A Metaanalysis of the Effects of Computer Technology on School Students’ Mathematics Learning
Purchase on Springer.com
$39.95 / €34.95 / £29.95*
Rent the article at a discount
Rent now* Final gross prices may vary according to local VAT.
Abstract
This study examines the impact of computer technology (CT) on mathematics education in K12 classrooms through a systematic review of existing literature. A metaanalysis of 85 independent effect sizes extracted from 46 primary studies involving a total of 36,793 learners indicated statistically significant positive effects of CT on mathematics achievement. In addition, several characteristics of primary studies were identified as having effects. For example, CT showed advantage in promoting mathematics achievement of elementary over secondary school students. As well, CT showed larger effects on the mathematics achievement of special need students than that of general education students, the positive effect of CT was greater when combined with a constructivist approach to teaching than with a traditional approach to teaching, and studies that used nonstandardized tests as measures of mathematics achievement reported larger effects of CT than studies that used standardized tests. The weighted least squares univariate and multiple regression analyses indicated that mathematics achievement could be accounted for by a few technology, implementation and learner characteristics in the studies.
Inside
Within this Article
 Definition of Terms and Types of Technology
 Context Matters to CT Application
 Objective and Research Questions
 Method
 Results
 Discussion
 References
 References
Other actions
 Albright, M., & Graf, D. (1992). Teaching in the Information Age: The role of educational technology. San Francisco: JosseyBass.
 Anderson, J., Boyle, F., et al. (1985). Intelligent tutoring systems. Science, 228(4698), 456–462. CrossRef
 Anderson, J., Corbett, A., et al. (1995). Cognitive tutors: Lessons learned. The Journal of Learning Sciences, 4, 167–207. CrossRef
 Ball, S. (1988). Computers, concrete materials and teaching fractions. School Science and Mathematics, 88, 470–475. CrossRef
 Braden, J. P., Shaw, S. R., et al. (1991). An evaluation of a computerassisted instructional program for elementary hearingimpaired students. The Volta Review, 93(6), 247–252.
 Brush, T. A. (1997). The effects of group composition on achievement and time on task for students completing ILS activities in cooperative pairs. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 30(1), 2–17.
 Burns, P. K., & Bozeman, W. C. (1981). Computerassisted instruction and mathematics achievement: Is there a relationship? Educational Technology, 21(10), 32–39.
 Burrill, G., Allison, J., et al. (1992). Handheld graphing technology in secondary mathematics: Research findings and implications for classroom practice. Dallas, TX: Texas Instruments Corp.
 Char, C. (1989). Computer graphics feltboards: New software approaches for young children's mathematical exploration. San Francisco: American Educational Research Association.
 Christmann, E., Badgett, J., et al. (1997). Microcomputerbased computerassisted instruction within differing subject areas: A statistical deduction. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 16(3), 281–296. CrossRef
 Clark, R. (1983). Reconsidering research on learning from media. Review of Educational Research, 53, 445–460.
 Clements, D. (1998). Young Children and Technology. Washington, DC: Forum on early childhood science, mathematics, and technology education.
 Coley, R., Cradleer, J., et al. (2000). Computers and the classroom: The status of technology in US schools. Princeton: Policy Information Center, Educational Testing Service.
 Cooper, J., Heron, T., et al. (1987). Applied behavior analysis. Columbus: Merrill.
 Creswell, J. W. (2003). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA, Sage.
 Farrell, A. M. (1996). Roles and behaviors in technologyintegrated precalculus classrooms. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 15, 35–53. CrossRef
 Fuchs, L. S., & Fuchs, D. (1998). General educators' instructional adaptation for students with learning disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly, 21(1), 23–33. CrossRef
 Fuchs, L., Fuchs, D., et al. (2002). Explicitly teaching for transfer: Effects on the mathematical problem solving performance of students with disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 17, 90–106. CrossRef
 Funkhouser, C. (1993). The influence of problemsolving software on student attitudes about mathematics. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 25(3), 339–346.
 Gaur, A., & Gaur, S. (2006). Statistical methods for practice and research: A guide to data analysis using SPSS. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
 Glass, G. V., B. McGaw, et al. (1981). Metaanalysis in social research. Beverly Hills, CA, SAGE.
