The role of arts-related information and communication technology use in problem solving and achievement: Findings from the programme for international student assessment

Journal of Educational Psychology

Volumn 106, Issue 2, 2014, Pages 348-363

  Liem, Gregory Arief D ^a   Martin, Andrew J ^b   Anderson, Michael ^b   Gibson, Robyn ^b   Sudmalis, David ^c  

^a NANYANG TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY   (Singapore)

^b UNIVERSITY OF SYDNEY   (Australia)

^c Australia Council for the Arts   (Australia)

Author keywords

Arts; ICT; OECD; PISA; Problem solving skill

Indexed keywords

EID: 84925396099     PISSN: 00220663     EISSN: 19392176     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/a0034398     Document Type: Article

References (77)

1. Anderson, J. R. (1993). Problem solving and learning. American Psychologist, 48, 35-44. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.48.1.35
2. Aprill, A. (2001). Toward a finer description of the connection between arts education and student achievement. Arts Education Policy Review, 102, 25-26. doi:10.1080/10632910109600013
3. Ashman, A. F., Conway, R. N. F. (1993). Teaching students to use process-based learning and problem solving strategies in mainstream classes. Learning and Instruction, 3, 73-92. doi:10.1016/0959-4752(93)90009-O
4. Attewell, P., Battle, J. (1999). Home computers and school performance. The Information Society, 15, 1-10. doi:10.1080/019722499128628
5. Attewell, P., Suazo-Garcia, B., Battle, J. (2003). Computers and young children: Social benefit or social problem? Social Forces, 82, 277-296. doi:10.1353/sof.2003.0075
6. Bamford, A. (2006). The WOW factor: Global research compendium on the impact of the arts in education. New York, NY: Waxmann Munster.
7. Bohnert, A., Fredricks, A. J., Randall, E. (2010). Capturing unique dimensions of youth organized activity involvement: Theoretical and methodological considerations. Review of Educational Research, 80, 576-610. doi:10.3102/0034654310364533
8. Burton, J., Horowitz, R., Abeles, H. (1999). Learning in and through the arts: Curriculum implications. In E. B. Fiske (Ed.), Champions of change: The impact of the arts on Learning (pp. 35-46). Washington, DC: The Arts Education Partnership and The President's Committee on the Arts and the Humanities.
9. Bussière, P., Gluszynski, T. (2004). The impact of computer use on reading achievement of 15-year-olds. Ottawa, Canada: Human Resources and Skills Development.
10. Cain, T. (2004). Theory, technology and the music curriculum. British Journal of Music Education, 21, 215-221. doi:10.1017/S0265051704005650
11. Caldwell, L. L., Witt, P. A. (2011). Leisure, recreation, and play from a developmental context. New Directions for Youth Development, 2011, 13-27. doi:10.1002/yd.394
12. Catterall, J. S. (2009). Doing well and doing good by doing art: The effects of education in the visual and performing arts on the achievements and values of young adults. Los Angeles, CA: Imagination Group Books.
13. Catterall, J. S., Dumais, S. A., Hampden-Thompsan, G. (2012). The arts and achievement in at-risk youth: Findings from four longitudinal studies. Washington, DC: National Endowment for the Arts.
14. Chi, M. T. H., Glaser, R., Farr, M. (Eds). (1988). The nature of expertise. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
15. Chiu, M. M., Khoo, L. (2005). Effects of resources, distribution inequality, and privileged bias on achievement: Country, school, and student level analyses. American Educational Research Journal, 42, 575-603. doi:10.3102/00028312042004575
16. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
17. Crow, B. (2006). Musical creativity and the new technology. Music Education Research, 8, 121-130. doi:10.1080/14613800600581659
18. Curbelo, J. (1984). Effects of problem-solving instruction on science and mathematics student achievement: Meta-analysis of findings (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Florida State University.
19. Deasy, R. (Ed.). (2002). Critical links: Learning in the arts and student academic and social development. Washington, DC: Arts Education Partnership.
20. Dossey, J. A., McCrone, S. S., O'Sullivan, C., Gonzales, P. (2006). Problem solving in the PISA and TIMSS 2003 assessments (Technical Rep. NCES 2007-049). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics.
21. Duran, M., Sendag, S. (2012). A preliminary investigation into critical thinking skills of urban high school students: Role of an IT/STEM program. Creative Education, 3, 241-250. doi:10.4236/ce.2012.32038
22. Fiske, E. (Ed.). (1999). Champions of change: The impact of the arts on learning. Washington, DC: The Arts Education Partnership and the President's Committee on the Arts and Humanities.
23. Fredricks, J. A., Eccles, J. S. (2008). Participation in extracurricular activities in the middle school years: Are there developmental benefits for African American and European American youth? Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 37, 1029-1043. doi:10.1007/s10964-008-9309-4
