Evaluating the Effectiveness of Digital Platforms in Improving Student Outcomes with Reference to UG and PG

International Journal of Advanced Engineering, Management
and Science (IJAEMS)
Peer-Reviewed Journal
ISSN: 2454-1311 | Vol-11, Issue-4; Jul-Aug, 2025
Journal Home Page: https://ijaems.com/
DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.22161/ijaems.114.16
This article can be downloaded from here: www.ijaems.com 133
©2025 The Author(s). Published by Infogain Publication, This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0
License. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
Evaluating the Effectiveness of Digital Platforms in
Improving Student Outcomes with Reference to UG
and PG
M. Akhila Reddy1, Pooja Sharma2
1Assistant Professor, CMR Institute of Technology, Hyderabad, Telangana, India.
2Student of MBA, CMR Institute of Technology, Hyderabad, Telangana, India
Received: 11 Jun 2025; Received in revised form: 05 Jul 2025; Accepted: 09 Jul 2025; Available online: 12 Jul 2025
Abstract— This study examines the impact of digital learning platforms on undergraduate and
postgraduate students, focusing on accessibility, flexibility, and engagement. It evaluates whether tools like
online lectures and LMS have enhanced academic experiences or introduced new challenges. Using
structured questionnaires, data was collected from diverse academic backgrounds. Findings reveal that while
digital platforms improve access and flexibility, many students face issues like reduced motivation and digital
fatigue. Postgraduate students adapt more easily, showing greater independence. The study concludes that
digital tools are vital in modern education but must be improved to support interaction, reduce fatigue, and
meet varied learning needs.
Keywords— Digital learning Platforms, Student Academic Outcomes, Online Education
Effectiveness, UG and PG Education, Student Engagement and Performance.
I. INTRODUCTION & BACKGROUND OF
THE STUDY
Over the past decade, digital technologies
have transformed global education, shifting from
traditional classroom methods to technology-
enhanced learning environments. Platforms such as
LMS (Moodle, Blackboard, Canvas) and AI-powered
tools have expanded access, flexibility, and
personalization in education. The COVID-19
pandemic accelerated this shift, making online and
blended learning models essential. While many
students adapted well to digital learning, others faced
challenges like poor connectivity, reduced interaction,
and digital fatigue. This study explores the
effectiveness of digital platforms in enhancing student
outcomes focusing on academic performance,
engagement, motivation, and adaptability. It
compares the experiences of undergraduate (UG) and
postgraduate (PG) students, recognizing that each
group may respond differently to digital tools. By
identifying which features work best for each level,
the research aims to help institutions tailor digital
strategies that better support diverse learning needs.
Statement of the Problem
Digital platforms are widely used in higher education,
but their actual effectiveness in improving student
outcomes remains uncertain. Many students face
challenges like reduced interaction and adaptability
issues, especially at different academic levels. There is
a lack of focused research on how UG and PG students
perceive and benefit from these platforms, making it
essential to evaluate their true impact on learning and
performance.
Research Questions:
1. How do digital platforms impact student
engagement and motivation?

