) of students’ module results. The first section of this article reviews student success in higher education to problematise approaches to supporting student success at South African universities. Further, it identifies reasons why a new lens for exploring success is needed and the usefulness of technology- mediated advising to evidence-informed learning support within the context of the study. Next, self-authorship (Baxter Magolda, 2008; Perez, 2019), the underpinning theoretical framework guiding the research, is discussed. The following section describes the methodology, explaining how the participants were identified by means of performance tracking using the AutoScholar Advisor System (Auto-Ad.). The Auto-Ad was used in this study since it is a system “designed to automate and optimise … higher education process toward increased graduation rate” (Modern Scholarship, 2023). The next section illustrates the data generated using the Auto-Ad, which is specifically designed around the project methods to analyse the quantitative research survey, and then analyses qualitative comments on success factors. The last section elaborates on the implications of the findings, reflects on the limitations, offers recommendations for further research, and concludes with a summary of the key findings. https://doi.org/10.38140/pie.v41i2.7088 2132023 41(2): 213-232 https://doi.org/10.38140/pie.v41i2.7088 Khumalo, et al. Technology-mediated advising for student success 2. Student success in higher education Globally, student success continues to interest higher education researchers, practitioners, and institutions. This is because of its importance to the student experience (Raaper, Brown & Llewellyn 2022), student outcomes (Guo et al., 2022), and institutional sustainability (Sanches et al., 2022), among other considerations. Wood and Breyer (2017: 3) identify three stakeholders for success in higher education, namely the individual, the institution, and national and global stakeholders. These are attributed success factors and tend to overlap (Wood & Breyer, 2017). Attempts to define student success have recently emphasised a greater need for positioning the students as an important stakeholder at the centre of their learning (Bloch et al., 2022). There is a shift from a fundamental definition viewing student success as access to and completion of higher education qualifications (Wood & Breyer, 2017) to looking beyond graduation. In addition to completion of the qualification requirements (Kuh et al., 2006), other facets of student success have been emphasised, including career aspirations (Atkins & Ebdon, 2014), quality of student experiences and engagement (Kinzie & Kuh, 2017). The role that context plays in shaping students’ educational experiences matters (Henderson & Cunningham, 2023). Therefore, an expanded definition of student success does not only account for qualification attainment, but also includes other outcomes and aspects of educational experiences (Alyahyan & Düştegör, 2020). An expanded definition of student success is necessary to provide insight into what contributes to graduation or completion and into the actions that can improve student performance, progression, and success. Hence, a measure of student success in higher education includes a combination of engagement, retention, progression, attainment, and completion indicators (Alyahyan & Düştegör, 2020). In the present study, we operationalise student success in terms of student academic support as indicated in the measure of how students engage, and the positive outcomes of that engagement (Soika, 2021). Discussion on student success in higher education needs to consider the students’ backgrounds. It must address equity issues as well as other imperatives influencing the desired students’ educational outcomes (McNair et al., 2022). In South Africa, a sizeable population of university students come from educational and social environments that are still marginalised (McGhie, 2012). Even though some of these students receive government funding for their education, primarily through the National Students Financial Aid Scheme (NSFAS), their socio-economic circumstances limit the effectiveness of this support in promoting retention, persistence, and success, and in preventing dropouts (Masutha, 2022). Students experience university differently (Fataar, 2018), and for some, vulnerabilities may be supported by the deficit model of student support and reinforced by speculative rather than insightful guided academic advising (NACADA, 2003). There is a risk of downplaying intersecting exclusionary structures (Masutha, 2022) and cultural factors that block opportunities for student learning. Lemmens and Henn (2016) suggest that data analytics are necessary to support evidence- informed practices in South African higher education. One use of data analytics could be to enable insight into students’ perceptions of the positive factors that influence their success and enable a better understanding of their mindsets (Pride, 2014). Data analytics can also lead to positioning students as crucial agents in their learning, motivating them to aim for high performance and success (Talbi & Ouared, 2022; Ifenthaler & Yau, 2020). https://doi.org/10.38140/pie.v41i2.7088 2142023 41(2): 214-232 https://doi.org/10.38140/pie.v41i2.7088 Perspectives in Education 2023: 41(2) 3. A critical overview of the approach to supporting student success within a South African university context Students at South African universities have differing educational experiences (Fataar, 2018). Coming from stratified social, economic and schooling backgrounds, they continue along different pathways in higher education (Cosser, 2018). The academic support system tends to be normative, prioritising pre-1997 student deficit concepts of academic development (Volbrecht & Boughey, 2004). This undermines the development of student agency (Nnadozie & Khumalo, 2023). While various approaches have been implemented to improve student success (Scott, 2018), what these have in common is the pursuit of helping students to pass by dealing with disadvantages through financial and remedial support. Perhaps what is lacking is an approach to support that focuses on students’ experiences of normalising success in ‘being’ and ‘doing’ by themselves. An approach to understanding and supporting students’ success needs to be empowering, allowing them to recognise and draw on their strengths, to understand their support needs, and to enact agency for meeting such needs. Various scholars (Blair, Campbell & Duffy, 2017; Menkor et al., 2021; Strayhorn, 2018) suggest that multi-pronged strategies allow for a holistic view of success, including experiences of academic success, student well-being, and a sense of belonging. Such strategies require data-driven methods to inform an understanding of the influences on students’ success and supporting student success. 