Previous by DateNext by Date Date Index
Previous by ThreadNext by Thread Thread Index
LM_NET Archive



Good points, Bob, though I was pleased at all the factors the study
corrected for, which would seem to make the research pretty valid.  I
have seen so many that do not do this anywhere near so thoroughly and
the research is thus nearly pointless.  I saw one recently about black
students getting less sleep than white students, but it was not
corrected socio-economically, which could have a significant impact on
the data.

Despite correcting for past achievement level, teachers, socio-economic
factors, etc., the fact is that whatever is motivating them, somewhere
in here is still the kernel that the workers are doing better than the
players, the ants are doing better than the grasshoppers.

Are there students who neither used computers much for the writing
process, nor for playing?  And where did they fall?  That would seem to
be the missing piece.

:) To use your pencil analogy, if this was a pencil study, do you
suppose those who often used pencils to do homework (as opposed to those
who just scratched it on mud with a stick) would have an achievement gap
over those who used pencils but used them more often to play tic-tac-toe
and write notes to the cute classmate across the aisle?  And how did the
mud-scratchers do?  :)

Thanks for the comic strip recommendation.

Lauri Cahoon-Draus
K-12 Library Media Specialist
Suring School Libraries
draus@suring.k12.wi.us

"It is a capital mistake to theorise before one has data. Insensibly
one begins to twist facts to suit theories, instead of theories to suit
facts." Sherlock Holmes - A Scandal in Bohemia.

>>> Robert-Koreis -FW <rkoreis@FWPS.ORG> 2/4/2005 9:54:34 AM >>>
Nancy Willard <nwillard@CSRIU.ORG> writes:
>
>Note the following passages in this article:
>
>" the study found that the more regularly students use computers to
write papers for school, the better they performed on the Massachusetts
Comprehensive Assessment Systems (MCAS) English/Language Arts exam...
> Conversely, the study found that students' recreational use of
computers to play games, explore the Internet for fun, or chat with
friends at home had a negative effect on students' MCAS reading
scores."
*-
I have a very hard time atributing performance to computer use.  As I
recall, there were many studies and meta-studies in the '80s touting
the
learning benefits of using computers.  Go back further and and just
about
every other media device was researched for positive attributes.

In 1983(?), Richard Clark of USC authored "Reconsidering Research on
Learning from Media".  The gist of the piece was that it's the
content,
and curriculum, not the medium that influences learning.

I would posit that even if students were using that tired technology
of
pencils and dried wood pulp, there would still be an achievement gap
over
students who used computers to play games or those who just sat and
scribbled pictures.  However, the scribblers might do better in a test
of
artistic ability.   ;-)

Bob Koreis
--------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------
All LM_NET postings are protected by copyright law.
To change your LM_NET status, e-mail to: listserv@listserv.syr.edu
In the message write EITHER: 1) SIGNOFF LM_NET  2) SET LM_NET NOMAIL
3) SET LM_NET MAIL  4) SET LM_NET DIGEST  * Allow for confirmation.
LM_NET Help & Information: http://www.eduref.org/lm_net/
Archive: http://www.eduref.org/lm_net/archive/
EL-Announce with LM_NET Select: http://elann.biglist.com/el-announce/
LM_NET Supporters: http://www.eduref.org/lm_net/ven.html
--------------------------------------------------------------------

LM_NET Mailing List Home