This article examines the implementation of a one-to-one laptop program in three diverse schools in California. The program was carried out in one largely Hispanic low socio-economic junior high, one largely Asian Asian-American high-SES K-8 school, and in the gifted program in a medium-SES elementary school. Interviews, observations, surveys, and analysis of student work indicated that the program helped facilitate writing-intensive, information-rich, multimodal, and student-centered instruction. Analysis of test scores in English and mathematics indicate that laptop students failed to keep up with non-laptop students in the first year of implementation but made strong gains in the second year of implementation. Explanations for these outcomes are discussed.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AndersonR. E., & RonnkvistA. (1999). The presence of computers in American schools. Teaching, Learning, and Computing: 1998 Survey Report.Irvine, CA: Center for Research on Information Technology and Organizations.
2.
BeckerG. S. (2005). The age of human capital. In LazearE. P. (Ed.), Education in the twenty-first century.Stanford, CA: Hoover Press.
3.
BeckerH. J. (2000). Who's wired and who's not: Children's access to and use of computer technology. The Future of Children, 10—Children and Computer Technology, 2, 44–75.
4.
BloomM.BurrowsM.LafleurB., & SquiresR. (1997). The economic benefits of improving literacy skills in the workplace.Publications Information Center, Conference Board of Canada.
5.
CordesS. (2004). Statewide accountability environments and their effect on teachers' practices. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of California, Irvine.
6.
CubanL. (2001). How can I fix it?: Finding solutions and managing dilemmas: An educator's road map.New York: Teachers College Press, Columbia University.
7.
CubanL. (2003). Oversold and underused: Computers in the classroom.Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
8.
CulpK. M.HoneyM., & MandinachE. (2003). A retrospective on twenty years of education technology policy:Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Technology.
DunleavyM.DexterS., & HeineckeW. F. (2007). What added value does a 1:1 student to laptop ratio bring to technology-supported teaching and learning?Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 23, 440–452.
11.
EisenP. (2003). Skills for a 21st century workforce: Can we meet the challenge. In FoxM. A. (Ed.), Pan-organizational summit on the U.S. science and engineering workforce: Meeting summary (pp. 134–147). Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
12.
GeeJ. P. (2003). What video games have to teach us about learning and literacy.New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
13.
GeeJ. P. (2004). Situated language and learning: A critique of traditional schooling.New York: Routledge.
ISTE NETS Project. (2007). National educational technology standards for students.Washington, DC: International Society for Technology in Education.
16.
JohnstoneB. (2003). Never mind the laptops: Kids, computers, and the transformation of learning.Lincoln, NE: iUniverse.
17.
KlingR. (2000). Learning about information technologies and social change: The contribution of social informatics. The Information Society, 16, 217–232.
18.
KressG. (2003). Literacy in the new media age.London and New York: Routledge.
19.
Laptops for Learning Task Force. (2004). Laptops for learning.Florida: Florida Department of Education.
20.
Market Data Retrieval. (2005). The K-12 technology review 2005.Shelton, CT: Market Data Retrieval.
National Assessment of Educational Progress. (2005). NAEP 2004 trends in academic progress three decades of student performance in reading and mathematics.Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences.
23.
National Commission on Writing in America's Schools and Colleges. (2003). The neglected “R”: The need for a writing revolution.
24.
NCREL. (2003). enGauge 21st century skills: Literacy in the digital age.Naperville, IL: North Central Regional Educational Laboratory and the Metiri Group.
25.
New London Group. (1996). A pedagogy of multiliteracies: Designing social futures. Harvard Educational Review, 66(1), 60–92.
26.
NovakG. M.PattersonE. T.GavrinA. D., & ChristianW. (1999). Just in time teaching.Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
27.
Partnership for 21st Century Skills. (2006). Assessment of 21st century skills.
28.
PenuelW. R. (2005). Research: What it says about 1 to 1 learning.Cupertino: Apple Computer.
29.
RockmanS. (2003, Fall). Learning from laptops. Threshold Magazine, pp. 24–28.
30.
RussellM.BebellD., & HigginsJ. (2004). Laptop learning: A comparison of teaching and learning in upper elementary classrooms equipped with shared carts of laptops and permanent 1:1 laptops. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 30(4), 313–330.
31.
RussellM.HigginsJ., & HoffmanT. (2004). Examining the effect of text editor and robust word processor on student writing performance.Boston, MA: TASC Publications, Lynch School of Education, Boston University.
32.
RussellM., & PlatiT. (2002). Does it matter with what I write?: Comparing performance on paper, computer and portable writing devices. Current Issues in Education, 5(4), online journal no print edition. http://cie.asu.edu/volume5/number4
33.
SandholtzJ. H.RingstaffC., & DwyerD. C. (1997). Teaching with technology: Creating student-centered classrooms.New York: Teachers College Press.
34.
SilvernailD. L. (2005). Does Maine's middle school laptop program improve learning? A review of evidence to date.Gorham, ME: Center for Education Policy, Applied Research, & Evaluation.
35.
SilvernailD. L., & LaneD. M. (2004). The impact of Maine's one-to-one laptop program on middle school teachers and students: Phase one summary evidence.Maine Education Policy Research Institute, University of Southern Maine.
36.
StraussA. L., & CorbinJ. M. (1998). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory.Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
37.
WalkerL.RockmanS., & ChesslerM. (2000). A more complex picture: Laptop use and impact in the context of changing home and school access. [Electronic Version] from http://www.elob.org/
38.
WarschauerM. (2006). Laptops and literacy: Learning in the wireless classroom.New York: Teachers' College Press.
39.
WarschauerM.KnobelM., & StoneL. (2004). Technology and equity in schooling: Deconstructing the digital divide. Educational Policy, 18(4), 562–588.
40.
WarschauerM., & WareP.(2006). Automated writing evaluation: Defining the classroom research agenda. Language Teaching Research, 10(2), 1–24.
41.
WindschitlM., & SahlK. (2002). Tracing teachers' use of technology in a laptop computer school: The interplay of teacher beliefs, social dynamics, and institutional culture. American Educational Research Journal, 39(1), 165–205.
42.
ZuboffS. (1989). In the age of the smart machine: The future of work and power.New York: Basic Books.
43.
ZuckerA. A., & McGheeR. (2005). A study of one-to-one computer use in mathematics and science instruction at the secondary level in Henrico County Public Schools.Washington, DC: SRI International.