4. Reimagining the approach to supporting student success There is a call for a change in the discourse on improving student success in higher education. Thus, for example, Wood and Breyer (2017) see the move to discussing success and retention rather than failure and attrition as an aspect of this change. Van den Bogaard and Zijlstra (2016: 7) advocate applying meaningful ways by developing “new methods and a new discourse to understand the complex issues of student success”. They argue that there is a need to look beyond one-size-fits-all ‘best practices’ to adopt a solution for specific situations using emergent practices that emphasise co-creative solutions (Van den Bogaard & Zijlstra, 2016). Citing Dorst (2015), they also suggest that a new discourse of student success in higher education should allow for reframing to study “‘student success’ and the related concepts such as … what does ‘success’ mean, … what other solutions and approaches can we think of when we do not consider our fixed ideas …” (Van den Bogaard & Zijlstra, 2016: 7). Such calls for reframing the discourse of student success have prompted the use of the lens of performance and strength in the present study, as opposed to the dominant approach focusing on failure and deficit. 5. Technology-mediated learning support for student success Increasingly, it has been shown that the integration of technology with innovation in the educational process involves the student taking on a central role in learning (Jokhan et al., 2022). Research in South Africa (Cele, 2021) highlights the relevance of data-driven student support mechanisms at universities. Data-driven student academic support using automated advising mediation can elicit active engagement of the student. In exploring meditation as a pedagogical practice, Riofrío-Calderón and Ramírez-Montoya (2022: 2) cite Tobon et al. (2018) to explain mediation as a “process of supporting another person, team, or community https://doi.org/10.38140/pie.v41i2.7088 2152023 41(2): 215-232 https://doi.org/10.38140/pie.v41i2.7088 Khumalo, et al. Technology-mediated advising for student success to solve problems … through continuous feedback”. The Auto-Ad facilitates student optimal performance and success through mediation within the social learning environment in engagements with peers, advisors and lecturers. 6. Students’ role and enhancing their success at university The ability of individual students to navigate their learning at university is critical for success. Yang and Li (2020) note that students play a greater role in their success than any other stakeholders. Korobova and Starobin (2015) explain that students contribute to their success through engagement. Students’ ability to navigate their learning as major role players can change their educational outcomes. Support that recognises the student’s active agency as an important contributor to success entails drawing on their strengths and their positive attitudes regarding their own success and that of peers. According to Pizzolato and Ozaki (2007: 197), self-authorship can be useful as a lens to explore student success, because it allows for an understanding consistent with the socially constructed nature of knowledge (cognitive), own beliefs, values, and goals (intrapersonal), and the belief of others (interpersonal). 7. Theoretical framework: Self-authorship Self-authorship enables the use of social, emotional, and cognitive dimensions for understanding students’ agency. Citing Magolda (1998), Johnson (2013: 4) defines self- authorship as “the ability to collect, interpret, and analyse information and reflect on one’s own beliefs in order to form judgments”. Baxter Magolda (2004) further expounds on the cognitive, intrapersonal, and interpersonal dimensions of self-authorship in terms of the stages of its development. Thus, the student’s agency in balancing social factors with a strong sense of self-knowledge underpins their positive attitude. The cognitive, intrapersonal, and interpersonal stages of the development of student self- authorship start first with the cognitive dissonance that occurs as students find themselves beginning to seek acceptance while at the same time trying to balance their own beliefs with societal expectations (Strayhorn, 2014). In the second stage, students begin to develop as the authors of their lives (Pizzolato & Ozaki, 2007), moving away from normative ways of thinking and doing. The last stage involves the acquisition of the internal foundations (Baxter Magolda, 2008) which guide individual actions through an established set of internally derived principles. Self-authorship implies that the student develops a certain agency to act. There is recognition of self, strength, and capability of action. Self-authorship also entails learning to become the author of one’s own life, enabling change through the development of a strong internal foundation to guide actions (Baxter Magolda, 2008). Students make informed choices and decisions in relation to academic performance. Hence self-authorship enables the student to navigate their identity, own beliefs, and external influences in the negotiation of their academic success. It is possible in higher education to use context-relevant support initiatives to enhance the student self-authorship, allowing them to enable the development of a strong internal foundation to guide their actions. At South African universities, with high attrition and low completion rates (Cosser, 2018), support initiatives can be most important means to encourage students to draw on their experiences and strengths to self-motivate engagement (Kinzie & Kuh, 2017), improve performance, and aim for a positive outcome (Soika, 2021). https://doi.org/10.38140/pie.v41i2.7088 2162023 41(2): 216-232 https://doi.org/10.38140/pie.v41i2.7088 Perspectives in Education 2023: 41(2) 8. Study site/project background The study was conducted in the School of Education at a public university in South Africa as a project entitled ‘Student academic success: enhancing potential cum laude and summa cum laude students’ self-authorship’, a sub-project of the main project, “What are the factors that influence student success with the university?” Khoza (2020) suggests that student poor academic performance and disengagement from programme of study at South African universities is linked to a lack of adequate academic support. However, even where support is available, deficit discourses, diminishing a meaningful focus on students’ strengths, still permeate institutionally structured support systems. To improve the students’ support experiences and enhance their success, the Auto- Ad predictive (Yang et al., 2020) and visualisation analytics features (Ifenthaler & Yau, 2020) include online curriculum mapping, academic progress tracking, and automated advising. 