Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Research Agenda for Technology, Education, and Development: Taking Stock and Looking Ahead

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
ICT-Supported Innovations in Small Countries and Developing Regions

Abstract

This chapter discusses the role that research should play in the current discussions about the role of technology in educational development, with particular reference to small developing states. It shows that often decisions about technology use in education are far from being based on evidence and suggests that this is due partly to the absence of a rigorous knowledge base but also of an appropriate research agenda. No doubt, research has a role to play investigating further the role that technology solutions play in improving the quality of education. But the right research questions must be asked. This chapter addresses two questions. First, it looks at what is currently known and the limitations of the existing knowledge base about how technology can contribute to improving learning – recognizing the paradox that developing countries, which make comparatively bigger efforts in this domain, lag also in terms of knowledge base. The question is therefore whether research has missed the point and failed to build a comprehensive, coherent and useful knowledge base. Second, the chapter considers both what elements are missing and how the important research challenges required to assemble them could be met.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    References to technology are to be understood as limited to digital equipment, services, contents, and applications to support teaching and learning.

  2. 2.

    This contribution will refer solely to basic schooling (typically, compulsory primary and secondary education), considering that the characteristics of higher education and other levels and forms of formal and non-formal education, such as technical and vocational education or adult education, for instance, would require a very different approach.

  3. 3.

    Typically, a random assignment of students or schools to school-based interventions improves the internal validity of causal inferences (Duflo, Glennerster, & Kremer, 2008; Glewwe & Kremer, 2006).

  4. 4.

    This expression was first used to indicate that, in the particular case of distance education, research was unable to demonstrate the superiority of technology-supported courses over traditional arrangements of distance education. It has been later extended to all other areas of education (Russell, 1999).

  5. 5.

    However, different techniques related to the measurement of added value aim at improving the chances of isolating influences.

  6. 6.

    Technology components include both traditional (such as paper and pencil) and digital.

  7. 7.

    This process assumes that all other variables remained constant.

  8. 8.

    This has been the case for developing models of technology acceptance that have been successfully tested empirically in the education sector (Davis, Bagozzi, & Washaw, 1989; Schwarz & Chin, 2007; Venkatesh, Davis, & Morris, 2007).

References

  • Alavi, M., & Leidner, E. D. (2001). Research commentary: Technology-mediated learning. A call for greater depth and breadth of research. Information Systems Research, 12(1), 1–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alsop, G., & Tompsett, C. (2007). From effect to effectiveness: The missing research questions. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 10(1), 28–39.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ananiadou, K., & Claro, M. (2010). 21st century skills and competencies for new millennium learners in OECD countries. Paris: OECD Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arias Ortiz, E., & Cristia, J. N. (2014). El BID y la tecnología para mejorar el aprendizaje: ¿cómo promover programas efectivos? Washington, DC: Banco Interamericano de Desarrollo.