 Hartley, S. S. (1977). Metaanalysis of the effects of individually paced instruction in mathematics. Dissertation Abstracts International 38(7A): University Microfilms No. 7729, 926.
 Hecht, J. B., N. K. Roberts, et al. (1995). Teacher Teams and Computer Technology. 1995 Annual Meeting of the MidWestern Educational Research Association, Chicago, IL.
 Hedges, L., & Olkin, I. (1985). Statistical methods for metaanalyses. Orlando: Academic.
 Hembree, R., & Dessart, D. J. (1986). Effects of handheld calculators in precollege mathematics education: A metaanalysis. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 17, 83–99. CrossRef
 Irish, C. (2002). Using peg and keyword mnemonics and computerassisted instruction to enhance basic multiplication performance in elementary students with learning and cognitive disabilities. Journal of Special Education Technology, 17(4), 29–40.
 Kaput, J. (1992). Technology and mathematics in education. In D. A. Grouws (Ed.), Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 515–556). New York: Macmillan.
 Kieran, C., & Hillel, J. (1990). It's tough when you have to make the triangles angles: Insights from a computerbased geometry environment. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 9, 99–127.
 Kim, S. (1993). The relative effectiveness of handson and computersimulated manipulative in teaching seriation, classification, geometric, and arithmetic concepts to kindergarten children. Dissertation Abstracts International, 54(09), 3319.
 Koedinger, K. R., Anderson, J. R., et al. (1997). Intelligent tutoring goes to school in the big city. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 8, 30–43.
 Kozma, R. (2001). Learning with media. In D. P. Ely and T. Plomp (Eds.), Classic writings on instructional technology (pp. 155–188). Colorado: Libraries Unlimited, Inc.
 Kulik, C., & Kulik, J. (1986). Effectiveness of computerbased education in colleges. AEDS Journal, 19, 81–108.
 Kulik, C., & Kulik, J. (1991). Effectiveness of computerbased instruction: An updated analysis. Computers in Human Behavior, 7, 75–94. CrossRef
 Kulik, J., Kulik, C., et al. (1980). Effectiveness of computerbased college teaching: A metaanalysis of findings. Review of Educational Research, 50, 525–544.
 Kulik, K., Schwalb, B., et al. (1982). Programmed instruction in secondary education: A metaanalysis of evaluation findings. Journal of Educational Research, 75(3), 133–138.
 Kulik, J., BangertDrowns, R., et al. (1983). Effects of computer based teaching on secondary school students. Journal of Educational Psychology, 75(1), 19–26. CrossRef
 Li, Q. (2004). Technology and mathematics education: Any impact? The Eleventh International Literacy and Education Research Network Conference on Learning, La Havana.
 Lipsey, M., & Wilson, D. (2001). Practical metaanalysis. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
 Lou, Y., Abrami, P. C., et al. (2001). Small group and individual learning with technology: A metaanalysis. Review of Educational Research, 71(3), 449–521. CrossRef
 Means, B. (1994). The technology and education reform: The reality behind the promise. San Francisco: JosseyBass.
 Moreno, R., & Mayer, R. E. (2000). Multimediasupported metaphors for meaning making in mathematics. Cognition and Instruction, 17(3), 215–248. CrossRef
 Mushi, S. (2000). Use of interactive video technology to teach middle school mathematics. Chicago: Northeastern Illinois University.
 National Council of Teachers of Mathematics [NCTM]. (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston: Author.
 Niemiec, R., & Walberg, H. (1985). Computers and achievement in the elementary schools. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 1, 435–440. CrossRef
 Niemiec, R., Samson, G., et al. (1987). The effects of computerbased instruction inclementary schools: A quantitative synthesis. Journal for Research on Computing in Education, 20, 85–103.
 Nute, N. (1997). The impact of engagement activity and manipulatives presentation on intermediate mathematics achievement, timeontask, learning efficiency and attitude. Dissertation Abstracts International, 58(08), 2988.
 Reimer, K., & Moyer, P. S. (2005). Thirdgraders learn about fractions using virtual manipulatives: A classroom study. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 24(1), 5–25.
 Rosenthal, R. (1991). Metaanalytic procedures for social research. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
 Rosenthal, R., & Rosnow, R. L. (1984). Essentials of behavioral research: Methods and data analysis. New York: McGrawHill.
