Implementation and effects of one-to-one computing initiatives: A research synthesis

Journal of Research on Technology in Education

Volumn 38, Issue 3, 2006, Pages 329-348

  Penue, William R ^a  

^a SRI INTERNATIONAL   (United States)

Author keywords

Laptops; Research synthesis; Ubiquitous computing; Wireless connectivity

Indexed keywords

EID: 85008814899     PISSN: 15391523     EISSN: 19450818     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/15391523.2006.10782463     Document Type: Article

References (77)

1. Adelman, N., Donnelly M. B., Dove, T., Tiffany-Morales, J., Wayne, A., & Zucker, A. A. (2002). The integrated studies of educational technology: Professional development and teachers’ use of technology. Menlo Park, CA: SRI International.
2. Becker, H. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2000). Subject and teacher objectives for computer-using classes by school socio-economic status. Irvine, CA and Minneapolis, MN: Center for Research on Information Technology and Organizations, University of California, Irvine, and University of Minnesota.
3. Becker, H. J., Ravitz, J., & Wong, Y. (1999). Teacher and teacher-directed student use of computers and product (No. 3: Teaching, Learning, and Computation, 1998 National Survey.). Irvine, CA: University of California at Irvine.
4. Blumenfeld, P., Fishman, B. J., Krajcik, J., Marx, R. W., & Soloway, E. (2000). Creating usable innovations in systemic reform: Scaling up technology-embedded project-based science in urban schools. Educational Psychologist, 35(3), 149-164.
5. Chang, H.-h., Henriquez, A., Honey, M., Light, D., Moeller, B., & Ross, N. (1998). The Union City story: Education reform and technology—students’ performance on standardized tests. New York, NY: Center for Children and Technology.
6. Coburn, C. E. (2004). Beyond decoupling: Rethinking the relationship between the institutional environment and the classroom. Sociology of Education, 77(3), 211-244.
7. Colella, V. (2000). Participatory simulations: Building collaborative understanding through immersive dynamic modeling. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 9(4), 471-500.
8. Consortium on School Networking. (2004). A guide to handheld computing in K—12 education. Washington, DC: Author.
9. Cuban, L. (1986). Teachers and machines: The classroom use of technology since 1920. New York: Teachers College Press.
10. Cuban, L. (2001). Oversold and underused: Computers in the classroom. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
11. Daitzman, P. (2003). Evaluation of the national model laptop program—technology literacy, a dimension of information literacy: A journey into the global learning community, November 2002—June 2003. New Haven, CT: East Rock Global Magnet School.
12. Davies, A. (2004). Finding proof of learning in a one-to-one computing class-room. Courtenay, BC: Connections Publishing.
13. Davis, D., Garas, N., Hopstock, P., Kellum, A., & Stephenson, T. (2005). Henrico County Public Schools iBook survey report. Arlington, VA: Development Associates, Inc.
14. Dinnocenti, S. T. (2002). Laptop computers in an elementary school: Perspectives on learning environments from students, teachers, administrators, and parents. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Connecticut, Storrs, CT. UMI Publication Number 3034011.
15. Ertmer, P. A. (1999). Addressing first- and second-order barriers to change: Strategies for technology integration. Educational Technology Research and Development, 47(4), 47-61.
16. Fairman, J. (2004). Trading roles: Teachers and students learn with technology. Orono, ME: Maine Education Policy Research Institute, University of Maine Office.
17. Frank, K. A., Zhao, Y., & Borman, K. (2004). Social capital and the diffusion of innovations within organizations: Application to the implementation of computer technology in schools. Sociology of Education, 77(2), 148-171.
18. Garet, M. S., Porter, A. C., Desimone, L., Birman, B. F., & Yoon, K. S. (2001). What makes professional development effective? Results from a national sample of teachers. American Educational Research Journal, 38(4), 915-945.
19. Gaynor, I. W., & Fraser, B. J. (2003). Online collaborative projects: A journey for two Year 5 technology rich classrooms. Paper presented at the Western Australian Institute for Educational Research Forum. Retreived May 5, 2005 from http://education.curtin.edu.au/waier/forums/2003/gaynor.html.
20. Gulek, J. C., & Demirtas, H. (2005). Learning with technology: The impact of laptop use on student achievement. The Journal of Technology, Learning, and Assessment, 3(2). Available: http://www.jtla.org.
21. Harris, W. J., & Smith, L. (2004). Laptop use by seventh grade students with disabilities: Perceptions of special education teachers. Orono, ME: Maine Education Policy Research Institute, University of Maine Office.
22. Haynes, C. (1996). The effectiveness of using laptop computers with middle school students identified as being inhibited writers. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Union Institute, Cincinnati, OH. UMI Publication Number 9630228.