    Google Scholar 

  • Banerjee, A., Cole, S., Duflo, E., & Linden, L. (2007). Remedying education: Evidence from two randomized experiments in India. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 122(3), 1235–1264.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bebell, D., & O'Dwyer, L. M. (2010). Educational outcomes and research from 1:1 computing settings. The Journal of Technology, Learning, and Assessment, 9(1), 1–15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berliner, D. (2002). Educational research: The hardest science of all. Educational Researcher, 31(8), 18–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berlinski, S., Busso, M., & Cristia, J. (2013). The effects of technology use on learning outcomes in developing countries: A meta-analysis. Washington, DC: Banco Interamericano de Desarrollo. Documento mimeografiado.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bernard, R. M., Abrami, P. C., Borokhovski, E., Wade, C. A., Tamim, R. M., Surkes, M. A., & Bethel, E. C. (2009). A meta- analysis of three types of interaction treatments in distance education. Review of Educational Research, 79(3), 1243–1289.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bernard, R. M., Abrami, P. C., Lou, Y., & Borokhovski, E. (2004). A methodological morass? How we can improve the quality of quantitative research in distance education. Distance Education, 25(2), 176–198.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boster, F. J., Meyer, G. S., Roberto, A. J., Inge, C., & Strom, R. (2006). Some effects of video streaming on educational achievement. Communication Education, 55(1), 46–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brynjolfsson, E. (1993). The productivity paradox of information technology. Communications of the ACM, 36(12), 67–77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bull, G., Knezek, G., Roblyer, M. D., Schrum, L., & Thompson, A. (2005). A proactive approach to a research agenda for educational technology. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 37(3), 217–220.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Center for Promise. (2015). Wired to learn: K-12 students in the digital classroom. Washington, DC: America’s Promise Alliance.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cheung, A., & Slavin, R. (2013). The effectiveness of educational technology applications on mathematics achievement in K-12 classrooms: A meta-analysis. Educational Research Review, 9, 88–113.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cheung, A., & Slavin, R. E. (2011). The effectiveness of educational technology applications for enhancing mathematics achievement in K-12 classrooms: A meta-analysis. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University, Center for Research and Reform in Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clark, R. E. (1983). Reconsidering research on learning from media. Review of Educational Research, 53(4), 445–449.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clark, R. E. (1994). Media will never influence learning. Educational Technology Research and Development, 42(2), 21–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Conlon, T., & Simpson, M. (2003). Silicon Valley versus Silicon Glen: The impact of computers upon teaching and learning: A comparative study. British Journal of Educational Technology, 34(2), 137–150.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Conn, K. M. (2014). Identifying effective education interventions in Sub-Saharan Africa: A meta-analysis of rigorous impact evaluations. New York, NY: Columbia University Academic Commons.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cradler, J. (2003). Technology’s impact on teaching and learning. Learning and Leading with Technology, 30(7), 54–57.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cristia, J., Ibarrarán, P., Cueto, S., Santiago, A., & Severín, E. (2012). Tecnología y desarrollo infantil: Evidencia del Programa Una Computadora por Niño. Documento de trabajo N° 304. Washington, DC: Banco Interamericano de Desarrollo.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cuban, L. (2001). Oversold and underused. Computers in the classroom. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., & Washaw, P. R. (1989). User acceptance of computer technology: A comparison of two theoretical models. Management Science, 35(8), 982–1003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dillon, A., & Gabbard, R. (1998). Hypermedia as an educational technology: A review of the quantitative research literature on learner comprehension, control, and style. Review of Educational Research, 68(3), 322–349.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duflo, E., Glennerster, R., & Kremer, M. (2008). Using randomization in development economics research: A toolkit. In T. P. Schultz & J. Strauss (Eds.), Handbook of development economics (Vol. 4, pp. 3895–3062). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Elsevier.

    Google Scholar 

  • Evans, D. K., & Popova, A. (2015). What really works to improve learning in developing countries? An analysis of divergent findings in systematic reviews [Policy Research Working Paper 7203]. Washington, DC: World Bank Group.

    Google Scholar 

  • Faber, B., Sanchis-Guarner, R., & Weinhardt, F. (2015). ICT and education: Evidence from student home addresses [NBER Working Paper No. 21306]. Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fabos, B., & Young, M. D. (1999). Telecommunication in the classroom: Rhetoric versus reality. Review of Educational Research, 69(3), 217–259.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fairlie, R. W., & London, R. A. (2012). The effects of home computers on educational outcomes: Evidence from a field experiment with community college students. Economic Journal, 122(561), 727–753.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fairlie, R. W., & Robinson, J. (2013). Experimental evidence on the effects of home computers on academic achievement among schoolchildren. American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, 5(3), 211–240.

    Google Scholar 

  • Falck, O., Mang, C., & Woessmann, L. (2015). Virtually no effect? Different uses of classroom computers and their effect on student achievement [IZA Discussion Paper No. 8939]. Bonn, Germany: Institute for the Study of Labor.

    Google Scholar 

  • Friedman, W., Gerard, F., & Ralaingita, W. (2010). International independent evaluation of the effectiveness of Institut pour l’Education Populaire’s “Read-Learn-Lead” (RLL) program in Mali: Mid-term report. Research Triangle Park, NC: RTI International Council of Scientific Unions. Committee on the Teaching of Science.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ganimian, A. J., & Murnane, R. J. (2016). Improving education in developing countries: Lessons from rigorous impact evaluations. Review of Educational Research, 86(3), 719–755. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654315627499