Reddy and Sharma International Journal of Advanced Engineering, Management and Science, 11(4) -2025
2. Do digital platforms improve academic
performance and grades?
3. What features of digital platforms are most effective
in enhancing student outcomes?
4. How do digital platforms support personalized
learning and student needs?
Objectives of the Study:
1. To Understand the various Digital Platforms
using by UG and PG Students.
2. To Investigate the Relationship between Digital
Platform usage and Student Engagement.
3. To Evaluate the effectiveness of Digital
Platform in improving Academic Performance
of UG and PG Students.
Scope and limitations of the study:
This study focuses solely on UG and PG students'
perceptions of digital platforms, excluding educator
and administrative views. The limited, self-reported
sample may not represent the broader student
population and may carry bias. Factors like internet
access, digital literacy, and socio-economic
background were not controlled but could affect
outcomes.
Review of Literature
1. Impact of Use of Technology on Student
Learning Outcomes: Evidence from a Large-
scale Experiment in India
(Naik et al., 2020)
This multi-state study found that while EdTech
improved learning in some regions, outcomes
were inconsistent due to weak internet, poor
infrastructure, and untrained teachers. The
success of digital tools depended more on local
support than technology alone.
2. The Influence of Teaching Content Efficacy and
Digital Learning Tools in Indian Higher
Education (Panda, Dash, Kaswan, Chaudhary,
2025)
Teacher readiness and effective use of
curriculum-aligned digital tools significantly
influenced student performance. The study
stressed the importance of faculty training and
relevant digital content for meaningful
engagement.
3. Impact of Online Learning in India: A Survey
of University Students during COVID-19
Goswami, Thanvi, Padhi, 2021)
Students appreciated online learning’s flexibility
but highlighted low interactivity, tech issues, and
lack of hands-on experiences. The study
recommends integrating active learning features
to enhance digital education.
4. Effectiveness of Digital Platforms on Indian
School Students: A City-Wise Comparative
Study (Iqbal, Chawla, Mishra, Shaw,
Chakraborty, 2022)
Urban students benefited from better
connectivity and teacher support, while semi-
urban learners faced access issues. The findings
highlight the digital divide and the need for
region-specific implementation strategies.
Research Gap:
Although digital platforms in education have been
extensively examined, there is a noticeable lack of
focus on student-centric perspectives particularly
the differences between undergraduate and
postgraduate learners. Existing research rarely
explores how these platforms influence academic
outcomes from the students' point of view. This
study aims to fill that gap by comparing the
experiences and perceptions of UG and PG students.
II. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
Research Design: Descriptive and Analytical
Research
This study is descriptive as it aims to observe and
describe students' usage of digital platforms, and
analytical as it evaluates the impact of these platforms
on academic outcomes.
A mixed-methods approach combining quantitative
survey data with qualitative feedback from students
helps evaluate both the breadth and depth of digital
platform usage and its outcomes.
Population and sample:
The study focuses on students enrolled in UG and PG
programs, with a sample size of 100 participants and
among all 90 responded for analysis.
Data Collection Methods:
• Primary data is collected directly from UG
and PG students through structured

questionnaires and Google Forms to gather
the insights about their experiences with
digital platforms.
• Secondary data includes existing research
papers, academic reports, institutional
records, and relevant online sources to
support the analysis and provide context.
Data Analysis Techniques:
1. Data Visualization Tools: Microsoft Excel,
percentages are employed to create graphs,
charts, and dashboards that visually represent
findings, making it easier to interpret data
patterns.
2. Statistical Techniques: Techniques such as
Chi-square test is applied.
Data Analysis & Interpretation
1. Which digital platforms do you use most
for academic learning?
Platform Type Frequency Percentage
Online coaching
platforms (e.g.,
Unacademy, BYJU’S)
23 25.56
Video conferencing
tools (Zoom, Google
Meet)
28 31.11
Learning management
systems (Moodle,
Blackboard)
24 26.67
Educational websites
and apps
15 16.67
Total 90 100
Interpretation: Video conferencing tools such as
Zoom and Google Meet were most popular (31.11%),
followed by learning management systems (26.67%)
and online coaching platforms (25.56%). Educational
websites and apps were used by 16.67%.
2. Which format of digital content supports
your learning best?
Content Format Frequency Percentage
Live online classes 34 37.78
Recorded sessions 28 31.11
Interactive quizzes 15 16.67
Study materials (PDFs) 13 14.44
Total 90 100
Interpretation: Live online classes were most
effective for 37.78%, recorded sessions for 31.11%,
interactive quizzes for 16.67%, and study materials
(PDFs) for 14.44%.
3. Do digital platforms make learning more
engaging at your academic level (UG/PG)?
Agreement Level Frequency Percentage
Strongly agree 31 34.44
Agree 47 52.22
Disagree 9 10
Strongly disagree 3 3.33
Total 90 100
23
28
24
15
25.56
31.11
26.67
16.67
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
Online
coaching
platforms
Video
conferencing
tools
Learning
management
systems
Educational
websites and
apps
Platform Type
Frequency Percentage
34
28
15
37.78
31.11
16.67
0
10
20
30
40
Live online classes Recorded sessions Interactive quizzes
Content Format

Interpretation: A majority agreed, with 34.44%
strongly agreeing and 52.22% agreeing. A minority
expressed disagreement (13.33%).
4. How effective are the video
lectures/tutorials on digital platforms for
your academic improvement?
Effectiveness Frequency Percentage
Very effective 32 35.56
Moderately effective 40 44.44
Slightly effective 16 17.78
Not effective 2 2.22
Total 90 100
Interpretation: Video content was very effective for
35.56%, moderately effective for 44.44%, slightly
effective for 17.78%, and ineffective for 2.22%.
5. Has your academic performance improved
due to digital platforms?
Performance
Change
Improved
significantly
33 36.67
Improved
moderately
44 48.89
No change 12 13.33
Decreased 1 1.11
Total 90 100
Interpretation: Academic performance improved
significantly for 36.67%, moderately for 48.89%, with
13.33% reporting no change and 1.11% a decline.
Chi-Square Calculation
Hypotheses:
H01- There is no Significant effectiveness of
Digital Platform in improving Academic
Performance
H11- There is Significant effectiveness of Digital
Platform in improving Academic
Performance
31
47
9
3
34.44
52.22
10
3.33
0 20 40 60
STRONGLY AGREE
AGREE
DISAGREE
STRONGLY DISAGREE
Agreement Level
Percentage Frequency
35.56
44.44
17.78
2.22
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
Effectiveness
Frequency
Percentage
33
44
12
1
36.67
48.89
13.33
1.11
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Improved
significantly
Improved
moderately
No change Decreased
Performance Change

