One study found that "students who annotated text on their iPads scored 25% higher on questions regarding information transfer than their paper-based peers."
Compare Apples to apples, please. How did they do compared to students who annotated text in their textbooks? Or took decent notes? Or did anything other than pick their nose?
How did the students playing Angry Birds on their iPad do vs. kids who took notes on paper?
And if we're comparing those kids who left their iPads at home or destroyed them vs. those who were active enough to remember, causation is pretty much too strong.
(And as others have pointed out... n = 18? I HATE social scientists who take themselves seriously and have the nerve to make serious claims, not that I know these guys have.)
[And though Al Gore's app is pretty cool...]
There's nothing magic about iPads. There's something magic about open minds.
Guys, I was FAILING college. Then I bought an iPad and now I'm acing. Explain that!
lol just kidding, this is all nonsense glad to see people point it out though
Yes, people have dismissed this as nonsense without having the faintest idea what the methodology was, which is always a great idea. Glad it warmed your heart.
There's a lot of "studies" shown and the papers that have been published. All I'm saying is studies done on 18 students at a private university yield statistically insignificant results. Everyone has their own thoughts about this but I recommend reading the studies from their original source. Don't think I dislike any iDevice, I just dislike how this "study" is reporting its results.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacRulez
Thanks for providing the link to the actual source that AI forgot to include.
Ah. Now we see why AI "forgot" to include it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by chronster
Oh for crying out loud, this study was from 18 students? Good grief. Why do I even come here anymore.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rufwork
(And as others have pointed out... n = 18? I HATE social scientists who take themselves seriously and have the nerve to make serious claims, not that I know these guys have.)
Just noting the irony of a bunch of people deciding, sans evidence, that the methodology of the study must be useless or was very casually conducted, while immediately taking up an unsubstantiated (and apparently made up out of whole cloth) figure of "18 students" as proof of same.
Compare Apples to apples, please. How did they do compared to students who annotated text in their textbooks? Or took decent notes? Or did anything other than pick their nose?
How did the students playing Angry Birds on their iPad do vs. kids who took notes on paper?
And if we're comparing those kids who left their iPads at home or destroyed them vs. those who were active enough to remember, causation is pretty much too strong.
(And as others have pointed out... n = 18? I HATE social scientists who take themselves seriously and have the nerve to make serious claims, not that I know these guys have.)
[And though Al Gore's app is pretty cool...]
There's nothing magic about iPads. There's something magic about open minds.
Yes, I'm sure none of this occurred to the researchers, who probably just wandered into a class for the first time completely unaware of possible complicating factors. And I have no doubt that no one thought to lock down these iPads so that students couldn't download games, because who would ever think of that?
After all, these problems occurred to you, and who could be smarter than you?
I'm not sure where this is going to lead to. There are going to be an awful lot of iHaters out there saying that it's unfair for Apple to have reign over education and that they'd rather see 'open source' tablets that are cheaper or something to that effect. Apple is definitely going to take the lead in pilot programs. The iHaters continue to keep saying that $500+ is too expensive and I don't see it. They're getting a very high quality tablet with an excellent ecosystem that developers love. All iPads are basically the same unlike those various Android tablets with altered UIs. It appears that Apple is going to be around for a long time so there doesn't seem like any risk of them going out of business. Apple also seems to have the most cash reserve to just about get anything done in regards to design and manufacturing.
The only problem Apple might have is a good one, and that is, will Apple/Foxconn and various component vendors be able to keep up with iPad demand. If Apple were to really lock down the educational sector and actually change schools from textbooks to digital learning with iPads, it would be a really, really huge win for Apple. It would go back to the days when Apple was a leader of placing computers in the school system. The sky would be the limit. Maybe Apple should just start building factories on its own. I'm probably just getting carried away, but if students, teachers and school management really think iPads are worthwhile for learning, maybe Apple has a chance to make a breakthrough like never before. I sure hope it's true that students are able to study better with iPads than plain textbooks. That would be a great advance for overall education. I sure hope Apple doesn't blow this chance in some unexpected way.
An Apple II with two floppy drives (no hard disk) and monochrome monitor was about $2K, as I remember it, which is probably about $4K in 2011 dollars and education bought them in droves, so the $500 price shouldn't be an issue. Print textbooks are also very expensive.
But having said that, while this might be a great tool for college students, I would be a little more wary for elementary schools students who need to learn to read and need to put pen to paper, which leads to all kinds of cognitive advances too detailed to go into here.
Furthermore, while I'm sure having textbooks on the iPad improved efficiency, would they not have had the same efficiency (or even greater, since the keyboard is better) on a laptop? Also, I've seen other surveys that claimed that college students (surprisingly) still prefered their textbooks in print form.
In other news, students from families with higher incomes outperform students from families with lower incomes....
Because, again, a study such as this probably just asked kids with iPads how they were doing, instead of, oh, I dunno, doing a pilot program where they provided some classes with iPads to see how they performed compared to those without.
Because, obviously, whatever this so called "university" is, it probably involves a bunch of morons and Apple fanboys who couldn't be bothered to even pretend to have a way of getting useful data before telling everyone about it. Because by God that's what builds a reputation for a university-- making childish mistakes with your public projects that everyone can instantly detect!
Just noting the irony of a bunch of people deciding, sans evidence, that the methodology of the study must be useless or was very casually conducted, while immediately taking up an unsubstantiated (and apparently made up out of whole cloth) figure of "18 students" as proof of same.