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glewwe, P. (2002). Schools and skills in developing countries: Education policies and socioeconomic outcomes. Journal of Economic Literature, 40(2), 436–482.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glewwe, P., & Kremer, M. (2006). Schools, teachers, and education outcomes in developing countries. In E. Hanushek & F. Welch (Eds.), Handbook of the economics of education (Vol. 2, pp. 945–1017). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: North Holland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glewwe, P., Kremer, M., & Moulin, S. (2009). Many children left behind? Textbooks and test scores in Kenya. American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, 1(1), 112–135.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glewwe, P. W., Hanushek, E. A., Humpage, S. D., & Ravina, R. (2013). School resources and educational outcomes in developing countries: A review of the literature from 1990 to 2010. In P. W. Glewwe (Ed.), Education policy in developing countries (pp. 13–64). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Global Education Monitoring Report. (2016). Every child should have a textbook. Paris, France: UNESCO.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guislain, P., Zhen-Wei Qiang, C., Lanvin, B., Minges, M., & Swanson, E. (2006). Overview: Information and communications for development – Global trends and policies. Washington DC: World Bank.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hattie, J. (2009). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. London, England: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hikmet, N., Taylor, E. Z., & Davis, C. J. (2008). The student productivity paradox: Technology mediated learning in schools. Communications of the ACM, 51(9), 128–131.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hsu, Y. C., Ho, H. N. J., Tsai, C. C., Hwang, G. J., Chu, H. C., Wang, C. Y., & Chen, N. S. (2012). Research trends in technology-based learning from 2000 to 2009: A content analysis of publications in selected journals. Educational Technology & Society, 15(2), 354–370.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hwang, G.-J., & Tsai, C.-C. (2011). Research trends in mobile and ubiquitous learning: A review of publications in selected journals from 2001 to 2010. British Journal of Educational Technology, 42(4), 65–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keser, H., Uzunboylu, H. S., & Ozdamli, F. (2011). The trends in technology supported collaborative learning studies in 21st century. World Journal on Educational Technology, 3(2), 103–119.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kozma, R. (1991). Learning with media. Review of Educational Research, 61(2), 179–211.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kozma, R., & Wagner, D. (2005). Core indicators for monitoring and evaluation studies for ICT in education. In D. Wagner (Ed.), Monitoring and evaluation of ICT in education projects – a handbook for developing countries (pp. 35–57). Washington, DC: infoDev.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kremer, M., Brannen, C., & Glennerster, R. (2013). The challenge of education and learning in the developing world. Science, 340(6130), 297–300.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krishnaratne, S., White, H., & Carpenter, E. (2013). Quality education for all children? What works in education in developing countries. New Delhi: International Initiative for Impact Evaluation (3ie).

    Google Scholar 

  • Kukulska-Hulme, A. (2007). Mobile usability in educational contexts: What have we learnt? International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 8(2), 1–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lai, F., Zhang, L., Hu, X., Qu, Q., Shi, Y., Boswell, M., & Rozelle, S. (2012). Computer assisted learning as extracurricular tutor? Evidence from a randomized experiment in rural boarding schools in Shaanxi (Vol. 235). Stanford, CA: Rural Education Action Project.

    Google Scholar 

  • Landauer, T. K. (1995). The trouble with computers: Usefulness, usability, and productivity. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lawless, K. A., & Pellegrino, J. W. (2007). Professional development in integrating technology into teaching and learning: Knowns, unknowns, and ways to pursue better questions and answers. Review of Educational Research, 77(4), 575–614.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lederman, N. (2003). What works: A commentary on the nature of scientific research [editor’s note]. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 3(1).

    Google Scholar 

  • Linden, L. L. (2008). Complement or substitute? The effect of technology on student achievement in India. Washington, DC: Infodev.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lipsey, M. W., & Wilson, D. B. (2001). Practical meta-analysis. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lubin, I. A. (2016). Intentional ICT: Curriculum, education and development [IBE Working Papers on Curriculum Issues No. 17]. Geneva, Switzerland: IBE-UNESCO.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lucas, A. M., McEwan, P. J., Ngware, M., & Oketch, M. (2014). Improving early-grade literacy in East Africa: Experimental evidence from Kenya and Uganda. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 33(4), 950–976.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McEwan, P. J. (2015). Improving learning in primary schools of developing countries: A meta-analysis of randomized experiments. Review of Educational Research, 85(3), 353–394.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Means, B., Toyama, Y., Murphy, R., Bakia, M., & Jones, K. (2009). Evaluation of evidence-based practices in online learning: A meta-analysis and review of online learning studies. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Planning, Evaluation and Policy Development.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nachmias, R. (2004). Factors involved in the implementation of pedagogical innovations using technology. Education and Information Technologies, 9(3), 291–308.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • OECD. (2010a). Are the new millennium learners making the grade? Technology use and educational performance in PISA. Paris: OECD Publishing.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • OECD. (2010b). Inspired by technology, driven by pedagogy: A systemic approach to technology-based school innovations. Paris: OECD Publishing.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • OECD. (2015). Students, computers and learning: Making the connection. Paris: PISA, OECD Publishing.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Olofsson, A. D., Lindberg, J. O., Fransson, G. R., & Hauge, T. E. (2011). Uptake and use of digital technologies in primary and secondary schools – A thematic review of research. Nordic Journal of Digital Literacy, 6(4), 208–226.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pedró, F. (2012). Connected minds. Technology and today’s learners. Paris: OECD Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peslak, A. R. (2005). The educational productivity paradox. Studying the effects of increased IT expenditures in educational institutions. Communications of the ACM, 48(10), 111–114.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Power, T., Gater, R., Grant, C., & Winters, N. (2014). Educational technology topic guide [HEART topic guides]. London: The Health & Education Advice & Resource Team.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reeves, T. C. (2000). Enhancing the worth of instructional technology Research through “design experiments” and other development research strategies. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roblyer, M. D. (2004). If technology is the answer, what’s the question? Research to help make the case for why we use technology in teaching. Paper presented at the Technology and Teacher Education Annual Conference, 2004, Charlottesville, VA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rogers, E. (2003). Diffusion of innovations (5th ed.). New York, NY: The Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ross, S. M., Morrison, G. R., & Lowther, D. L. (2010). Educational technology research past and present: Balancing rigor and relevance to impact school learning. Contemporary Educational Technology, 1(1), 17–35.

