You are here:

Models of Educational Computing @ Home: New Frontiers for Research on Technology in Learning
Article

, University of California—Los Angeles, United States ; , University of Michigan, United States ; , Georgia Institute of Technology, United States

AACE Review (formerly AACE Journal) Volume 10, Number 2, ISSN 1065-6901 Publisher: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), Waynesville, NC USA

Full Text

Abstract

To date, the major emphasis of educational technology researchers has been the development and use of educational technologies within school settings. Noticeably absent has been research and considerations that focus on the home as a computer-based learning environment and potential connections between school and home learning. Given the increasing presence of computers in homes, the authors argue for an explicit research focus on the various ways that computers in homes can be used to create rich learning environments or extend school-based learning environments. To that end, this article discusses various models of educational computing in the home that are linked to learning in school, along with critical issues for consideration by researchers who choose to venture into this emerging area.

Citation

Kafai, Y.B., Fishman, B.J. & Bruckman, A. (2002). Models of Educational Computing @ Home: New Frontiers for Research on Technology in Learning. AACE Review (formerly AACE Journal), 10(2), 52-68. Norfolk, VA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved August 13, 2024 from .

© 2002 Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE)

Keywords

References

View References & Citations Map
  1. Bruckman, A. (1998). Community support for constructionist learning. The Journal of Collaborative Computing, 7, 47-86.
  2. Bruckman, A., & DeBonte, A. (1997, December). MOOSE goes to school: A
  3. Caldell, R.M. (1986, May/June). Computer learning can begin at home. Electronic Education, 13-15.
  4. CEO Forum on Education and Technology. (1997). School technology and readiness report: From pillars to progress (Year One Report). WashingCognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt. (1996). Looking at technology
  5. Coleman, J.S. (1987). Families and schools. Educational Researcher, 16, 32-38. Duffield, J.A. , & McFarlane, T.A. (1999 , April). The lightspan partnership: The effect of technology on achievement and the homeschool connection. Paper presentation at the 1999 AERA Conference. Montreal, Canada.
  6. Duncan, G.T. (1996). Is my research ethical? ACM Communications, 39(12), 67-68.
  7. Downes, T. (1995) Children and electronic media: the home-school connection. In D. Tinsey & T. Van Weert (Eds.), Liberating the learner, Proceedings of the World Conference on Computers in Education (pp. 543-535). Birmingham, UK.
  8. Education Week. (1997). Technology counts: Schools and reform in the informa
  9. Epstein, J.L. (1985). Home and school connections in schools of the future: Implications of research on parent involvement. Peabody Journal of Education, 62(2), 18-41.
  10. Epstein, J.L. & Dauber, S.L. (1991). School programs and teacher practices of parent involvement in inner-city elementary and middle schools. Elementary School Journal, 91(3), 289-305.
  11. Fishman, B., Kupperman, J., & Soloway, E. (1998). Introducing urban Latino
  12. Giaquinta, J.B., Bauer, J.A., & Levin, J.E. (1993). Beyond technology’s promise: An examination of chi ldren’s educational computing a t home. New York: Cambridge University Press.
  13. Hess, R.D., & McGarvey, L.J. (1987). School-relevant effects of educational uses of microcomputers in kindergarten classrooms and homes. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 3(3), 269-287.
  14. Hoffman, D., & Novak, T.P. (1998). Bridging the digital divide: The impact of race on computer access and Internet use (Working Paper). Nashville, TN: Owen Graduate School of Management, Vanderbilt University [Online].
  15. Hunt, R. (1985). Computers and families—An overview. Marriage & Family Review 8(1/2), 11-26.
  16. Kafai, Y.B. (1995). Minds in play: Computer game design as context for children’s learning. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
  17. Kaiser Family Foundation (1999). Kids, media & The millennium. Sacramento, CA: Author. Kessell, S. (1999). Innovation and best practice project: Evaluation of the personal laptop program at Penrhos College. Perth, Western Australia: Penrhos College.
  18. Levin, T., & Gordon, C. (1989). Effect of gender and computer experience on attitudes toward computers. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 5(1), 69-88.
  19. Linn, M.C. (1985). Fostering equitable consequences from computer learning environments. Sex Roles, 13(3/4), 229-240.
  20. Lockheed, M. (1985). Women, girls, and computers: A first look a t the evidence. Sex Roles, 13(3/4), 115-121.
  21. McMillan, K., & Honey, M. (1992). Year one of project PULSE: Pupils using laptops for science and English (Final Report) . Center for Children and Technology, Bank Street College of Education.
  22. Moll, L.C., Amanti, C., Neff, D., & Gonzalez, N. (1992). Funds of knowledge
  23. Moses , J . (1979) . The computer in the home . In M .L . Dertouzos & J . Moses (Eds.), The computer age: A twenty-year view (pp. 3-20). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press .
  24. National Telecommunications and Information Administration (1998). Falling through the net II: New data on the digital divide. Washington, DC: National Telecommunications and Information Administration.
  25. Nichols, L.M. (1992). The influence of students’ computer-ownership and inhome use on achievement in an elementary school computer programming
  26. Panel on Educational Technology. (1997). Report to the President on the use of technology to strengthen K-12 education in the United States. Washington, DC: President’s Committee of Advisors on Science and Technology.
  27. Ramstad, E. (1997). The home advantage. Wall Street Journal, Special Section. November 17.
  28. Rockman Et Al. (1998a). Beyond the buddy project. Report to the Corporation for Educational Technology, Indianapolis, IN. San Francisco, CA: Rockman Et Al.
  29. Rockman Et Al (1998b). Powerful tools for schooling: Second year study of the laptop program. San Francisco, CA: Rockman Et Al.
  30. Rockman, S., & Sloan, K.R. (1995). Assessing the growth: The buddy project evaluation, 1994-95. Report to the Corporation for Educational Technology, Indianapolis, IN. San Francisco: Rockman Et Al.
  31. Rogers, E. (1985). The diffusion of home computers among households in Silicon Valley. Marriage & Family Review, 8(1/2), 89-102.
  32. Schall, P.L., & Skeele, R.W. (1995). Creating a home-school partnership for learning: Exploiting the home computer. Educational Forum, 59(3), 244-249. Shears, L. (Ed.) (1995). Computers and schools. Camberwell, Victoria, Australia: The Australian Council for Educational Research.
  33. Sutton, R.E. (1991). Equity and computers. Review of Educational Research, 61(4), 474-505.
  34. Tinnell, C.S. (1985). An ethnographic look at personal computers in the family setting. Marriage & Family Review, 8(1/2), 59-69.
  35. Watkins, B., & Brimm, D. (1985). The adoption and use of microcomputers in homes and elementary schools. In M. Chen & W. Paisley (Eds.), Children
  36. Wenglinsky, H. (1998). Does it compute? The relationship between educational technology and student achievement in mathematics (Policy Information Report). Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
  37. Wright, C. (1989). Home school research: Critique and suggestions for the future. Education and Urban Society, 21, 96-113.
  38. Zhao, Y., Mishra, P., & Girod, M. (2000). A clubhouse is a clubhouse is a clubhouse. Computers in Human Behavior, 16(3), 287-300.

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. Signed in users can suggest corrections to these mistakes.

Suggest Corrections to References

Cited By

View References & Citations Map

These links are based on references which have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. If you see a mistake, please contact info@learntechlib.org.