Vol. 15 No. 1 (2024): MEDIA EDUCATION – Studi, ricerche e buone pratiche
Articles

A ciascuna disciplina il suo risultato. Classi digitali vs. classi a didattica tradizionale: un confronto negli esiti degli apprendimenti

PDF
  • Brunella Fiore
Brunella Fiore
Università di Milano-Bicocca
DOI: https://doi.org/10.36253/me-15036

Published 2024-06-12

Keywords

  • digital classes,
  • INVALSI assessments,
  • socio-economic and cultural status (ESCS),
  • previous educational path,
  • second foreign language

Copyright (c) 2024 Brunella Fiore

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Abstract

In recent years, Italy has embarked on a transformative journey to embrace technology in education. This article focuses on the adoption of digital technologies, with particular attention to the digital classroom initiative. The digital classroom experience aims to utilize digital tools and resources to facilitate an engaging and innovative mode of learning for students. This contribution examines the effects of student participation in digital classrooms on learning outcomes, comparing them with traditional classrooms within the three-year curriculum of a lower secondary school. Through an evaluative approach based on representative data from a sample of over 200 students, we analyze the impact of digital classrooms on INVALSI test results. The analyses encompass descriptive models and linear regression models applied to the results of tests in Italian, Mathematics, English Reading, and English Listening. The models introduce control variables related to the socio-economic and cultural status of the students’ families of origin, as well as their prior performance in INVALSI tests (grades II and V), for students continuing in the same institution through the primary cycle. The results indicate the need for distinct considerations depending on the discipline under analysis: for Mathematics, belonging to a traditionally taught class seems to yield better results. In the case of Italian, English Reading, and English Listening, the effect is neutral. Socio-economic and cultural status appears to have less influence on English-related disciplines, and the trend, though not statistically significant, demonstrates partially positive effects in digital classroom participation, particularly for students with cognitive vulnerabilities. The outcomes underscore the necessity of discipline-specific differentiation and further assessment of outputs to delve into the specifics of innovative didactics implemented in digital classrooms.