    Google Scholar 

  • Russell, T. (1999). The no significant difference phenomenon. Raleigh, NC: North Carolina State University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sandholtz, J. H. (2001). Learning to teach with technology: A comparison of teacher development programs. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 9(3), 349–374.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schacter, J., & Fagnano, C. (1999). Does computer technology improve student learning and achievement? How, when, and under what conditions? Journal of Computing Research, 20(4), 329–343.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schrum, L., & Glassett, K. f. (2006). Research on educational technology: Challenges to implementation and impact of scientifically based research. Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association Annual Meeting, San Francisco, CA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schrum, L., Thompson, A., Maddux, C., Sprague, D., Bull, G., & Bell, L. (2007). Editorial: Research on the effectiveness of technology in schools: The roles of pedagogy and content. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 7(1), 456–460.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwarz, A., & Chin, W. (2007). Looking forward: Toward an understanding of the nature and definition of IT acceptance. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 8(4), 230–243.

    Google Scholar 

  • Solow, R. M. (1987, July 12). We’d better watch out [New York Times book review]. Retrieved from http://www.standupeconomist.com/pdf/misc/solow-computer-productivity.pdf

  • Tamim, R. M., Bernard, R. M., Borokhovski, E., Abrami, P. C., & Schmid, R. F. (2011). What forty years of research says about the impact of technology on learning: A second-order meta-analysis and validation study. Review of Educational Research, 81(1), 4–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tompsett, C. (2013). On the educational validity of research in educational technology. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 16(3), 179–190.

    Google Scholar 

  • Triplett, J. E. (1999). The Solow productivity paradox: What do computers do to productivity. Canadian Journal of Economics, 32(2), 309–334.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Rooij, S. W. (2009). Adopting open-source software applications in US higher education: A cross-disciplinary review of the literature. Review of Educational Research, 79(2), 682–701.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Velzen, J. H. (2013). Educational researchers and practicality. American Educational Research Journal, 50(4), 789–811.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Venkatesh, V., Davis, F. D., & Morris, M. G. (2007). Dead or alive? The development, trajectory and future of technology adoption research. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 8(4), 267–286.

    Google Scholar 

  • Winthrop, R., & Smith, M. S. (2012). A new face of education. Bringing technology into the classroom in the developing world [Working Paper]. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wu, Y.-T., Hou, H.-T., Hwang, F.-K., Lee, M.-H., Lai, C.-H., Chiou, G.-L., … Tsai, C.-C. (2013). A review of intervention studies on technology-assisted instruction from 2005–2010. Educational Technology & Society, 16(3), 191–203.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zucker, A. A., & Light, D. (2009). Laptop programs for students. Science, 323(5910), 82–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. UNESCO, 7 place de Fontenoy, 75007, Paris, France

    Francesc Pedró

Authors
  1. Francesc Pedró
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Francesc Pedró .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Independent Scholar and Researcher, Savannah, Georgia, USA

    Ian A. Lubin

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Association for Educational Communications and Technology (AECT)

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Pedró, F. (2018). The Research Agenda for Technology, Education, and Development: Taking Stock and Looking Ahead. In: Lubin, I. (eds) ICT-Supported Innovations in Small Countries and Developing Regions. Educational Communications and Technology: Issues and Innovations. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-67657-9_2

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-67657-9_2

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-67656-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-67657-9

  • eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation