Impact of One to One Programs on Student Achievement: A Review of Studies

Tara M. Kissel

University of North Texas

Abstract
Many schools today are bringing one to one computer initiatives into the classroom. These initiative are
happening but there is not a clear answer as to whether they are helping student’s achievement. Many
studies are short-term and see very little to no improvement through qualitative data Students though
overall see a change in themselves with the addition of laptops. Their attitudes and the attitudes of the
teachers involved have an impact on student achievement and the success of the program. But concerns
about the other elements one to one programs bring to the classroom need to be explored.
Introduction

Today's classroom is changing, there are tools and skills being utilized that would not be

recognizable to teachers from the last century. Technology is responsible for this change,

technology used to develop and technology used as a tool for educational purposes. One major

change in classrooms today is 1 to 1 program introduction; all students in a group (district,

campus, class) receive a computing device for the purpose of classroom achievement. As early

as 1989, K-12 schools experimented with providing students access to technology at a 1:1 ratio,

meaning that each student has a personal computing device throughout the school day and it

taken home. Since these early efforts, school leaders and policy makers have sought to keep

pace with constantly evolving hardware and network advances while navigating the

management and support of these tools in creating a relevant range of educational opportunities

for their students (Bebell & O’Dwyer, 2010). The government also makes demands of education

technology through policy creation such as No Child Left Behind (NCLB) and Student Succeeds

Act, which states: though tools, training, research, and new models student achievement and

digital literacy will be improved with technology (U.S DOE, 2015).There are many questioning

the move to 1 to 1 programs in the classroom. All levels are asking: Do 1 to 1 programs impact

student achievement?

Student Achievement

1 to 1 programs have been an effort to utilize technological advancements to improve

student achievement. There may be a misguided view of what 1 to 1 programs can do to help

students. Several studies have shown nominal score changes in traditional testing

environments. K-2nd grade students in math and reading have no shown the gains expected in

early stages of implementations (Debell & Pedula 2015). Though after implementation some

gains made in the following two years but stagnating the second grade (Debell & Pedula 2015).
Programs in California and Colorado also only show minor gains in testable skills (Zheng,

Warschauer & Farkes 2012). Standardized tests score pulled from 1 to 1 programs have not

shown statistically significant growth with the introduction of laptops (Warschauer 2005). A

randomized experiment from West Point Academy went so far as to show that students lost

cognitive ability during testing. The students involved scored lower than their counter parts

without computers being used in the classroom (Carter, Greenberg & Walker 2016). These

studies have data that contradict some in education that believe technology is the answer to

being competitive in global education. But with that some think that testing student achievement

based on technology usage with paper and pencil may not be the most effective way to test

(Bebell & Key 2010).

Other studies have found more significant gains in student achievement with 1 to 1

programs, these gains have been reported with other factors. Rosen and Beck-Hill looked at 4

and 5th grade students who received laptops and were compared to peers without laptops in

ELA and math skills through their standardized test scores, observations and interviews. After a

year of the program students with laptops showed statistical gains in math and ELA

standardized testing. The main advantage reported was the added interaction from computers

they received with teachers (Rosen & Beck-Hill 2012). The same study found that involvement

in the program reduced student’s absences and discipline issues over the course of a year

(Rosen & Beck-Hill 2012). Positive correlations can be found between student access and their

achievement, particularly with at-risk students (Rosen & Beck-Hill 2012; Miller 2017; Judge,

Puckett & Bell 2006). Gains can be made in ELL and Hispanic populations when 1 to 1

programs are utilized within these groups. These at-risk learners spend more time at school

using their devices to write or engage in literacy activities through social media (Zheng,

Warschauer & Farkes 2013). Effective technology usage can help with issues of unequal

access and opportunities by bridging gaps among different groups (Rosen & Manny-Ikan 2011),

allowing students, the ability to achieve learning goals.

Perceptions of achievement

Student achievement is not always about rote memory and a student ability to repeat

(Mayer 2002). There are other factors involved in their achievement and motivation that lead to

the transfer of knowledge (Mayer 2002). Student perception can have an effect on achievement,

students who recognize the value of the technology report more satisfaction with their learning

goals (Al-Bataineh, Al-Bataineh & Harris 2016). The use of mobile 1 to 1 devices enabled

enable students to intact with content, learning resources, peers and teachers in different ways

than was traditionally available (Redmond and Willocks 2014). And this leads to students feeling

that 1 to1 devices had a positive effect on their achievement goals. The highest usage reported

has been in ELA and mathematics classrooms, where student reported greater achievement

and parents feel there were a positive effect on the student’s education (Redmond & Willocks

2014). Students have also self-reported feelings of being more organized and engaged and they

overall felt their writing time and quality had improved with the introduction of laptops to their

classrooms (Zheng, Warschauer & Farkes 2012). When computers are brought into schools

there are new demands and new opportunities for both students and teachers, the content is not

much different but there can be a great effect on pedagogy and instructional approaches

(Hoffman & Storz). Students enjoy new approaches teachers take which leads them to

comment that they feel their skills have improved through the introduction of 1 to 1 programs in

their classroom (Lowther, Inan, Ross & Strahl 2012).

