The Calculus for Kids project was deliberately designed to use computers in the transformation of curriculum. The intervention used multi-media learning materials to assist teachers and Year 6 (aged 11–12 years) students understand the principles of integral calculus. They used Maple mathematics software to solve real-world problems using these principles and by employing conventional mathematics notation on their individual computers. Between June 2010 and April 2016, it was implemented in 23 classes at 19 schools involving 434 students. Two methods were used to calculate effect sizes of 22.19 (pre-test/post-test Cohen’s d) and 1.17 (age-maturation). Positive gains were also found in students’ attitudes, particularly in Technology confidence. This article discusses methods for calculating effect sizes for transformational education with computers and recommends further research in the field.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.
Buy single article
Instant access to the full article PDF.
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.
Subscribe to journal
Immediate online access to all issues from 2019. Subscription will auto renew annually.
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.
Allen, D. (2001). Learning integral calculus through non-template problem solving. Primus: Problems, Resources, and Issues in Mathematics Undergraduate Studies, 11(2), 147–160. https://doi.org/10.1080/10511970108965985.
Anderson, J. (2010). ICT transforming education: A regional guide. Bangkok. UNESCO Regional Office for Education in Asia and the Pacific. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000189216_eng
Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority. (2015a). Guide to understanding ICSEA (index of community socio-educational advantage) values. Author. http://docs.acara.edu.au/resources/Guide_to_understanding_icsea_values.pdf
Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority. (2015b). National Assessment Program – Literacy and numeracy 2014: Technical report. Sydney: ACARA https://www.nap.edu.au/_resources/2014_NAPLAN_technical_report.pdf.
Barkatsas, A. (2004). A new scale for monitoring students’ attitudes to learning mathematics with technology (MTAS). 28th annual conference of the Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia. http://www.merga.net.au/documents/RP92005.pdf
Bialik, M., & Fadel, C. (2017). Overcoming system inertia in education reform. Boston, MA, USA: Center for Curriculum Redesign https://curriculumredesign.org/wp-content/uploads/Inertia-in-Education-CCR-Final.pdf.
Blin, F., & Munro, M. (2008). Why hasn’t technology disrupted academics’ teaching practices? Understanding resistance to change through the lens of activity theory. Computers & Education, 50(2), 475–490. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2007.09.017.
Bloom, H. S., Hill, C. J., Black, A. R., & Lipsey, M. W. (2008). Performance trajectories and performance gaps as achievement effect-size benchmarks for educational interventions. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 1(4), 289–328. https://doi.org/10.1080/19345740802400072.
Burford, S., Partridge, H., Brown, S., Hider, P., & Ellis, L. (2015). Education for Australia’s information future. Higher Education Research & Development, 34(3), 458–471. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2014.973380.
Cerna, L. (2013). The nature of policy change and implementation: A review of different theoretical approaches. OECD https://www.oecd.org/edu/ceri/The%20Nature%20of%20Policy%20Change%20and%20Implementation.pdf.
Chin, C.K.H., Fluck, A., Chong, C.L., Penesis, I., Ranmuthugala, D. and Coleman, B. (2017). Higher order thinking through Calculus for Kids. Journal of Digital Learning and Teaching Victoria 4(1)26–31. https://dltv.vic.edu.au/resources/Journals/Higher_Order_Thinking_Through_Calculus_for_Kids.pdf
Chrisafis, A. (2018) French school students to be banned from using mobile phones. The Guardian (newspaper) 7 Jun 2018. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/jun/07/french-school-students-to-be-banned-from-using-mobile-phones
Cobb, P., Confrey, J., diSessa, A., Lehrer, R., & Schauble, L. (2003). Design experiments in educational research. Educational Researcher, 32(1), 9–13. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X032001009.
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Collins, A., Joseph, D., & Bielaczyc, K. (2004). Design research: Theoretical and methodological issues. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(1), 15–42. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327809jls1301_2.
