CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 73Education and Technology IntegrationSchool Choice and PerformanceGender and Technology in Education

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 103 of the 105 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Technology and Education: Computers, Software, and the Internet

Open access
Bulman, George, Fairlie, Robert·2016·National Bureau of Economic Research
DOI 10.3386/w22237
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

A substantial amount of money is spent on technology by schools, families and policymakers with the hope of improving educational outcomes.This paper explores the theoretical and empirical literature on the impacts of technology on educational outcomes.The literature focuses on two primary contexts in which technology may be used for educational purposes: i) classroom use in schools, and ii) home use by students.Theoretically, ICT investment and CAI use by schools and the use of computers at home have ambiguous implications for educational achievement: expenditures devoted to technology necessarily offset inputs that may be more or less efficient, and time allocated to using technology may displace traditional classroom instruction and educational activities at home.However, much of the evidence in the schooling literature is based on interventions that provide supplemental funding for technology or additional class time, and thus favor finding positive effects.Nonetheless, studies of ICT and CAI in schools produce mixed evidence with a pattern of null results.Notable exceptions to this pattern occur in studies of developing countries and CAI interventions that target math rather than language.In the context of home use, early studies based on multivariate and instrumental variables approaches tend to find large positive (and in a few cases negative) effects while recent studies based on randomized control experiments tend to find small or null effects.Early research focused on developed countries while more recently several experiments have been conducted in developing countries.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3386/w22237

Cites

103 of 103 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 105 references

Research works printed but not linked: 5

  1. Hanushek, Eric A. 2006. "School Resources," In Eric A. Hanushek and Finis Welch (Ed.). Handbook of the Economics of Education, Volume 2, Amsterdam: North Holland: 865-908.
  2. Krueger, Alan B. 1993. "How Computers Have Changed the Wage Structure: Evidence from Micro Data." Quarterly Journal of Economics. 107:1, 35-78.
  3. McEwan, Patrick J. 2014 "Improving Learning in Primary School of Developing Countries: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Experiments," Review of Educational Research.
  4. Noll, Roger G., Dina Older-Aguilar, Gregory L. Rosston, and Richard R. Ross. 2000. "The Digital Divide: Definitions, Measurement, and Policy Issues," paper presented at Bridging the Digital Divide: California Public Affairs Forum, Stanford University. OECD. 2014. OECD Factbook 2014: Economic, Environmental and Social Statistics, http://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/economics/oecd-factbook-2014_factbook-2014-en.
  5. Peck, Craig, Larry Cuban, and Heather Kirkpatrick. 2002. "Technopromoter dreams, student realities," Phi Delta Kappan, 83(6), 472-480.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Bulman, G., & Fairlie, R.
Affiliations
National Bureau of Economic Research (US)
ORCID
Fairlie, Robert
Venue
National Bureau of Economic Research
Publisher
National Bureau of Economic Research
Published
2016-05
DOI
10.3386/w22237
OpenAlex
W3140230804
Cited by
66
References
105
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 13 · 2016: 3
Type
report
Language
en
Open access
Locations
National Bureau of Economic Research (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Education › Education and Technology Integration
  • Social Sciences › Education › School Choice and Performance
  • Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Gender and Technology in Education
Keywords
educational technology, ICT investment, computer-assisted instruction, home computer use, educational outcomes, academic performance, classroom technology, developing countries, mathematics education, school finance

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