The effectiveness of educational technology applications for enhancing mathematics achievement in K-12 classrooms: A meta-analysis

Educational Research Review

Volumn 9, Issue , 2013, Pages 88-113

  Cheung, Alan ^a   Slavin, Robert ^b  

^a CHINESE UNIVERSITY OF HONG KONG   (Hong Kong)

^b JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Educational technology applications; K 12; Mathematics achievement; Meta analysis

Indexed keywords

EID: 84873956320     PISSN: 1747938X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.edurev.2013.01.001     Document Type: Review

References (136)

1. Abram, S. L. (1984). The effect of computer assisted instruction on first grade phonics and mathematics achievement computation. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Northern Arizona University.
2. Alifrangis C.M. An integrated learning system in an elementary school: Implementation, attitudes, and results. Journal of Computing in Childhood Education 1991, 2(3):51-66.
3. Atkins, J. (2005). The association between the use of accelerated math and students' math achievement. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, East Tennessee State University.
4. Bailey, T. E. (1991). The effect of computer-assisted instruction in improving mathematics performance of low achieving ninth grade students. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, The College of William and Mary.
5. Barrow, L., Markman, L., & Rouse, C. E. (2008). Technology's edge: The educational benefits of computer-aided instruction. Unpublished Working paper. National Bureau of Economic Research.
6. Bass G., Ries R., Sharpe W. Teaching basic skills through microcomputer assisted instruction. Journal of Educational Computing Research 1986, 2(2):207-219.
7. Becker H.J. Effects of computer use on mathematics achievement: Findings from a nationwide field experiment in grade five to eight 2002, Center for Research on Elementary and Middle Schools, Baltimore, Maryland, ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 342684.
8. Becker H.J. Mindless or mindful use of integrated learning systems. International Journal of Educational Research 1994, 21(1):65-79.
9. Birch, J. (2002). The effects of the Delaware Challenge Grant Program on the standardized reading and mathematics test scores of second and third grade students in the Caesar Rodney School District. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Wilmington College.
10. Borton W.M. The effects of computer managed mastery learning on mathematics test scores in the elementary school. Journal of Computer-Based Instruction 1988, 15(3):95-98.
11. Boster F.J., Yun J.A., Strom R., Boster L.J. Evaluation of new century education software: 7th grade mathematics academic year 2004-2005 2005, Cometrika, Inc, Grant Joint Union high schools district.
12. Brehmer-Evans, K. A. (1994). The effects of the integrated learning system on reading and mathematics achievement of magnet program students in the school district of the city of River Rouge. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Wayne State University, Detriot, MI.
13. Cabalo J.V., Vu M.T. Comparative effectiveness of carnegie learning's cognitive tutor algebra I curriculum: A report of a randomized experiment in the maui school district 2007, Empirical Education, Inc., Palo Alto, CA.
14. Campuzano L., Dynarski M., Agodini R., Rall K. Effectiveness of reading and mathematics software products: Findings from two student cohorts 2009, Institute of Education Sciences, Washington, DC.
15. Carrier C., Post T.R., Heck W. Using microcomputers with fourth-grade students to reinforce arithmetic skills. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education 1985, 16(1):45-51.
16. Dynarski M., Agodini R., Heaviside S.N., Carey N., Campuzano L., Means B., et al. Effectiveness of reading and mathematics software products: Findings from the first student cohort 2007, Institute of Education Sciences, Washington, DC.
17. Easterling, B. (1982). The effects of computer-assisted instruction as a supplement to a classroom instruction in reading comprehension and arithmetic. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, North Texas State University.
18. Estep S.G., McInerney W.D., Vockell E., Kosmoski G. An investigation of the relationship between integrated learning systems and academic achievement. Journal of Educational Technology Systems 1999-2000, 28(1):5-19.
19. Fletcher J.D., Hawley D.E., Piele P.K. Costs, effects, and utility of microcomputer assisted instruction in the classroom. American Educational Research Journal 1990, 27(4):783-806.