PDF

References

  1. Abbiati, G., Argentin, G., Azzolini, D., Ballarino, G. & Vergolini, L. (2022). Experimental research in education: An appraisal of the italian experience. Schweizerische Zeitschrift Fuer Soziologie, 48(1), 21-46. https://doi.org/10.2478/sjs-2022-0004
  2. Archer, K., Savage, R., Sanghera-Sidhu, S., Wood, E., Gottardo, A. & Chen, V. (2014). Examining the effectiveness of technology use in classrooms: A tertiary meta-analysis. Computers & Education, 7, 140-149. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.06.001
  3. Argentin, G. & Gerosa, T. (2016). ICT e livelli di apprendimento nella scuola primaria: Un’analisi sull’impatto della LIM in classe. Media Education, 2, 216-241. Consultato su https://www.rivistadistoriadelleducazione.it/index.php/med/article/view/8761
  4. Arztmann, M., Hornstra, L., Jeuring, J. & Kester, L. (2022). Effects of games in STEM education: A meta-analysis on the moderating role of student background characteristics. Studies in Science Education, 1-37. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057267.2022.2057732
  5. Avvisati, F., Hennessy, S., Kozma, R.B. & Vincent-Lancrin, S. (2013). Review of the Italian strategy for digital schools. OECD working paper series. Retrived from http:// www.oecd-ilibrary.org/education/review-of-the-italian-strategy-for-digitalschools_ 5k487ntdbr44-en
  6. Bado, N. (2022). Game-based learning pedagogy: A review of the literature. Interactive Learning Environments, 30(5), 936-948. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2019.1683587
  7. Balanskat, A., Blamire, R. & Kefala S. (2006). The ICT Impact Report: A review of studies of ICT impact on schools in Europe. European Schoolnet. Retrived from https://en.unesco.org/icted/content/ict-impact-report-review-studies-ict-impact-schools-europe
  8. Balanskat, A. (2009). Study of the impact of technology in primary schools – Synthesis report. Empirica and European Schoolnet. Retrived from https://erte.dge.mec.pt/sites/default/files/Recursos/Estudos/synthesis_report_steps_en.pdf
  9. Bester, G. & Brand, L. (2013). The effect of technology on learner attention and achievement in the classroom. South african journal of education, 33(2), 1-15. doi: 10.15700/saje.v33n2a405
  10. Bingimlas, KA. (2009). Barriers to the successful integration of ICT in teaching and learning environments: A review of the literature. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 5(3) 235-245. https://doi.org/10.12973/ejmste/75275
  11. Carr, J. M. (2012). Does math achievement h‘APP’en when iPads and game-based learning are incorporated into fifthgrade mathematics instruction? Journal of Information Technology Education, 11(1), 269-286. Retrived from https://www.jite.org/documents/Vol11/JITEv11p269-286Carr1181.pdf
  12. Chauhan, S. (2017). A meta-analysis of the impact of technology on learning effectiveness of elementary students. Computers & Education, 105, 14-30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2016.11.005
  13. Culén, A., & Gasparini, A. (2012). Tweens with the iPad classroom – Cool but not really helpful? International Conference on e-Learning and e Technologies in Education (ICEEE), 1-6, doi: 10.1109/ICeLeTE.2012.6333771
  14. Cumming, T. M., Strnadová, I. & Singh, S. (2014). iPads as instructional tools to enhance learning opportunities for students with developmental disabilities: An action research project. Action Research, 12, 151-176. https://doi.org/10.1177/1476750314525480
  15. Decataldo, A. & Fiore, B. (2018). Valutare l’istruzione. Dalla scuola all’università. Carocci.
  16. Decataldo, A. & Fiore, B. (2022). Digital-insecurity and overload: The role of technostress in lecturers’ work-family balance. Italian Journal Of Sociology Of Education, 14(3), 75-102. doi: 10.14658/PUPJ-IJSE-2022-3-4
  17. Dacataldo A., Fiore B. (2023). Non alla stessa velocità: la polarizzazione dei risultati delle scuole nelle regioni del Sud Italia. Città in controluce, 41/42, 87-105. Retrived from https://www.unisg.it/assets/Citta-in-controluce-Fontefrancesco-1.pdf
  18. Delgado, A., Wardlow, L., O’Malley, K., & McKnight, K. (2015). Educational technology: A review of the integration, resources, and effectiveness of technology in K-12 classrooms. Journal of Information Technology Education Research, 14, 397-416. Retrieved from http://www.jite.org/documents/Vol14/JITEv14ResearchP397- 416Delgado1829.pdf
  19. Dundar, H., & Akcayir, M. (2012). Tablet vs. paper: The effect on learners’ reading performance. International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education, 4, 441-450. Retrived from https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1068592
  20. Eng, T.S. (2005). The impact of ICT on learning: A review of research. International Education Journal, 6(5), 635-650. Retrived from https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ855017
  21. Falcinelli, F. & Gaggioli, C. (2017). Insegnare ed apprendere nelle classi digitali. Studi E Ricerche Sull’educazione Mediale, 198-209.
  22. Faber, J. M., Luyten, H., & Visscher, A. J. (2017). The effects of a digital formative assessment tool on mathematics achievement and student motivation: Results of a randomized experiment. Computers & education, 106, 83-96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2016.12.001
