Ask HN: Do computers and tablets really improve education at elementary level? | Hacker News Reader

Ask HN: Do computers and tablets really improve education at elementary level?

58 pointstomek_zemla66 comments

Some recent personal observations and tutoring led me to believe that schools introduced mandatory laptops and tablets simply to appear modern.

What I see is pre/teens spending most of their days (evenings and weekends) on social media using devices mandated by schools and purchased at great cost by parents. I see close to none usage of the same devices for improved learning/teaching.

Kids don't hang out on Wikipedia. They follow pop stars on Instagram. All day (and night if not restricted) using electronics that supposedly improves education.

Majority of 'educational' usage is along the lines of looking up class schedule online and doing homework on ebooks which could very well be paper based. For example what are the benefits of using drawing program vs paper, pencil, ruler for basic geometry? Is it worth spending money on iPad Air to facilitate this? Wouldn't be better to use these funds for better teacher pay and teacher/student ratios?

Are there any studies supporting or disproving my observations? What are your personal observations?

View on HN

A tablet (iPad or otherwise) much less so; tablets are very much "consumption" devices, which can consume packaged educational content and videos, but don't help with collaboration.

However, a two-way interactive device like a laptop or Chromebook? Typing homework instead of writing it? Having collaborative tools available to work with others, both in and out of school? Playing with preliminary programming environments? Trying experiments and visualizations? Yes, that can absolutely help.

Just handing a device to every student will not automatically improve education, though; they're not magic. There need to be lesson plans, adapted materials, tools (e.g. for teachers to collaborate with students and students to collaborate with each other), and not just the same lessons ported to turn in homework on a computer. That takes time and effort, but the result will be students much more adapted to a highly tech-integrated society.

(Disclaimer: the above derives from professional experience and observations, but is not a comment made with my professional hat on; not speaking for anyone else here.)

As for the comments on social media: yes, and that's something many of them will do as adults too. Many people are highly social, and hang out with each other online. Some of what they do will be educational and productive, but having a computer doesn't mean it has to be used entirely for education and productivity. Even just posting online provides practice writing and typing, both of which benefit from practice. Some of their time might be spent on random Internet forum sites arguing with each other, which of course will never be a skill they'll make use of as well-adjusted adults like us. But it'll keep kids inside and thus off your lawn.

> A tablet (iPad or otherwise) much less so; tablets are very much "consumption" devices, which can consume packaged educational content and videos, but don't help with collaboration.

If you told me I had to make a video or a drawing, collaborative or otherwise, and I could only have an iPad or a laptop (and no special peripherals for either), and nothing else, I'd take the iPad without hesitation.

I might take it if you told me I had to make a song, too, depending on the laptops on offer (the alternative in schools is usually Chromebooks) and what sorts of instruments (if any) I might be permitted to use.

> If you told me I had to make a video or a drawing, collaborative or otherwise, and I could only have an iPad or a laptop (and no special peripherals for either), and nothing else, I'd take the iPad without hesitation.

A drawing, perhaps, though only if the laptop can't be flipped around to put the touchscreen at a convenient angle. A convertible with a stylus seems ideal for that.

But a video? I'd definitely prefer the laptop.

My experience has been that even fairly high-end laptops have much worse cameras than i-devices, and usually only have a front-facing one, making for some really awkward, shaky, low-quality filming and a lot of difficulty framing shots, manipulating controls while filming, and so on.

[EDIT] which reminds me: for any photography-related project, I'd take the iPad too, obviously. Really anything that's not mostly typing or very suited to the use of a mouse.

When someone says make a video to me I think taking a bunch of clips with a camera and putting them together into a video. Since I have already assumed a camera all that is left is editing, and I'll take a computer over a tablet for that.

I agree that taking the clips the tablet is better than with any computer.

This, yes; I was talking about video editing, not video recording.

> Just handing a device to every student will not automatically improve education, though; they're not magic.

This. Blended learning is more of an art; if you are interested in how it can be applied in schools, I highly recommend this MOOC: https://www.coursera.org/learn/blended-learning

Lots of different models, readings and videos, including tours of the more "tech-savvy" schools :)

How is a Chromebook less of a consumption device than an iPad?

