Abstract

Beginning Chinese learners from Central Asia often show uneven development in classroom participation, online practice, and Chinese character writing. This study examined how smart teaching tools support formative assessment and process feedback in an elementary international Chinese classroom. A 12-week teaching practice was conducted with 17 students from Kyrgyzstan, Kazakhstan, and Russia, representing learners from Central Asia and neighbouring regions; 14 of them were Dungan students. Multi-source data collected through Chaoxing Learning Platform, the International Chinese Smart Teaching System, and a smart handwriting pen system were analysed with descriptive statistics and qualitative observation. The results showed that digital interaction was used 4.6 times per 50-minute class on average, increasing from 3.2 times per class in the first week to 5.1 times per class in the twelfth week, and the average participation rate in demanding tasks such as recitation and translation reached 94.1%. The average online practice score was 90.1, and each assignment was submitted 6.3 times on average, showing repeated corrective learning based on platform feedback. The average regular performance score was 90.12, the average final course grade was 76.94, and the passing rate was 100%. Handwriting trajectories revealed stroke order, stroke direction, starting position, and structural layout problems that were not fully visible in final written products, such as writing the vertical stroke before the horizontal stroke in simple characters like “十”. Students showed positive acceptance of the tools, with an average satisfaction score of 4.19 out of 5; the point system received the highest score of 4.41. The findings show that smart teaching tools make the learning process of Central Asian Chinese learners more visible and provide practical evidence for classroom adjustment, writing feedback, and formative assessment

Keywords

learning analytics; Dungan learners; Chinese character writing; formative assessment; classroom interaction; process feedback

