An examination of one-to-one computing in the middle school: Does increased access bring about increased student engagement?

Journal of Educational Computing Research

Volumn 42, Issue 4, 2010, Pages 423-441

  Donovan, Loretta ^a   Green, Tim ^a   Hartley, Kendall ^b  

^a CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF NEVADA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 77952622770     PISSN: 07356331     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2190/EC.42.4.d     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Atalib, H. (2002). The use of mobile-wireless technology for education. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED475184).
2. Baker, R. S., Corbett, A. T., Koedlinger, K. R., & Wagner, A. Z. (2004). Off-task behavior in the cognitive tutor classroom: When students game the system. Proceedings of ACM CHI 2004: Computer-Human Interaction , 383-390.
3. Bangert-Drowns, R. L., & Pyke, C. (2001). Student engagement with educational software: An exploration of literate thinking with electronic literature. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 24 (3), 213-234.
4. Barron, A. E., Harmes, J. C., & Kemker, K. J. (2006). Technology as a classroom tool: Learning with laptop computers. In L. Tan Wee Hin & R. Subramaniam (Eds.), Handbook of research on literacy in technology at the K-12 level (pp. 271-286) Hershey, PA: Idea Group Reference.
5. Becker, H. J. (2001). How are teachers using computers in instruction? Retrieved January 11, 2009 from http://www.crito.uci.edu/tlc/findings/ conferences-pdf/how-are-teachers-using.pdf
6. Crystal, J. (2001). One-to-one technology: A model for 21st century education? In C. Montgomerie & J. Viteli (Eds.), Proceedings of World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia and Telecommunications 2001 (pp. 337-341). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.
7. Doyle, W. (1986). Classroom organization and management. In M. C. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (3rd ed., pp. 392-431). New York: Macmillan.
8. Goffman, E. (1967). Interaction ritual. Middlesex, England: Penguin Books.
9. Hall, G. E., Alquist, A., Hendrickson, M. B., George, A. A., Johnson, M., Thorton, E., et al. (1999). Using constructs and techniques from research to facilitate and assess implementation of an innovative mathematics curriculum. Journal of Classroom Interaction, 34 (1), 1-8.
10. Hall, G. E., & George, A. A. (2000). The use of innovation configuration maps in assessing implementation: The bridge between development and student outcomes. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED445099).
11. Hall, G. E., & Hord, S. M. (2006). Implementing change: Patterns, principles, and potholes (2nd ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
12. Hartnell-Young, E. (2001). Successful integration of learning technologies in school classrooms (SILT). In C. Montgomerie & J. Viteli (Eds.), Proceedings of World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia and Telecommunications 2001 (pp. 680-681). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.
13. Heck, S., Stiegelbauer, S. M., Hall, G. E., & Loucks, S. F. (1981). Measuring innovation configurations: Procedures and application. Austin, TX: Southwest Educational Development Laboratory.
14. International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE). (2008). National educational technology standards. Retrieved December 26, 2008 from http://cnets.iste.org/
15. Linnenbrink, E. A., & Pintrich, P. R. (2003). The role of self-efficacy beliefs in student engagement and learning in the classroom. Reading and Writing Quarterly, 19 , 119-137.
16. Lowther, D. L., Ross, S. M., & Morrison, G. M. (2003). When each one has one: The influences on teaching strategies and student achievement of using laptops in the classroom. Educational Technology Research and Development, 51 (3), 23-44.
17. McHale, T. (2007). One-to-one in Alaska. Technology and Learning, 27 (8), 24-16.
18. Mouza, C. (2008). Learning with laptops: Implementation and outcomes in an urban, under-privileged school. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 40 (4), 447-472.
19. Penuel, W. R. (2006). Implementation and effects of one-to-one computing initiatives: A research synthesis. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 38 (3), 329-348.
20. Richardson, V., & Placier, P. (2001). Teacher change. In V. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (4th ed., pp. 905-947). Washington: American Educational Research Association.
21. Rockman et al. (1997). Report of a laptop pilot program. Retrieved January 2, 2009 from http://www.rockman.com/projects/index.php
22. Rockman et al. (1998). Powerful tools for schooling: Second year study of the laptop program. Retrieved January 10, 2009 from http://www.rockman.com/ projects/index.php
23. Russell, M., Bebell, D., Cowan, J., & Corbelli, M. (2002). An AlphaSmart for each student: Does teaching and learning change with full access to word processors? Paper presented at National Educational Computing Conference, San Antonio, TX. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED475950).
24. Schaumburg, H. (2001). Fostering girl's computer literacy through laptop learning: Can mobile computers help to level out the gender difference? National Educational Computing Conference Proceedings , Chicago, IL. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED462945).
25. Spradley, J. P. (1980). Participant observer. Fort Worth, TX: Harcourt.
26. Ward, R., Keller, M., & Figg, C. (2003). Emerging technologies and forestry: Using handhelds and an interdisciplinary approach to introduce forestry in the middle school classroom. In C. Crawford et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology and Teacher Education International Conference 2003 (pp. 1353-1356). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.
27. Windschitl, M., & Sahl, K. (2002). Tracing teachers' use of technology in a laptop computer school: The interplay of teacher beliefs, social dynamics, and institutional culture. American Educational Research Journal, 39 (1), 165-205.
28. Zucker, A. (2004). Developing a research agenda for ubiquitous computing in schools. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 30 (4), 371-386.