Concerns

New incentives and new trends always come with their own set of concerns. 1 to 1

programs have their own set of forces that can effect student achievement. Many students

today are actively engaged in using social media with heighten access through 1 to 1 programs

(Duggan, Ellison, Lampe, Lenhart & Madden 2015). They are engaging in blogs, wikis, and
online communities and some believe this translate this as gains in writing practice (Prensky

2001); however, a disconnect exists between students’ out-of-school and in-school literacy

practices (Harklau & Pinnow, 2009). Along with the heighten us of social media there is a fear

of classroom distractions. Laptops hold value in the classroom for a variety of reasons but it can

create classroom management problems (Dunleavy, Dexter & Heinecke 2007). When student

engage in ‘non-school related utilization’ their attention is pulled away from the goal of the

classroom (Crook Sharma & Wilson 2006). Both parents and students have expressed

concerns with the long term effects and added distractions of technology in a classroom

(Redmond & Willocks 2014).

Conclusions

Technology programs are not slowing down and 1 to 1 programs are a part of that.

Technology is a tool that has the potential to help student achieve. There is evidence that 1 to 1

programs can promote student learning, but there are counters to that argument. A trend that

runs through several pieces of literature is that teachers need to be more prepared and trained

to utilize technology in a classroom (Davies & West 2014). Teachers need to be prepared to

mitigate distractions and be able to manage this new environment (Davies & West 2014). When

an initiative is supported students and teachers alike are more willing to work with it and not feel

resistant to the idea of technology in the classroom. School leadership needs to take

responsibility and help teachers remove the obstacles that are detrimental to integration

(Miranda & Russell 2012). Students feel that computers enhance their learning and

achievement, building on that engagement has the possibility to create more learning

opportunities for all students ((Al-Bataineh, Al-Bataineh & Harris 2016). Overall there is a

positive indication of educational outcomes but there are further obstacles to overcome before 1

to 1 programs can create recordable change in the classroom (Redmond & Willocks 2014).
 References

Bebell, D., & Kay, R. (2010). One to one computing: A summary of the quantitative results from the Berkshire Wireless Learning Initiative. The Journal

of Technology, Learning and Assessment, 9(2).

Bebell, D., & O'Dwyer, L. M. (2010). Educational outcomes and research from 1:1 computing settings. The Journal of Technology, Learning, and

Assessment, 9(1), 1-15.

Bebell, D., & Pedulla, J. (2015). A Quantitative Investigation into the Impacts of 1: 1 iPads on Early Learner’s ELA and Math Achievement. Journal of

Information Technology Education: Innovations in Practice, 14, 191-215.

Carter, S. P., Greenberg, K., & Walker, M. S. (2017). The impact of computer usage on academic performance: Evidence from a randomized trial at

the United States Military Academy. Economics of Education Review, 56, 118-132.

Crook, S., Sharma, M., & Wilson, R. (2017). Teachers’ Transition into a 1: 1 Laptop Environment: A Longitudinal Case Study of Four Science Teachers

over 5 Years. International Journal of Innovation in Science and Mathematics Education (formerly CAL-laborate International), 25(5).

Davies R.S., West R.E. (2014) Technology Integration in Schools. In: Specto r J., Merrill M., Elen J., Bishop M. (eds) Handbook of Research

on Educational Communications and Technology. Springer, New York, NY

Duggan, M., Ellison, N. B., Lampe, C., Lenhart, A., & Madden, M. (2015). Social media update 2014. Pew research center, 19.

Harris, J., Al-Bataibeh M. & Al-Bataineh, A. (2015). One to one technology and its effect on student academic achievement and motivation.

Proceedings of Global Learn 2015, 579-584.

Judge, S., Puckett, K., & Bell, S. M. (2006). Closing the digital divide: Update from the early childhood longitudinal study. The Journal of Educational

Research, 100(1), 52-60.

Lowther, D. L., Inan, F. A., Strahl, J. D., & Ross, S. M. (2012). Do one-to-one initiatives bridge the way to 21st century knowledge and skills?. Journal

of Educational Computing Research, 46(1), 1-30.

Mayer, R. E. (2002). Rote versus meaningful learning. Theory into practice, 41(4), 226-232.

Miller, Nicole, "The Impact of 1:1 Laptop Environments on the English Language Arts Achievement of Fifth Grade Students from Diverse Socio-

Economic Backgrounds" (2017). Doctoral Dissertations and Projects. 1524.

http://digitalcommons.liberty.edu/doctoral/1524

Miranda, H. P., & Russell, M. (2012). Understanding factors associated with teacher‐directed student use of technology in elementary classrooms: A

structural equation modeling approach. British Journal of Educational Technology, 43(4), 652-666.

Penuel, W. R. (2006). Implementation and effects of one-to-one computing initiatives: A research synthesis. Journal of research on technology in

education, 38(3), 329-348.

Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants part 1. On the horizon, 9(5), 1-6.

Rosen, Y., & Beck-Hill, D. (2012). Intertwining digital content and a one-to-one laptop environment in teaching and learning: Lessons from the time to

know program. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 44(3), 225-241.

Rosen, Y., & Manny-Ikan, E. (2011). The social promise of educational technology: The case of the Time To Know program. In American Educational

Research Association Annual Meeting. New Orleans, Louisiana.

Warschauer, M. (2005). Going one-to-one. Educational Leadership, 63(4), 34.

Chicago

Willocks, B., & Redmond, P. (2014). Evaluating a 1-to-1 iPad project: beyond rose coloured glasses. In Conference Proceedings of the Australian

Computers in Education Conference 2014 (Vol. 1, No. 1, pp. 399-406). Australian Council for Computers in Education.

Zheng, B., Warschauer, M., & Farkas, G. (2013). Digital writing and diversity: The effects of school laptop programs on literacy processes and

outcomes. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 48(3), 267-299.

Zuber, E. N., & Anderson, J. (2013). The initial response of secondary mathematics teachers to a one-to-one laptop program. Mathematics Education

Research Journal, 25(2), 279-298.