9. Methodology Online invitations to participate in the study were sent to 842 potential cum laude and summa cum laude undergraduate students in the BEd programme. The students were identified by means of analysis of students’ records from the university’s Institutional Intelligence and comprised 382 students in their second year of study, 265 in the third year, and 191 in the fourth year. The representative population had completed their first year of study. This means that they would have developed attributes in their learning and would also have understood the nature of success enablers and barriers. Because the population came from differing levels of study and diverse backgrounds, the heterogenous purposive sampling method (Etikan, Musa & Alkassim, 2016) was utilised to select the 200 respondents in the study. This is appropriate for ensuring that participants represent the diverse composition for maximal variation (Creswell & Clark, 2017) and data variability. The data were collected via the Auto-Ad (see Figure 5 below). The questionnaire yielded a response rate of 23.7% of the distributed questionnaire population. The results were analysed using the Auto-Ad (see Figures 6 and 7 below). The Pollster analysis feature of the Auto-Ad was used to correlate the student performance data (student average pass rate, mean) with each of the questionnaire responses. The data analysis is based on the Pearson R coefficient value, where the R-value was calculated between the Extent of Agreement for a given statement and the student CRW. A value closer to 1 or -1 indicates a relatively high correlation between the agreement with a statement and student performance. All information relating to the participant identity was anonymised in compliance with the ethical approval for the study. 10. Data analysis and interpretation of results 10.1 Tracking and advising cum laude trajectory students In the tracking process, the Auto-Ad enabled four views represented here as Views A-D in Figures 1, 2, 3 and 4 below. The Auto-Ad automated advising view, shown in Figure 4, was embedded within the university Student Central portal. In A, the Specifications View, as Figure 1 shows, a user may specify the criteria for cum laude and summa cum laude, with respect to the broader institution policy as well as the individual programme-specific rules, for example, performance in capstone modules. Once the specification is complete, it becomes possible for the system to determine whether students are on track for a particular class of degree. In the figures below, student names and numbers are encrypted by applying anonymisation hashing in compliance with the privacy of information protocols. https://doi.org/10.38140/pie.v41i2.7088 2172023 41(2): 217-232 https://doi.org/10.38140/pie.v41i2.7088 Khumalo, et al. Technology-mediated advising for student success Figure 1: Cum laude specifications View: A https://doi.org/10.38140/pie.v41i2.7088 2182023 41(2): 218-232 https://doi.org/10.38140/pie.v41i2.7088 Perspectives in Education 2023: 41(2) In B, the Cum Laude Identification View, illustrated in Figure 2, the Auto-Ad provides a report that shows the number of students in the categories summa/cum laude/completed/not completed. It also shows each semester’s CRW for each student and compliance with cum laude criteria, with specific reasons for the classification. The class of pass is also shown. Figure 2: Cum laude identification View: B https://doi.org/10.38140/pie.v41i2.7088 2192023 41(2): 219-232 https://doi.org/10.38140/pie.v41i2.7088 Khumalo, et al. Technology-mediated advising for student success In C, the Student Potential View, the Auto-Ad focuses on the class of degree for students who have already missed the cum laude classification. In contrast to the cum laude requirements, the class of degree (e.g. first class, upper second class) can improve when student performance improves. For example, a student who underperforms in an earlier year of study is on track to graduate with a third-class degree; if the student’s performance improves in subsequent years, this may improve to second or even first class. The Student Potential View indicates which class of degree the student will currently earn and what CRW should be achieved to attain a better class at the final graduation. Unfortunately, most students are not aware of their current class of graduation and would not easily calculate what is required to improve on this. By making students aware at each stage of the current status and the requirements for improving, the Auto-Ad motivates them to make stronger efforts. Figure 3: Cum Laude Student Potential View: C The Student Nudging View (View D) coordinates with the Student Potential View (View C) to give a student more specific advice. Although View C gives broad performance improvement advice, it may not be specific enough to direct student activity. In View D, however, the Auto- Ad calculates the requirement in each of the student’s current modules to determine what https://doi.org/10.38140/pie.v41i2.7088 2202023 41(2): 220-232 https://doi.org/10.38140/pie.v41i2.7088 Perspectives in Education 2023: 41(2) performance must be achieved in the remaining assessments. Since certain assessments in the modules in the current semester have already been completed, the remaining assessments will have to earn above a certain minimum level if the student wants to graduate with a higher class of degree. This level will differ from module to module, based on what the student has achieved in the assessments. Figure 4: Student Nudging View; View D The Student Nudging View, as shown in Figure 4 above, gives the student a clearer view of what is needed to achieve a higher class of pass. To further understand what supports their high performance and success, and with a view to enhancing their performance at full potential, an online survey questionnaire was administered to the students at the end of Semester One of 2022. The questionnaire instrument included close and open-ended questions as Figure 5 below shows (see link to questionnaire: https:// modernscholarship.org/CumLaudeQuestionnaire/). https://doi.org/10.38140/pie.v41i2.7088 https://modernscholarship.org/CumLaudeQuestionnaire/ https://modernscholarship.org/CumLaudeQuestionnaire/ 2212023 41(2): 221-232 https://doi.org/10.38140/pie.v41i2.7088 Khumalo, et al. Technology-mediated advising for student success Figure 5: Cum laude and summa cum laude trajectory questionnaire https://doi.org/10.38140/pie.v41i2.7088 2222023 41(2): 222-232 https://doi.org/10.38140/pie.v41i2.7088 Perspectives in Education 2023: 41(2) 11. Results