It has a real keyboard, and far more collaborative tools.

Chromebook allows you to type papers etc.

But Apple Pages is free for iPad, and so are Google Docs and Microsoft Word. And of course you can run all the same webapps as on the Chromebook.

I've seen first hand students waste time trying to highlight something correctly or navigate the menu by pecking away at the screen of their iPad, when a mouse would have made their actions much faster and more precise

You could supply hardware keyboard-cases that prop up the tablet at a usable angle. But otherwise, typing long documents on a tablet is a miserable experience.

This is more flexible. The iPad can gain a keyboard when you need one, but Chromebooks can't lose their keyboards when they get in the way.

They have convertible chromebooks.

This. As the owner of a full-body aluminium convertible chromebook, I'd concur: The point about "losing the keyboard" doesn't apply per se, if you're talking about the right Chromebook model. The Asus C100P for example makes a good tablet and its laptop-experience has never been matched with any iPad-keyboard I've seen so far.

On the other hand, a Chromebook's problem (for now) regarding the "tablet mode" lies in the ChromeOS GUI: It wasn't designed with touch screens in mind (especially the browser itself) and feels clunkier than other tablet controls. Google are on their way to remedy that through their integration of Android apps though. They're certainly not there yet, but I can imagine that changing in the forseeable future.

Here's a vested interest trying to cherry-pick studies to make tablets in the classroom seem useful, and it's pretty thin gruel:

http://www.securedgenetworks.com/blog/8-Studies-Show-iPads-i...

1. A study showing that giving kindergartners short-term exposure to tablet learning programs caused a short-term increase in literacy scores (probably just novelty effect)

2. A non-study anecdote from a med school

3. A survey showing kids prefer being given iPads to not being given iPads

4. The same kindergarten study again

5. A probably real study showing that math apps improve algebra test scores (probably through increased practice)

6. Another survey showing kids still want toys

7. Anecdote that tablets can improve accessibility for disabled students

8. Another legit-looking math study with a positive result

9. Another give-us-toys survey

Assuming these guys have done a good job searching for evidence of value, the only decent result for mainstream K-12 education is that it maybe makes math practice more palatable which would definitely improve math scores.

"maybe makes math practice more palatable which would definitely improve math scores" - I have this thought experiment where you drop off ipads in inner city Detroit. They are loaded with games, but the only way to unlock the games is to solve a certain number of math problems each day. My theory is that test scores far surpass the public schools.

I think it depends entirely how they are used.

CAD (Onshape), programming, digital arts/photography, making video, collaborating on writing and presentations for group projects, collaborating with your classmates, doing research -- all great uses.

In other words: classroom tech is probably best (IMHO) when used in nearly the same way you would use it in a job or a non-school project.

Replacing existing educational systems and tools (conventional textbooks, testing, etc.) ... probably less useful.

I'd both agree and disagree with that. I can imagine such technology being very useful for teaching if it is applied well, and - as you note - replacing current ways of teaching completely certainly won't help.

I'm not sure about the "using it as if for a Job" part though. It wouldn't surprise me if there were some good teaching techniques using such hardware in new ways - it's just that they haven't been tried yet.

If one could let kids explore some topic on their own (given certain boundaries) in fun ways, I could imagine that alone could have positive effects. Perhaps you meant that with your remark too (I'm not sure if I misread you there)?

Edit: I could, for example, also imagine a scenario where a traditional "text book scenario" is accompanied by some "sandbox" examples where kids could try different parameters in the style of Bret Victor's "Inventing on Principle" talk. I've generally thought that his demos, while being truly great, wouldn't help too much when it comes to actual work. For showcasing something and educating someone in a more explorational way, they seem to have a huge potential, though.

As an engineer who has pivoted toward education (I worked in the Obama administration on CS Ed and games for learning) I want to say "of course technology helps!" but what the drumbeat of research shows us is that it is no silver bullet -- what's important is the WAY technology is used. Think of the technology as a tool. If the educator knows how to utilize the tool to enhance learning, then it will help!

