Cited by 53Digital Education and SocietyEducational Innovations and TechnologySchool Choice and Performance

Intended and Unintended Consequences of Educational Technology on Social Inequality

Tawfik, Andrew A, Reeves, Todd D, Stich, Amy·2016·TechTrends

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s11528-016-0109-5

Cites

77 of 77 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Educational technologies like smartboards have led to greater social inequality.

    “Some scholars have recently discussed, for example, how educational technologies like smartboards (which improve student learning outcomes and increase classroom efficiency) have led to greater social inequality.”
  • Smartboards were disproportionately deployed into high-resourced schools, disproportionately benefited students with high socioeconomic status, and further increased economic disparities along class lines.

    “Since smartboards were disproportionately deployed into high-resourced schools, they disproportionately benefited students with high socioeconomic status, thus further increasing economic disparities along class lines [10, 60].”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Tawfik, A. A., Reeves, T. D., & Stich, A.
Affiliations
Northern Illinois University (US)
Corresponding author
Tawfik, Andrew A
Venue
TechTrends
Published
2016-07-25
Volume
60
Issue
6
Pages
598-605
ISSN
  • 1559-7075 (ISSN-L)
  • 8756-3894
OpenAlex
W2481259854
Cited by
53
References
77
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 1
FWCI
4.46
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
TechTrends (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Digital Education and Society
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Educational Innovations and Technology
  • Social Sciences › Education › School Choice and Performance
Keywords
educational technology, social inequality, educational equity, access to education, educational opportunities, achievement gap, unintended consequences, social context of technology

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review