Not Really

I’ve been in classrooms where I’ve seen teachers using technology effectively — frequently, I’ve seen teachers using smart whiteboards effectively. I’ve seen bits of software that seem really engaging. But again, it’s all piecemeal at this point. . . . If it doesn’t work in all contexts for all kids, I want to be able to describe which context it works in for which kids, and we’re not there yet for anything” 

(Source: Daniel Willingham, a University of Virginia cognitive scientist as cited in Marketplace as quoted in Learning About Tech: No Dancing Hamsters Please)

Joanne, who authored the blog above highlights some powerful points. None is so powerful as this:

The question in both of these reports is not whether technology can improve learning outcomes; lots of well-designed experimental research establishes that it can. The question, rather, is whether it is improving learning outcomes

And the answer seems to be: Not really.

Ouch. Of course, the experimental research cited is about this stuff:

In particular, when compared to No tutoring, the effect sizes of answer-based tutoring systems, intelligent tutoring systems, and adult human tutors are believed to be d = 0.3, 1.0, and 2.0 respectively. This review did not confirm these beliefs. 

Instead, it found that the effect size of human tutoring was much lower: d = 0.79. Moreover, the effect size of intelligent tutoring systems was 0.76, so they are nearly as effective as human tutoring. (Source: The Relative Effectiveness of Human Tutoring, Intelligent Tutoring Services, and Other Tutoring Services)


Everything posted on Miguel Guhlin’s blogs/wikis are his personal opinion and do not necessarily represent the views of his employer(s) or its clients. Read Full Disclosure


Discover more from Another Think Coming

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

Leave a comment