From: mmm4v@uva386.schools.virginia.edu (Marguerite M. Mason)
Subject: Calculator Research
Organization: Virginia's Public Education Network (Charlottesville)
Date: Thu, 07 Jan 93 17:05:11 GMT

In response to your question about research on use of
calculators at elementary and secondary school, I believe you
will find what you are looking for in an article called
"Effects of hand held calculators in precollege mathematics
education: A meta-analysis" by R. Hembree and D. Dessart
appearing in the Journal for Research in Mathematics Education
in 1886, Volume 17, pages 83-89.  If you have difficulty
finding it, I can send you a copy.

The article analyzes all the research conducted up to that
point with calculators and summarizes it nicely.

As a graduate student long ago, I was involved in a large study
that focused on grades 2-6.  There were 50 classrooms in five
states involved, so we could legitimately use the classroom as
a unit of analysis, rather than individual students.  There was
a class at each grade level 2-6 serving as a non calculator
using control group and a class at each grade level using
calculators as part of their math class at each of the five
sites.  The students were pretested using, as I remember - it
was a long time ago-, CAT and some other stuff in September,
used the calculators regularly, were tested again in February,
switched which group used the calculators then, and were tested
again in May.  The results - using the calculators didn't rot
anyone's brain.  Fourth grade was the only place were the
calculator using students didn't do as well or better.  Here it
turned out that one teacher whose students weren't using the
calculators felt that they were being shortchanged so she gave
them an extra 1/2 hour - 1 hour of math a day.  No wonder they
did a lot better than the other students!

Another interesting result emerged when we interviewed the
entire 3rd grade and 5th grade at one of the buildings involved
in the study.  They were given 15 computational exercises and
five non-conventional problems such as the handshake problem.
They had paper and pencil and calculator available and were
told they could do them in their head, or use paper and pencil
or calculator.  Almost the entire 3rd grade did 27 + 12 in the
head correctly.  Almost none of the 5th graders did that simple
problem in their head; most pick up the pencil immediately.
Maybe we shouldn't worry so much about students becoming
calculator dependent when we make them paper and pencil
dependent.

We also found that the students who didn't use the calculators
in class (i.e., weren't shown how and when to use them) used
them whenever they got the chance.  Isn't it better to show the
students how and when to use them?  It isn't a case of ignore
them, they will go away.

With the second graders who were learning their basic facts, we
had calculating races.  Two students were given 10 problems
like 3 + 5 and 15 - 9.  The calculator student was told he
could use the calculator, but he had to punch in every
problem.  The other student, the one with out the calculator
could get the answers any way he chose.  Obviously the student
who didn't have to punch in everything always one.  And the
kids remembered that.  In fact, we developed the rule of thumb
that if a computation would take longer than 30 seconds to do
with paper-and-pencil, then a calculator should be used.  If
less than 30 seconds, then why bother?  

What do you think?

I could go on about the effect we found in teaching problem
solving and a bunch of other stuff, but I've rambled long
enough.  Let me know if you need a copy of the Hembree &
Dessart article.

Newsgroups: k12.ed.math