23. Hegedus, S., & Kaput, J. (2004, September). An introduction to the profound potential of connected algebra activities: Issues of representation, engagement and pedagogy. Paper presented at the 28th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, Bergen, Norway. Retrieved December 1, 2005 from http://www.simcalc.umassd.edu/downloads/RR261_Kaput.pdf.
24. Hill, J., & Reeves, T. (2004). Change takes time: The promise of ubiquitous computing in schools. A report of a four year evaluation of the laptop initiative at Athens Academy. Athens, GA: University of Georgia.
25. Jaillet, A. (2004). What is happening with portable computers in schools? Journal of Science Education and Technology, 13(1), 115-128.
26. Kanaya, T., Light, D., & Culp, K. M. (2005). Factors influencing outcomes from a technology-focused professional development program. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 37(3), 313-329.
27. Kaput, J., & Hegedus, S. (2002). Exploiting classroom connectivity by aggregating student constructions to create new learning opportunities. Paper presented at the 26th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, Norwich, UK. Retrieved December 1, 2005 from http://www.simcalc.umassd.edu/downloads/PME2002.pdf.
28. Kozma, R. B. (1991). Learning with media. Review of Educational Research, 61, 179-212.
29. Kulik, C.-L. C., & Kulik, J. A. (1991). Effectiveness of computer-based instruction: An updated analysis. Computers in Human Behavior, 7, 75-94.
30. Kulik, J. A. (1994). Meta-analytic studies of findings on computer-based instruction. In E. L. Baker & H. F. O’Neill, Jr. (Eds.), Technology assessment in education and training (pp. 9-33). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
31. Lane, D. M. M. (2003). The Maine Learning Technology Initiative impact on students and learning. Portland, ME: Center for Education Policy, Applied Research, and Evaluation, University of Southern Maine.
32. Lemke, C., & Martin, C. (2003a). One-to-one computing in Indiana: A state profile. Culver City, CA: Metiri Group.
33. Lemke, C., & Martin, C. (2003b). One-to-one computing in Maine: A state profile. Culver City, CA: Metiri Group.
34. Lemke, C., & Martin, C. (2003c). One-to-one computing in Michigan: A state profile. Culver City, CA: Metiri Group.
35. Lemke, C., & Martin, C. (2003d). One-to-one computing in Virginia: A state profile. Culver City, CA: Metiri Group.
36. Light, D., McDermott, M., & Honey, M. (2002). Project Hiller: The impact of ubiquitous portable technology on an urban school. New York: Center for Children and Technology, Education Development Center.
37. Lowther, D. L., & Ross, S. M. (2003, April). When each one has one: The influences on teaching strategies and student achievement of using laptops in the classroom. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, IL. Retrieved April 8, 2005 from http://crep.memphis.edu/web/research/pub/Laptop_AERA_2003.pdf.
38. Lowther, D. L., Ross, S. M., & Morrison, G. R. (2001, July). Evaluation of a laptop program: Successes and recommendations. Paper presented at the National Education Computing Conference, Chicago, IL. Retrieved April 20, 2005 from http://home.earthlink.net/-anebl/lowther.pdf.
39. Means, B., & Olson, K. (1995). Technology’s Role in Education Reform: Findings from a National Study of Innovating Schools. Menlo Park, CA: SRI International.
40. Means, B., & Penuel, W. R. (2005). Research to support scaling up technology-based educational innovations. In C. Dede, J. P. Honan, & L. C. Peters (Eds.), Scaling up success: Lessons from technology-based educational improvement (pp. 176-197). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
41. Mitchell Institute. (2004). One-to-one laptops in a high school environment: Piscataquis Community High School study final report. Portland, ME: Great Maine Schools Project, George J. Mitchell Scholarship Research Institute.
42. Molina, A., Sussex, W., & Penuel, W. R. (2005). Training Wheels evaluation report. Menlo Park, CA: SRI International.
43. Morrison, G. R., Lowther, D., & DeMuelle, L. (1999). Integrating computer technology into the classroom. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Merrill/Prentice Hall.
44. Myers, J. L. (1996). The influence of a take-home computer program on mathematics achievement and attitudes of Title I elementary school children. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Georgia, Athens, GA. UMI Publication Number 9636476.
45. National Center for Education Statistics. (2000). Teachers’ tools for the 21st century: A report on teachers’ use of technology. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
46. National Research Council. (2002). Scientific research in education. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
47. Newhouse, C. P., & Rennie, L. (2001). A longitudinal study of the use of student-owned portable computers in a secondary school. Computers & Education, 36(3), 223-243.
48. North Carolina Department of Public Instruction. (1999). 1997-98 report of student performance: North Carolina Tests of Computer Skills. Raleigh, NC: North Carolina Department of Public Instruction.
49. Penuel, W. R., Kim, D. Y., Michalchik, V., Lewis, S., Means, B., Murphy, B., et al. (2001). Using technology to enhance connections between home and school: A research synthesis. Menlo Park, CA: SRI International.