20. Gaeddert, T. J. (2001). Using Accelerated Math to enhance student achievement in high school mathematics courses. Unpublished master thesis, Friends University.
21. Gatti G.G., Petrochenkov K. Pearson successmaker math efficacy study: 2009-10 final report 2010, Gatti Evaluation Inc., Pittsburgh, PA.
22. Hess R.D., McGarvey L.J. School-relevant effects of educational uses of microcomputers in kindergarten classrooms and homes. Journal of Educational Computing Research 1987, 3(3):269-287.
23. Hotard, S. R., & Cortez, M. J. (1983). Computer assisted instruction as an enhancer of remediation. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 139655).
24. Howell, C. A. (1996). A comparison of chapter one middle school students who received Jostens integrated learing instruction and those who received chapter one services only. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Georgia.
25. Hunter, C. T. L. (1994). A study of the effect of instructional method on the reading and mathematics achievement of chapter one students in rural georgia. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, South Carolina State University.
26. Johnson-Scott, P. L. (2006). The impact of Accelerated Math on student achievement. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Mississippi State University.
27. Khalili A., Shashaani L. The effectiveness of computer applications: A meta-analysis. Journal of Research on Computing in Education 1994, 27(1):48-62.
28. Kirby P.C. Comparison of i can learn and traditionally-taught 8th grade general math student performance on the California standard test, Spring 2004 2004, Ed-cet, Inc., New Orleans, LA.
29. Kirby P.C. I can learn in Orleans parish public schools: Effects on LEAP 8th grade math achievement, 2003-2004 2006, Ed-cet, Inc., New Orleans, LA.
30. Kirby P.C. I can learn in Orleans parish public schools: Effects on LEAP 10th grade math achievement, 2003-2004 2006, Ed-cet, Inc., New Orleans, LA.
31. Laub, C. (1995). Computer-integrated learning system and elementary student achievement in mathematics: An evaluation study. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Temple University.
32. Levy, M. H. (1985). An evaluation of computer-assisted instruction upon the achievement of fifth grade students as measured by standardized tests. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Bridgeport.
33. Manuel, S. L. Q. (1987). The relationship between supplemental computer assisted mathematics instruction and student achievement. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, The University of Nebraska.
34. McCart, C. L. (1996). Use of an Integrated Learning System in improving achievement for at-risk students on the New Jersey early warning Test. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Temple University.
35. Metrics Associates Inc. (1981). Evaluation of the computer-assisted instruction Title I project, 1980-1981. Chelmsford, MA: Metrics Associates, Inc. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 233122).
36. Meyer, P. A. F. (1986). A comparative analysis of the value of intrinsic motivation in computer software on the math achievement, attitudes, attendance, and depth-of-involvement of underachieving students. Unpublished Doctoral dissertation, The College of William and Mary, Virginia.
37. Miller H. Quantitative analyses of student outcome measures. International Journal of Education Research 1997, 25:119-136.
38. Mintz, K. S. (2000). A comparison of computerized and traditional instruction in elementary mathematics. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, The University of Alabama.
39. Moore B.M. Achievement in basic math skills for low performing students: A study of teachers' affect and CAI. The Journal of Experimental Education 1988, 57(1):38-44.
40. Morgan, C. E., Sangston, B. J., & Pokras, R. (1980). Evaluation of computer-assisted instruction, 1975-1976. Rockville, MD: Montgomery County Public Schools. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 139655).
41. Nunnery J.A., Ross S.M. Effects of the school renaissance program on student achievement in reading and mathematics. Research in the Schools 2007, 14(1):40.
42. Pane J.F., McCaffrey D.F., Slaughter M.E., Steele J.L., Ikemoto G.S. An experiment to evaluate the efficacy of cognitive tutor geometry. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness 2010, 3:254-281.