  23. Fernández-López, Á., Rodríguez-Fórtiz, M. J., Rodríguez- Almendros, M. L., & Martínez-Segura, M. J. (2013). Mobile learning technology based on iOS devices to support students with special education needs. Computers & Education, 61, 77-90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.09.014
  24. Ferrer, F., Belvís, E., & Pàmies, J. (2011). Tablet PCs, academic results and educational inequalities. Computers & Education, 56(1), 280-288. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2010.07.018
  25. Fiore B. (2021), La relazione tra famiglie e scuola. Modelli organizzativi e politiche sociali. Carocci.
  26. Furió, D., Juan, M.-C., Seguí, I. & Vivó, R. (2015). Mobile learning vs. traditional classroom lessons: A comparative study. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 31, 189-201. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12071
  27. Garzón, J., Acevedo, J. (2019). Meta-analysis of the impact of Augmented Reality on students’ learning gains. Educational Research Review, 27, 244–260. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2019.04.001
  28. Gasparini, A.A., & Culén, A. L. (2012). Tablet PCs–An Assistive technology for students with reading difficulties? In ACHI 2012, The Fifth International Conference on Advances in Computer–Human Interactions, pp. 28-34.
  29. Goodwin, K. (2012). Use of tablet technology in the classroom. State of New South Wales: NSW Department of Education and Communities.
  30. Grollo, M., Gui, M., Pellai, A. & Oretti, C. (2022). Educazione digitale familiare dalla nascita. Medico E Bambino, 41(9), 569-580. https://doi.org/10.53126/MEB41569
  31. Giusti, S., Gui, M., Micheli, M., & Parma, A. (2015). Gli effetti degli investimenti in tecnologie digitali nelle scuole del mezzogiorno. Materiali UVAL Analisi e studi Documenti Metodi, 33. Retrived from https://boa.unimib.it/retrieve/handle/10281/92732/136211/MUVAL33_Digitale_scuola.pdf
  32. Gui, M. (2019). Il digitale a scuola. Il Mulino.
  33. Gui, M., Fiore, B., Garassini, S., Grollo, M., Lanza, S. (2023). I Patti Digitali: un approccio comunitario all’educazione mediale. Comunicazionepuntodoc, 28, 81-104.
  34. Gui, M., Respi, C., Sironi, G., Ercolanoni, S. & Fiore, B. (2024). Report dell’indagine su genitori e figli. Patto Educativo Digitale della Città di Milano [Rapporto tecnico]. Retrived from https://www.partecipami.it/infodiscs/getfile/19343
  35. Haßler, B., Major, L. & Hennessy, S. (2016). Tablet use in schools: A critical review of the evidence for learning outcomes. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 32(2), 139-156. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12123
  36. Huang, Y.-M., Liang, T.-H., Su, Y.-N., & Chen, N.-S. (2012). Empowering personalized learning with an interactive e-book learning system for elementary school students. Educational Technology Research and Development, 60, 703-722. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-012-9237-6
  37. INVALSI (2023). Rapporto Prove Invalsi 2023. Consultato su https://invalsi-areaprove.cineca.it/docs/2023/Rilevazioni_Nazionali/Rapporto/Rapporto%20Prove%20INVALSI%202023.pdf
  38. IRVAPP (2012), Progetto Cl@assi 2.0: Primo rapporto intermedio. Consultato su http://irvapp.fbk.eu/sites/irvapp.fbk.eu/files/ IRVAPP-PR2012-01_0.pdf
  39. John, P. & Wheeler, S. (2015). The digital classroom: Harnessing technology for the future of learning and teaching. Routledge.
  40. Kao, C.W. (2014). The effects of digital game-based learning task in English as a foreign language contexts: A meta-analysis. Education Journal, 42(2), 113-141. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2020.102373
  41. Kalati, A.T. & Kim, M. S. (2022). What is the effect of touchscreen technology on young children’s learning?: A systematic review. Education and Information Technologies, 27, 1-19. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10816-5
  42. Kong, S.C. (2014). Developing information literacy and critical thinking skills through domain knowledge learning in digital classrooms: An experience of practicing flipped classroom strategy. Computers & education, 78, 160-173. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.05.009
  43. Lawrence, J.E. & Tar, U.A. (2018). Factors that influence teachers’ adoption and integration of ICT in teaching/learning process. Educational Media International, 55(1), 79-105. https://doi.org/10.1080/09523987.2018.1439712
  44. Liao, Y.K.C., Chang, H.W., Chen, Y.W. (2007). Effects of computer application on elementary school student’s achievement: A meta-analysis of students in Taiwan. Computers in the Schools, 24(3–4), 43-64. https://doi.org/10.1300/J025v24n03_04
  45. Lin, C.-P., Wong, L.-H. & Shao, Y.-J. (2012). Comparison of 1:1 and 1:m CSCL environment for collaborative concept mapping. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 28, 99-113. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2729.2011.00421.x