 Royer, J. M., Greene, B. A., et al. (1994). Can U.S. developed CAI work effectively in a developing country? Journal of Educational Computing Research, 10(1), 41–61. CrossRef
 Salerno, C. A. (1995). The effect of time on computerassisted instruction for atrisk students. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 28(1), 85–97.
 Shyu, H. Y. (1999). Effects of media attributes in anchored instruction. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 21(2), 119–139. CrossRef
 Smith, C., McLaughlin, M., et al. (1997). Conduct control on usenet. Journal of Computermediated Communication, 2(4), 1–11.
 Suh, J., Moyer, P. S., et al. (2005). Examining technology uses in the classroom: Developing fraction sense using virtual manipulative concept tutorials. The Journal of Interactive Online Learning, 3(4), 1–21.
 Terry, M. (1996). An investigation of differences in cognition when utilizing math manipulatives and math manipulative software. Dissertation Abstracts International, 56(7), 2650.
 Woodward, J. (1995). Technologybased research in mathematics for special education. Focus on Learning Problems in Mathematics, 17(2), 3–23.
 Woodward, J., Reith, D. (1995). Technologybased research in mathematics for special education. Focus on Learning Problems in Mathematics, 17(2), 3–23.
 Xin, J. F. (1999). Computerassisted cooperative learning in integrated classrooms for students with and without disabilities. Information Technology in Childhood Education Annual: 61–78.
 Ysseldyke, J., Spicuzza, R., et al. (2003). Using a curriculumbased instructional management system to enhance math achievement in urban schools. Journal of Education for Students Placed At Risk, 8(2), 247–265. CrossRef
 *Ash, J. (2005). The effects of computerassisted instruction on middle school mathematics achievement. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Tennessee State University.
 *Berryman, H. (1999). The effects of technology education labs on third grade mathematics scores. University of Sarasota, Sarasota, FL.
 *Blanton, W. E., Moorman, G. B., Hayes, B. A., & Warner, M. L. (1997). Effects of participation in the fifth dimension on far transfer. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 16, 371–396.
 *Carter, C., & Smith, L. (2002). Does the use of learning logic in algebra I make a difference in algebra II? Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 34, 157–161.
 *Chute, R., & Miksad, J. (1997). Computer assisted instruction and cognitive development in preschoolers. Child Study Journal, 27, 237–253.
 *Clariana, R. (1996). Differential achievement gains for mathematics computation, concepts, and applications with an integrated learning system. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science, 15, 203–215.
 *Clark, D. (2004). The effects of using computerassisted instruction of assist high school geometry students achieve higher levels of success on the Florida Competency Achievement Test. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Union Institute and University, Cincinnati, Ohio.
 *Connell, M. L. (1998). Technology in constructivist mathematics classrooms. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 17, 311–338.
 *Feng, S., & Caleo, J. (2000). Playing computer games versus better learning. Paper presented at the Annual Conference of the Eastern Educational Research Association. Clearwater, FL.
 *Fischer, E. (1997). The effects of applied technology instruction on mathematics achievement and career interests of urban seventhgrade students. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Old Dominion University.
 *Forde, T. B. (2003). The effects of technologysupported cognitive mathematical instruction on AfricanAmerican students characterized as atrisk for school failure. Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN.
 *Funkhouser, C. (2003). The effects of computeraugmented geometry instruction on student performance and attitudes. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 35, 163–175.
 *Iskander, W., & Curtis, S. (2005). Use of colour and interactive animation in learning 3D vectors. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 24, 149–156.
 *Kalyuga, S., & Sweller, J. (2005). Rapid dynamic assessment of expertise to improve the efficiency of adaptive elearning. Educational Technology Research & Development, 53, 83–93.
 *Lester. (1996). The effects of the geometer's sketchpad software on achievement of geometric knowledge of high school geometry students. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of San Francisco, San Francisco.
 *Lewis, S. K. (2004). The relationship of fulltime laptop computer access to student achievement and student attitudes in middle school. Florida Atlantic University, Boca Raton, FL.
 *Ling, S. (2004). Enhancing the learning of conics with technology. Unpublished master's thesis, California State University Dominguez Hills, Dominguez Hills.
 *Mac Iver, D. J., Balfanz, R., & Plank, S. B. (1998). The talent development middle school. An elective replacement approach to providing extra help in math—The CATAMA program (computer and teamassisted mathematics acceleration). Report No. 21. Baltimore, MD: Center for Research on the Education of Students Placed at Risk.