and findings Figure 6 below shows the strongest most positively correlated factors are (a) choice of study and degree of motivation (b) study habits. Figure 6: Most positively correlated factors to cum laude and summa cum laude students’ high performance and success The open-ended questions further interrogated the students’ responses regarding influencing factors. The most positively correlated comments are presented verbatim in examples shown in Figure 7 below. Figure 7: Most positively correlated comments on cum laude and summa cum laude students’ high performance and success https://doi.org/10.38140/pie.v41i2.7088 2232023 41(2): 223-232 https://doi.org/10.38140/pie.v41i2.7088 Khumalo, et al. Technology-mediated advising for student success As illustrated in Figure 8 below, the strongest most negatively correlated factors are shown as home environment and relationship. What did not appear include (a) institution-related factors, (b) financial stress, (c) involvement in extra-mural activities, and (d) friends. Figure 8: Most negatively correlated factors to cum laude and summa cum laude students’ high performance and success The most negatively correlated comments on cum laude and summa cum laude students’ high performance and success are presented verbatim in the examples shown in Figure 9 below. Figure 9: Most negatively correlated comments on cum laude and summa cum laude students’ high performance and success https://doi.org/10.38140/pie.v41i2.7088 2242023 41(2): 224-232 https://doi.org/10.38140/pie.v41i2.7088 Perspectives in Education 2023: 41(2) 12. Discussion The narrative comments correlate the students’ performance and reflect their experiences in terms of the way in which they tend to see themselves, their role in their learning, and their sense of agency in engaging. In showing agency, the students demonstrated a tendency to self-authoring abilities (Van der Lecq, 2016) and reliance on their own ability to self- regulate (Henderson & Cunningham, 2023) and make important decisions, which the Auto-Ad encourages and reinforces. Drawing on the experiences of the students, as the correlated comments (see Figures 7 and 9 above) show, the assumptions about what they considered as important to high performance and success can be summed up as knowledge, self, and relationship, as Figure 10 below shows. Figure 10: The meld of cognitive, intrapersonal, interpersonal dimensions in high performing students’ assumptions of their self-authoring abilities Luo, Yang and Zuo (2019) aver that students affirm their agency in the ways they self-regulate in mediating their own academic progress. The comments by the students (see Figures 7 and 9) suggest that they have a strong sense of self and self-belief in their ability to self-motivate for high performance. While Mintz (2019) observes that data-informed proactive advising is one of the eight steps institutions must take to improve their students’ success, it should also be recognised that students themselves have knowledge of the factors they perceive as affecting their success at university. Students could mediate support experiences on an interactive platform to improve performance. Consolidated support views (see Figures 1-4) could allow students broader interactions in the support experience to develop their role in enhancing their success. In this way, the students optimise their development of the student self-authorship and the associated behavioural competencies (Baxter Magolda, 2008; Perez, 2019) needed for self-directed learning (Olivier & Wentworth, 2021). The strongest factors influencing the study participants’ success were choice of degree, motivation, study habits, family, and relationships. Mondisa and Adams (2022) and Tomlinson and Jackson (2021) affirm the link between high performance and better motivation and https://doi.org/10.38140/pie.v41i2.7088 2252023 41(2): 225-232 https://doi.org/10.38140/pie.v41i2.7088 Khumalo, et al. Technology-mediated advising for student success self-authorship. The current study suggests that the high-performing students’ sense of self-direction could be reinforced using automated advising. By the provision of timely and useful analytics information with feedback that prompts them to set goals and keep on track, students could be motivated to perform at optimal potential (Ifenthaler & Yau, 2020; Talbi & Ouared, 2022). 13. Reflective statistics can be used for student nudging The Auto-Ad made it possible to use student data analytics to support students’ decision- making in their learning, enabling a view of the performance trajectory each semester for each student, namely the semester CRW and compliance with cum laude criteria. Importantly, it also specified reasons and proffered the advising necessary for each student’s success. Advising support staff had access to the automated mediation, resulting in the integration of support experiences. The Auto-Ad facilitated this in following ways. 1. Cum laude specifications The Auto-Ad identified students on track to graduate cum laude by facilitating the capture of the class (“Class of pass”) that a student was on track to graduate with. Importantly, by evaluating the performance of the students in each semester, it provided each of them with the incentives and advice they needed to make important decisions on their performance. 2. Cum laude student reporting In typical cum-laude student reports generated by the Auto-Ad, the summary view specified the number of students on track to graduate in the cum laude category. It further specified, for each semester, the reasons for the student still being on track to graduate cum laude or summa cum laude. Furthermore, it showed the student what CRW value was necessary to retain the status of cum laude or summa cum laude. 3. Class of graduation If the criterion for the cum-laude classification is not achieved in any semester, it is then no longer possible for the student to graduate cum laude. For example, where a CRW of 80% is required for cum laude graduation and, if a CRW of 75% is achieved in any semester, the student cannot graduate cum laude. To counteract potential demotivation in this situation, the Auto-Ad reported on the student’s potential to increase the class of pass. For instance, when the overall CRW is used to calculate the “class of pass”, a student may be able to raise this in subsequent semesters (see Figure 2 above). This information was provided in addition to the anticipated class of pass at graduation. It is evident in Figure 4 above that, while the student was on track to graduate with just a third-class pass, a better class could be achieved by increasing the outcomes in the remaining credits. The Auto-Ad not only indicated the CRW needed for the remaining credits, but also considered the modules the student was currently enrolled in and the exams already passed in those modules. It then determined the outcomes necessary for the forthcoming exams to obtain the CRW required for a higher class. A link labelled “Improve my results” was integrated into the user interface to allow students to assess their own performance, identify their own reasons for underperformance, and take action to improve their performance either by working with academic advisors or other student support services or by engaging in https://doi.org/10.38140/pie.v41i2.7088 2262023 41(2): 226-232 https://doi.org/10.38140/pie.v41i2.7088 Perspectives in Education 2023: 41(2) self-directed learning. The examiners for the entire academic programme could access this report. Students could also access a report of this sort via the Student Central section of the Auto-Ad (see Figure 5). 