Blended learning and personalized learning are two methodologies in which technology is actively valuable. You can learn more about those on sites like Edutopia and EdWeek. Here's a great summary article from EdWeek looking at concepts for technology in education: http://www.edweek.org/ew/issues/technology-in-education/

I'm a big fan of using digital games as an engagement modality and curriculum augmentation. GlassLab and SRI did some work together a few years ago and their meta-analysis indicated that adding a digital game to a traditional curriculum could on average increase cognitive learning outcomes by 12%. Of course it varies wildly depending on the game and circumstance. https://www.sri.com/sites/default/files/brochures/digital-ga...

Personal observations:

Tablets/e-readers are great for schools. There are plenty of DRM-free e-books. Instead of buying crates of books, you can just buy some files and them copy them to all the e-readers on the school network.

I've never been able to manage physical flash-card decks, but once I got a smartphone I started using spaced repetition system (SRS) flash-card apps, which can organize (probably) millions of flash-cards and show them to you in the most optimal way for exploiting the long-term memory. I've learned over 3,000 Arabic, Japanese, and Korean words combined, thanks to SRS flash-card apps.

And in this day-and age where pretty much everyone is a network/system administrator (they just don't know it) it's important for kids to learn how to really use a real computer. The most useful thing I learned in my digital media class was how to organize files. I've never met an employer or coworker who could maintain a neat filesystem, even though an untamed Downloads directory would often be the source of their computer troubles.

There is a huge opportunity for these technologies to make schools better. But at the same time, that opportunity has been here for over a decade now.

One more observation: american public schools have horrible taste in software.

Do you know where to get DRM-free ebooks for elementary school children? Project Gutenberg is great for olde authors, not so much for fun simple stuff for kids.

There wasn't any copy protection in the e-books I bought from amazon. However, I haven't bought an e-book from amazon in 6 years. So that may no longer be the case, if more publishers have started using DRM.

Yes, Amazon now adds DRM to all their ebooks and often you don't even get the actual book file but just access to a cloud version.

No. It's meant to augment learning, but it's doing the exact opposite. Laptops/Tablets are redundant objects in the classroom, because instead of providing support to what's already good in the classroom, they're designed to replace them. Personally I'd choose paperback over ebook every single time.

Before anything else, try asking yourself a slightly different question:

If you were given when you were a kid a laptop or tablet (and if internet existed at the time) would you have used it to study or to look around for (choose whatever fits better) music, movies, lolcats, funny videos, maybe some p0rn and the like?

As a relatively younger human I can say that I fit the bill and the answer is "both." I watch videos, play video games, browse memes, and listen to music but at the same time I also program and work on lots of side projects. It's possible to do both but I guess it is tempting to just consume media with these shiny devices--it's way too easy to waste an entire afternoon playing Overwatch or getting lost on Reddit.

OP here... Exactly. My concern is that 11, 12, 13 year olds need a lot of editorial guidance, mentoring and teachers who are truly fluent with technology to do more useful activities and less useless or downright harmful on their devices.

18 year old can (usually) figure out how to use Internet and technology in general to improve themselves and advance their education. Small kids not so much...

Right.

The (wrong) idea is that the tool (tablet/laptop) by sheer magic can replace guidance, if you prefer it is a form of lazyness by the teachers and/or the parents that assume that the kids will not do what they are better at (which is of course playing) 80-90% of the time (and use it for school work for the bare minimum 10-20% actually needed to get a decent vote).

Under some guidance I find the tablet or laptop an exceptionally good tool, but it is just a tool, so in itself its usage without appropriate programs and mentoring it can become worse than useless, an additional means of distraction.

Obvious answer: "yes, both, several of the above". Doesn't have to be an either-or.

Great question, great comments. Consensus seems to be that computers are tools and can be helpful if the learning model is right. Specifically, computers can allow for mastery (see Sal Khan on TED) and personalization (see Silicon Valley schools). I think the follow up question is: will the current system evolve to a 21st-century model, where computers can be effectively utilized?

(My answer is no, here's my proposal for a better model: https://medium.com/@prendalearn/nanoschool-a-new-take-on-edu...)

