Does Math Achievement h’APP’en when iPads and Game-Based Learning are Incorporated into Fifth-Grade Mathematics Instruction?
Jennie M. Carr, Bridgewater College, United States
JITE-Research Volume 11, Number 1, ISSN 1539-3585 Publisher: Informing Science Institute
After 10 years of No Child Left Behind standards-focused education, mathematics scores have improved only marginally for elementary-aged students. Students who developed a solid conceptual mathematics foundation at the elementary level succeeded later in higher-level mathematics courses; thus, educators have sought ways to increase mathematics achievement, especially among elementary school students. Educators have utilized advances in technology with game-based learning applications and wireless Internet access to create exciting interactive learning opportunities for students that may translate into student achievement. The purpose of this quantitative, quasi-experimental study was to examine the effects of iPad use as a 1-to-1 (1:1) computing device on 5th-grade students’ mathematics achievement in two rural Virginia elementary schools. A nonequivalent groups pretest and post-test design was used with 104 fifth-grade students. For one academic quarter of nine weeks, the experimental group used iPads as 1:1 computing devices daily during mathematics class while the control group members did not. A pretest was administered before the iPad intervention and a post-test was administered after the iPad intervention. The change from pretest to post-test was not significantly different between the two groups as measured by a one-way repeated measures analysis of variance. Recommendations for future study include increasing the intervention duration, using additional participants, collecting qualitative data, and providing students with continuous 24-hour, seven-day-a-week iPad access.
Carr, J.M. (2012). Does Math Achievement h’APP’en when iPads and Game-Based Learning are Incorporated into Fifth-Grade Mathematics Instruction?. Journal of Information Technology Education: Research, 11(1), 269-286. Informing Science Institute. Retrieved March 24, 2019 from https://www.learntechlib.org/p/111505/.
- Agodini, R., Harris, B., Atkins-Burnett, S., Heaviside, S., Novak, T., & Murphy, R. (2009). Achievement effects of four early elementary school math curricula: Findings from first graders in 39 Schools (NCEE 2009-4052). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance.
- Alagic, M. (2003). Technology in the mathematics classroom: Conceptual orientation. Journal of Computers in Mathematics& Science Teaching, 22(4), 381-399.
- Allsopp, D.H., Kyger, M.M., & Lovin, L.H. (2007). Teaching mathematics meaningfully: Solutions for reaching struggling learners. Baltimore, MD: Paul H Brookes.
- Amin, J. (2010). Twenty first century classrooms: Changing scenario. Learning Community: An International Journal of Education& Social Development, 1(1), 23-28.
- Ash, K. (2011, February 4). Calif. District pushes digital-text initiative forward. Education Week Digital Directions. Retrieved from http://www.edweek.org/dd/articles/2011/02/09/02books.h04.html
- Banister, S. (2010). Integrating the iPod touch in K-12 Education: Visions and vices. Computers in the Schools, 27(2), 121-131. Doi:10.1080/07380561003801590
- Bauleke, D.S., & Herrmann, K.E. (2010). Reaching the “iBored”. Middle School Journal, 41(3), 33-39.
- Bebell, D., O’Dwyer, L.M., Russell, M., & Hoffmann, T. (2010). Concerns, considerations, and new ideas for data collection and research in educational technology studies. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 43(1), 29-52.
- Bell, A. (2007). Handheld computers in schools and media centers. Santa Barbara, CA: Linworth Books.
- Berk, R.A. (2010). How do you leverage the latest technologies, including Web 2.0 tools, in your classroom? International Journal of Technology in Teaching and Learning, 6(1), 1-13. Retrieved from http://www.ronberk.com/articles/2010_leverage.pdf Buckley, P. (2010). The rough guide to the iPad. New York, NY: Penguin Group.
- Castelluccio, M. (2010). The table at work. Strategic Finance, 92(5), 59-60.