43. Pike, D. C. (1991). Computer-assisted instruction and student achievement in chapter I schools. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Georgia, Georgia.
44. Resendez M., Azrin M., Strobel A. A study on the effects of Pearson's 2009 enVisionMATH program: Final summative report 2009, PRES Associates, Jackson, WY.
45. Rogosta M. Computer-assisted instruction and compensatory education: A longitudinal analysis. Machine-Mediated Learning 1983, 1(1):97-127.
46. Ross S.M., Nunnery J.A. The effect of school renaissance on student achievement in two Mississippi school districts 2005, Center for Research in Educational Policy, Memphis.
47. Rutherford, T., Kibrick, M., Burchinal, M., Richland, L., Conley, A., Osborn, K., et al. (2010). Spatial Temporal Mathematics at scale: An innovative and fully developed paradigm to boost math achievement among all learners. Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association.
48. Schmidt, S. (1991). Technology for the 21st century: The effects of an integrated distributive computer network system on student achievement. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of La Verne.
49. Schoolhouse LeapFrog An evaluation of the LeapTrack assessment and instruction system in Oakland 1st-4th grade classrooms 2004, LeapFrog Schoolhouse, Emeryville, CA.
50. Shanoski, L. A. (1986). An analysis of the effectiveness of using microcomputer assisted mathematics instruction with primary and intermediate level students. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Indiana University of Pennsylvania.
51. Shneyderman A. Evaluation of the cognitive tutor algebra I program 2001, Office of Evaluation and Research, Miami-Dade County Public Schools, Miami, FL.
52. Smith, J. E. (2001). The effect of the Carnegie Algebra Tutor on student achievement and attitude in introductory high school algebra. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, VA.
53. Spencer, T. M. (1999). The systemic impact of integrated learning system on mathematics achievement. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Eastern Michigan University.
54. Spicuzza R., Ysseldyke J., Lemkuil A., Kosciolek S., Boys C., Teelucksingh E. Effects of curriculum-based monitoring on classroom instruction and math achievement. Journal of School Psychology 2001, 39(6):521-542.
55. Thayer, J. (1992). The effect of the use of computer-assisted instruction (CAI) on attitudes and computational scores of developmental mathematics students at two inner-city schools with predominately black enrollment. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Florida International University.
56. Todd, W. E. (1985). Effects of computer-assisted instruction on attitudes and achievement of fourth grade students in reading and mathematics. Unpublished Doctoral dissertation, University of North Texas, Texas.
57. Turner, L. G. (1985). An evaluation of the effects of paired learning in a mathematics computer-assisted-instruction program. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Arizona State University.
58. Van Dusen L.M., Worthen B.R. Can intergrated instructional technology transform the classroom?. Educational Leadership 1995, 53(2):28-33.
59. Watkins M.W. Microcomputer-based math instruction with first-grade students. Computers in Human Behavior 1986, 2:71-75.
60. Webster, A. H. (1990). The relationship of computer assisted instruction to mathematics achievement, student cognitive styles, and student and teacher attitudes. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Delta State University, Cleveland, MI.
61. Whitaker, J. C. (2005). Impact of an integrated learning system on reading and mathematics achievement. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Tennessee State University.
62. Wijekumar K., Hitchcock J., Turner H., Lei P.W., Peck K. A multisite cluster randomized trial of the effects of compass learning Odyssey math on the math achievement of selected grade 4 students in the mid-Atlantic region: Final report 2009, Institute of Education Sciences, U. S. Department of Education, Washington, DC.
63. Ysseldyke J., Bolt D.M. Effect of technology-enhanced continuous progress monitoring on math achievement. School Psychology Review 2007, 36(3):453-467.
64. Ysseldyke J., Spicuzza R., Kosciolek S., Teelucksingh E., Boys C., Lemkuil A. Using a curriculum-based instructional management system to enhance math achievement in urban schools. Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk 2003, 8(2):247-265.
