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.

Integrating technology into the classroom has been an increasing trend, and while many

studies have been conducted to explore the efficacy of computer learning tools, there is a need to

explore the actual effects of technology implementation and to identifying contributing factors

that affect student achievement in the K-12 classroom. This study utilizes a meta-analysis to

explore the effect sizes of computer learning in the population of K-12 mathematics students.

Additionally, a multiple regression model was used to identify factors that most significantly

contribute to the positive effects of computer usage.

The study synthesized information extrapolated from a total of 36,793 mathematics

students that participated in 46 different studies. From these studies, 85 effect sizes were

included in the analysis. Each study was screened to ensure that participants were using

computer technology (CT), were members of regular K-12 classrooms, participated in either

experimental or quasi-experimental studies published between 1990 and 2006, were measured in

math achievement (which was subsequently utilized as the dependent variable in the study), and

were part of a study that provided or allowed for the calculation of an effect size.

Each study was coded for the purposes of identifying key characteristics that potentially

contributed to or detracted from the effectiveness of the CT intervention. First, studies were

coded for sample demographic characteristics (such as race and gender), CT intervention

characteristics (including duration and teaching method), nature of the research design, and for

results and findings. These coding schemes were utilized by two different raters and resulted in

complete agreement between raters after some focused discussions. This process was used to
maximize the reliability of the current study. Finally, when necessary, authors were contacted in

an effort to seek more information.

A total of 13 different independent variables were initially coded for inclusion in the

multiple regression analysis portion of the study. These variables include: gender, racial

composition, socieoeconomic status, special education status, level of education (elementary or

secondary), unit of analysis (class or non class), duration of intervention, method of teaching

(constructivist or traditional), type of testing instrument (standardized or non standardized test),

country, year of study publication, type of computer technology, type of research design, and

confidence rating of the reported or calculated effect size. These independent variables were

tested using a weighted-least squares (WLS) multiple regression to determine the effect on the

dependent variable of effect size of the CT implementation. The purpose of the multiple

regression model is to determine which of these features can significantly predict large, positive

effects of utilizing CT implementation in the classroom.

Initially, all 13 factors were included in the multiple regression model, but were

eliminated individually between model runs until only statistically significant features remained

in the multiple regression model. The null hypothesis in the study is that none of the features can

significantly predict high effect sizes of CT implementation, but the multiple regression analysis

statistic, R-square, and ANOVA analyses within the regression model yielded multiple factors

that can significantly contribute to strong effects. Namely, higher effects were found in

students that were in special education, students that were at the elementary level, studies that

used larger unit of analyses (i.e. larger than one class), learning environments that were

constructivist in nature, and studies that utilized non-standardized assessment instruments.

Additionally, studies that took place after 2000, were found to significantly influence the
likelihood of greater effects. These variables produced an R-square of 0.34, which means that

34% of the variance in effect sizes can be explained by these factors.

This study synthesizes a body of literature for multiple purposes, one of the most

interesting of which is determining which factors can most greatly influence positive effects for

utilizing CT. The multiple regression analysis would suggest many implications, particularly for

special education teachers at the elementary level, and serves to demonstrate the utility of

incorporating CT in this particular setting. Furthermore, the results demonstrate that for teachers

in any setting that utilize CT, a constructive approach might better yield the benefits of CT rather

than traditional teaching methods. I appreciate the fact that the researchers chose to use a meta-

analysis approach in order to build their multiple regression model; I can see how drawing from

such a tremendous data set can offer a wealth of information to help maintain the integrity of the

multiple regression model. While the study offers a very comprehensive perspective on the

factors that contribute to the greatest effects of CT, I can also see how this generalized view may

serve as a limitation to the study. In trying to synthesize such a large body of somewhat

disparate studies, the researchers are then limited to exploring demographic, design, and

implementation methods that were universally discussed across all 46 studies. While multiple

contributing factors were identified, I can also see how utilizing multiple regression in a single

study that explores even more factors might serve to identify additional contributors of variance

in CT effects. Overall, the study expertly blends and soundly explains how a merger of

methodologies can deeply explore previous findings in a fresh, new way.