You are here:

Does Digital Teaching Platform Make a Difference?
PROCEEDINGS

, , Time To Know, Israel

EdMedia + Innovate Learning, in Lisbon, Portugal ISBN 978-1-880094-89-1 Publisher: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), Waynesville, NC

Full Text

Abstract

This study explores the effects of a social-constructivist technology-rich learning environment on elementary schools students' achievement in Mathematics and English Language Arts (ELA). The subjects were 59 4th grade students, who joined a Time To Know program in Dallas and 68 4th grade students who learned in traditional settings. Findings indicated that learning with Time To Know program significantly enhanced students Mathematics and ELA achievements and contributed to development of Mathematics reasoning skills. In addition, the study showed that Time To Know program narrowed the gap between the low and high achievement students, as well as significantly promoted the academic outcomes of at-risk students, compared to the traditional settings. The paper is based on data collected in an evaluation study conducted by Scott, Rockman, Kuusinen, & Bass (2011).

Citation

Rosen, Y. & Livshits, D. (2011). Does Digital Teaching Platform Make a Difference?. In T. Bastiaens & M. Ebner (Eds.), Proceedings of ED-MEDIA 2011--World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia & Telecommunications (pp. 3700-3711). Lisbon, Portugal: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved August 6, 2024 from .

© 2011 Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE)