- Clark, A.C., & Ernst, J.V. (2009). Gaming in technology education. Technology Teacher, 68(5), 21-26.
- Cozby, P.C. (2009). Methods in behavioral research (10th ed.). Boston, MA: McGraw Hill.
- Cuban, L. (2001). Oversold and underused: Computers in the classroom. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
- DeCastro-Ambrosetti, D., & Cho, G. (2002). Technology: Panacea or obstacle in the education of diverse student populations? Multicultural Education, 10(2), 25-30.
- Dewey, J. (1922). Democracy and education. New York, NY: MacMillian. Dewey, J. (1938/1998). Experience and education: The 60th anniversary edition. Indianapolis, IN. Kappa Delta Pi Press.
- Donovan, L., Green, T., & Hartley, K. (2010). An examination of one-to-one computing in the middle school: Does increased access bring about increased student engagement? Journal of Educational Computing Research, 42(4), 423–441. Doi:10.2190/EC.42.4.d
- Enriquez, A.G. (2010). Enhancing student performance using tablet computers. College Teaching, 58(3), 77-84. Doi:10.1080/87567550903263859
- Franklin, T. (2011). Mobile learning: At the tipping point. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 10(4), 261-275.
- Goddard, M. (2002). What do we do with these computers? Reflections on technology in the classroom. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 35(1), 19-26.
- Granberg, E., & Witte, J. (2005). Teaching with laptops for the first time: Lessons from a social science classroom. New Directions for Teaching& Learning, 101, 51-59. Doi:10.1002/tl.186 281 The Impact of iPads on Math Achievement
- Griffin, S. (2007). Early intervention for children at risk of developing mathematical learning difficulties. In D.B. Berch & M.M. Mazzocco (Eds.), Why is math so hard for some children?: The nature and origins of mathematical learning difficulties and disabilities (pp. 343-345). Baltimore, MD: Paul H
- Heise, B., & Himes, D. (2010). The course council: An example of student-centered learning. Journal of Nursing Education, 49(6), 343-345.
- Hill, R.A. (2011). Mobile digital devices. Teacher Librarian, 39(1), 22-26.
- Hlodan, O. (2010). Mobile learning: Anytime, anywhere. BioScience, 60(9), 682. Doi:10.1525/bio.2010.60.9.4
- Hoffmann, L. (2009, August 1). Learning through games. Communications of the ACM, 52(8), 21-22. Available from http://cacm.acm.org/magazines/2009/8/34487-learning-through-games/fulltext Holcomb, L.B. (2009). Results& Lessons learned from 1:1 laptop initiatives: A collective review. TechTrends: Linking Research& Practice to Improve Learning, 53(6), 49-55. Doi:10.1007/s11528-0090343-1
- Houghton Mifflin Harcourt. (2012). HMH Fuse™ algebra I: Results of a yearlong algebra pilot in Riverside, California. Retrieved from http://www.hmheducation.com/fuse/pdf/hmh-fuse-riversidewhitepaper.pdf
- Hu, W. (2007, May 4). Seeing no progress, some schools drop laptops. Retrieved from http://www.intelligentcommunity.org/clientuploads/PDFs/Schools-Drop-Laptops-NYT050407.pdf Hubbard, L. (2000). Technology-based math curriculum. T.H.E. Journal, 28(3), 80-84.