50. Riel, M., & Becker, H. J. (2000, April). The beliefs, practices, and computer use of teacher leaders. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans.
51. Rockman ET AL. (1995). Assessing the growth: The Buddy Project evaluation, 1994-5- San Francisco: Author.
52. Rockman et al. (1998). Powerful tools for schooling: Second year study of the laptop program. San Francisco: Author.
53. Roschelle, J., & Pea, R. D. (2002). A walk on the WILD side: How wireless handhelds may change computer-supported collaborative learning. International Journal of Cognition and Technology, 7(1), 145-168.
54. Roschelle, J., Pea, R. D., Hoadley, C. M., Gordin, D. G., & Means, B. (2000). Changing how and what children learn in school with computer-based technologies. The Future of Children, 10(2), 76-101.
55. Roschelle, J., Penuel, W. R., & Abrahamson, A. L. (2004). The networked classroom. Educational Leadership, 61(5), 50-54.
56. Russell, M., Bebell, D., & Higgins, J. (2004). Laptop learning: A comparison of teaching and learning in upper elementary classrooms equipped with shared carts of laptops and permanent one-to-one laptops. Boston: Technology and Assessment Study Collaborative, Boston College.
57. Sandholtz, J., Ringstaff, C., & Dwyer, D. (1997). Teaching with technology: Creating student-centered classrooms. New York: Teachers College Press.
58. Sarama, J., Clements, D. H., & Henry, J. J. (1998). Network of influences in an implementation of a mathematics curriculum innovation. International Journal of Computers for Mathematical Learning, 3(2), 113-148.
59. Schaumburg, H. (2001, June). Fostering girls’ computer literacy through laptop learning. Paper presented at the National Educational Computing Conference, Chicago, IL.
60. Sheingold, K., & Hadley, M. (1990). Accomplished teachers: Integrating computers into classroom practice. New York: Center for Technology in Education, Bank Street College of Education.
61. Silvernail, D. L., & Harris, W. J. (2003). The Maine Learning Technology Initiative teacher, student, and school perspectives: Mid-year evaluation report. Port-land, ME: Maine Education Policy Research Institute, University of Southern Maine.
62. Silvernail, D. L., & Lane, D. M. M. (2004). The impact of Maine’s one-to-one laptop program on middle school teachers and students: Phase one summary evidence. Portland, ME: Maine Education Policy Research Institute, University of Southern Maine.
63. Stevenson, K. R (1998). Evaluation report—Year 2: Middle School Laptop Program, Beaufort County School District. Beaufort, SC: Beaufort County School District.
64. Stevenson, K. R (1999). Evaluation report—Year 3: Middle School Laptop Program, Beaufort County School District. Beaufort, SC: Beaufort County School District.
65. Stevenson, K. R. (2002). Evaluation report—Year 2: High school laptop computer program (Final Report, for school year 2001/2002). Liverpool: Liverpool Central School District, New York.
66. Stroup, W. M. (2002, September). Instantiating Seeing Mathematics Structuring the Social Sphere (MS3): Updating generative teaching and learning for networked mathematics and science classrooms. Paper presented at the First International Conference on Wireless and Mobile Technologies in Education, Vaxjo, Sweden.
67. Tatar, D., Roschelle, J., Vahey, P., & Penuel, W. R. (2003). Handhelds go to school. IEEE Computer, 36(9), 30-37.
68. Trimmel, M., & Bachmann, J. (2004). Cognitive, social, motivational and health aspects of students in laptop classrooms. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 20(2), 151-158.
69. Vahey, P., & Crawford, V. (2002). Palm Education Pioneers program: Final evaluation. Menlo Park, CA: SRI International.
70. Warschauer, M., Grant, D., Real, G. D., & Rousseau, M. (2004). Promoting academic literacy with technology: Successful laptop programs in K—12 schools. System, 32(14), 525-538.
71. Watson, D. M., & Tinsley, D. M. (Eds.). (1995). Integrating information technology into education. London: Chapman and Hall.
72. Wilensky, U., & Stroup, W. M. (2000). Networked gridlock: Students enacting complex dynamic phenomena with the HubNet architecture. In B. Fishman & S. O’Connor-Divelbiss (Eds.), Fourth international conference of the learning sciences (pp. 282-289). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
73. 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.
74. Yarnall, L., Shechtman, N., & Penuel, W R. (in press). Using handheld computers to support improved classroom assessment in science: Results from a field trial. Journal of Science Education and Technology.
75. Zucker, A. A. (2004). Developing a research agenda for ubiquitous computing in schools. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 30(4), 371-386.
76. Zucker, A. A., & McGhee, R. (2005). A study of one-to-one computer use in mathematics and science instruction at the secondary level in Henrico County Public Schools. Arlington, VA: SRI International.
77. Zurita, G., & Nussbaum, M. (2004). Computer supported collaborative learning using wirelessly connected handheld computers. Computers and Education, 42, 289-314.