| |
|
Last updated October
9, 2006
The Best Evidence Encyclopedia
What are the impacts of the use
of instructional technology on reading, writing,
and math achievement in elementary and secondary
schools? This review considers studies published
since 1990 to find out. The types of technology
applications reviewed are as follows.
- Integrated Learning
Systems (ILS) in Reading: Software programs
that provide sequential, usually tutorial reading
instruction while keeping extensive records of
student progress. Examples: Jostens/Compass
Learning and CCC SuccessMaker.
- Writing to Read (WTR):
A kindergarten-first grade program that taught
students to read at least in part by teaching
writing. This program is no longer disseminated.
- Accelerated Reader:
A supplementary program that helps students make
book selections and then tests their understanding
of what they have read.
-
Word
Processing: Giving students opportunities
to use word processors to improve their creative
writing skills.
-
Computer
Enrichment: Games, simulations, access
to the Internet, and other supplementary applications.
-
Computer
Writing Prompts: Word processing programs
that provide hints to students on writing mechanics
or ideas.
- Integrated Learning
Systems (ILS) in Mathematics: Software
programs that provide sequential, usually tutorial
mathematics instruction while keeping track of
student progress.
-
Computer
Tutorials in Science: Tutorial programs
that focus on specific science instruction.
-
Computer
Simulations in Science: Programs in
which students experiment with models of real-world
phenomena, such as a frictionless world.
-
Microcomputer-Based
Laboratories: Technology that uses
electronic sensors to collect data on physical
systems for use in laboratory experiments.
A total of 61 studies
across all subjects and grade levels met the inclusion
criteria. Outcomes were summarized as effect sizes
(ES), the difference between adjusted experimental
and control means divided by the control group
standard deviation. Overall conclusions were as
follows.
-
Integrated
Learning Systems in Reading: Very small
effects (ES= +0.06 across 9 studies)
-
Writing
to Read: Clear positive effects in
kindergarten (ES= +0.84 across 2 studies) and
Grade 1 (ES= +0.40 across 6 studies), and mixed
effects beyond Grade 1 (ES= +0.25 across five
studies).
-
Accelerated
Reader: Mixed but mostly positive effects
(ES= +0.43 across 3 experimental studies)
-
Microcomputer-Based
Laboratories: Mixed effects, no overall trend
(ES= +0.01 across 8 very brief studies)
-
Computer Tutorials:
Clear positive effects (ES= +0.59 across 6 brief
studies)
-
Computer
Simulations: Mixed but mostly positive effects
(ES= +0.32 across 6 very brief studies)
Kulik carried out a broad search
for technology programs at all grade levels and
in all
subjects. He included studies that met the following
criteria:
-
Schools using
technology programs had to be compared to those
receiving traditional instruction, with equivalent
pretests
-
Outcome measures
had to be measured the same way in experimental
and control groups, and could not be measured
in a way more likely to register gains in one
group than in another
-
Studies had
to be free from serious differential attrition
(i.e., loss of more subjects from one group
than from another)
-
The study report
had to have appeared in 1990 or later
Kulik did not provide
ratings of individual technology programs, but
he did provide sufficient information to permit
ratings to be made in two categories in which
there were sufficient numbers of studies: integrated
learning systems (plus Accelerated Reader) in
elementary schools, and ILS in secondary schools.
Currently available programs that had been studied
in experiments of at least 12 weeks in duration
were categorized using the rating system developed
by Slavin & Lake (2006)*:
Programs were rated according to the overall
strength of the evidence supporting their effects
on achievement. “Effect size” (ES)
is the proportion of a standard deviation by which
a treatment group exceeds a control group. Large
studies are those involving a total of at least
10 classes or 250 students. The categories are
as follows:
*Slavin, R.E., & Lake, C. (2006). Effective
programs in elementary mathematics: A best-evidence
synthesis. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University,
Center for Data-Driven Reform in Education.
For another review
of research on computer-assisted instruction in
elementary mathematics, see Slavin & Lake,
2006*.
*Full report
available at http://www.sri.com/policy/csted/reports/sandt/it/Kulik_ITinK-12_Main_Report.pdf
|
|
|