65. Abrami P.C., Bernard R.M. Research on distance education: In defense of field experiments. Distance education 2006, 27(1):5-26.
66. Bangert-Drowns R.L., Kulik J.A., Kulik C.L.C. Effectiveness of computer-based education in secondary schools. Journal of Computer-Based Instruction 1985, 12:59-68.
67. Becker H.J. Computer-based integrated learning systems in the elementary and middle grades: A critical review and synthesis of evaluation reports. Journal of Educational Computing Research 1992, 8(1):1-41.
68. Borenstein M., Hedges L.V., Higgins J.P.T., Rothstein H.R. Introduction to Meta-analysis 2009, Wiley, West Sussex.
69. Burns, P. K. (1981). A quantitative synthesis of research findings relative to the pedagogical effectiveness of computer-assisted instruction in elementary and secondary schools. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, The University of Iowa.
70. Burrill G., Allison J., Breaux G., Kastberg S., Leatham K., Sanchez W. Handheld graphing technology in secondary mathematics 2002, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI.
71. Campuzano L., Dynarski M., Agodini R., Rall K. Effectiveness of reading and mathematics software products: Findings from two student cohorts 2009, Institute of Education Sciences, Washington, DC.
72. Cheung A., Slavin R.E. Effectiveness of educational technology applications for enhancing reading achievement in K-12 classrooms: A meta-analysis 2011, Center for Research and Reform in Education, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD.
73. Choi-Koh S.S. A student's learning of geometry using the computer. The Journal of Educational Research 1999, 92(5):301-311.
74. Christmann E.P., Badgett J.L. A meta-analytic comparison of the effects of computer-assisted instruction on elementary students' academic achievement. Information Technology in Childhood Education Annual 2003, 1:91-104.
75. Christmann E.P., Lucking R.A., Badgett J.L. The effectiveness of computer-assisted instruction on the academic achievement of secondary students. Computers in the Schools 1997, 13(3-4):31-40.
76. Clark R.E. Reconsidering research on learning from media. Review of Educational Research 1983, 53(4):445-449.
77. Clark R.E. Confounding in education computing research. Journal of Educational Computing Research 1985, 1(2):445-460.
78. Cooley L.A. Evaluating student understanding in a calculus course enhanced by a computer algebra system. Primus 1997, 7(4):308-316.
79. Dellario T.E. The effects of computer assisted instruction in basic skills courses on high-risk ninth grade students 1987, Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Western Michigan University.
80. Dersimonian R., Laird N. Meta-analysis in clinical trials. Controlled Clinical Trials 1986, 7:177-188.
81. Dynarski M., Agodini R., Heaviside S.N., Carey N., Campuzano L., Means B., et al. Effectiveness of reading and mathematics software products: Findings from the first student cohort 2007, Institute of Education Sciences, Washington, DC.
82. Edwards J., Norton S., Taylor S., Weiss M., Dusseldoph R. How effective is CAI? A review of research. Educational Leadership 1975, 33(2):147-153.
83. Eisenberg, M. B., & Johnson, D. (1996). Computer skills for information problem-solving: Learning and teaching technology in context. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 392463).
84. Ellington A.J. A meta-analysis of the effects of calculators on students' achievement and attitude levels in precollege mathematics classes. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education 2003, 34(5):433-463.
85. Fletcher-Finn C., Gravatt B. The efficacy of computer-assisted instruction (CAI): A meta-analysis. Journal of Educational Computing Research 1995, 12(3):219-241.
86. Funkhouser C. The effects of computer-augmented geometry instruction on student performance and attitudes. Journal of Research on Technology in Education 2003, 35:163-175.
87. Glass G., McGaw B., Smith M.L. Meta-analysis in social research 1981, Sage, Beverly Hills, CA.
88. Hartley, S. S. (1977). Meta-analysis of the effects of individually paced instruction in Mathematics. Unpublished Doctoral dissertation, University of Colorado at Boulder.
