Technology-enriched classrooms: Effects on students of low socioeconomic status

Journal of Research on Technology in Education

Volumn 34, Issue 4, 2002, Pages 389-409

  Page, Michael S ^a  

^a LOUISIANA TECH UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Achievement; Classroom interaction; Computer assisted instruction; Self esteem; Technology enrichment

Indexed keywords

EID: 85007863460     PISSN: 15391523     EISSN: 19450818     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/15391523.2002.10782358     Document Type: Article

References (92)

1. Amidon, E., & Hunter, E. (1966). Improving teaching: The analysis of classroom verbal interaction. New York: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston.
2. Apple Works [Computer software]. (1998). Cupertino, CA: Apple.
3. Armstrong, S. W. (1979). Perceived brightness and classroom interactions. Educational Research Quarterly, 4(4), 54-60.
4. Attewell, P., & Battle, J. (1999). Home computers and school performance. Information Society, 15(1), 1-10.
5. Baker, E. L., Gearhart, M., & Herman, J. L. (1994). Evaluating the Apple Classrooms ofTomorrow. In E. L. Barker & H. F. O’Neil (Eds.), Technology assessment in education and training (pp. 172-197). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
6. Beane, J. A., & Lipka, R. P. (1986). Self-concept, self-esteem, and the curriculum. New York: Teachers College Press.
7. Becker, H. J. (1998). Running to catch a moving train: Schools and informa-tion technologies. Theory into Practice, 37(1), 20-30.
8. Becker, H. J., & Ravitz, J. L. (1998). The equity threat of promising innova-tions: Pioneering internet-connected schools. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 19(1), 1-26.
9. Berliner, D. (1991). Educational psychology and pedagogical expertise: New findings and new opportunities for thinking about training. Educational Psy-chologist, 26, 145-155.
10. Breakwell, G. M., & Fife-Shaw, C. (1987). Young people’s attitudes toward new technology: Source and structure. In J. H. Lewko (Ed.), How children and adolescents view the world of work (pp. 51-67). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
11. Bruck, M., & Bodwin, R. F. (1962). The relationship between self-concept and the presence and absence of scholastic underachievement. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 18, 181-182.
12. Brush, T. A. (1997). The effects of group composition on achievement and time on task for students completing ILS activities in cooperative pairs. Com-puting in Education, 30(1), 2-17.
13. Burnett, D. G. (1981). Introduction: The humanities and nontraditional studies. Alternative Higher Education: The Journal of Nontraditional Studies, 6(1), 3-6.
14. Bums, P. K., & Bozeman, W. C. (1981). Computer-assisted instruction and mathematics achievement: Is there a relationship? Educational Technology, 21, 32-39.
15. California Achievement Test. (1996). Monterey, CA: CTB/McGraw-Hill.
16. Cantrell, J. (1993). Technology’s promise for at-risk students. Thrust for Edu-cational Leadership, 22(1), 22-25.
17. Chadbourne, J. W., Bradley, C. H., & Ivey, A. E. (1981). Toward intentional teaching: A human endeavor. The Humanist Educator, 20, 99-106.
18. Cheffers, J., Mancini, V., & Martinek, T. (1980). Interaction analysis: An ap-plication to nonverbal and verbal activity. Winchester, MA: Book Tech.
19. Christmann, E. P., Badgett, J., & Lucking, R. (1997). Microcomputer-based computer-assisted instruction within differing subject areas: A statistical deduc-tion. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 16, 281-296.
20. Clark, R. E. (1983). Reconsidering research on learning from media. Review of Educational Research, 53(4), 445-459.
21. Clark, R. E. (1985). Confounding in educational computing research. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 1(2), 137-148.
22. Clark, R. E. (1994). Media will never influence learning. Educational Technology Research and Development, 42(2), 21-29.
23. Clements, D. H., Nastasi, B. K., & Swaminathan, S. (1993). Young children and computers: Crossroads and directions from research. Young Children, 48(2), 56-64.
24. Cummings, H. W. (1986). Software Review. In F. E. Dance (Ed.), Communication education (Vol. 35, pp. 200-203). Annandale, VA: Speech Communication Association.
25. DeGraw, B. C. (1990). A study to determine changes in social interaction among students, teachers, and parents influenced by the placement of microcomputers in the homes and school of fourth-grade Fuqua students during 1988-1989. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Indiana State University.
26. Diggs, C. S. (1997). Technology: A key to unlocking at-risk students. Learning & Leading with Technology, 25, 38-40.
27. Dwyer, D. C. (1995). Changing the conversation about teaching, learning, and technology: A report on 10 years of ACOT research. Cupertino, CA: Apple.