- Huizenga, J.J., Admiral, W.W., Akkerman, S.S., & Dam, G. (2009). Mobile game-based learning in secondary education: engagement, motivation, and learning in a mobile city game. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 25(4), 332-344. Doi:10.1111/J.1365-2729.2009.00316.x
- Jackson, J. (2009). Game-based teaching: What educators can learn from videogames. Teaching Education, 20(3), 291-304. Doi:10.1080/10476210902912533
- Johnson, B., & Christensen, L. (2012). Educational research: Quantitative, qualitative, and mixed approaches (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
- Kulik, C., & Kulik, J. (1991). Effectiveness of computer-based instruction: An updated analysis. Computers in Human Behavior, 7(1/2), 75-94. Doi:10.1016/0747-5632(91)90030-5
- Lavín-Mera, P.P., Torrente, J.J., Moreno-Ger, P.P., Vallejo-Pinto, J.A., & Fernández-Manjón, B.B. (2009). Mobile game development for multiple devices in education. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning, 4(S2), 19-26. Retrieved from http://online-journals.org/ijet/article/view/910
- Lewis, R.E. (2011). The effectiveness of computer-assisted instruction on student math achievement (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses database. (UMI 3441943).
- Li, S.C., & Pow, J.C. (2011). Affordance of deep infusion of one-to-one tablet-PCs into and beyond classroom. International Journal of Instructional Media, 38(4), 319-326.
- Lowther, D.L., Ross, S.M., & Morrison, G.M. (2003). When each one has one. Educational Technology Research and Development, 51(3), 23-44. Doi:10.1007/BF02504551
- Mansour, S.S., & El-Said, M. (2009). Multi-players role-playing educational serious games: A link between fun and learning. International Journal of Learning, 15(11), 229-239.
- Marlowe, B.A., & Page, M.L. (2005). Creating and sustaining the constructivist classroom. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press. Carr
- Mendicino, M., & Heffernan, N. (2007). Comparing the learning from intelligent tutoring systems, nonintelligent computer-based versions, and traditional classroom instruction. Manuscript submitted for publication.
- Moreau, N. (2010). Do clickers open minds? Use of a questioning strategy in developmental mathematics (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Capella University, Minneapolis, MN.
- Murphy, G.D. (2011). Post-PC devices: A summary of early iPad technology adoption in tertiary environments. E-Journal of Business Education& Scholarship of Teaching, 5(1), 18-32.
- Murray, O., & Olcese, N. (2011). Teaching and learning with iPads, Ready or not? Techtrends: Linking Research& Practice to Improve Learning, 55(6), 42-48. Doi:10.1007/s11528-011-0540-6National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP). (2000). The nation’s report card: 2000. Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/pdf/main2000/2001518.pdf National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP). (2003). The nation’s report card: 2003. Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/pdf/main2003/2004451.pdf
- National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.
- National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2008). Position statement on equity in mathematics education. Retrieved from www.nctm.org/?about/content.aspx?id=8452NoChildLeftBehindActof2001,Pub.L.No.107-110.§115,Stat.1425(2002).Retrievedfromhttp://www.ed.gov/policy/elsec/leg/esea02/index.html
- Nugent, G.C. (2005). Use and delivery of learning objects in K-12: The public television experience. TechTrends: Linking Research& Practice to Improve Learning, 49(4), 61-66.
- Ornstein, A.C., & Levine, D.U. (2003). Foundations of education (8th ed.). Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.
- Ozel, S., Yetkiner, Z.E., & Capraro, R.M. (2008). Technology in K-12 mathematics classrooms. School Science& Mathematics, 108(2), 80-85. Doi:10.1111/J.1949-8594.2008.tb17807.x
- Park, H. (2008). The impact of technology use on Hispanic students’ mathematics achievement within family and school contexts: Subgroup analysis between English-and non-English speaking students. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 38(4), 453-468.
- Pieratt, J.R. (2010). Advancing the ideas of John Dewey: A look at the high tech Schools. Education& Culture 26(2), 52-64.
- Price, A. (2011). Making a difference with smart tablets. Teacher Librarian, 39(1), 31-34. Program for International Student Assessment (PISA). (2000). Messages from PISA 2000. Retrieved from http://www.oecd.org/pages/0,3417,en_32252351_32236159_1_1_1_1_1,00.htmlProgramforInternationalStudentAssessment(PISA).(2003).Internationaloutcomesoflearninginmathematicsliteracyandproblemsolving:PISA2003resultsfromU.S.perspective.Retrievedfromhttp://www.oecd.org/pages/0,3417,en_32252351_32236173_1_1_1_1_1,00.html
- Resendez, M., & Azin, M. (2006). 2005 Scott Foresman –Addison Wesley elementary math randomized control trial: Final report. Jackson, WY: Pres Associates.