Cordes, C., & Miller, E. (Eds.). (2000). Fool's gold: A critical look at computers in childhood. Alliance for Childhood: College Park, MD, USA http://www.allianceforchildhood.net/projects/computers/computers_reports.htm.
Crean, A. (2018) French parliament backs Macron bill to ban phones in schools. Sky News. https://news.sky.com/story/french-parliament-backs-macron-bill-to-ban-phones-in-schools-11397666
Davis, J. A. (1971). Elementary survey analysis. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Downes, T., Fluck, A., Gibbons, P., Leonard, R., Matthews, C., Oliver, R., Vickers, M., & Williams, M. (2002). Making better connections. Science and Training: Commonwealth Department of Education https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/f4af/8bca64cc49f501023a668cd1ad704873b0a3.pdf.
Fluck, A. (2003a). Why isn't ICT as effective as it ought to be in school education? ICT and the Teacher of the Future: International Federation for Information Processing Working Groups 3.1 and 3.3 Working Conference, 26–31 January 2003, Melbourne, Australia, pp. 39–41.
Fluck (2003b). Integration or Transformation?: A cross-national study of Information and Communication Technology in School Education. Thesis: University of Tasmania. http://eprints.utas.edu.au/232
Fluck, A. (2005). The realities of transforming education through ICT, invited keynote at Global Project Based Learning Forum and Exhibition, Kaohsiung, Taiwan, 29–35 (Eng).
Fluck, A., Ranmuthugala, S.D., Chin, C.K.H. & Penesis, I. (2011). Calculus in elementary school: an example of ICT-based curriculum transformation, SITE 2011, Nashville, USA, pp. 3203–3210. http://www.editlib.org/j/SITE/v/2011/n/1
Fluck, A.E., Ranmuthugala, D., Chin, C. and Chong, J. (2016). Innovating with Science-ercise. Australian Council for Computers in Education Conference Proceedings, 29 September - 2 October 2016, Brisbane, Australia, pp. 46–51.
Freiberger, V., Steinmayr, R., & Spinath, B. (2012). Competence beliefs and perceived ability evaluations: How do they contribute to intrinsic motivation and achievement? Learning and Individual Differences, 22(4), 518–522. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2012.02.004.
Glass, G. V., McGaw, B., & Smith, M. L. (1981). Meta-analysis in social research. London: Sage.
Google. (2019). Using the TAR model to connect technology to your vision. Fort Osage R-1 School District / Independence, MO, USA. https://edutransformationcenter.withgoogle.com/resource/5754105528057856
Goss, P., & Chisholm, C. (2016). Widening gaps: What NAPLAN tells us about student progress: Technical report. Grattan Institute: Carlton, VIC, AU https://grattan.edu.au/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/937-Widening-gaps-technical-report.pdf.
Gravemeijer, K., & Doorman, M. (1999). Context problems in realistic mathematics education: A calculus course as an example. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 39(1–3), 111–129. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1003749919816.
Gylfason, G. J. (2016). An introduction to the Icelandic national examinations for 7th grade 2016. Kópavogi, Iceland: Directorate of Education, Iceland. https://mms.is/sites/mms.is/files/foreldrabref_-_7_bekkur_-_enska.pdf
Hamilton, E. R., Rosenberg, J. M., & Akcaoglu, M. (2016). The substitution augmentation modification redefinition (SAMR) model: A critical review and suggestions for its use. TechTrends, 60(5), 433–441. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-016-0091-y.
Hattie, J. A. C. (2009). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. Abingdon: Routledge.
Head, B. (2016) Australia’s record on digital disruption: A retrospective report card. In The Executive’s Guide to Navigating Digital Disruption. Australian Computer Society. https://www.acs.org.au/content/dam/acs/acs-publications/ACS-Executives-Guide-to-Navigating-Digital-Disruption.pdf
Hillier, M. & Fluck, A. (2017). Transforming exams - how IT works for BYOD e-exams In H. Partridge, K. Davis, & J. Thomas. (Eds.), Me, us, IT! Proceedings ASCILITE 2017: 34th International Conference on Innovation, Practice and Research in the Use of Educational Technologies in Tertiary Education (pp. 100-105). Toowoomba, 4-6 December. http://2017conference.ascilite.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/Concise-HILLIER.pdf
Hopkins, W. G. (1997). New view of statistics. http://www.sportsci.org/resource/stats/effectmag.html
Hornstra, L., van der Veen, I., Peetsma, T., & Volman, M. (2015). Innovative learning and developments in motivation and achievement in upper primary school. Educational Psychology, 35(5), 598–633. https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410.2014.922164.
