Search

The choice of mobile applications (apps) for learning has been heavily relied on customer and teacher reviews, designers' descriptions, and alignment with existing learning and human-computer interaction theories. There is limited empirical evidence to advise on the educational value of mobile apps as these are used by children. Understanding the impact of mobile apps on young children's learning is timely given the lack of evidence-based recommendations that could guide parents and teachers in selecting apps for their children. In this paper, we present the results of a series of Randomised Control Trials (RCTs) with 376 children aged 5 to 6 years old who interacted with two maths apps in three schools in the UK. Pre/post-test comparisons revealed learning gains in both the control and intervention groups, suggesting that the selected applications are equally good to standard maths practice. Implications for the selection and use of mobile apps are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Iberica is the property of Asociacion Europea de Lenguas para Fines Especificos and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

• This paper explores whether ability grouping in UK primary schools at age 7 affects how much pupils like Maths, English and school generally by age 11. • How much pupils like particular school subjects and school generally is an important outcome to consider because there is no a priori reason why those in higher and lower ability groups should diverge over time with respect to the degree to which they enjoy their studies (as distinct from their perception of how well they are doing academically relative to other pupils). • Our key finding is that pupils placed in the lower ability groups were less likely than their peers in the high ability group to come to enjoy, continue to enjoy, or increase their enjoyment of Maths between the ages of 7 and 11, both before and after controlling for maths ability at age 7, sex and social class background. Similar patterns were evident in relation to liking of English and school generally before controlling for these factors, but were largely statistically insignificant after the inclusion of control variables. • This finding is robust to different modelling strategies including individual fixed effects. • Given that the extent to which pupils like their studies is known to influence their level of academic engagement and achievement, our findings lend support to the wealth of evidence indicating that ability grouping - at least as currently practiced in UK primary schools - is harmful for those judged to be of lower ability. Advocates of grouping pupils by measured ability for instructional purposes claim that ability-homogeneous classrooms increase the attainment of high-ability pupils without detriment to the attainment of pupils judged to be of lower ability. Opponents of ability grouping, in contrast, argue that high-ability pupils do at best only marginally better in ability-homogeneous classrooms than they would have done in mixed-ability settings, whereas low-ability pupils do significantly worse. One mechanism posited by the critics of ability grouping is that this practice causes psychological harm to those labelled low-ability, resulting in a self-fulfilling prophecy of low attainment. Most previous studies have measured this posited psychological impact of ability grouping in terms of pupils' "academic self-concept", a term which refers to pupils' perceptions of how good they are in relation to particular subjects or to academic study generally. This paper explores the related but distinct concept of "academic enjoyment", which refers to the extent to which pupils like the particular subjects they study, and like school generally, which has been shown to be positively correlated with academic engagement and achievement. While academic self-concept may change over time as pupils become aware of their level of academic performance, as indicated by test scores and/or their placement in particular ability groups, this need not be the case for change over time in pupils' enjoyment of their studies which could, in theory at least, remain stable or change in a uniform direction regardless of the ability group in which pupils are taught. In this paper we explore whether pupils' enjoyment of Maths, English, and school generally, changes in a differential manner between the ages of 7 and 11 depending on the ability group in which pupils were placed at age 7. We do so by drawing on data from the Millennium Cohort Study (MCS) which has followed a nationally representative sample of children in the UK born between 2000 and 2002. Compared to pupils in the high ability group, those in the low ability group were less likely to come to enjoy, continue to enjoy, or increase their enjoyment of Maths between the ages of 7 and 11, both before and after controlling for pupils' measured ability in Maths at age 7 and the key demographic variables of gender and social class background. Similar divergences with respect to enjoyment of English and school generally were evident before controlling for these additional factors, but were largely statistically insignificant after the inclusion of these controls. Overall our findings suggest that ability grouping in primary schools does more harm than good, at least in relation to pupils' enjoyment of Maths. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]