Interesting idea. However your model - like all interest based learning models - fails because learning is hard. How will you force kids to memorize their multiplication tables, their spelling lists... These are things that are hard to do and interesting. (note once you get good things like spelling bees are fun, but until you are good it is not fun so few kids will cross that gap)

I agree, what if people decide not to learn. My two answers are 1) they wouldn't learn in a compulsory model anyway, not really (https://medium.com/@prendalearn/teaching-is-impossible-what-... and 2) gamification can go a long way.

Actually testing this next week with a summer camp where we bought a bunch of cool, fun toys and the kids can play all day once they get their work done (x% mastered on Khan Academy, y pages read, z words written). I'm making all this up - no academic background.

It depends a lot on what you are learning. I think playing DreamBox significantly helped my daughter (1st grade) learn how to count. Simply because she likes playing with it so she got a lot of practice for no effort. The key is there: no effort, or an effort that is lower than the reward. But I don't think there are many things where this applies.

Reflecting on my personal experience: in junior high school and above I played a lot of video games available only in English, that truly helped with my learning of the language. And now that I'm studying kanji: spaced repetition on the iPhone...

I'm sure it doesn't improve their education but I bet it helps soothe the ones who are bored out of their fucking minds. I had a ti-83 to occupy myself when I was a kid but a tablet would have been amazing!

The TI-83 had some pretty kickass games. I remember playing "Drugwars" on mine in High School.

Not a clear yes.

  less than 60% of teachers think that pupils' academic 
  performance also improves, or in other words, the impact on their marks is seen to be lower than 
  on their learning

https://phys.org/news/2013-06-digital-tablets-classroom.html and http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED541157.pdf

No.

Readable academic blog post

https://fredrikdeboer.com/2017/04/12/study-of-the-week-compu...

http://www.nber.org/papers/w19060

Experimental Evidence on the Effects of Home Computers on Academic Achievement among Schoolchildren Robert W. Fairlie, Jonathan Robinson

Computers are an important part of modern education, yet many schoolchildren lack access to a computer at home. We test whether this impedes educational achievement by conducting the largest-ever field experiment that randomly provides free home computers to students. Although computer ownership and use increased substantially, we find no effects on any educational outcomes, including grades, test scores, credits earned, attendance and disciplinary actions. Our estimates are precise enough to rule out even modestly-sized positive or negative impacts. The estimated null effect is consistent with survey evidence showing no change in homework time or other "intermediate" inputs in education.

Depends on how it's used. You can use any tool poorly. Even large businesses do not always use their computers in the best way.

1.) I grew up in a poor area. For high school they introduced an alternative school where you could come in whenever-- basically just rooms full of computers, you would take the whole lesson on the computer. They were able to use only a few teachers for a lot of students this way. While the courses themselves could use a little more work, overall it allowed people to finish high school that otherwise wouldn't have. I think the "let the computer do a lot of the teaching" method is a great one. Lets people work at their own pace and takes some pressure off the teachers.

2.) In an ideal world I would think you could buy a laptop and then save money on books, but at least here in the USA I don't usually see it done that way.

3.) Even if they're doing totally irrelevant stuff, knowing how to use a computer to search for answers and filter out bad information is a great skill to have. So while yes, they need to do their homework, I don't think it's awful if they also use it for playing on.

> In an ideal world I would think you could buy a laptop and then save money on books,

School books are normally overpriced, but they are expected to last 5 years. A laptop will not survive 5 years in the hands of a kid, and even if it does it is so obsolete that you wouldn't want to use it.

In my area, and I think it's like this in much of the USA, they come out with a new "edition" of books every year and require you to get the latest for class in college. Even in high school I remember they kept having to buy new books quite a lot. Also keep in mind 1 laptop = all your books for all your classes + the whole internet. In my high school we took 7 classes per day per semester, so that's 7 books = 1 laptop.

Every school I've went to growing up had cheap usually out of date desktop computers bought in bulk. They were old and ugly. But they were fine, most of the time it was just used for reading or word processing. Sometimes google or an e-course. You don't need a lot of power for that. They kept those computers for ages, I am pretty sure way past 5 years.

When my younger brother went through high school they gave everyone cheap laptops and if you broke it you paid for it, that seemed to work fine. Lots of really young kids are getting cell phones these days and managing to take care of them. I think that's probably helping teach them to be careful with electronics.