Huang, Y.-M., Liao, Y.-W., Huang, S.-H., & Chen, H.-C. (2014). A jigsaw-based cooperative learning approach to improve learning outcomes for mobile situated learning. Educational Technology & Society, 17(1), 128–140 https://www.j-ets.net/ETS/journals/17_1/12.pdf.
Jónasson, J. T. (2016). Educational change, inertia and potential futures: Why is it difficult to change the content of education? European Journal of Futures Research, 4(7), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40309-016-0087-z.
Kirk, R. E. (1996). Practical significance: A concept whose time has come. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 56(5), 746–759. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164496056005002.
Kotrlik, J. W., & Williams, H. A. (2003). The incorporation of effect size in information technology, learning and performance research. Information Technology, Learning, and Performance Journal, 21(1), 1–7 https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/e5c3/504ca4baef11c1cda8ec085833dbccb63259.pdf.
Kozma, R. B. (2011). A framework for ICT policies to transform education. In Transforming education: The power of ICT policies. Paris, France: United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0021/002118/211842e.pdf
Lattu, M. (2014). Digitalisation of the Finnish matriculation examination - geography on the first wave in 2016. Invited talk presented at the Open Source Geospatial Research and Education Symposium, Otaniemi, Espoo, Finland. 10–13 June. http://2014.ogrs-community.org/2014_papers/Lattu_OGRS2014.pdf .
Li, Q., & Ma, X. (2010). A meta-analysis of the effects of computer technology on school students’ mathematics learning. Educational Psychology Review, 22(3), 215–243. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-010-9125-8.
Lopez, X., Valenzuela, J., Nussbaum, M., & Tsai, C. (2015). Some recommendations for the reporting of quantitative studies. Computers & Education, 91(2015), 106–110. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2015.09.010.
Magana, S. (2017). Disruptive classroom technologies: Transcending the status quo with the T3 framework. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
Maple. (2016). User case study: Maple helps teach calculus to 11-year old students. Maplesoft, a division of Waterloo Maple Inc., Waterloo, Ontario. https://www.maplesoft.com/company/casestudies/stories/136487.aspx
Ministerial Council on Education, Employment, Training and Youth Affairs (Australia and New Zealand) (MCEETYA). (2005). Contemporary learning: Learning in an online world. Curriculum Corporation. http://www.curriculum.edu.au/verve/_resources/Contemp_Learning_Final.pdf
Moursund, D. (2005). Introduction to information and communication Technology in Education. Eugene, OR: University of Oregon http://darkwing.uoregon.edu/~moursund/Books/ICT/ICTBook.pdf.
MySchool. (2017). The my school website. Sydney: Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority https://www.myschool.edu.au.
NAP [National Assessment Program]. (2017). NAPLAN Online. Author https://www.nap.edu.au/online-assessment
National Assessment Program (2016). Score equivalence tables. https://www.nap.edu.au/results-and-reports/how-to-interpret/score-equivalence-tables
Nitschke, S. (2016). Calculus for Kids: Engaging Students in Mathematics through ICT. Australian Council for Computers in Education Conference Proceedings, 29 September - 2 October 2016, Brisbane, Australia. http://conference.acce.edu.au/index.php/acce/acce2016/paper/view/95
OECD. (2017). Characteristics of education systems, in Education at a glance 2017: OECD indicators, OECD publishing. Paris: DOI https://doi.org/10.1787/eag-2017-35-en.