  46. Liu, T.-C., Lin, Y.-C., & Paas, F. (2012). Effects of cues and real objects on learning in amobile device supported environment. British Journal of Educational Technology, 44, 38-399. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2012.01331.x
  47. Liu, T.-C., Lin, Y.-C. & Paas, F. (2014). Effects of prior knowledge on learning from different compositions of representations in a mobile learning environment. Computers & Education, 72, 328-338. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2013.10.019
  48. McClanahan, B., Williams, K., Kennedy, E. & Tate, S. (2012). A breakthrough for Josh: How use of an iPad facilitated reading improvement. TechTrends, 56, 20-28. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-012-0572-6
  49. McNaughton, S., Rosedale, N., Zhu, T., Siryj, J., Oldehaver, J., Teng, S. L. & Jesson, R. (2022). Relationships between self-regulation, social skills and writing achievement in digital schools. Reading and Writing, 1-19. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1007/s11145-021-10232-8
  50. Miller, B. T., Krockover, G. H., & Doughty, T. (2013). Using iPads to teach inquiry science to students with a moderate to severe intellectual disability: A pilot study. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 50, 887-911. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21091
  51. Pan, Y., Ke, F. & Xu, X. (2022). A systematic review of the role of learning games in fostering mathematics education in K-12 settings. Educational Research Review, 36, article 100448. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2022.100448
  52. Pluhar, E., Kavanaugh, J.R., Levinson, J.A., Rich, M. (2019). Problematic interactive media use in teens: comorbidities, assessment, and treatment. Psychology Research and Behavior Management, 12, 447-455. https://doi.org/10.2147/PRBM.S208968
  53. Rettore, E. & Checchi, D. (2014). La valutazione degli esiti sugli apprendimenti degli alunni. In S. Girardi & V. Pandolfini (Ed.), Rapporto finale del progetto cl@assi 2.0. Fondazione Agnelli. Consultato su https://irvapp.fbk.eu/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/progress_report_2014_01.pdf
  54. Riconscente, M.M. (2013). Results from a controlled study of the iPad fractions gameMotion Math. Games and Culture, 8, 186-214. https://doi.org/10.1177/1555412013496894
  55. Schmid, R.F., Bernard, R.M., Borokhovski, E., Tamim, R.M., Abrami, P.C., Surkes, M.A., Wade, C.A. & Woods, J. (2014). The effects of technology use in postsecondary education: A meta-analysis of classroom applications. Computers & Education, 72, 271-291. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2013.11.002
  56. Sheir-Neiss G.I., Kruse, R.W., Rahman T., Jacobson L.P., Pelli J.A. (2003). The association of backpack use and back pain in adolescents. Spine, 28 (9), 922-930. https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-200305010-00015
  57. Sheppard, D. (2011). Reading with iPads – The difference makes a difference. Education Today, 11, 12–15. Retrived from http://sttechnology.pbworks.com/w/file/fetch/55436694/Sheppard_(2011)_Reading%20with%20IPads.pdf
  58. Sung, Y.T., Chang, K.E. & Liu, T.C. (2016). The effects of integrating mobile devices with teaching and learning on students’ learning performance: A meta-analysis and research synthesis. Computers & Education, 94, 252–275. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2015.11.008
  59. Talan, T., Doğan, Y. & Batdı, V. (2020). Efficiency of digital and non-digital educational games: A comparative meta-analysis and a meta-thematic analysis. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 52(4), 474-514. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2020.1743798
  60. Timotheou, S., Miliou, O., Dimitriadis, Y., Sobrino, S.V., Giannoutsou, N., Cachia, R., Monés, A.M. & Ioannou, A. (2023). Impacts of digital technologies on education and factors influencing schools’ digital capacity and transformation: A literature review. Education Information Technology, 28(6), 6695-6726. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-11431-8
  61. Van Gent, C., Dols J.J, de Rover C.M., Hira Sing R.A. & de Vet H.C. (2003). The weight of schoolbags and the occurrence of neck, shoulder, and back pain in young adolescents, Spine, 28(9), 916-921. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.brs.0000058721.69053.ec
  62. Villena-Taranilla, R., Tirado-Olivares, S., Cózar-Gutiérrez, R., González-Calero, J.A. (2022). Effects of virtual reality on learning outcomes in K-6 education: A meta-analysis. Educational Research Review, 35(100434). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2022.100434
  63. Wang, L.H., Chen, B., Hwang, G.J., Guan, J.Q. & Wang, Y.Q. (2022). Effects of digital game-based STEM education on students’ learning achievement: A meta-analysis. International Journal of STEM Education, 9(26), 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-0 22-00344-0
  64. Ward, N.D., Finley, R.J., Keil, R.G. & Clay, T. G. (2013). Benefits and limitations of iPads in the high school science classroom and a trophic cascade lesson plan. Journal of Geoscience Education, 61, 378–384. https://doi.org/10.5408/13-008.1
  65. Zierer, K. (2019). Putting learning before technology! The possibilities and limits of digitalization. Routledge.