■支持小学或基础教育的移动设备投资正在增加,必须通过强有力的证据来证明其影响。这项对随机对照试验的系统评价旨在确定移动设备在主流小学教室中支持识字和算术结果的总体影响。
■本系统综述的目的是了解移动设备如何在世界各地的初等/初等教育中使用,特别是,确定在小学教室中使用移动设备进行的活动如何影响所涉及的学生的识字和算术能力。在此背景下,移动设备被定义为平板电脑(包括iPad和其他品牌设备),智能手机(通常具有触摸屏界面和互联网连接的智能手机)和掌上游戏机(通常也具有触摸屏和互联网功能)。感兴趣的干预措施是旨在提高小学/小学(或同等学历)教室中4-12岁儿童的识字和/或算术能力的干预措施。具体来说,该评论旨在回答以下研究问题:-小学教室中的移动设备集成对儿童的识字和算术结果有什么影响?-是否有更有效地支持识字和算术的特定设备?(平板电脑,智能手机,或手持游戏机)-是否有特定的课堂整合活动在支持识字和算术方面具有适度的有效性?-是否有特定的儿童群体,移动设备在支持识字和算术方面更有效?(跨年龄组和性别)。-移动设备对学习的好处是否会持续到研究之外的任何时间?-关于在小学/初等教育中使用移动设备的可用证据的质量如何,专家咨询小组在关键阶段支持审查进程,以确保与当前做法的相关性。
■搜索策略旨在检索已发表和未发表的文献,并合并了相关期刊和其他数据库,重点是教育和社会科学。进行了强大的电子数据库搜索(12个数据库,包括APAPsychInfo,WebofScience,ERIC,英国教育指数等,以及相关政府和其他网站),以及相关期刊和会议记录的手工搜索。还与该领域的知名作者联系,以确定任何正在进行或未发表的研究。所有搜索和作者联系都发生在2020年10月至11月之间。审查小组承认,新的研究可能已经出现,目前还没有被捕获。今后对审查的进一步更新很重要,并将以此处反映的证据为基础。
■该审查包括任何国家(4-12岁)的主流小学/小学/幼儿园教育环境中的儿童,以及在小学教室(或全球等效设备)内使用移动设备(包括平板电脑,智能手机,或手持游戏设备)有意支持识字或算术学习。在研究设计方面,本综述仅纳入随机对照试验.
■通过稳健的搜索策略确定了总共668个参考文献,包括已发表和未发表的文献。重复筛选后,18项相关研究,包括11,126名参与者,14种独特的干预措施,使用稳健方差估计和随机效应荟萃分析模型综合了46项相关结果指标。偏差风险评估是由三位评审员使用ROB2工具评估研究质量,有13项研究被评为有一些担忧,和5具有很高的偏见风险。还提取并分析了与所包括的干预措施类型有关的定性数据,以比较每种干预措施的关键要素。
■A肯定,发现有统计学意义的联合效应(Cohen\sd=0.24,CI0.0707至0.409,p<0.01),证明在研究和干预措施中,使用移动设备进行数学或识字干预的儿童比使用替代设备的儿童获得了更高的算术或识字结果(例如,笔记本电脑或台式电脑)或没有设备(像往常一样上课)。然而,考虑到上述偏倚风险评估,这些结果应谨慎解释(5项研究评估偏倚风险高,13项研究评估为有一些担忧)。由于干预措施和课堂环境差异很大,需要进一步的研究来更全面地了解任何潜在的影响.敏感性分析旨在确定调节因素,包括年龄或性别,屏幕尺寸,干预暴露的频率/剂量,和方案实施特征/活动(基于Puentedura[2009]SAMR技术集成模型)。确定的研究太少了,无法支持对足够的权力进行定量分析,从而得出关于调节因素的有力结论,以及没有足够的数据来确定超出即时测试期的影响。还进行了敏感性分析,以排除被确定为具有高偏倚风险的五项研究,以确定它们可能对总体结果产生的任何影响。
■总的来说,这篇综述表明,对于包括在内的具体干预措施和研究,移动设备在课堂上的使用导致了显著的,对相关儿童的识字和算术结果的积极影响,对它们在小学教育中的持续使用带来积极影响。然而,考虑到上述对偏见风险评估的担忧,不同的情况,干预措施和治疗条件和强度,必须谨慎解释调查结果。该评论还支持需要进一步进行有力的研究,以更好地了解有效的方法,在什么情况下,为了谁,使用移动设备来支持学习。
UNASSIGNED: Investment in mobile devices to support primary or elementary education is increasing and must be informed by robust evidence to demonstrate impact. This systematic
review of randomised controlled trials sought to identify the overall impact of mobile devices to support
literacy and numeracy outcomes in mainstream primary classrooms.
