TY - INPR A1 - Müller, Andreas A1 - Falter, Thomas T1 - When Work (Re)releases Energy: Five steps towards regenerative people management N2 - In this article, we explore the innovative concept of regenerative work, which positions itself as a response to the challenges of the modern working world. At the core of our discussion are five phases of work design: from conventional (degenerative) work, often perceived as burdensome, through employee-oriented work, human-centeredness, restorative work, and finally to regenerative work, which can return energy to employees (and the environment). We examine the influence that leaders, employees, and HR professionals can have on designing working conditions, jobs, and teams. Practical examples illustrate how companies can achieve a positive energy balance for employees and teams through energy analysis. We emphasize that regenerative work is not a distant ideal but an achievable goal that can be realized through the conscious design of the workplace. Y1 - 2025 U6 - https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.10446.57928 ER - TY - CHAP A1 - Hauser, Florian A1 - Staufer, Susanne A1 - Röhrl, Simon A1 - Nadimpalli, Vamsi Krishna A1 - Ezer, Timur A1 - Grabinger, Lisa A1 - Mottok, Jürgen A1 - Falter, Thomas ED - Gómez Chova, Luis ED - González Martínez, Chelo ED - Lees, Joanna T1 - LEVERAGING FIVE QUESTIONNAIRES TO ANALYZE STUDENT LEARNING STRATEGIES AND GENERATE AI-POWERED INDIVIDUALIZED LEARNING PATHS T2 - ICERI2025 Proceedings N2 - Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has significantly accelerated the shift toward online and blended learning in higher education, placing renewed emphasis on the individualization of learning content to meet diverse student needs. Even high-quality learning materials may fail to engage learners if they do not align with students’ personal preferences and learning styles. Identifying these learner preferences, therefore, emerges as a critical challenge. Objectives: This paper presents ongoing work within a larger research project aimed at employing artificial intelligence to recommend optimal learning path for students in specific courses. Beyond mere optimization, the goal is to ensure the best possible fit between learning materials and individual learners. Sample & Methods: A total of 27 students from technical degree programs took part in this survey. All participation was voluntary, and data were handled in full compliance with GDPR regulations. Although our broader project integrates fine-grained learning analytics from Moodle, the present abstract focuses exclusively on the self-report questionnaire results. Participants completed five instruments: 1. Index of Learning Styles (ILS) 2. LIST-K (Learning and Study Strategies Inventory – Short version) 3. BFI-10 (Big Five Inventory – 10 items) 4. Custom Preferences Instrument, capturing preferences for specific learning elements (e.g. instructional videos, lecture notes, summaries) and basic demographic data 5. Motivational Value Systems Questionnaire (MVSQ), piloted last semester to assess value orientations and motivational drivers Results: Preliminary analyses of the questionnaire data reveal: - Learning Styles (ILS): The majority lean toward the visual learning type (M = 5.740, SD = 3.430). - Learning Strategies (LIST-K): High scores on metacognitive strategies (M = 3.000; SD = 0.520) and collaboration with peers (M = 3.190; SD = 0.540). - Preferred Learning Elements: Summaries, overviews, and self-checks are most favored. - Value Orientations (MVSQ): Students are primarily driven by the pursuit of personal achievement (M = 4.400; SD = 11.140). Conclusion & Significance: By integrating these five standardized questionnaires, we gain valuable insights into student learning preferences—insights that complement our Moodle analytics in the broader project. Observed trends suggest that learning materials should be concise and designed to facilitate peer interaction and knowledge deepening. These findings will guide the refinement of our AI-driven recommendation engine, enhancing its ability to deliver personalized learning paths that boost both engagement and effectiveness. KW - AI in higher education KW - learning management system KW - adaptive learning KW - personalized learning paths KW - online and blended learning Y1 - 2025 U6 - https://doi.org/10.21125/iceri.2025.0658 SP - 1775 EP - 1784 PB - IATED ER -