There has been an ongoing trend towards integrating more technology in grade-school classrooms and at younger and younger ages. This often involves assigning each student a tablet or laptop in schools. While I trust this trend originates from the best of intentions, I am not impressed. And unfortunately for the school districts and the children, shiny new objects often lose when competing against simplicity. Much like the Baby Einstein issue, technology is not making your kid smarter. It would seem, just the opposite is sometimes true.

There have been several programs designed to give children more opportunities and access to education by doling out laptops like candy on Halloween. Thankfully, researchers follow these children to assess how well the kids are doing after receiving their screens. The surprising answer in several studies: worse. The kids are doing worse. Let’s go over a few examples.

In Romania, there was a voucher program designed to help low-income families defray the cost of obtaining a computer for their children. The “vouchered” kids spent less time watching television (Wahoo!), but they also spent less time doing their homework, got lower grades and had lower educational aspirations compared to controls (whoops!).3

In North Carolina, a research study examined the effects of high-speed internet introduction and found that it was associated with negative impacts on math and reading test scores.8

In Texas, a large-scale study was undertaken when the state used $20 million in federal stimulus money to fund technology immersion by distributing laptops to students in 21 schools. Another 21 schools who did not receive the one-to-one laptops served as a control. A New York Times article critiqued the program, highlighting mixed results overall and lower test scores in some areas.

In a major worldwide study (31 nations) linking computer use with test scores, the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) found that students who used computers the most during the school day had lower reading and math scores. Schools which had more technology in the classroom were improving less than schools which had less technology. The study controlled for race and income, finding that when comparing students, those who used computers more during the school day generally did worse.1

…those who used computers more during the school day generally did worse.

Why Doesn’t Technology Help in Schools?

Bringing technology into schools and giving computers to low-income students is based on the age-old wisdom that more is better; faster is better. When it comes to student learning, this just isn’t so.

Borrowing from some research on adults and technology, studies show that information viewed online is less likely to be encoded into memory than when the same information is viewed in physical books.2 Another study of college students found that paper texts were superior to electronic texts in learning, likely due to the distractions of hyperlinks and embedded videos.4 Additionally, in a recent survey, undergraduate college students at UCLA strongly preferred print texts over electronic ones.5

So computers are distracting. What about if we take away all the distraction of computers and use them for something really simple like note taking? They must out-perform note taking via a pen and paper, right? Plus, there is the added benefit of saving trees! Turns out, no, even when the computer is used for only taking notes, it results in shallower processing and worse performance on tests.6 The researchers suggest this may be because students are not processing the information and putting it in their own short-hand, but rather are typing the professor’s words verbatim, aided by their speedy computer. I believe there is also something about the physical process of writing with a pen and paper that results in different processing in our brains.

Research has shown that computers are not used only for note-taking in most university classrooms. Rather, they are used for multi-tasking via text messaging, Facebook and internet searches. Classroom multitasking is related to significantly lower GPAs.7 I use this justification when I teach face-to-face courses. I do not allow technology (unless there is a verifiable disability issue). When I have allowed technology in the past, I notice the clicking keeps going even when I am not saying anything important. Additionally, it is rather easy to tell when someone is texting in class, since most normal people don’t look down at their crotch and smile otherwise.

Basically, it doesn’t work because it’s distracting. It doesn’t work because learning requires deep sustained attention and the internet thrives on clicks and lots of shallow sampling. It doesn’t work because sometimes learning is work, it’s challenging and can be boring. A device offers an immediate out from the boredom.

Can technology help? I’m sure the answer is yes, it could. If it was used in very specific ways, and all the other trash was blocked. I hope that pro-technology advocates and researchers work on ways to make technology in the classroom better. But, the reality is that often when technology is used in grade schools, it’s not helping learning outcomes. Instead, it can hurt them. And, it’s a rather expensive way to hurt learning outcomes.

Expensive Does Not Mean Better

It is estimated that schools spend over 5 billion dollars per year on computers. And, yet, there is not strong evidence that computers are helping young children in school. Some research shows small positive effects. A lot of research shows no effects. And, referencing the studies above, they sometimes hurt student achievement. The tools that are already in place (engaging instructors, pen, paper and hard copy books) may be superior. Here’s the real kicker, free resources, like getting children outside in nature and giving them more frequent free play and physical exercise breaks, do have a very positive outcome on children’s learning. The research is not mixed on that. Let’s stop spending money on things that don’t seem to be working and start saving money on things that definitely do work (getting outside, free play, and physical exercise).

A recent documentary by Michael Moore highlights how Finland dramatically improved their international school ranking by reducing school hours, eliminating homework and increasing free play outdoors.

Closer to Home: More Free Play in the United States

Eagle Mountain Elementary in Fort Worth, Texas has been experimenting with exactly that. They have been giving kindergarten and first grade students four 15-minute outdoor recess breaks per day (two in the morning, two in the afternoon). The teachers were concerned about covering all their content and giving up so much time to outdoor play. As you should suspect, the opposite is true. The teachers are reporting the students are learning more, solving problems independently, there have been fewer disciplinary problems, and the students are able to focus better in class. The program is part of the Liink project, run by a professor at Texas Christian University. I think that project is absolutely fabulous. But, I’ll be honest: even four 15-minute breaks sound pitiful to me. Based on my knowledge of child development, there is nothing more important for a five-year-old than free play and outdoor time, and it should be an integral part of the day. However, in public schooling, kindergarten is becoming increasingly academic with little time for play and plenty of homework and testing.9

Schools that are Encouraging Outdoor Free Play

It seems that even the consumers have spoken with increases in the amount of nature schools that have opened in the past ten years and increases in enrollment in Waldorf schools. Forest and nature schools have gained popularity in the past ten years, in part due to the book The Last Child in the Woods: Saving Our Children from Nature Deficit Disorder, which highlighted the positive effects of allowing children to play in the outdoors. The Association of Waldorf Schools of North America shows 179 schools in their database. Their students are successful by many measures that are more important than the traditional educational achievement ones, but they excel there as well with over 94% of their graduates continuing on to higher education.

If you need any more convincing that an alternative form of schooling may be better for children and delaying screen introduction may be a good idea, check out the video below on a traditionally low-tech Waldorf school:

If you want to learn more about Silicon Valley’s Waldorf School of the Peninsula highlighted in the above video, check out their recent promotional video:

Waldorf schooling often delays technology introduction until after children reach the double digits. Sounds like a perfect fit with the Screen-Free Parenting approach.

Join The Revolution Sign up to have great articles like this one sent right to you in our Screen-Free Parenting weekly recap email. Email Address Yes!

*This post contains Amazon Affiliate links for your convenience. Should you chose to purchase something, Screen-Free Parenting receives a small referral fee at no additional cost to you.

References