UNASSIGNED: The aim of this systematic
review was to understand how mobile devices are used in primary/elementary education around the world, and in particular, determine how activities undertaken using mobile devices in the primary classroom might impact literacy and numeracy attainment for the pupils involved. Within this context, mobile devices are defined as tablets (including iPads and other branded devices), smartphones (usually those with a touchscreen interface and internet connectivity) and handheld games consoles (again usually with touchscreen and internet-enabled). The interventions of interest were those aimed at improving literacy and/or numeracy for children aged 4-12 within the primary/elementary school (or equivalent) classroom.Specifically, the review aimed to answer the following research questions: -What is the effect of mobile device integration in the primary school classroom on children\'s literacy and numeracy outcomes?-Are there specific devices which are more effective in supporting
literacy and numeracy? (Tablets, smartphones, or handheld games consoles)-Are there specific classroom integration activities which moderate effectiveness in supporting literacy and numeracy?-Are there specific groups of children for whom mobile devices are more effective in supporting literacy and numeracy? (Across age group and gender).-Do the benefits of mobile devices for learning last for any time beyond the study?-What is the quality of available evidence on the use of mobile devices in primary/elementary education, and where is further research needed in this regard? An Expert Advisory Group supported the review process at key stages to ensure relevance to current practice.
UNASSIGNED: The search strategy was designed to retrieve both published and unpublished literature, and incorporated relevant journal and other databases with a focus on education and social sciences. Robust electronic database searches were undertaken (12 databases, including APA PsychInfo, Web of Science, ERIC, British Education Index and others, and relevant government and other websites), as well as a hand-search of relevant journals and conference proceedings. Contact was also made with prominent authors in the field to identify any ongoing or unpublished research. All searches and author contact took place between October and November 2020. The review team acknowledges that new studies will likely have emerged since and are not captured at this time. A further update to the review in the future is important and would build on the evidence reflected here.
UNASSIGNED: The review included children within mainstream primary/elementary/kindergarten education settings in any country (aged 4-12), and interventions or activities initiated within the primary school classroom (or global equivalent) that used mobile devices (including tablets, smartphones, or hand-held gaming devices) to intentionally support literacy or numeracy learning. In terms of study design, only Randomised Controlled Trials were included in the
review.
UNASSIGNED: A total of 668 references were identified through a robust search strategy including published and unpublished literature. Following duplicate screening, 18 relevant studies, including 11,126 participants, 14 unique interventions, and 46 relevant outcome measures were synthesised using Robust Variance Estimation and a random effects meta-analysis model. Risk of Bias assessment was undertaken by three reviewers using the ROB2 tool to assess the quality of studies, with 13 studies rated as having some concerns, and 5 as having high risk of bias. Qualitative data was also extracted and analysed in relation to the types of interventions included to allow a comparison of the key elements of each.
UNASSIGNED: A positive, statistically significant combined effect was found (Cohen\'s d = 0.24, CI 0.0707 to 0.409, p < 0.01), demonstrating that in the studies and interventions included, children undertaking maths or literacy interventions using mobile devices achieved higher numeracy or literacy outcomes than those using an alternative device (e.g., a laptop or desktop computer) or no device (class activities as usual). However these results should be interpreted with caution given the risk of bias assessment noted above (5 studies rated high risk of bias and 13 rated as having some concerns). As the interventions and classroom circumstances differed quite widely, further research is needed to understand any potential impact more fully.Sensitivity analysis aimed to identify moderating factors including age or gender, screen size, frequency/dosage of intervention exposure, and programme implementation features/activities (based on Puentedura\'s [2009] SAMR model of technology integration). There were too few studies identified to support quantitative analysis of sufficient power to draw robust conclusions on moderating factors, and insufficient data to determine impact beyond immediate post-test period. Sensitivty analysis was also undertaken to exclude the five studies identified as having a high risk of bias, to identify any impact they may have on overall findings.
UNASSIGNED: Overall, this review demonstrates that for the specific interventions and studies included, mobile device use in the classroom led to a significant, positive effect on literacy and numeracy outcomes for the children involved, bringing positive implications for their continued use in primary education. However given the concerns on risk of bias assessment reported above, the differing circumstances, interventions and treatment conditions and intensities, the findings must be interpreted with caution. The review also supports the need for further robust research to better understand what works, under what circumstances, and for whom, in the use of mobile devices to support learning.