1. What is your current academic level?
Academic Level Frequency Percentage
Undergraduate 31 34.44
Postgraduate 49 54.44
Diploma/Certificate 6 6.67
Other 4 4.44
Total 90 100
Creating 2×2 Matrix
• Postgraduate: 49
• Undergraduate: 31
2. How effective are the video lectures/tutorials
on digital platforms for your academic
improvement?
Very effective 32 35.56
Moderately effective 40 44.44
Slightly effective 16 17.78
Not effective 2 2.22
Total 90 100
Creating 2×2 Matrix:
Proportionally Distribute Responses
Effective Responses (72 out of 90)
• UG: 31/80×72≈27.9
• PG: 49/80×72≈44.1
Ineffective Responses (18 out of 90)
• UG: 31/80×18≈6.975
• PG: 49/80×18≈11.025
Now round of:
Stream UG PG Total
Effective 28 44 72
Ineffective 7 11 18
Total 35 55 90
III. RESULTS
The chi-square statistic is 0. The p-value is 1. The result
is not significant at p < .05.
Since p = 1.0, there is no significant relationship
between the academic stream (UG/PG) and perceived
effectiveness of digital platforms.
Results & Findings
Major
Effective 32 + 40 = 72 35.56 + 44.44
= 80.00
Ineffective 16 + 2 = 18 17.78 + 2.22 =
20.00
Findings:
1. Video conferencing tools such as Zoom and
Google Meet were most popular (31.11%),
followed by learning management systems
(26.67%) and online coaching platforms
(25.56%). Educational websites and apps were
used by 16.67%.
2. Live online classes were most effective for
37.78%, recorded sessions for 31.11%,
interactive quizzes for 16.67%, and study
materials (PDFs) for 14.44%.
3. A majority agreed, with 34.44% strongly
agreeing and 52.22% agreeing. A minority
expressed disagreement (13.33%).
4. Video content was very effective for 35.56%,
moderately effective for 44.44%, slightly
effective for 17.78%, and ineffective for 2.22%.
5. Academic performance improved
significantly for 36.67%, moderately for
48.89%, with 13.33% reporting no change and
1.11% a decline.
Statistical Results:
Based on the chi-square test findings, there is no
statistically significant relationship between academic
UG PG
Row
Totals
Effective
28 (28.00) [0.0
0]
44 (44.00) [0.0
0]
7
2
Ineffectiv
e
7 (7.00) [0.00]
11 (11.00) [0.0
0]
1
8
Column
Totals 35 55
90 (Gran
d Total)