24. Gadanidis, G., Hughes, J., Cordy, M. (2011). Mathematics for gifted students in an arts- and technology-rich setting. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 34, 397-433. doi:10.1177/016235321103400303
25. Galton, M. (2008). Creative practitioners in schools and classrooms. Cambridge, England: University of Cambridge.
26. Getzels, J. W., Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1976). The creative vision: A longitudinal study of problem finding. New York, NY: Wiley.
27. Gibson, M. A., Larson, M. A. (2007). Visual arts and academic achievement. Journal for Learning through the Arts, 3, 1-41.
28. Graham, J. W. (2009). Missing data analysis: Making it work in the real world. Annual Review of Psychology, 60, 549-576. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.58.110405.085530
29. Hartley, K., Bendixen, L. (2001). Educational research in the Internet age: Examining the role of individual characteristics. Educational Researcher, 30, 22-26. doi:10.3102/0013189X030009022
30. Hattie, J. (2009). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. London, England: Routledge.
31. Hembree, R. (1992). Experiments and relational studies in problem solving: A meta-analysis. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 23, 242-273. doi:10.2307/749120
32. Hennessy, S., Dunham, P. (2002). Equity issues affecting mathematics learning using ICT. Research in Mathematics Education, 4, 145-165.
33. Hew, K. H., Brush, T. (2007). Integrating technology into K-12 teaching and learning: Current knowledge gaps and recommendations for future research. Education Technology Research Development, 55, 223-252. doi:10.1007/s11423-006-9022-5
34. Hunter, M. (2005). Education and the arts: Research overview. A summary report prepared for the Australia Council for the Arts. Canberra: Australian Government and Australian Council for the Arts.
35. Jæger, M. M. (2011). Does cultural capital really affect academic achievement? New evidence from combined sibling and panel data. Sociology of Education, 84, 281-298. doi:10.1177/0038040711417010
36. Kuh, G., Vesper, N. (1999). Do computers enhance or detract from student learning? Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Montreal, Quebec.
37. Lei, J., Zhao, Y. (2007). Technology uses and student achievement: A longitudinal study. Computers & Education, 49, 284-296. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2005.06.013
38. Li, Q., Ma, X. (2010). A meta-analysis of the effects of computer technology on school students' mathematics learning. Educational Psychology Review, 22, 215-243. doi:10.1007/s10648-010-9125-8
39. Liao, Y.-k. C. (2007). Effects of computer-assisted instruction on students' achievement in Taiwan: A meta-analysis. Computer & Education, 48, 216-233. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2004.12.005
40. Lowerison, G., Sclater, J., Schmid, R. F., Abrami, P. C. (2006). Student perceived effectiveness of computer technology use in post-secondary classrooms. Computers & Education, 47, 465-489. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2004.10.014
41. Mak, B. L., Degennaro, A. (1999). Computer graphics for art creation: Cultural biases against its acceptance in education. Computers & Graphics, 23, 419-427. doi:10.1016/S0097-8493(99)00049-7
42. Marsh, H. W., Balla, J. R., Hau, K.-T. (1996). An evaluation of incremental fit indices: A clarification of mathematical and empirical processes. In G. A. Marcoulides & R. E. Schumacker (Eds.), Advanced structural equation modeling techniques (pp. 315-353). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
43. Marsh, H. W., Hau, K.-T., Wen, Z. (2004). In search of golden rules: Comment on hypothesis-testing approaches to setting cutoff values for fit indexes and dangers in overgeneralising Hu and Bentler's (1999) findings. Structural Equation Modeling, 11, 320-341. doi:10.1207/s15328007sem1103_2
44. Marsh, H. W., Kleitman, S. (2002). Extracurricular school activities: The good, the bad, and the nonlinear. Harvard Educational Review, 72, 464-514.
45. Martin, A. J., Liem, G. A. D., Mok, M. M. C., Xu, J. (2012). Problem solving and immigrant student mathematics and science achievement: Multination findings from the Programme for International Student Assessment. Journal of Educational Psychology, 104, 1054-1073. doi:10.1037/a0029152
46. Mayer, R. E. (2008). Learning and instruction (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Merrill Prentice Hall.
47. Mayer, R. E., Wittrock, M. C. (1996). Problem-solving transfer. In D. C. Berliner & R. C. Calfee (Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology (pp. 47-62). New York, NY: Macmillan.
48. McComb, B. L. (2000, September). Assessing the role of educational technology in the teaching and learning process: A learner-centered perspective. Retrieved from http://tepserver.ucsd.edu/courses/tep203/fa04/a/articles/mccombs.pdf
