The Reference Desk, using available evidence and research, provides quick-turnaround responses to questions submitted by education stakeholders around the Northeast and Islands Region. Every Friday, REL-NEI highlights one or two questions submitted to its Reference Desk.
How Effective is Technology at Teaching Math and English?
With summer winding down, schools are gearing up for new students, a new school year, and fresh beginnings. Schools also are focused on stimulus money, with many especially thinking about how to use American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) funds to improve teacher effectiveness through the use of technology in the classroom. One of the questions the Reference Desk received this summer dealt with this topic directly: How effective is educational software at delivering instruction? As schools explore options for spending stimulus funds, understanding how technology can impact learning and teacher effectiveness will be critical.
Question
How effective are stand-alone educational software products at delivering effective instruction in English and math?
Research Synopsis
Reference Desk researchers found mixed results for stand-alone software, and few generalizable results about software overall. One Institute of Education Sciences (IES) resource found that nine out of 10 products under review, “had statistically insignificant effects on test scores for the full sample (two years of student data) and the second-year sample” (see Campuzano et al. below). Conversely, a What Works Clearinghouse report on Accelerated Reader found that there was “no discernible effects on reading fluency, mixed effects on comprehension, and potentially positive effects on general reading achievement.”
Note that the researchers understood stand-alone software as computer-assisted instruction (CAI), which “refers to instruction or remediation presented on a computer” (see the full PDF below for more on this).
Publicly Available Resources
- Effectiveness of Reading and Math Software Products: Findings from Two Student Cohorts. Campuzano, L., Dynarski, M., Agodini, R., and Rall, K.; 2009; U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, NCEE 2009-4041; February 2009; 111 pages.
Source: National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education
This study reviewed a variety of reading and math programs for various grade levels. The report states: “the study’s main objective was to assess the effects that using software products may have had on reading or math scores on standardized achievement tests. Nine of the 10 products had statistically insignificant effects on test scores for the full sample (two years of student data) and the second-year sample. One product had a positive and statistically significant effect for the full sample. The magnitude of this effect is equivalent to moving the average student from the 50th percentile to the 54th percentile (an effect size of 0.09).”
- What Works Clearinghouse Intervention Report: Waterford Early Reading Program™. July 16, 2007; 6 pages.
Source: What Works Clearinghouse, National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education
This Intervention Report provides information on a study conducted using the Waterford Early Reading Program™, a software-based curriculum for students in kindergarten through second grade. “Waterford Early Reading Program™ was found to have potentially positive effects on alphabetics and no discernible effects on comprehension.”
- What Works Clearinghouse Intervention Report: Accelerated Reader. October, 2008; 11 pages.
Source: What Works Clearinghouse, National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education
This Intervention Report provides information on a study conducted using the Accelerated Reader program. “Accelerated Reader was found to have no discernible effects on reading fluency, mixed effects on comprehension, and potentially positive effects on general reading achievement.”
- Effective Programs in Elementary Mathematics: A Best-Evidence Synthesis. Slavin, R. and Lake, C.; February 2007; 113 pages.
Source: Best Evidence Encyclopedia from Google general search
This article reviews research on the achievement outcomes of three approaches to improving elementary mathematics, including computer-assisted instruction. “While outcomes of studies of CAI are highly variable, most studies do find positive effects, and none significantly favored a control group…. There is not enough high-quality evidence on particular CAI approaches to recommend any one over another, at least based on student outcomes on standardized tests.”
Reference Desk Researchers also recommend the Best Evidence Encyclopedia and the Northeast & the Islands Regional Technology in Education Consortium Report: Technology and Teaching Children to Read: What does the Research Say? as good places to learn more about technology in the classroom.
Download the Full Response
If this material brings up questions of your own, please submit a new request here. If you’re interested in learning more about the Reference Desk, read about us here. And finally, share thoughts, experiences, and resources of your own in our Feedback section below.