- Resendez, M., Azin, M., & Strobel, A. (2009). A study on the effects of Pearson’s 2009 enVision math program: Final summative report. Jackson, WY: Pres Associates.
- Rockman, S. (2004). A study in learning: What does the latest research on mobile computing tell us about teachers, students– and testing. Technology& Learning, 25(3), 1-12.
- Rosen, Y., & Beck-Hill, D. (2012). Intertwining digital content and a one-to-one laptop environment in teaching and learning: Lessons from the time to know program. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 44(3), 225-241.
- Ross, S.M., Morrison, G.R., & Lowther, D.L. (2010). Educational technology research past and present: Balancing rigor and relevance to impact school learning. Contemporary Educational Technology, 1(1), 17-35.
- Salkind, N.J. (2010). Encyclopedia of research design. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
- Sarama, J., & Clements, D.H. (2009). Teaching math in the primary grades. Young Children, 64(2), 63-64.
- Shuler, C. (2009). Pockets of potential: Using mobile technologies to promote children’s learning. New York, NY: The Joan Ganz Cooney Center at Sesame Workshop.
- Silvernail, D.L., & Gritter, A.K. (2004). Maine’s middle school laptop program: Creating better writers. Gorham, ME: University of Southern Maine.
- Stevens, C. (2011). Designing the iPad: Building applications that sell. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley and Sons.
- Suki, N.M., Suki, N.M., Eshaq, A.R., & Choo, K.A. (2010). Using mobile device for learning: Students’ perspective. Proceedings of the International Conference on e-Learning (pp. 291-299).
- Tanner, D., & Tanner, L. (2007). Curriculum development: Theory into practice (4th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.
- Texas Center for Educational Research. (2009). Evaluation of the Texas technology immersion pilot: Final outcome of a four-year study. Retrieved from http://www.tcer.org/research/etxtip/documents/y4_etxtip_final.pdf Todd, A. (2010). The effects of progressive time delay utilizing an iPod on math fact acquisition (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest. (AAT 3407486)
- Traxler, J. (2010). Distance education and mobile learning: Catching up, taking stock. Distance Education, 31(2), 129-138.
- Trochim, W., & Donnelly, J. (2007). The research methods knowledge base (3rd ed.). Mason, OH: Cengage.
- Tzuo, P. (2007). The tension between teacher control and children’s freedom in a child-centered classroom: Resolving the practical dilemma through a closer look at the related theories. Early Childhood Education Journal, 35(1), 33-39.
- U.S. Census Bureau. (2011). State and county quickfacts. Retrieved from http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/index.html
- VandeWalle, J.A., Karp, K.S., & Bay-Williams, J.M. (2010). Elementary and middle school mathematics: Teaching developmentally (7th ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
- Vartuli, S., & Rohs, J. (2007). Selecting curriculum content that stimulates thought. Early Childhood Education Journal, 35(5), 393-396.
- Viadero, D. (2009). Study gives edge to 2 math programs. Education Week, 28(23), 3-4.
- Walberg, H.J. (2011). Tests, testing, and genuine school reform. Chicago, IL: Hoover Institution Press.
- Wang, W. (2010). My new iPad: A user’s guide. San Francisco, CA: No Starch Press.
- Westbook, R.B. (1993). John Dewey 1859-1952. Prospects: The Quarterly Review of Comparative Education. 23(1/2), 277-291.
- Wright, A. (2012). Tablets over textbooks. Communications of the ACM, 55(3).
These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. If you see a mistake in the references above, please contact firstname.lastname@example.org.