28. Ehman, L. H., Glenn, A. D., Johnson, V., & White, C. S. (1992). Using computer databases in student problem solving: A study of eight social studies teachers’ classrooms. Theory and Research in Social Education, 20, 179-206.
29. Feirsen, R. (1984). Interaction analysis: Applications for special education. NASSP Bulletin, 68(469), 61-65.
30. Flanders, N. A. (1970). Analyzing teaching behavior. Reading, MA: Addison- Wesley Publishing Company.
31. Freiberg, H. J. (1981). Three decades of the Flanders Interaction Analysis System. Journal of Classroom Interaction, 16(2), 1-7.
32. Funkhouser, C. (1993). The influence of problem-solving software on student attitudes about mathematics. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 25, 339-346.
33. Gardner, C. M., Simmons, P. E., & Simpson, R. (1992). The effects of CAI and hands-on activities on elementary students’ attitudes and weather knowl-edge. School Science and Mathematics, 92, 334-336.
34. Gordon, A., & Brown, K. W. (1993). Beginnings and beyond: Foundations in early childhood education (3rd ed.). Albany, NY: Delmar Publishers.
35. Grolier Multimedia Encyclopedia [Computer software]. (1997). New York: Scholastic, Inc.
36. Grossen, B., & Carnine, D. (1990). Diagramming a logic strategy: Effects on difficult types and transfer. Learning Disability Quarterly, 13, 168-182.
37. Haugland, S. W. (1992). The effect of computer software on preschool children’s developmental gains. Journal of Computing in Childhood Education, 3(1), 15-30.
38. Holden, C. (1989). Computers make slow progress in class. Science, 244, 906-909.
39. Hoover, H. D., Hieronymus, A. N., Frisbie, D. A., & Dunbar, S. B. (1996). Iowa Tests of Basic Skills Form M. Iowa City: University of Iowa.
40. HyperStudio [Computer software]. (1989-2001). Torrance, CA: Knowledge Adventure, Inc.
41. Iowa Tests of Basic Skills. (1996). Chicago: Riverside Publishing.
42. Jegede, O. J., & Okebukola, P. A. (1989). Some socio-cultural factors militating against drift towards science and technology in secondary schools. Research in Science and Technological Education, 7, 141-151.
43. Jones, K., & Sherman, A. (1980). Two approaches.to evaluation. Educational Leadership, 37, 553-557.
44. Keller, F. S. (1968). Good-bye teacher. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1, 79-89.
45. Kid Pix [Computer software]. (1990-2001). Novato, CA: The Learning Company.
46. Kilburn, J. (1978). Better for both-Thoughts on teacher-pupil interaction. Education, 6(2), 9-11.
47. Kinzie, M. B., Sullivan, H. J., & Berdel, R. L. (1992). Motivational and achievement effects of learner control over content review within CAI. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 8, 101-114.
48. Krendl, K. A. (1986). Media influence on learning: Examining the role of preconceptions. Educational Communication and Technology, 34, 223-234.
49. Kristiansen, R. (1991). Consensus on computers in education: Do teachers, parents and pupils share the same expectations and attitudes towards computers? Education and Computing, 7, 199-207.
50. Kulik, J. A., Kulik, C., & Bangert-Drowns, R. L. (1985). Effectiveness of computer-based education in elementary schools. Computers in Human Behavior, 1, 59-74.
51. Lehrer, R., & Randle, L. (1987). Problem solving, metacognition and compo-sition: The effects of interactive software for first-grade children. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 3, 409-427.
52. Liao, Y. (1992). Effects of computer-assisted instruction on cognitive outcomes: A meta-analysis, Joumal of Research on Computing in Education, 24, 367-380.
53. Mann, D., & Shafer, E. A. (1997). Technology and achievement. The American School Board Journal, 184(7), 22-23.
54. Math Blaster [Computer software]. (1994). Torrance, CA: Knowledge Adven-ture, Inc.
55. Mevarech, Z. R., Silber, O., & Fine, D. (1991). Learning with computers in small groups: Cognitive and affective outcomes. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 7, 233-243.
56. Mevarech, Z. R., Stern, D., & Levita, I. (1987). To cooperate or not to cooperate in CAI: That is the question. Journal of Educational Research, 80, 164-167.
57. Miller, N. A. (1992). Toward a common vision: The change process in prac-tice. Educational Technology, 32(11), 58-62.
58. Milone, M. N., & Salpeter, J. (1996). Technology and equity issues. Technology and Learning, 16(4), 38-41, 44-47.
59. Ober, R. L. (1970). The reciprocal category system. Journal of Research and Development in Education, 4(1), 34-51.
60. Office [Computer software]. (1997-2001). Redmond, WA: Microsoft.
61. Pagliaro, L. A. (1979). Instructional interactions and tne mega interactive model of instruction. Educational Technology, 19(11), 35-39.