level (undergraduate or postgraduate) and students'
perception of the effectiveness of digital learning
platforms. The p-value obtained (1.0) is well above the
conventional significance threshold of 0.05.
As a result, we fail to reject the null hypothesis (H₀),
which means that students' academic standing does
not influence how they perceive the effectiveness of
digital platforms. Undergraduate and postgraduate
students experience digital learning in a similar
manner, facing comparable benefits and challenges.
This suggests that digital learning tools are equally
accessible and impactful across different academic
levels, and their effectiveness is not dependent on
whether the learner is at the UG or PG stage.
IV. DISCUSSION
Interpretation of Results:
The survey highlights a strong shift toward digital
learning in higher education, especially among
digitally adept postgraduate students. Online and
hybrid modes are preferred, reflecting post-pandemic
trends. Private and autonomous institutions lead in
digital adoption, suggesting better readiness
compared to government colleges.
Tools like video conferencing and LMS are widely
used and linked to improved academic outcomes,
motivation, and satisfaction. However, gaps in peer
connection and timely feedback remain. Overall,
digital platforms are becoming a central and effective
part of modern education in India.
Limitations of the study:
1. Limited Sample Size – Results may not represent
all UG and PG students across regions.
2. Subjective Responses – Data is based on self-
reported opinions, which may lack accuracy.
3. Short-Term View – The study captures a single
point in time, not long-term effects.
V. CONCLUSION & RECOMMENDATIONS
Summary of key findings:
The study reveals strong adoption of digital learning
among UG and PG students, mainly young
postgraduates from private and autonomous
institutions. Online and blended modes were
preferred, with tools like Zoom, LMS platforms, and
coaching sites used frequently. Live and recorded
sessions, interactive features, and video content were
found effective in improving engagement,
motivation, and academic performance. Most
students adapted well, found platforms easy to use,
and received timely feedback. Overall, digital
learning was well-received and widely
recommended for its flexibility and effectiveness.
Conclusion
The study confirms the growing reliance on digital
platforms in higher education, particularly among
young postgraduate students. Online and hybrid
learning are preferred for their flexibility, with tools
like video conferencing and LMS enhancing
engagement and academic performance. Most
students find digital platforms effective, easy to use,
and motivating. While private and autonomous
institutions show stronger digital adoption, gaps in
feedback and student connection remain areas for
improvement. Overall, digital learning has become a
core component of modern education, offering
significant benefits when effectively implement.
Suggestions for future research:
1. Broader Participation – Include a larger,
more diverse student sample across regions
and backgrounds.
2. Platform Effectiveness – Compare specific
digital tools to identify the most impactful
platforms.
3. Long-Term Impact – Assess the sustained
effects of digital learning on performance
and skills.
REFERENCES
[1] Almahasees, Z., Mohsen, K., & Amin, M. O. (2021).
Faculties and students’ perceptions of online learning
during COVID-19. International Journal of Educational
Research Open, 2, 100072.
[2] Dhawan, S. (2020). Online Learning: A Panacea in the
Time of COVID-19 Crisis. Journal of Educational
Technology Systems, 49(1), 5–22.
[3] Adarkwah, M. A. (2021). "I’m not against online
teaching, but what about us?" ICT in Ghana post
COVID-19. Education and Information Technologies, 26(2),
1665–1685.
[4] Basilaia, G., & Kvavadze, D. (2020). Transition to Online
Education in Schools during a SARS-CoV-2
Coronavirus (COVID-19) Pandemic in Georgia.
Pedagogical Research, 5(4), em0060.

[5] Malik, M., Fatima, G., & Abbas, M. (2023). Comparative
Study of E-learning Impact on Technical and Non-
Technical Courses. International Journal of Digital
Education and E-Learning, 6(2), 45–53.
[6] Singh, V., & Thurman, A. (2019). How many ways can
we define online learning? A systematic literature
review of definitions of online learning. American
Journal of Distance Education, 33(4), 289–306
[7] ResearchGate. (2024). The Effectiveness of Digital Learning
Platforms in Enhancing Student Engagement and Academic
Performance. Retrieved from
[8] ResearchGate. (2024). Impact of Digital Learning Tools on
Academic Performance: A Case Study of Makerere
University. Retrieved from
[9] Coursera. (n.d.). Coursera. Retrieved July 12, 2025, from
https://www.coursera.org
[10] Google. (n.d.). Google. Retrieved July 12, 2025, from
https://www.google.com
[11] EdX. (n.d.). EdX. Retrieved July 12, 2025, from
https://www.edx.org
[12] LinkedIn Learning. (n.d.). LinkedIn Learning. Retrieved
July 12, 2025, from
https://www.linkedin.com/learning
[13] YouTube EDU. (n.d.). YouTube Education. Retrieved
July 12, 2025, from
https://www.youtube.com/education
[14] NPTEL. (n.d.). National Programme on Technology
Enhanced Learning. Retrieved July 12, 2025, from
https://nptel.ac.in
[15] SWAYAM. (n.d.). Study Webs of Active–Learning for
Young Aspiring Minds. Retrieved July 12, 2025, from
https://swayam.gov.in
[16] UNESCO. (n.d.). Digital Education – UNESCO.
Retrieved July 12, 2025, from
https://www.unesco.org/en/digital-education
[17] ResearchGate. (n.d.). ResearchGate. Retrieved July 12,
2025, from https://www.researchgate.net

Evaluating the Effectiveness of Digital Platforms in Improving Student Outcomes with Reference to UG and PG

More Related Content

Similar to Evaluating the Effectiveness of Digital Platforms in Improving Student Outcomes with Reference to UG and PG (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

Evaluating the Effectiveness of Digital Platforms in Improving Student Outcomes with Reference to UG and PG