49. McDonald, R. P., Marsh, H. W. (1990). Choosing a multivariate model: Noncentrality and goodness of fit. Psychological Bulletin, 107, 247-255. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.107.2.247
50. McFarlane, A., Sakellariou, S. (2002). The role of ICT in science education. Cambridge Journal of Education, 32, 219-232. doi:10.1080/03057640220147568
51. Moga, E., Burger, K., Hetland, L., Winner, E. (2000). Does studying the arts engender creative thinking? Evidence for near but not far transfer. Journal of Aesthetic Education, 34, 91-104. doi:10.2307/3333639
52. Muthén, L. K., Muthén, B. O. (2012). Mplus user's guide. Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén.
53. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (1989). Curriculum and evaluation standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.
54. National Endowment for the Arts. (2009). 2008 survey of public participation in the arts. Washington, DC: Author.
55. National Research Council. (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
56. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2003). The PISA 2003 assessment framework: Mathematics, reading, science, and problem solving knowledge and skills. Paris, France: Author.
57. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2004). Learning for tomorrow's world: First results from PISA 2003. Paris, France: Author.
58. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2004). Problem solving for tomorrow's world first measures of cross-curricular competencies from PISA 2003. Paris, France: Author.
59. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2005). Are students ready for a technology-rich world? What PISA studies tell us. Paris, France: Author.
60. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2005). PISA 2003 data analysis manual: SPSS users. Paris, France: Author.
61. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2005). PISA 2003 technical report. Paris, France: Author.
62. Peter, J., Valkenburg, P. M. (2006). Adolescents' exposure to sexually explicit material on the Internet. Communication Research, 33, 178-204. doi:10.1177/0093650205285369
63. President's Committee on the Arts and the Humanities. (2011). Reinvesting in arts education: Winning America's future through creative schools. Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved from www.pcah.gov
64. Randi Korn & Associates, Inc. (2007). Teaching literacy through art. Alexandria, VA: Author.
65. Randi Korn & Associates, Inc. (2010). Educational research: The art of problem solving. Alexandria, VA: Author.
66. Stapleton, L. M. (2006). An assessment of practical solutions for structural equation modeling with complex sample data. Structural Equation Modeling, 13, 28-58. doi:10.1207/s15328007sem1301_2
67. Subrahmanyam, K., Greenfield, P., Kraut, R., Gross, E. (2001). The impact of computer use on children's and adolescents' development. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 22, 7-30. doi:10.1016/S0193-3973(00)00063-0
68. Subrahmanyam, K., Kraut, R., Greenfield, P., Gross, E. (2000). The impact of home computer use on children's activities and development. Future of Children, 10, 123-144.
69. Thiessen, V., Looker, E. D. (2007). Digital divides and capital conversion: The optimal use of information and communication technology for youth reading achievement. Information, Communication & Society, 10, 159-180. doi:10.1080/13691180701307370
70. Toh, T. L., Quek, K. S., Leong, Y. H. (2011). Making mathematics practical: An approach to problem solving. Singapore: World Scientific. doi:10.1142/8171
71. Tramonte, L., Willms, J. D. (2010). Cultural capital and its effects on education outcomes. Economics of Education Review, 29, 200-213. doi:10.1016/j.econedurev.2009.06.003
72. Ursyn, A. (1997). Computer art graphics integration of art and science. Learning and Instruction, 7, 65- 86. doi:10.1016/S0959- 4752(96)00011-4
73. van der Veen, J. (2012). Draw your physics homework? Art as a path to understanding in physics teaching. American Educational Research Journal, 49, 356-407. doi:10.3102/0002831211435521
74. Webster, P. R. (2007). Prelude: Knowledge, skills, attitudes, and values: Technology and its role in arts education. In L. Bresler (Ed.), International handbook of research in arts education (pp. 1293-1295). Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Springer.
75. Wenglinsky, H. (1998). Does it compute? The relationship between educational technology and student achievement in mathematics. Princeton, NJ: ETS Policy Information Center.
76. Winner, E., Cooper, M. (2000). Mute those claims: No evidence (yet) for a causal link between arts study and academic achievement. Journal of Aesthetic Education, 34, 11-75. doi:10.2307/3333637
77. Yuan, K. H. (2005). Fit indices versus test statistics. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 40, 115-148. doi:10.1207/s15327906mbr4001_5