An interesting article in Bloomberg Businessweek on use of computers and educational outcomes (outcomes being performance in standardized tests or 'knowing'). So the general conclusion appears to be that technology has no impact or a negative impact. However a quick read indicates that the results of the some of the cited studies are more nuanced.
The important issue is how one defines learning outcomes - learning is about more than math and science scores, but even it we stick with these outcomes, it is not just introduction of technology that may lead to negative outcomes but also changes in the curriculum.
Here are some results from the Inter-American Development Bank Study on Costa Rica:
" ... the intervention generated a more active learning environment ... students in the treatment group report explaining concepts to the class more often, preparing more exercises for others to solve, and frequently discussing possible solutions or arguments with other students."
"... all treatment groups that changed pedagogy to a student-centered approach learned less geometry than the control group ... results form the computer lab are very similar to results of the new curriculum suggesting that it does not help much."
So forget about technology - a student centered approach also has a negative impact as does the introduction of a new curriculum (without adding in technology. And as one would expect, outcomes also depend on teachers.
"The evidence also suggests that teachers went through the motions as prescribed but did not master the innovation in a way that would have allowed students to get the most of it." This - after training teachers!
Now to the best students. Classes became more participative in the treatment groups and this made some students "uncomfortable with their new roles". The "most abled" students were most uncomfortable. Students with "higher pre-treatment SAT were disproportionally disengaged from the class". Perhaps because they were more comfortable with the lecture style of teaching and/or because they lacked other 'soft' skills which are more important in a student-centered environment.
Regardless, this is not just about technology, but about any changes in the way of doing things. In the short-run (which is what randomized-trial based studies measure) there are likely to be adjustments costs and those most uncomfortable with the change are likely to be the 'best students' since they did so well under the old regime. So it would be nice to get some longitudinal evidence before concluding that technology has no impact or a negative impact on educational outcomes. There is also a need to move away from the technocratic bean-counting approach to measuring outcomes.
