An Evaluation of the Impact of 1:1 Laptops on Student Attainment in Senior High School Sciences

Our study capitalized on a unique natural experiment rather than a researcher-designed, randomized experiment whereby, thanks to the Australian Government's Digital Education Revolution, half of grade 9 students in 2008 received laptops and half did not. Consequently in late 2011, when these students sat for their grade 12 external examinations based on the same curriculum implemented across the state of New South Wales, half of them had been schooled with 1:1 laptops for over three years, and half without. With school principals and district administrators asking the question ‘what will these laptops do to our examination results?' this dichotomous scenario presented us with a unique opportunity to find out. The aim of this study was to evaluate if having 1:1 laptops was a predictor of success in the sciences in the external examinations. The science students (N = 967) from 12 high schools in Sydney, Australia were studied. Using socio-demographic, school and examination data, multiple regression analyses were performed to measure the impact of the 1:1 laptop provision and other variables on student attainment in biology, chemistry and physics. We found that being schooled with 1:1 laptops had statistically significant and positive standardized regression coefficients with student attainment, with a medium effect size in physics (0.38), and small effect sizes in biology (0.26) and chemistry (0.23). Upon further investigation, exploring data provided by student and teacher questionnaires, we found that the greater effect size in physics corresponded with greater use of simulations and spreadsheets by students and teachers.

[1]  A Middle School One-to-One Laptop Program: The Maine Experience , 2011 .

[2]  Matt Dunleavy,et al.  The Impact of 1:1 Laptop Use on Middle School Math and Science Standardized Test Scores , 2007 .

[3]  Randy L. Bell,et al.  Computer Simulations to Support Science Instruction and Learning: A critical review of the literature , 2012 .

[4]  Damian Bebell,et al.  One to One Computing: A Summary of the Quantitative Results from the Berkshire Wireless Learning Initiative , 2010 .

[5]  Ellie Rennie,et al.  Free for All: A Case Study Examining Implementation Factors of One-to-One Device Programs , 2013 .

[6]  Simon J. Crook,et al.  Seeing Eye-to-Eye on ICT: Science Student and Teacher Perceptions of Laptop Use across 14 Australian Schools. , 2013 .

[7]  Osman Nafiz Kaya,et al.  Engaging students in environmental research projects: Perceptions of fluency with innovative technologies and levels of scientific inquiry abilities , 2011 .

[8]  Gerald Knezek,et al.  The Power of One To One. , 2004 .

[9]  Sue Bennett,et al.  Understanding students' use and value of technology for learning , 2014 .

[10]  Queensland..  Household use of information technology , 2006 .

[11]  William R. Penuel,et al.  Implementation and Effects Of One-to-One Computing Initiatives , 2006 .

[12]  J. Kelder,et al.  Developing Threshold Learning Outcomes for Agricultural Science , 2013 .

[13]  Ina V. S. Mullis,et al.  TIMSS and PIRLS 2011: Relationships among Reading, Mathematics, and Science Achievement at the Fourth Grade--Implications for Early Learning. , 2013 .

[14]  Jacob L. Vigdor,et al.  Scaling the Digital Divide: Home Computer Technology and Student Achievement , 2010 .

[15]  Jacob M. Marszalek,et al.  Computers and Traditional Teaching Practices: Factors influencing middle level students’ science achievement and attitudes about science , 2011 .

[16]  Riina Vuorikari,et al.  Overview and analysis of 1:1 learning initiatives in Europe , 2013 .

[17]  Andrew J. Martin,et al.  Academic Momentum at University/College: Exploring the Roles of Prior Learning, Life Experience, and Ongoing Performance in Academic Achievement across Time , 2013 .

[18]  Sara Hennessy,et al.  Situated Expertise in Integrating Use of Multimedia Simulation into Secondary Science Teaching , 2006 .

[19]  Michael Russell,et al.  Concerns, Considerations, and New Ideas for Data Collection and Research in Educational Technology Studies , 2010 .

[20]  Sarah Hug,et al.  A Study of the 1:1 Laptop Program at the Denver School of Science & Technology. , 2007 .

[21]  Sarah Hug,et al.  Teaching and Learning Physics in a 1:1 Laptop School , 2008 .

[22]  R. Murnane,et al.  Methods Matter: Improving Causal Inference in Educational and Social Science Research , 2010 .

[23]  Spss,et al.  Discovering Statistics (4th Edition ed. , 2013 .

[24]  Silvia Micheletta.  John Hattie, Visible Learning. A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. London & New York: Routledge (2009). John Hattie, Visible Learning for teachers. Maximizing impact on learning. London & New York: Routledge (2012). , 2013 .