Keywords

References

View References & Citations Map
  1. Bebell, D. (2007). 1 to 1 computing: Year one results from the Berkshire Wireless Learning Initiative evaluation. American Educational Research Association Annual Meeting. Chicago.
  2. Becker, H. (2001). How are teachers using computers in instruction? Seattle, WA: Center for Research on Information Technology and Organizations, University of California, Irvine.
  3. Bernard, R.M., Abrami, P.C., Borokhovski, E., Anne Wade, C., Tamim, R.M., Surkes, M.A., & Bethel, E.C. (2009). A meta-analysis of three types of interaction treatments in distance education. Review of Educational Research, 79(3), 1243–1289.
  4. Blachowicz, C., Bates, A., Berne, J, Bridgman, T., Chaney, J., & Perney, J (2009). Technology and atrisk young readers and their classrooms, Reading Psychology, 30(5), 387-411.
  5. Cuban, L. (2001). Oversold and underused: Computers in the classroom. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University.
  6. Cuban, L. (2003). Why is it so hard to get good schools? New York: Teachers College.
  7. 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.
  8. Edmonds, K., & Li, Q. (2005). Teaching at-risk students with technology: Teachers’ beliefs, experiences, and strategies for success. Annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association. Montreal.
  9. Fosnot, C. (2005). Constructivism: Theory, perspectives, and practice. New York: Teachers College Press.
  10. Francisco, J.M., & Maher, C.A. (2005). Conditions for promoting reasoning in problem solving: Insights from a longitudinal study. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 24(3/4), 361–372.
  11. Fullan, M. (2007). The new meaning of educational change. New York: Teachers College.
  12. Goetze, S., & Walker, B.J. (2004). At-risk readers can construct complex meanings: Technology can help. The Reading Teacher, 57(8), 778-780.
  13. Greaves, T., & Hayes, J. (2006). America’s Digital Schools 2008: A five-year forecast. Shelton, CT: Market Data Retrieval.
  14. Gulek, J., & Demirtas, H. (2005). Learning with technology: The impact of laptop use on student achievement. Journal of Technology, Learning, and Assessment, 3(2), 1–39.
  15. Jaillet, A. (2004). What is happening with portable computers in schools? Journal of Science Education and Technology, 13(1), 115–128.
  16. Jackson, L.A., von Eye, A., Biocca, F.A., Barbatsis, G., Zhao, Y., & Fitzgerald, H.E. (2006). Children's home Internet use: Predictors and psychological, social, and academic consequences. In R. Kraut, M. Brynin, & S.
  17. Jonassen, D., & Reeves, T. (1996). Learning with technology: Using computers as cognitive tools. In D. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of research for educational communications and technology (pp. 694–
  18. Lei, J., & Zhao, Y. (2008). One-to-one computing: What does it brings to school? Journal of Educational Computing Research, 39(2), 97–122.
  19. Lajoie, S.P. (2000). Computers as cognitive tools: No more walls (Vol. 2). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
  20. Marzano, R., & Kendall, J. (2007). The new taxonomy of educational objectives. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
  21. Moore, J.L., Laffey, J.M., Espinosa, L.M., & Lodree, A.W. (2002). Bridging the digital divide for atrisk students: Lessons learned. TechTrends, 46(2), 5-9.
  22. Prawat, R.S. & Folden, R.E. (1994). Philosophical perspectives on constructivist views of learning. Educational Psychologist, 29(1), 37–48.
  23. Rosen, Y. (2009). Effects of animation learning environment on knowledge transfer and learning motivation. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 40(4), 439-455.
  24. Rosen, Y., & Manny-Ikan, E. (2011). The social promise of educational technology: The case of the Time To Know program. Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association Annual Meeting. New Orleans, Louisiana.
  25. Rosen, Y, & Rimor, R. (2009). Using collaborative database to enhance students’ knowledge construction. Interdisciplinary Journal of E-Learning and Learning Objects, 5, 187-195.
  26. Rosen, Y. & Salomon, G. (2007). The differential learning achievements of constructivist technologyintensive learning environments as compared with traditional ones: A meta-analysis. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 36(1), 1–14.
  27. Roschelle, J., Pea, R., Hoadley, C., Gordin, D., & Means, B. (2000). Changing how and what children learn in school with computer-based technologies. The Future of Children, 10(2), 76–101.
  28. Salomon, G. (2002). Technology and pedagogy: Why don’t we see the promised revolution? Educational Technology, 42(2), 71-75.
  29. Salomon, G., & Perkins, D.N. (2005). Do technologies make us smarter? Intellectual amplification with, of, and through technology. In D.D. Preiss & R. Sternberg (Eds.). Intelligence and technology (pp. 71–86). Mahwah, NJ: LEA.
  30. Scott, B., Rockman, S., Kuusinen, C., & Bass, K. (2011). Evaluating the effectiveness of the Time To Know program. Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association Annual Meeting, New Orleans.
  31. Shapley, K., Sheehan, D., Sturges, K., Caranikas-Walker, F., Huntsberger, B., & Maloney, C. (2009). Evaluation of the Texas Technology Immersion Pilot: Final outcomes for a four-year study (2004–05 to 2007–08). Austin, TX: Texas Center for Educational Research.
  32. Silvernail, D., & Gritter, A. (2005). Maine’s middle school laptop program: Creating better writers. Gorham, ME: Maine Education Policy Research Institute.
  33. Stiff, L.V., & Curcio, F.R. (Eds.) (1999). Developing mathematical reasoning in grades K-12: 1999 Yearbook. Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
  34. Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
  35. Von Glasersfeld, E. (1995). A constructivism approach to teaching. L. Steffe & J. Gale (Eds). Constructivism in education (pp. 3–15). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
  36. Walters, J., Dede, C., & Richards, J. (2010). Pedagogical fit: An analysis of the design of Time To Know. New York: Time To Know.
  37. Warschauer, M. (2003). Technology and social inclusion: Rethinking the digital divide. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  38. Warschauer, M. & Matuchniak, T. (2010). New technology and digital worlds: Analyzing evidence of equity in access, use, and outcomes. Review of Research in Education, 34(1), 179–225.
  39. Weston, M.E., & Bain, A. (2010). The end of techno-critique: The naked truth about 1:1 laptop initiatives and educational change. The Journal of Technology, Learning, and Assessment, 9(6), 5–25.
  40. White, B., & Frederiksen, J. (2005). A theoretical framework and approach for fostering metacognitive development. Educational Psychologist, 40(4), 211–223.
  41. Yackel, E., & Hanna, G. (2003). Reasoning and proof. In J. Kilpatrick, G. Martin, & D. Schifter (Eds.), A research companion to principles and standards for school mathematics (pp. 227–236). Reston, VA:
  42. Zucker, A. & Light, D. (2009). Laptop programs for students. Science, 323(5910), 82–85.

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. Signed in users can suggest corrections to these mistakes.

Suggest Corrections to References

Slides

Also Read

Related Collections

Pages You've Visited

Abstracts