I'm really interested in your high school experience. Did you mostly work solo, or was there a lot of interaction with other kids? Informal tutoring, collaborating on hard problems, etc.

Well I only did my final semester there, the alternate school opened in my last year of high school. Anyways it was pretty much exclusively solo work. You just had to grind through an e-course. If you got stuck the software would say "need a hint" or something like that. If that didn't work, it would try to reteach you the lesson. I think they also let us use Google. If you were still stuck you could ask a teacher. People mostly stuck to themselves.

I will say similarly I think the 42 Code School in Fremont, CA mostly relies on e-courses and group collaboration with minimal teacher help. I have a friend who goes there. It is more college level. https://www.42.us.org/

I think a key thing with both of these schools is that to some degree the students wanted to be there. The alternative high school was opened in my area mostly to help people who really wanted to finish high school but were poor and dropping out to work, had a teen pregnancy, or were sick. There were a few advanced students who just wanted to finish early but that was a minority. A lot of them just really wanted to get a real diploma ASAP to get better jobs.

You mention geometry. There are some excellent apps like https://www.euclidea.xyz/ for that, much better than pencil and paper. (I don't know about any outcomes with kids, just my own experience. But if I had kids I would totally want to see what they made of it.)

But in general, when I got an iPad Pro this year and looked for science/math toys to run on it, I was disappointed. There are a lot more didactic educational apps than more imaginative uses of the new medium. Some worth mentioning:

* Earth: a primer * Several apps and games to learn basic programming Scratch-style * Khan Academy * Desmos * Some interactive books from e.g. the Exploratorium * XSection from the same company as Euclidea * A digital-logic game whose name I forget * Kaleidopaint * EveryCircuit * An audio spectrum viewer

I'd like to hear of more to try.

This has become a huge fad in countries like India of late (seen this first hand). Rather than aiding the learning experience, these are used by institutions to brand themselves as "smart schools" and in turn charge higher fees for providing so called "smart e-education".

Then there are xyz companies capitalizing on this by building custom tablets/ipads with their own educational content ripping off both schools and the parents by selling "premium" content that helps students have an "edge" among their peers.

But then, for most parents this is also a matter of pride - "my kids attend a smart school! What about your kids?" which is fueling this pathetic trend.

Almost all of my cousins are enrolled in these smart schools and they don't care much since they now have device to play games on in lieu of learning something meaningful.

I feel sad to see these in a country where there aren't proper schools in thousands of villages.

EDIT: fixed typos

I actually wrote a post about the benefits of ed tech in education for grad school several years ago, which addresses this issue: http://blog.wsd.net/jreeve/the-case-for-ed-tech/

The TL;DR is: Yes, they undeniably improve academic performance, and studies have shown this repeatedly. However, keep in mind the studies demonstrating this are done with teachers who actually knew how to use the technology, were trained to do so, and had specific instructional goals in mind for using the tech to benefit their students. If schools/districts just throw this technology at teachers without proper training and academic objectives, it will do nothing. Computers and tablets are useful in the hands of a good teacher, but they are tools. They cannot turn bad instructional practices into good instructional practices.

A bicycle for the mind doesn't make the mind stronger. To learn requires focused effort, and having the computer do the work for you means the effort doesn't happen.

If there was solid evidence it worked, you'd see that evidence cited everywhere.

There is evidence, however, that it helps kids with learning disabilities.

No, and it has been known for 20 years that they don't https://www.amazon.co.uk/Silicon-Snake-Oil-Cliff-Stoll/dp/03...

This is spam. If you have an argument for or against and want to provide data you link to said data. This is a link to a hardback book for purchase.

I'm not saying you're right or wrong I just find this the opposite of effective for conveying your point.

For purchase for 1p, and containing all the research. What exact point are you trying to make?

My point was very clear. I suggest reading my original comment again.

Perhaps you don't know what the word "spam" means? Perhaps you are a "troll"?

Since when is citing a book considered spam?

When stating something as a fact on HN the poster typically posts proof that is verifiable. When you post a link to a book there is no research one can verify. It's of no value in the timespan nor do posters have the trust that they should pay money to see evidence that someone purports. In addition to that you'd still need to verify the source(s) that book used, if it even cites any (I'm unfamiliar with the book, how would I know what it contains?).