89. Hedges, L. V. (1984). Meta-analysis: Statistics issues. Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, USA.
90. Hedges L.V., Olkins I. Vote counting methods in research synthesis. Psychological Bulletin 1980, 88:359-369.
91. Hembree R., Dessart D.J. Effects of hand-held calculators in precollege mathematics education: A meta-analysis. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education 1986, 17(2):83-99.
92. Hollebrands K.F. High school students' understandings of geometric transformations in the context of a technological environment. Journal of Mathematical Behavior 2003, 22(1):55-72.
93. Hollebrands K.F. The role of a dynamic software program for geometry in the strategies high school mathematics students employ. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education 2007, 38(2):164-192.
94. Jamison D.N., Suppes P., Wells S. Effectiveness of alternative instructional media. Review of Educational Research 1974, 44(1):1-67.
95. Karvelis B.A. The effect on elementary student achievement of computer-assisted and computer-managed instruction 1988, Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of San Francisco.
96. Kulik C.L.C., Kulik J.A. Effectiveness of computer-based instruction: An updated analysis. Computers in Human Behavior 1991, 7(1-2):75-94.
97. Kulik J.A. Effects of using instructional technology in elementary and secondary schools: What controlled evaluation studies say 2003, SRI International, Arlington, VA.
98. Kulik J.A., Kulik C.L.C., Bangert-Browns R.L. Effectiveness of computer-based education in elementary schools. Computers in Human Behavior 1985, 1:59-74.
99. Kozma R.B. Will media influence learning: Reframing the debate. Educational Technology Research and Development 1994, 42(2):7-19.
100. Lee W.C. The effectiveness of computer assisted instruction and computer programming in elementary and secondary mathematics: A meta-analysis 1990, University of Massachusetts-Amherst, Amherst.
101. Li Q., Ma X. A meta-analysis of the effects of computer technology on school students' mathematics learning. Educational Psychology Review 2011, 22:215-243.
102. Liao Y.K. Effects of hypermedia versus traditional instruction on students' achievement: A meta-analysis. Journal of Research on Computing in Education 1998, 30(4):341-359.
103. Liao Y.K. Effects of hypermedia on students' achievement: A meta-analysis. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia 1999, 8(3):255-277.
104. Liao Y.K. Effects of computer-assisted instruction on students' achievement in Taiwan: A meta-analysis. Computers and Education 2007, 48(2):216-233.
105. Lipsey M.W., Wilson D.B. Practical meta-analysis 2001, Sage, Thousand Oaks.
106. Meyer M.M., Feinberg S.E. Assessing evaluation studies: The case of bilingual education strategies 1992, National Academy of Sciences, Washington, DC.
107. National Assessment of Educational Progress. (2011, May 1). Grade 4 and 8 national mathematics results. Retrieved from. http://nationsreportcard.gov/math_2009/.
108. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2011, April 23). Principles and standards for mathematics education. Retrieved from. http://www.nctm.org/standards/content.aspx?id=26792.
109. Nathan M., Robinson C. Considerations of learning and learning research: Revisiting the "media effects" debate. Journal of Interactive Learning Research 2001, 12(1):69-88.
110. Niemiec R.P., Samson G., Weinstein T., Walberg H.J. The effects of computer based instruction in elementary schools: A quantitative synthesis. Journal of Research on Computing in Education 1987, 20(2):85-103.
111. Ouyang, R. (1993). A meta-analysis: Effectiveness of computer-assisted instruction at the level of elementary education. Unpublished dissertation, Indiana University of Pennsylvania, Indiana.
112. Pearson P.D., Ferdig R.E., Blomeyer R.L., Moran J. The effects of technology on reading performance in the middle-school grades: A meta-analysis with recommendations for policy 2005, Learning Point Associates, Naperville, IL.
113. Rakes C.R., Valentine J.C., McGatha M.B., Ronau R.N. Methods of instructional improvement in algebra: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research 2010, 80(3):372-400.