[25]  Michael Fullan,et al.  Choosing the wrong drivers for whole system reform , 2011 .

[26]  Brett E. Shelton,et al.  An Examination of the Changes in Science Teaching Orientations and Technology-Enhanced Tools for Student Learning in the Context of Professional Development , 2014 .

[27]  Samia Khan,et al.  New Pedagogies on Teaching Science with Computer Simulations , 2011 .

[28]  F Bell.  The implication of context in applying learning technologies (Editorial) , 2010 .

[29]  P. Lachenbruch.  Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences (2nd ed.) , 1989 .

[30]  Maurice Walker,et al.  Patterns of participation in year 12 , 2003 .

[31]  James Cengiz Gulek,et al.  Learning With Technology: The Impact of Laptop Use on Student Achievement , 2005 .

[32]  S. Gorard,et al.  The impact of socio‐economic status on participation and attainment in science , 2009 .

[33]  Augustine J. Kposowa,et al.  Student Laptop Use and Scores on Standardized Tests , 2013 .

[34]  Timothy P. Scott,et al.  A Meta-Analysis of National Research: Effects of Teaching Strategies on Student Achievement in Science in the United States , 2007 .

[35]  V. Sampson,et al.  The Efficacy of Student-Centered Instruction in Supporting Science Learning , 2012, Science.

[36]  Gerald H. Krockover,et al.  Using iPads to teach inquiry science to students with a moderate to severe intellectual disability: A pilot study , 2013 .

[37]  Oscar Valiente.  1-1 in Education: Current Practice, International Comparative Research Evidence and Policy Implications , 2010 .

[38]  D. Light,et al.  Laptop Programs for Students , 2009, Science.

[39]  Buly A. Cardak,et al.  Catholic School Effectiveness in Australia: A Reassessment Using Selection on Observed and Unobserved Variables , 2013 .

[40]  Tomas Kroksmark.  The stretchiness of learning the digital mystery of learning in one-to-one environments in schools , 2014, Education and Information Technologies.

[41]  Jacob Cohen.  Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences , 1969, The SAGE Encyclopedia of Research Design.

[42]  M. Linn,et al.  Gender Similarities in Mathematics and Science , 2006, Science.

[43]  Daniel L. Schwartz,et al.  Spatial Learning and Computer Simulations in Science , 2009 .

[44]  Louise Archer,et al.  Adolescent boys’ science aspirations: Masculinity, capital and power , 2014 .

[45]  Robert H. Tai,et al.  The Two High-School Pillars Supporting College Science , 2007, Science.

[46]  Alexis Berry,et al.  Using Laptops to Facilitate Middle School Science Learning: The Results of Hard Fun. Research Brief. , 2009 .

[47]  Claudia Smarkola,et al.  Ubiquitous laptop usage in higher education: Effects on student achievement, student satisfaction, and constructivist measures in honors and traditional classrooms , 2008, Comput. Educ..

[48]  V. Johnson.  Revised standards for statistical evidence , 2013, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[49]  J. Huppert,et al.  Computer simulations in the high school: Students' cognitive stages, science process skills and academic achievement in microbiology , 2002 .

[50]  Manjula D. Sharma,et al.  Bloom-ing Heck! The Activities of Australian Science Teachers and Students Two Years into a 1:1 Laptop Program Across 14 High Schools , 2013 .

[51]  Mark E. Weston,et al.  The End of Techno-Critique: The Naked Truth about 1:1 Laptop Initiatives and Educational Change , 2010 .

[52]  Shelia R. Cotten,et al.  Balancing the One-To-One Equation: Equity and Access in Three Laptop Programs , 2014 .

[53]  N. Lampert.  Patterns of Participation , 1990 .

[54]  Michael D. Kaplowitz,et al.  A Comparison of Web and Mail Survey Response Rates , 2004 .

[55]  C. Wieman,et al.  PhET: Simulations That Enhance Learning , 2008, Science.

[56]  Luke Houghton,et al.  The wiki way of learning , 2009 .

[57]  John Hattie,et al.  Visible Learning: A Synthesis of Over 800 Meta-Analyses Relating to Achievement , 2008 .

[58]  Selcuk R. Sirin.  Socioeconomic Status and Academic Achievement: A Meta-Analytic Review of Research , 2005 .

[59]  P. Tambade.  Trajectory of Charged Particle in Combined Electric and Magnetic Fields Using Interactive Spreadsheets , 2011 .

[60]  Fethi A. Inan,et al.  Do One-to-One Initiatives Bridge the Way to 21st Century Knowledge and Skills? , 2012 .

[61]  Sarah K. Howard,et al.  More than beliefs: Subject areas and teachers' integration of laptops in secondary teaching , 2015, Br. J. Educ. Technol..