Computers and student learning: Interpreting the multivariate analysis of pisa2000

Journal of Research on Technology in Education

Volumn 37, Issue 4, 2005, Pages 339-347

  Bielefeldt, Talbot ^a,b  

^a International Society for Technology in Education   (United States)

^b ISTE   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 85008856907     PISSN: 15391523     EISSN: 19450818     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/15391523.2005.10782441     Document Type: Note

References (25)

1. Adams, R., & Wu, M. (2002). PISA 2000 technical report. Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development.
2. Doubts about school computer use. (2004, November 24). BBC News. Retrieved March 25, 2005 from http://news.bbc.co.uk/l/hi/education/4032737.stm.
3. Becker, H. J., & Ravitz, J. L. (2001). Computer use by teachers: Are Cubans predictions correct? Paper presented at the 2001 Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Seattle, WA. Retrieved February 28, 2002, from http://www.crito.uci.edu/tic/findings/conferences-pdf/aera_2001.pdf.
4. Boster, F. J., Meyer, G. S., Roberto, A. J., & Inge, C. C. (2002). A report on the effect of the Unitedstreaming application on educational performance. East Lansing, MI: Cometrika, Inc., Baseline Research, LLC., & Longwood University.
5. Boster, F. J., Meyer, G. S., Roberto, A. J., Lindsey, L., Smith, R., Strom, R., Inge, C. C. (2004). A report on the effect of the Unitedstreaming application on educational performance: The 2004 Los Angeles Unified School District mathematics evaluation. East Lansing, MI: Cometrika, Inc., Baseline Research, LLC, & Longwood University.
6. Clark, R. E. (2001). Questioning the meta-analyses of computer-based instruction research. In R. E. Clark, (Ed.), Learning from media: Arguments, analysis, and evidence (pp. 13-36). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.
7. Fouts, J. (2000). Research on computers and education: Past, present, and future. Seattle, WA: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. Retrieved March 3, 2003 from http: /1 www.gatesfoundation.org/education/researchandevaluation/computer-researchsummary.pdf.
8. Fuchs, T., & Woessmann, L. (2004). Computers & student learning: Bivariate and multivariate evidence on the availability and use of computers at home and at school. CESifio Working Paper 1321. Munich: CESifo. Available: http://ideas. repec.org/p/ces/ceswps/_l 321.html.
9. Goolsbee, A., & Guryan, J. (2002). The impact of Internet subsidies in public schools. NBER working paper series, No. 9090. Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research. Retrieved October 21, 2002, from http://www.nber. org /papers/w9090.
10. International Society for Technology in Education. (2000). National educational technology standards for students: Connecting curriculum and technology. Eugene, OR: ISTE.
11. International Society for Technology in Education. (2002). National educational technology standards for teachers: Preparing teachers to use technology. Eugene, OR: ISTE.
12. International Society for Technology in Education. (2003). National educational technology standards for teachers: Resources for assessment. Eugene, OR: ISTE.
13. Johnson, J., & Barker, L.T. (2002). Assessing the impact of technology in teaching and learning: A sourcebook for evaluators. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Institute for Social Research.
14. Knezek, G. (1998). Instruments for assessing attitudes toward information technology. Denton, TX: Texas Center for Educational Technology. Retrieved April 4, 2005 from http://www.tcet.unt.edu/pubs/studies/contents.htm.
15. Kulik, J. (2003). Effects of using instructional technology in elementary and secondary schools: What controlled evaluation studies say. Arlington, VA: SRI International. Retrieved October 3, 2003, from http://www.sri.com/policy/csted/reports/sandt/it/Kulik_ITinK-12_Main_Report.pdf.
16. Morgan, P., & Ritter, S. (2002). An experimental study of the effects of Cognitive Tutor Algebra I on student knowledge and attitude. Pittsburgh: Carnegie Learning. Available: http://www.carnegielearning.com/research/published_research/Moore200 lwriteup.pdf.
17. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2002). Sample tasks from the PISA 2000 assessment: Reading, mathematical and scientific literacy. Paris: Author. Retrieved March 26, 2005 from http://www.pisa.oecd.org/dataoecd/44/62/33692744.pdf.
18. Prais, S. J. (2003). Cautions on OECD’s recent educational survey (PISA). Oxford Review of Education, 29(2). Available: http://www.pisa.oecd.org/dataoecd/29/48/33680693.pdf.
19. Wenglinsky, H. (1998). Does it compute? The relationship between educational technology and student achievement in mathematics. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service. Retrieved March 6, 2002, from ftp://ftp.ets.org/p ub/res/technolog. pdf.
20. What Works Clearinghouse. (2004). Topic report: Middle school mathematics. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved April 1, 2005 from http://w-w-c.org.
21. Waxman, H., Connell, M. L., & Gray, J. (2002). A quantitative synthesis of recent research on the effects of teaching and learning with technology on student outcomes. North Central Regional Educational Laboratory (NCREL). Retrieved September 16, 2003 from http://www/ncrel.org.
22. Lemay, R. (2005, March 22). Do computers help with children’s education? ZDNet Australia. Retrieved March 25, 2005 from http://www.zdnet.com.au/news/communications/0,2000061791,39185 500,00.htm.
23. MacDonald, G. J. (2004, December 6). Too much computer exposure may hinder learning. USA Today. Retrieved April 3, 2005 from: http://www.usatoday.com/tech/news/2004-12-06-complicating-things_x.htm.
24. Toxic computers? (2005, March). NEA Today. Retrieved March 25, 2005 from http://www.nea.org/neatoday/0503/upfront.html.
25. Effect of Computer Use on Student Achievement Unclear. (2004, November 30). TechLearning. Retrieved March 25, 2005 from http://www.techlearning. com/' content/ednew si2004-1130.htm