References

  1. Alhusaiyan, E. (2025). A systematic review of current trends in artificial intelligence in foreign language learning. Saudi Journal of Language Studies, 5(1), 1-16. doi: 10.1108/SJLS-07-2024-0039.
  2. Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 5(1), 7-74. doi: 10.1080/0969595980050102.
  3. Brazhkin, V., & Strakos, J.K. (2023). Student preferences for multiple attempts and feedback on online quantitative assessments. Intersection: A Journal at the Intersection of Assessment and Learning, 4(2). doi: 10.61669/001c.77262.
  4. Cai, J., & Liu, X. (2023). Construction and application of a three-stage and nine-step teaching model from the perspective of international Chinese smart education. Chinese Teaching in the World, 37(4), 534-546. doi: 10.13724/j.cnki.ctiw.2023.04.011.
  5. Chukwuemeka, E.J. (2025). Smart education: Opportunities, challenges and future of traditional education. International Journal of Smart Technology and Learning, 4(3), 191-202. doi: 10.1504/IJSMARTTL.2025.146286.
  6. Davis, F.D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319-340. doi: 10.2307/249008.
  7. Fan, J., & Tian, M. (2026). Online learning environment predicting CFL learning achievement among international students in China: Mediating effect of student engagement. Sustainability, 18(4), article number 1905. doi: 10.3390/su18041905.
  8. Hankeln, C., Kroehne, U., Voss, L., Gross, S., & Prediger, S. (2025). Developing digital formative assessment for deep conceptual learning goals: Which topic-specific research gaps need to be closed? Educational Technology Research and Development, 73(4), 1953-1973. doi: 10.1007/s11423-025-10486-x.
  9. Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81-112. doi: 10.3102/003465430298487.
  10. Hernández-Campos, M., González-Torres, A., & García-Peñalvo, F.J. (2025). Learning outcomes evaluation through learning analytics systems in higher education: A systematic literature review. Sage Open, 15(3). doi: 10.1177/21582440251347374.
  11. Lai, Y., Zhang, X., & Fan, Z. (2025). Relationship between Chinese character conformational features and the legibility of handwritten Chinese characters for CFL beginners. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 54(5), 53-77. doi: 10.1007/s10936-025-10169-x.
  12. Li, B., & Liu, J. (2021). Transformation dimensions, practical challenges, and countermeasures of international Chinese education in the new era. Chinese Teaching in the World, 35(1), 3-13. doi: 10.13724/j.cnki.ctiw.2021.01.001.
  13. Li, Y., Liu, T., & Yang, W. (2025). Leveraging large language models for smart educational services: A comprehensive review. In Big Data – BigData 2025 (pp. 104-120). Сham: Springer. doi: 10.1007/978-3-032-06524-7_7.
  14. Ngulube, P., & Ncube, M.M. (2025). Leveraging learning analytics to improve the user experience of learning management systems in higher education institutions. Information, 16(5), article number 419. doi: 10.3390/info16050419.
  15. Rodríguez-Ortiz, M.Á., Santana-Mancilla, P.C., & Anido-Rifón, L.E. (2025). Machine learning and generative AI in learning analytics for higher education: A systematic review of models, trends, and challenges. Applied Sciences, 15(15), article number 8679. doi: 10.3390/app15158679.
  16. Shi, Q., Hu, B., & Zhu, Z. (2026). Orthography-sound vs. orthography-meaning mapping in Chinese character learning: Evidence on typing and handwriting. Foreign Language Annals, 59(2), 477-499. doi: 10.1111/flan.70053.
  17. Siemens, G., & Long, P. (2011). Penetrating the fog: Analytics in learning and education. EDUCAUSE Review, 46(5), 31-40.
  18. Solis Trujillo, B.P., Velarde-Camaqui, D., Gonzales Nuñez, C.A., Castillo Silva, E.V., & Gonzalez Said de la Oliva, M.D.P. (2025). The current landscape of formative assessment and feedback in graduate studies: A systematic literature review. Frontiers in Education, 10, article number 1509983. doi: 10.3389/feduc.2025.1509983.
  19. Sun, H., Wang, T., & Yu, M. (2026). Influence of computer-assisted stroke order learning on Chinese character writing in second language learners. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 39(4), 1000-1022. doi: 10.1080/09588221.2024.2443769.
  20. Wen, T., & Liu, X. (2023). Teaching design from the perspective of international Chinese smart education. Language Teaching and Linguistic Studies, 4, 24-33.
  21. World Medical Association. (2013). World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki: Ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects. JAMA, 310(20), 2191-2194. doi: 10.1001/jama.2013.281053.
  22. Xiao, Z., Xiao, H., & Xu, C. (2025). Information-theoretic measures for mapping regularities between orthography and phonology: A comprehensive quantification and validation in the Chinese writing system. Behavior Research Methods, 57, article number 232. doi: 10.3758/s13428-025-02721-3.
  23. Xu, C., & Bai, J. (2025). Dynamic quality assessment of Chinese language courses: Building smart education systems with generative AI and deep behavioral analytics. In Proceedings of the 2025 International conference on artificial intelligence and educational systems (pp. 353-358). New York: Association for Computing Machinery. doi: 10.1145/3744367.3744423.
  24. Xu, Z., Yu, S., Torrance, M., Nottbusch, G., Zhao, N., & Cai, Z. (2026). A stroke-level large-scale database of Chinese character handwriting and the OpenHandWrite_Toolbox for handwriting research. Behavior Research Methods, 58, article number 162. doi: 10.3758/s13428-026-03001-4.
  25. Yang, J., Shi, G., Zhu, W., & Sun, Y. (2025). Intelligent technologies in smart education: A comprehensive review of transformative pillars and their impact on teaching and learning methods. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 12(1), article number 1239. doi: 10.1057/s41599-025-05444-0.
  26. Yang, L., & Lin, J. (2026). Measuring learners’ writing development in a Chinese as a foreign language (CFL) context. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 64(2), 577-600. doi: 10.1515/iral-2024-0137.
  27. Yu, J., Fletcher, J., Everatt, J., & Astall, C. (2026). Teaching Chinese characters in CFL education: Beliefs, practices, and contextual influences. System, 137, article number 103954. doi: 10.1016/j.system.2025.103954.
  28. Zhang, C., & Tsimpli, I. (2026). Is rows a rose in Chinese? A meta-analysis on the role of phonology, orthography and semantics in early Chinese character processing. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications. doi: 10.1057/s41599-026-07818-4.
  29. Zhou, X., Su, X., Zhang, J., & Yu, S. (2024). Engineering design and application of the international Chinese curriculum system. International Chinese Language Teaching Research, 2, 1-13.