Papert, S. (2000). Technology in schools: To support the system or render it obsolete. Milken Family Foundation. http://www.mff.org/edtech/article.taf?_function=detail&Content_uid1=106
Penuel, W. R. (2006). Implementation and effects of one-to-one computing initiatives: A research synthesis. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 38(3), 329–348. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2006.10782463.
Perkins, D. N. (1993). Person-plus: A distributed view of thinking and learning. In G. Salomon (Ed.), Distributed Cognitions: Psychological and educational considerations (pp. 88–110). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Pierce, R., Stacey, K., & Barkatsas, A. (2007). A scale for monitoring students’ attitudes to learning mathematics with technology. Computers & Education, 48(2007), 285–300. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2005.01.006.
Puentedura, R. R. (2006). Transformation, technology, and education. http://hippasus.com/resources/tte
Puentedura, R. R. (2017). Why prudence is (sometimes) not prudent: The trouble with too much substitution. http://hippasus.com/blog/archives/354.
Rea, L. M., & Parker, R. A. (1992). Designing and conducting survey research. San Francisco: Jossey- Bass.
Resnick, M. (1998). Technologies for Lifelong Kindergarten. Educational Technology Research & Development, 46(4), 43–55. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02299672.
Rogers, E. M. (2003). Diffusion of innovations (5th ed.). New York: Free Press.
Roschelle, J. M., Pea, R. D., Hoadley, C. M., Gordin, D. N., & Means, B. M. (2000). Changing how and what children learn in school with computer-based technologies. Future of Children, 10(2), 76–97. https://doi.org/10.2307/1602690.
Scardamalia, M. (2004). CSILE/knowledge forum®. In Education and technology: An encyclopedia (pp. 183-192). http://ikit.org/fulltext/CSILE_KF.pdf
SRI International. (2011). SimCalc: The mathematics of change. Retrieved from http://math.sri.com/research/index.html
Staff Writer. (2018). New categories for 2018 digital disruptors awards. Information Age, Jun 19 2018. https://ia.acs.org.au/article/2018/new-categories-for-2018-digital-disruptors-awards.html?ref=newsletter
Tallmadge, G. K. (1977). The joint dissemination review panel IDEABOOK. Washington, DC: U. S. Office of Education.
Tamim, R. M., Borokhovski, E., Pickup, D., Bernard, R. M., & El Saadi, L. (2015). Tablets for teaching and learning: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Commonwealth of Learning. http://oasis.col.org/bitstream/handle/11599/1012/2015_Tamim-et-al_Tablets-for-Teaching-and-Learning.pdf.
Tapia, M., & Marsh, G. E. (2004). An instrument to measure mathematics attitudes. Academic Exchange Quarterly, 8(2), 16–21 http://www.rapidintellect.com/AEQweb/cho25344l.htm.
Tinker, R. (2000). Ice machines, steamboats, and education: Structural change and educational technologies. Paper presented at The Secretary's Conference on Educational Technology, September 11-12. http://www.ed.gov/rschstat/eval/tech/techconf00/tinkerpaper.pdf
Volk, M., Cotic, M., Zajc, M., & Starcic, A. I. (2017). Tablet-based cross-curricular maths vs. traditional maths classroom practice for higher-order learning outcomes. Computers & Education, 114(2017), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2017.06.004.
Wiliam, D. (2010). Standardized testing and school accountability. Educational Psychologist, 45(2), 107–122. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461521003703060.
Wing, J. M. (2006). Computational thinking. CACM Viewpoint, March 2006, pp. 33–35, http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~wing
This work was supported by the Australian Research Council [LP130101088] with the University of Tasmania and industry partner Australian Scientific & Engineering Solutions Pty Ltd.
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
About this article
Cite this article
Fluck, A.E., Ranmuthugala, D., Chin, C.K.H. et al. Transforming learning with computers: Calculus for kids. Educ Inf Technol 25, 3779–3796 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-020-10136-0
- Transformation of learning
- Primary education
- Integral calculus
- Computer-based assessment
- Learner attitudes/perceptions
- Effect size of innovations