62. Parry, J. D., Thorkildsen, R. J., Biery, T. M., & Macfarlane, C. A. (1986). Computer-based instruction (CBI): The transition from research findings to teaching strategies. Educational Research Quarterly, 10(1), 30-39.
63. Poirot, J., & Robinson, G. (1994, March). Parent involvement and technology with at-risk students. The Computing Teacher, 21 (6), 44-45.
64. Poole, M. S., & Folger, J. P. (1981). Modes of observation and the validation of interaction analysis schemes. Small Group Behavior, 12, 477-493.
65. Popescu, D. (1978). Pipeline-orpipedream? Geoscope, 11(3), 136-151.
66. Portfolio Assessment Toolkit [Computer software]. (1997). Cary, IL: Forest Technologies.
67. Reglin, G. L. (1989). CAI effects on mathematics achievement and academic self-concept seminar. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 18(1), 43-48.
68. Repman, J. (1993). Collaborative, computer-based learning: Cognitive and affective outcomes. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 9, 149-163.
69. Riel, M. M., & Harasim, L. (1994). Research perspectives on network learning. Machine-Mediated Learning, 4, 91-113.
70. Robertson, E., Ladewig, B. H., Strickland, M. P., & Boshung, M. D. (1987). Enhancement of self-esteem through the use of computer-assisted instruction. Journal of Educational Research, 80, 314-316.
71. Ross, S. M., Smith, L. J., Morrison, G. R., & Erickson, A. (1989). Helping at-risk children through distance tutoring: Memphis ACOT. Technological Horizons in Education, 76(6), 68-71
72. Ryan, A. W. (1991). Meta-analysis of achievement effects of microcomputer applications in elementary schools. Educational Administration Quarterly 27, 161-184.
73. Ryba, K., Selby, L.; & Nolan, P. (1995). Computers empower students with special needs. Educational Leadership, 53(2), 82-84.
74. Ryser, G. R. (1990). Effects of computer education on students’ achievement, atti-tudes, and self esteem. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Texas.
75. Samuels, S. C. (1977). Enhancing self-concept in early childhood. New York: Human Sciences Press.
76. Schery, T., & O’Connor, L. (1997). Language intervention: Computer train-ing for young children with special needs. British Journal of Educational Technology, 28(4), 271-279.
77. Schwanke, D. (1981). Classroom interaction research: A survey of recent literature. Journal of Classroom Interaction, 16(2), 8-10.
78. Sheldon, K. (1996). Early childhood special education. “Can I play too?” Adapting common classroom activities for young children with limited motor abilities. Early Childhood Education Journal, 24(2), 115-120.
79. Signer, B. R. (1991). CAI and at-risk minority urban high school students. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 24, 189-203.
80. Snowman, J. (1995). Computer-based education: More hype than help? Mid-Western Educational Researcher, 5(1), 32-35.
81. Soar, R. S. (1983). Measures of quality in the classroom. Journal of Classroom Interaction, 18(2), 7-15.
82. Sugai, G., & Lewis, T. (1989). Teacher/student interaction analysis. Teacher Education and Special Education, 12, 131-138.
83. Swan, K., Guerrero, F., Mitrani, M., & Schoener, J. (1990). Honing in on the target: Who among the educationally disadvantaged benefits most from what CBI? Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 22, 381-403.
84. Toriskie, J. M. (1999). The effects of Internet usage on student achievement and student attitudes (fourth-grade, social studies). Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Loyola University of Chicago.
85. Tyler, D. K., & Vasu, E. S. (1995). Locus of control, self-esteem, achievement motivation, and problem-solving ability: Logowriter and simulations in the fifth- grade classroom. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 28, 98-120.
86. Waxman, H. C., & Paeron, Y. N. (1995). Improving the quality of classroom instruction for students at risk of failure in urban schools. Peabody Journal of Education, 70(2), 44-65.
87. Weizenbaum, J. (1987). The voice of a skeptic. The Edutech Report, 3(2-3), 4-5.
88. Winne, P. H., Woodlands, M. J., & Wong, B. Y. (1982). Comparability of self-concept among learning disabled, normal, and gifted students. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 15, 470-475.
89. Wood, P. C., Buescher, T. M., & Denison, C. (1979). Alternative opportunity program: Stemming potential delinquency in young adolescents. Behavioral Disorders, 4, 232-238.
90. Woodward, J., & Gersten, R. (1992). Innovative technology for secondary students with learning disabilities. Exceptional Children, 58, 399-406.
91. Yelland, N. (1995). Logo experiences with young children: Describing perfor-mance, problem-solving and social contexts of learning. Early Child Development and Care, 109, 61-74.
92. Zuczek, D. (1996). Illuminating classroom design. American School & University, 65(11), 40, 42, 44