114. Reimer K., Moyer P.S. Third-graders learn about fractions using virtual manipulatives: A classroom study. [Feature article]. The Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 2005, 24(1):5-25.
115. Roddick C.D. Differences in learning outcomes: Calculus and mathematica vs. traditional calculus. Primus 2001, 11(1):161-184.
116. Roschelle J., Shechtman N., Tatar D., Hegedus S., Hopkins B., Empson S., Gallagher L.P. Integration of technology, curriculum, and professional development for advancing middle school mathematics: Three large-scale studies. American Educational Research Journal 2010, 47(4):833-878.
117. Ryan A.W. Meta-analysis of achievement effects of microcomputer applications in elementary schools. Educational Administration Quarterly 1991, 27(2):161-184.
118. Schmidt F.L., Oh I.S., Hayes T.L. Fixed- versus random-effects models in meta-analysis: Model properties and an empirical comparison of differences in results. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology 2009, 62:97-128.
119. Sedlmeier P., Gigerenzer G. Do studies of statistical power have an effect on the power of studies?. Psychological Bulletin 1989, 105:309-316.
120. SETDA. (2010, August 1). National educational technology trends: 2010. Retrieved from. http://www.setda.org.
121. Shadish W.R., Cook T.D., Campbell D.T. Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for generalized causal inference 2002, Houghton-Mifflin, Boston.
122. Slavin R.E., Lake C. Effective programs in elementary mathematics: A best evidence synthesis. Review of Educational Research 2009, 78(3):427-455.
123. Slavin R.E., Lake C., Groff C. Effective programs in middle and high school mathematics: A best evidence synthesis. Review of Educational Research 2009, 79(2):839-911.
124. Slavin R.E., Madden N.A. Measures inherent to treatments in program effectiveness reviews. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness. 2011, 4(4):370-380.
125. Slavin R.E., Smith D. Effects of sample size on effect size in systematic reviews in education. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis 2009, 31(4):500-506.
126. Smith M. Publication bias and meta-analysis. Evaluation in Education 1980, 4:22-24.
127. Steen K., Brooks D., Lyon T. The impact of virtual manipulatives on first grade geometry instruction and learning. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching 2006, 25(4):373-391.
128. Sterling T. Publication decisions and their possible effects on inferences drawn from tests of significance-or vice versa. Journal of the American Statistical Association 1959, 54:30-34.
129. Suh J., Moyer P.S., Heo H. Examining technology uses in the classroom: Developing fraction sense using virtual manipulative concept tutorials. Journal of Interactive Online Learning 2005, 3(4):1-21.
130. Thompson, V.L. (2009). Student and faculty experiences using computer algebra systems in undergraduate mathematics classrooms (Ed.D. doctoral dissertation, Teachers College, Columbia University, New York). Retrieved from. http://search.proquest.com/docview/304869964?accountid=11752.
131. Van Dusen L.M., Worthen B.R. Can intergrated instructional technology transform the classroom?. Educational Leadership 1995, 53(2):28-33.
132. Vinsonhaler J.F., Bass R.K. A summary of ten major studies on CAI drill and practice. Educational Technology 1972, 12:29-32.
133. Wodarz, N. (1994). The effects of computer usage on elementary students' attitudes, motivation and achievement in mathematics. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Northern Arizona University.
134. Ysseldyke J., Spicuzza R., Kosciolek S., Boys C. Effects of a learning information system on mathematics achievment and classroom structure. Journal of Educational Research 2003, 96(3):163-173.
135. Ysseldyke J., Spicuzza R., Kosciolek S., Teelucksingh E., Boys C., Lemkuil A. Using a curriculum-based instructional management system to enhance math achievement in urban schools. Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk 2003, 8(2):247-265.
136. Zumwalt, D. (2001). The effectiveness of computer aided instruction in eighth grade pre-algebra classrooms in Idaho. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Idaho State University.