4. Integration The Auto-Ad supported integration with student results, using its poll method to integrate with student records. It also allowed the use of questionnaire response mapping to compute the student pass rate, mean and standard deviation in order to correlate the questionnaire response against the mean. By enabling a prompt clearer understanding of the student performance trend for student and staff, the Auto-Ad proved useful to the academic support mechanism. It is significant that even basic reflective statistics can be used for nudging students in ways that validate their performance and indicate their full potential. 14. Implications of the study Furthermore, in contrast to being fixated on underperformance, the Auto-Ad-mediated student academic support process opens up the student to the potential they can draw on to make a change. It supports the student to develop as self-directed learner (Tekkol & Demirel, 2018; Van der Lecq, 2016), improve performance and achieve positive outcomes through engaging (Soika, 2021). We recommend scaling up the project to a university-wide intervention involving students in other programmes and from other colleges. Given the higher education inequalities in South Africa (Wilson-Strydom, 2017) that affect access to success capacities, we also recommend the development of a corpus of studies on how students at other South African universities invest in their personal capacities, draw on their strengths to motivate performance. 15. Limitations of the study Limitations include the study design, which originally focused on cum laude and summa cum laude trajectory students. This flaw was mitigated as the project evolved and a way was developed also to motivate those students who had already fallen out of this bracket. Another limitation could be the assumption that all students have the competencies necessary to use technology-mediated learning support systems. Scholars, including Reddy Moonasamy and Naidoo (2022) and Nnadozie et al. (2020), highlight the challenges in using technology to support learning at South African universities. 16. Conclusion This study demonstrated a way of academic advising at South African universities to make undergraduate students aware of their current graduation class and specifically how to improve it. The Auto-Ad analytics increase students’ awareness of the potential to improve their performance by means of encouraging self-reflection on barriers and gaps and the advising to boost their CRW. Self-mediated academic support experiences in this context can position students to develop self-authorship (Baxter Magolda, 1998) in asserting responsibility for and, importantly, self-directing their learning (Olivier & Wentworth, 2021). The students can optimise their development of self-authorship and the associated behavioural competencies (Baxter Magolda, 2008; Perez, 2019) to improve engagement and positive outcomes (Soika, 2021). https://doi.org/10.38140/pie.v41i2.7088 2272023 41(2): 227-232 https://doi.org/10.38140/pie.v41i2.7088 Khumalo, et al. Technology-mediated advising for student success The findings affirm Ifenthaler’s (2020) assertion that data analytics contribute towards successful learning. While there is a need for caution in implementing interventions based on evidence drawn from data analytics (Larrabee Sønderlund et al., 2019), the researchers believe that institutional student academic support mechanisms cannot draw from notional premises either. Academic support systems need to leverage what Van der Lecq (2016: 84), citing Baxter Magolda and King (2004), described as learning to dance in the “space between guidance and empowerment”, to champion strategies that position students in strength and to enhance their success at university. This project was supported by the UKZN Access and Success Advisory Forum (ASAF) project - KRESGE Foundation grant. References Alyahyan, E. & Düştegör, D. 2020. Predicting academic success in higher education: Literature review and best practices. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 17: 1-21. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-020-0177-7 Atkins, M. & Ebdon, L. 2014. National strategy for access and student success in higher education. London: Department for Business, Innovation and Skills. Baxter Magolda, M.B. 1998. Developing self-authorship in young adult life. Journal of College Student Development, 39(2): 143-56. Baxter Magolda, M.B.B. 2008. Three elements of self-authorship. Journal of College Student Development, 49(4): 269-284. https://doi.org/10.1353/csd.0.0016 Baxter Magolda, M.B.B. & King, P.M. 2004. Learning partnerships: Theory and models of practice to educate for self-authorship. Sterling, VA: Stylus Publishing, LLC. Blair, H., Campbell, C. & Duffy, M. 2017. A multi-pronged approach to the enterprise-wide implementation of a personal learning environment. In Proceedings of 2017 ePortfolio Forum: Owning, Supporting and Sharing the Journey, pp. 9-17. Blikstein, P. & Worsley, M. 2016. Multimodal learning analytics and education data mining: Using computational technologies to measure complex learning tasks. Journal of Learning Analytics, 3(2): 220-238. https://doi.org/10.18608/jla.2016.32.11 Bloch, C., Fuglsang, S., Glavind, J.G. & Bendtsen, A.K. 2022) Quality work in higher education: A multi-stakeholder study. Quality in Higher Education, 21: 1-18. Available at https://doi.org/1 0.1080/13538322.2022.2123267 [Accessed on 14 May 2023]. Bokana, K.G. & Tewari, D.D. 2014. Determinants of student success at a South African university: An econometric analysis. The Anthropologist, 17(1): 259-277. https://doi.org/10.10 80/09720073.2014.11891436 Cele, N. 2021. Big data-driven early alert systems as means of enhancing university student retention and success. South African Journal of Higher Education, 35(2): 56-72. Available at http://dx.doi.org/10.20853/35-2-3899 [Accessed on 14 May 2023]. Cosser, M. 2018. Differential pathways of South African students through higher education. International Journal of Educational Development, 59: 100-109. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. ijedudev.2017.10.003 https://doi.org/10.38140/pie.v41i2.7088 https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-020-0177-7 https://doi.org/10.1353/csd.0.0016 https://doi.org/10.18608/jla.2016.32.11 https://doi.org/10.1080/13538322.2022.2123267 https://doi.org/10.1080/13538322.2022.2123267 https://doi.org/10.1080/09720073.2014.11891436 https://doi.org/10.1080/09720073.2014.11891436 http://dx.doi.org/10.20853/35-2-3899 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijedudev.2017.10.003 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijedudev.2017.10.003 2282023 41(2): 228-232 https://doi.org/10.38140/pie.v41i2.7088 Perspectives in Education 2023: 41(2) Council on Higher Education (CHE). 2014. Quality Enhancement Project: The Process for Public Higher Education Institutions. Pretoria: Inxon Printers. Creswell, J.W. & Clark, V.L.P. 2017. Designing and conducting mixed methods research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage publications. Dhunpath, R. & Subbaye, R. 2018. Student success and curriculum reform in post- apartheid South Africa. International Journal of Chinese Education, 7(1): 85-106. https://doi. org/10.1163/22125868-12340091 Etikan, I., Musa, S.A. & Alkassim, R.S. 2016. Comparison of convenience sampling and purposive sampling. American Journal of Theoretical and Applied Statistics, 5(1): 1-4. https:// doi.org/10.11648/j.ajtas.20160501.11 Fataar, A. 2018. Decolonising education in South Africa: Perspectives and debates. Educational Research for Social Change, 7(SPE): vi-ix. Guo, J.P., Yang, L.Y., Zhang, J. & Gan, Y.J. 2022. Academic Self-Concept, Perceptions of the Learning Environment, Engagement, and Learning Outcomes of University Students: Relationships and Causal Ordering. Higher Education: The International Journal of Higher Education Research, 83(4): 809-828. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-021-00705-8 Henderson, R.W. & Cunningham, L. 2023. In D. H. Schunk & B. J. Zimmerman (Eds), Creating interactive sociocultural environments for self-regulated learning. In Self- regulation of learning and performance (pp. 255-281). New York: Routledge. https://doi. org/10.4324/9780203763353-11 Ifenthaler, D. 2015. Learning Analytics: Benefits and challenges for higher education. Food for thought, the academic eye. The Council on Business & Society. Ifenthaler, D. 2017. Are higher education institutions prepared for learning analytics? TechTrends, 61(4): 366-371. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-016-0154-0 Ifenthaler, D. 2020. Supporting higher education students through analytics systems. Journal of Applied Research in Higher Education, 12(1): 1-3. https://doi.org/10.1108/JARHE- 07-2019-0173 Ifenthaler, D. & Yau, J.Y.K. 2020. Utilising learning analytics to support study success in higher education: A systematic review. Educational Technology Research and Development, 68(4): 1961-1990. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-020-09788-z Johnson, J.L. 2013. Self-authorship in pharmacy education. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 77(4): 1-5. https://doi.org/10.5688/ajpe77469 Jokhan, A., Chand, A.A., Singh, V. & Mamun, K.A. 2022. Increased digital resource consumption in higher educational institutions and the artificial intelligence role in informing decisions related to student performance. Sustainability, 14(4): 1-7. https://doi.org/10.3390/ su14042377 Kahu, E.R. & Nelson, K. 2018. Student engagement in the educational interface: Understanding the mechanisms of student success. Higher Education Research & Development, 37(1): 58-71. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2017.1344197 Khoza, L.P. 2020. Academic readiness of students for higher education: a case for academic support at Rhodes University. Masters Thesis. 10.13140/RG.2.2.36715.46888 [Accessed on 14 May 2023]. https://doi.org/10.38140/pie.v41i2.7088 https://doi.org/10.1163/22125868-12340091 https://doi.org/10.1163/22125868-12340091 https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajtas.20160501.11 https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajtas.20160501.11 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-021-00705-8 https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203763353-11 https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203763353-11 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-016-0154-0 https://doi.org/10.1108/JARHE-07-2019-0173 https://doi.org/10.1108/JARHE-07-2019-0173 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-020-09788-z https://doi.org/10.5688/ajpe77469 https://doi.org/10.3390/su14042377 https://doi.org/10.3390/su14042377 https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2017.1344197 http://dx.doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.36715.46888 2292023 41(2): 229-232 https://doi.org/10.38140/pie.v41i2.7088 Khumalo, et al. Technology-mediated advising for student success Kinzie, J. & Kuh, G. 2017. Reframing student success in college: Advancing know-what and know-how. Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning, 49(3): 19-27. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 00091383.2017.1321429 Korobova, N. & Starobin, S.S. 2015. A Comparative Study of Student Engagement, Satisfaction, and Academic Success among International and American Students. Journal of International Students, 5(1): 72-85. https://doi.org/10.32674/jis.v5i1.444 Kruss, G. 2017. Engaged universities and inclusive development: Grappling with new policy directions in South Africa. Universities, Inclusive Development and Social Innovation: An International Perspective, pp. 223-253. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-43700-2_10 Kuh, G.D., Kinzie, J.L., Buckley, J.A., Bridges, B.K. & Hayek, J.C. 2006. What matters to student success: A review of the literature (Vol. 8). Washington, DC: National Postsecondary Education Cooperative. Larrabee Sønderlund, A., Hughes, E. & Smith, J. 2019. The efficacy of learning analytics interventions in higher education: A systematic review. British Journal of Educational Technology, 50(5): 2594-2618. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12720 Lemmens, J.C. & Henn, M. 2016. Learning analytics: A South African higher education perspective. Institutional research in South African higher education, pp. 231-253. https://doi. org/10.18820/9781928357186/12 Luo, H., Yang, T., Xue, J. & Zuo, M. 2019. Impact of student agency on learning performance and learning experience in a flipped classroom. British Journal of Educational Technology, 50(2): 819-831. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12604 Mabokela, R.O. & Mlambo, Y.A. 2017. Access and equity and South African higher education: A review of policies after 20 years of democracy. Comparative Education Review, 61(4): 780-803. https://doi.org/10.1086/693913 Masutha, M. 2022. Highs, lows and turning points in marginalised transitions and experiences of noncompletion amongst pushed dropouts in South African higher education. Education Sciences, 12(9): 1-16. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci12090608 McGhie, V.F. 2012. Factors impacting on first-year students’ academic progress at a South African university. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Stellenbosch: Stellenbosch University. McNair, T.B., Albertine, S., McDonald, N., Major Jr, T. & Cooper, M.A. 2022. Becoming a student-ready college: A new culture of leadership for student success. San Francisco: John Wiley & Sons. Menkor, M., Nagengast, B., Van Laar, C. & Sassenberg, K. 2021. The fit between dignity self-construal and independent university norms: Effects on university belonging, well-being, and academic success. European Journal of Social Psychology, 51(1): 100-112. Available at https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2717 [Accessed on 12 May 2023]. Mintz, S. 2019. The 8 steps institutions need to take to improve student success. Available at https://www.insidehighered.com/blogs/higher-ed-gamma/8-steps-institutions-need-take- improve-student-success [Accessed 16 April 2023]. Modern Scholarship 2023. Auto Scholar Advisor, April 2. Available at https://modernscholarship. org/ [Accessed on 14 May 2023]. https://doi.org/10.38140/pie.v41i2.7088 https://doi.org/10.1080/00091383.2017.1321429 https://doi.org/10.1080/00091383.2017.1321429 https://doi.org/10.32674/jis.v5i1.444 https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-43700-2_10 https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12720 https://doi.org/10.18820/9781928357186/12 https://doi.org/10.18820/9781928357186/12 https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12604 https://doi.org/10.1086/693913 https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci12090608 https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2717 https://www.insidehighered.com/blogs/higher-ed-gamma/8-steps-institutions-need-take-improve-student-success https://www.insidehighered.com/blogs/higher-ed-gamma/8-steps-institutions-need-take-improve-student-success https://modernscholarship.org/ https://modernscholarship.org/ 2302023 41(2): 230-232 https://doi.org/10.38140/pie.v41i2.7088 Perspectives in Education 2023: 41(2) Mondisa, J.L. & Adams, R.S. 2022. A learning partnerships perspective of how mentors help protégés develop self-authorship. Journal of Diversity in Higher Education, 15(3): 337-53. https://doi.org/10.1037/dhe0000291 NACADA. 2003. Paper presented to the Task force on defining academic advising. Retrieved from NACADA Clearinghouse of Academic Advising Resources website. Available at https:// nacada.ksu.edu/Resources/Clearinghouse/View-Articles/Definitions-of-academic-advising. aspx [Accessed on 12 May 2023]. Nnadozie, V. & Khumalo, S. 2023. Self-agency and academically high-performing students’ success: Towards a praxis for academic support in one South African university. Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice, 20(1). Available at https://doi. org/10.53761/1.20.01.17 [Accessed 14 May 2023]. Nnadozie, V., Anyanwu, C.C., Ngwenya, J. & Khanare, F.P. 2020. Divergence and the use of digital technology in learning: Undergraduate students’ experiences of email feedback in a South African university. Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice, 17(3): 10. https://doi.org/10.53761/1.17.3.10 Notshulwana, V. 2011. Expanding opportunity through intentional equity transforming higher education in South Africa to benefit all. Africa Insight, 41(2): 142-159. https://doi.org/10.4314/ ai.v41i2.70399 Olivier, J. & Wentworth, A. 2021. Self-directed learning at school and in higher education in Africa. Radical Solutions for Education in Africa: Open Education and Self-directed Learning in the Continent, pp. 17-39. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-4099-5_2 Perez, R.J. 2019. Paradigmatic perspectives and self-authorship: Implications for theory, research, and praxis. Journal of College Student Development, 60(1): 70-84. https://doi. org/10.1353/csd.2019.0004 Peterson, R.L., O’Connor, A. & Strawhun, J. 2014. Academic Supports and Tutoring. Strategy Brief, University of Nebraska-Lincoln. Available at https://k12engagement.unl.edu/strategy- briefs/Academic%20Supports%209-11-14.pdf [Accessed on 12 May 2023]. Pizzolato, J.E. & Ozaki, C.C. 2007. Moving toward self-authorship: Investigating outcomes of learning partnerships. Journal of College Student Development, 48(2): 196-214. https://doi. org/10.1353/csd.2007.0019 Pride, L.D. 2014. Using learning stories to capture “Gifted” and “Hard worker” mindsets within a NYC specialized high school for the sciences. Theory Into Practice, 53(1): 41-47. https://doi. org/10.1080/00405841.2014.862121 Raaper, R., Brown, C. & Llewellyn, A. 2022. Student support as social network: Exploring non-traditional student experiences of academic and wellbeing support during the Covid-19 pandemic. Educational Review, 74(3): 402-421. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131911.2021.196 5960 Reddy Moonasamy, A. & Naidoo, G.M. 2022. Digital Learning: Challenges experienced by South African university students’ during the COVID-19 pandemic. The Independent Journal of Teaching and Learning, 17(2): 76-90. Riofrío-Calderón, G. & Ramírez-Montoya, M.S. 2022. Study of the academic behavior of participants in a MOOC module on energy sustainability using principal component analysis (PCA). In 2022 XII International Conference on Virtual Campus (JICV), IEEE, pp. 1-4. https:// doi.org/10.1109/JICV56113.2022.9934543 https://doi.org/10.38140/pie.v41i2.7088 https://doi.org/10.1037/dhe0000291 https://nacada.ksu.edu/Resources/Clearinghouse/View-Articles/Definitions-of-academic-advising.aspx https://nacada.ksu.edu/Resources/Clearinghouse/View-Articles/Definitions-of-academic-advising.aspx https://nacada.ksu.edu/Resources/Clearinghouse/View-Articles/Definitions-of-academic-advising.aspx https://doi.org/10.53761/1.20.01.17 https://doi.org/10.53761/1.20.01.17 https://doi.org/10.53761/1.17.3.10 https://doi.org/10.4314/ai.v41i2.70399 https://doi.org/10.4314/ai.v41i2.70399 https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-4099-5_2 https://doi.org/10.1353/csd.2019.0004 https://doi.org/10.1353/csd.2019.0004 https://k12engagement.unl.edu/strategy-briefs/Academic%20Supports%209-11-14.pdf https://k12engagement.unl.edu/strategy-briefs/Academic%20Supports%209-11-14.pdf https://doi.org/10.1353/csd.2007.0019 https://doi.org/10.1353/csd.2007.0019 https://doi.org/10.1080/00405841.2014.862121 https://doi.org/10.1080/00405841.2014.862121 https://doi.org/10.1080/00131911.2021.1965960 https://doi.org/10.1080/00131911.2021.1965960 https://doi.org/10.1109/JICV56113.2022.9934543 https://doi.org/10.1109/JICV56113.2022.9934543 2312023 41(2): 231-232 https://doi.org/10.38140/pie.v41i2.7088 Khumalo, et al. Technology-mediated advising for student success Sanches, F.E.F., Campos, M.L., Gaio, L.E. & Belli, M.M. 2022. Proposal for sustainability action archetypes for higher education institutions. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 23(4): 915-939. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJSHE-01-2021-0026 Schumacher, C. & Ifenthaler, D. 2018. Features students really expect from learning analytics. Computers in Human Behavior, 78: 397-407. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.06.030 Scott, I. 2018. Designing the South African higher education system for student success. Journal of Student Affairs in Africa, 6(1): 1-17. https://doi.org/10.24085/jsaa.v6i1.3062 Siemens, G. & Long, P. 2011. Penetrating the fog: Analytics in learning and education. EDUCAUSE Review, 46(5): 30. Soika, B. 2021. What is student success? New insight into a complex question. News and Insights, University of South California, September 1. Available at bit.ly/3XrjJuO [Accessed on 16 May 2023]. Strayhorn, T.L. 2014. Making a way to success: Self-authorship and academic achievement of first-year African American students at historically Black colleges. Journal of College Student Development, 55(2): 151-167. https://doi.org/10.1353/csd.2014.0011 Strayhorn, T.L. 2018. College students’ sense of belonging: A key to educational success for all students. New York, NY: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315297293 Strydom, F., Kuh, G. & Mentz, M. 2010. Enhancing success in South Africa’s higher education: Measuring student engagement. Acta Academica, 42(1): 259-278. Talbi, O. & Ouared, A. 2022. Goal-oriented student motivation in learning analytics: How can a requirements-driven approach Help? Education and Information Technologies, 27(9): 12083-12121. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-11091-8 Tekkol, İ.A. & Demirel, M. 2018. An Investigation of Self-Directed Learning Skills of Undergraduate Students. Frontiers in Psychology, 9: 2324-2324. https://doi.org/10.3389/ fpsyg.2018.02324 Tinto, V. 2012. Enhancing student success: Taking the classroom success seriously. Student Success, 3(1): 1. https://doi.org/10.5204/intjfyhe.v3i1.119 Tiroyabone, G.W. & Strydom, F. 2021. The development of academic advising to enable student success in South Africa. Journal of Student Affairs in Africa, 9(2): 1-16. https://doi. org/10.24085/jsaa.v9i2.3656 Tomlinson, M. & Jackson, D. 2021. Professional identity formation in contemporary higher education students. Studies in Higher Education, 46(4): 885-900. https://doi.org/10.1080/030 75079.2019.1659763 Universities South Africa (USAf). (2018). Understanding students: A key to systemic success. Available at http://www.usaf.ac.za/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/Understanding-students_ WEB.pdf [Accessed on 13 April 2023]. Van den Bogaard, M.E.D. & Zijlstra, W. 2016. Student success and the need for new discourse. In The 25th EAN Conference: Silver Jubilee Celebration, UCD Dublin, pp. 1-9. Van der Lecq, R. 2016. Self-authorship characteristics of learners in the context of an interdisciplinary curriculum: Evidence from reflections. Issues in Interdisciplinary Studies, 34: 79-108. https://doi.org/10.38140/pie.v41i2.7088 https://doi.org/10.1108/IJSHE-01-2021-0026 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.06.030 https://doi.org/10.24085/jsaa.v6i1.3062 http://bit.ly/3XrjJuO https://doi.org/10.1353/csd.2014.0011 https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315297293 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-11091-8 https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02324 https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02324 https://doi.org/10.5204/intjfyhe.v3i1.119 https://doi.org/10.24085/jsaa.v9i2.3656 https://doi.org/10.24085/jsaa.v9i2.3656 https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2019.1659763 https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2019.1659763 http://www.usaf.ac.za/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/Understanding-students_WEB.pdf http://www.usaf.ac.za/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/Understanding-students_WEB.pdf 2322023 41(2): 232-232 https://doi.org/10.38140/pie.v41i2.7088 Perspectives in Education 2023: 41(2) Volbrecht, T. & Boughey, C. 2004. Curriculum responsiveness from the margins? A reappraisal of academic development in South Africa. Curriculum responsiveness: Case Studies in Higher Education, pp. 57-80. Pretoria: SAUWCA. Wilson-Strydom, M. 2017. Disrupting structural inequalities of higher education opportunity: “Grit”, resilience and capabilities at a South African University. Journal of Human Development and Capabilities, 18(3): 384-398. https://doi.org/10.1080/19452829.2016.1270919 Wood, L.N. & Breyer, Y.A. 2017. Success in Higher Education. Springer: Singapore. https:// doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-2791-8 Yang, N. & Li, T. 2020. How stakeholders’ data literacy contributes to student success in higher education: a goal-oriented analysis. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 17(1): 41. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-020-00220-3 Yang, Y., Hooshyar, D., Pedaste, M., Wang, M., Huang, Y.M. & Lim, H. 2020. Predicting course achievement of university students based on their procrastination behaviour on Moodle. Soft Computing, 24: 18777-18793. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00500-020-05110-4 https://doi.org/10.38140/pie.v41i2.7088 https://doi.org/10.1080/19452829.2016.1270919 https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-2791-8 https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-2791-8 https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-020-00220-3 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00500-020-05110-4 _Hlk110079070 _Hlk131588903 _Hlk110137213 _Hlk131749024 _Hlk131604968 _Hlk110139001 _Hlk131926841 _Hlk131747075 _Hlk131926546 _Hlk132453814 _Hlk110137416 _Hlk126975757 _Hlk108412609 _Hlk108419007 _Hlk126060009 _Hlk110332218 _Hlk131762511 _Hlk131916508 _Hlk126063878 _Hlk126064938 _Hlk126065267 _Hlk126305067 _Hlk126066080 _Hlk126065883 _Hlk126066602 _Hlk126076979 _Hlk126076768 _Hlk126266132 _Hlk126078046 _Hlk126123225 _Hlk126078160 _Hlk126079270 _Hlk127015090 _Hlk127013978 _Hlk127021228 _Hlk127040985 _Hlk132310100 _Hlk131937005 _Hlk138689111 _Hlk132470834 _Hlk132483928 _Hlk132307436