Essentially: You're wrong but you have to pay and wait a few days to know why. Not really in the spirit of constructive arguments on HN.

In my opinion, anyway.

I haven't seen good evidence for most computers and related devices improving learning and that's part of the reason I ban them: https://jakeseliger.com/2008/12/28/laptops-students-distract... .

I have seen good evidence that computers do the opposite, in the form of Toyama's book Geek Heresy: https://jakeseliger.com/2015/11/17/geek-heresy-rescuing-soci... .

A lot of the move to requiring laptops, particularly district-supplied Chromebooks, is not driven by an effort to improve education per-se, but to improve the education workflow for teachers, and to go paperless.

Students are given a Chromebook and a G Suite for Education account, and all papers/homework is required to be submitted in Google Doc format. The accounts and the Chromebooks are, of course, centrally managed.

Because all students receive these devices (and in our case have to pay a $20/yr. insurance fee to cover any potential damage) any objection from poor or under-priviledged families is eliminated.

It is sold to parents as a way to improve education? Of course. But in reality it's not for the benefit of the students. It's for the teachers.

It likely makes the scores higher on tests, though not necessarily because they've learned the material better.

Anecdotally, I've seen recent immigrant children struggling to understand user interfaces (that I would argue were poorly designed, not that it matters to anyone caught in the bureaucracy) that more computer literate kids "get" immediately. The struggles with UI, such as kids literally spending dozens of minutes trying to get to the next question, undoubtedly exhaust and frustrate them. One can only guesstimate the effect on test scores but it can't be positive.

More exposure to a variety of software/UIs seems to matter.

3rd graders in my state take the PARCC exam which is done on a laptop or chromebook. So there is a push to make sure children at elementary school are familiar with such computers including typing practice. This makes sense.

At home I think Khan Academy is a great learning resource. Also even Youtube can be handy for doing research for young kids on history/animals/facts where reference books can be a little boring.

Aside from that I think its largely for show. No one wants to be left behind or seen to be.

Computers are a tool. Because they are the new things it is hard to see that they are just tools, so I like to start with this related question: do hammers improve education? Lets look at that question first.

I have never seen a math teacher who I would trust with a hammer. English (language) classes might have a paper mache hammer - one student made as a prop for a play and it has been hanging on the wall since. Physics teachers need a cartoon oversized sized rubber hammer. Shop class will have 60 different hammers, for some types there will be one for each student. Art class will have a couple, and once in a while borrow a bunch from the shop class...

Now that our mindset is correct we can re-ask the question: are computers useful? The answer is what are you going to do with them.

Part of modern English (language) class is typing. Starting perhaps 3rd grade there should be regular streams of reports handed in electronically. As students get older much of the literature they need to read is available free on a computer and hard to find in paper form. Other than a caution about handwriting and spelling still being useful skills I expect to see a lot of computers in language classrooms. As the kids get older things like web pages will be added to English class. (web pages have more in common with journalism than computer science!)

When the kids get older I expect art to be done on a computer, but for elementary aged kids art with messy paints is better than the computer. (some professional artists find painting on a computer is better than real paint: it works the same way until you want to hit undo or need the paint to dry at a different speed - but that is for older kids)

Math is about reasoning through a problem. Computers running flashcards can be useful at times (single digit addition, subtraction, multiplication should be memorized), but ultimately computers are easily harmful to the goal of teaching reasoning. In fact real math problems the arithmetic is easy enough that not being able to do it is a sign you made a mistake.

Science is like math, except the real world is messy and so an equation solver is helpful. Most of the learning is actually before the point or writing up your report though, and not using a computer is an advantage as it forces you to think about how you will measure something.

Shop class (though this barely exists anymore - I think this is a great loss) should cover CNC and 3d printing.

I do think its mostly just business. Both schools and device manufacturers can make a lot of money by making such tools mandatory. But there is no doubt that tablets and laptop application can help improve learning in students, but if used effectively

It's a tool. It depends on what you do with it.

>Kids don't hang out on Wikipedia

Hey! I did that..

OK, but starting at what age?

~9. Would not have gained an interest in CS or politics otherwise.

N O

Reply on news.ycombinator.com