 *Martindale, T., Pearson, C., Curda, L. K., & Pilcher, J. (2005). Effects of an online instructional application on reading and mathematics standardized test scores. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 37, 349–360.
 *McBride, R. O., & Lewis, G. (1993). Sharing the resources: electronic outreach programs. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 16, 372–386.
 *Moreno, R., & Mayer, R. E. (1999). Multimediasupported metaphors for meaning making in mathematics. Cognition and Instruction, 17, 215–248.
 *Olkun, S. (2003). Comparing computer versus concrete manipulatives in learning 2D geometry. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 22, 43–56.
 *Page, M. (2002). Technologyenriched classrooms: Effects on students of low socioeconomic status. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 34, 389–409.
 *Phillips, C. K. (2001). The effects of an integrated computer program on mathematics and reading improvement in grades three through five. The University of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN.
 *Quinn, D. W., & Quinn, N. W. (2001a). PLATO evaluation series. Grades 1–8, Apache Junction Unified School District 43, Apache Junction, Arizona. Bloomington, MN: PLATO Learning, Inc.
 *Quinn, D. W., & Quinn, N. W. (2001b). PLATO evaluation series. Jobs for YouthBoston, Madison Park TechnicalVocational H.S. Boston, Massachusetts. Bloomington, MN: PLATO Learning, Inc.
 *Schpilberg, B., & Hubschman, B. (2003). Facetoface and computer mediated tutoring: A comparative exploration on high school students' math achievement. Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association Conference. Chicago, IL.
 *Shyu, H. Y. (2000). Using videobased anchored instruction to enhance learning: Taiwan's experience. British Journal of Educational Technology, 31, 57–69.
 *Smith, B. (2002). The impact of the utilization of advantage learning systems' technology on students' academic achievement. Unpublished doctorate dissertation, Tennessee State University.
 *Soeder, K. (2001). The effect of computeraided instruction on mathematics achievement. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Immaculata College.
 *Wheeler, J. L., & Regian, J. W. (1999). The use of a cognitive tutoring system in the improvement of the abstract reasoning component of word problem solving. Computers in Human Behaviour, 15, 243–254.
 *Wittman, T. K., Marcinkiewicz, H. R., & HamodeyDouglas, S. (1998). Computer assisted automatization of multiplication facts reduces mathematics anxiety in elementary school children. Paper presented at the National Convention of the Association for Educational Communications and Technology. St. Louis, MO.
 *Wodarz, N. (1994). The effects of computer usage on elementary students' attitudes, motivation and achievement in mathematics. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Northern Arizona University.
 *Ysseldyke, J., Betts, J., Thill, T., & Hannigan, E. (2004). Use of an instructional management system to improve mathematics skills for students in Title 1 programs. Preventing School Failure, 48(4), 10–14.
 *Ysseldyke, J., Spicuzza, R., Kosciolek, S., & Boys, C. (2003). Effects of a learning information system on mathematics achievement and classroom structure. Journal of Educational Research, 96, 163–173.
 *Ysseldyke, J., Spicuzza, R., Kosciolek, S., Teelucksingh, E., Boys, C., & Lemkuil, A. (2003). Using a curriculumbased instructional management system to enhance math achievement in urban schools. Journal of Education for Students Placed At Risk, 8, 247–265.
 *Ysseldyke, J., Tardrew, S., Betts, J., Thill, T., & Hannigan, E. (2004). Use of an instructional management system to enhance math instruction of gifted and talented students. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 27, 293–310
 *Zumwalt, D. (2001). The effectiveness of computer aided instruction in eighth grade prealgebra classrooms 1061Q6 in Idaho. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Idaho State University, Idaho.
 Title
 A Metaanalysis of the Effects of Computer Technology on School Students’ Mathematics Learning
 Journal

Educational Psychology Review
Volume 22, Issue 3 , pp 215243
 Cover Date
 20100901
 DOI
 10.1007/s1064801091258
 Print ISSN
 1040726X
 Online ISSN
 1573336X
 Publisher
 Springer US
 Additional Links
 Topics
 Keywords

 Metaanalysis
 Technology
 Mathematics
 Achievement
 Attitude