Judging by all the people you've quoted throughout this thread I'd say there should be more studies about how we can get people to learn.
There should be a study of playing Angry Birds on ipad will boost your brain.
I know you are trying to be funny but there have actually been studies about using games such as sudoku and crosswords puzzles as 'brain exercise' to slow dementia and memory loss. They would probably include physics games like Angry Birds as well
One of the people he quoted has more than a decade of experience working with researchers to design exactly this sort of qualitative methodology, certainly enough to appreciate that the researchers in question have wisely chosen not to publish results at this time; more wisely, it seems, than AI's jumping to conclusion from a handful of off-the-cuff comments.
So someone who should know better jumped on the "18 students" thing without bothering to check if it were true. I guess we all make mistakes.
"Wisely chosen not to publish their results at this time"? You are truly and utterly full of shit.
Comments
Thanks for providing the link to the actual source that AI forgot to include.
Ah. Now we see why AI "forgot" to include it.
Oh for crying out loud, this study was from 18 students? Good grief. Why do I even come here anymore.
One study found that "students who annotated text on their iPads scored 25% higher on questions regarding information transfer than their paper-based peers."
Compare Apples to apples, please. How did they do compared to students who annotated text in their textbooks? Or took decent notes? Or did anything other than pick their nose?
How did the students playing Angry Birds on their iPad do vs. kids who took notes on paper?
And if we're comparing those kids who left their iPads at home or destroyed them vs. those who were active enough to remember, causation is pretty much too strong.
(And as others have pointed out... n = 18? I HATE social scientists who take themselves seriously and have the nerve to make serious claims, not that I know these guys have.)
[And though Al Gore's app is pretty cool...]
There's nothing magic about iPads. There's something magic about open minds.
Correlation is not causation.
Agreed. In fact, even the correlation is questionable.
Guys, I was FAILING college. Then I bought an iPad and now I'm acing. Explain that!
lol just kidding, this is all nonsense
Yes, people have dismissed this as nonsense without having the faintest idea what the methodology was, which is always a great idea. Glad it warmed your heart.
Go to acu.edu/connected
There's a lot of "studies" shown and the papers that have been published. All I'm saying is studies done on 18 students at a private university yield statistically insignificant results. Everyone has their own thoughts about this but I recommend reading the studies from their original source. Don't think I dislike any iDevice, I just dislike how this "study" is reporting its results.
Thanks for providing the link to the actual source that AI forgot to include.
Ah. Now we see why AI "forgot" to include it.
Oh for crying out loud, this study was from 18 students? Good grief. Why do I even come here anymore.
(And as others have pointed out... n = 18? I HATE social scientists who take themselves seriously and have the nerve to make serious claims, not that I know these guys have.)
Just noting the irony of a bunch of people deciding, sans evidence, that the methodology of the study must be useless or was very casually conducted, while immediately taking up an unsubstantiated (and apparently made up out of whole cloth) figure of "18 students" as proof of same.
Compare Apples to apples, please. How did they do compared to students who annotated text in their textbooks? Or took decent notes? Or did anything other than pick their nose?
How did the students playing Angry Birds on their iPad do vs. kids who took notes on paper?
And if we're comparing those kids who left their iPads at home or destroyed them vs. those who were active enough to remember, causation is pretty much too strong.
(And as others have pointed out... n = 18? I HATE social scientists who take themselves seriously and have the nerve to make serious claims, not that I know these guys have.)
[And though Al Gore's app is pretty cool...]
There's nothing magic about iPads. There's something magic about open minds.
Yes, I'm sure none of this occurred to the researchers, who probably just wandered into a class for the first time completely unaware of possible complicating factors. And I have no doubt that no one thought to lock down these iPads so that students couldn't download games, because who would ever think of that?
After all, these problems occurred to you, and who could be smarter than you?
Guys, I was FAILING college. Then I bought an iPad and now I'm acing. Explain that!
lol just kidding, this is all nonsense
Just kidding? So you're still failing? Get back to your homework!
I'm not sure where this is going to lead to. There are going to be an awful lot of iHaters out there saying that it's unfair for Apple to have reign over education and that they'd rather see 'open source' tablets that are cheaper or something to that effect. Apple is definitely going to take the lead in pilot programs. The iHaters continue to keep saying that $500+ is too expensive and I don't see it. They're getting a very high quality tablet with an excellent ecosystem that developers love. All iPads are basically the same unlike those various Android tablets with altered UIs. It appears that Apple is going to be around for a long time so there doesn't seem like any risk of them going out of business. Apple also seems to have the most cash reserve to just about get anything done in regards to design and manufacturing.
The only problem Apple might have is a good one, and that is, will Apple/Foxconn and various component vendors be able to keep up with iPad demand. If Apple were to really lock down the educational sector and actually change schools from textbooks to digital learning with iPads, it would be a really, really huge win for Apple. It would go back to the days when Apple was a leader of placing computers in the school system. The sky would be the limit. Maybe Apple should just start building factories on its own. I'm probably just getting carried away, but if students, teachers and school management really think iPads are worthwhile for learning, maybe Apple has a chance to make a breakthrough like never before. I sure hope it's true that students are able to study better with iPads than plain textbooks. That would be a great advance for overall education. I sure hope Apple doesn't blow this chance in some unexpected way.
An Apple II with two floppy drives (no hard disk) and monochrome monitor was about $2K, as I remember it, which is probably about $4K in 2011 dollars and education bought them in droves, so the $500 price shouldn't be an issue. Print textbooks are also very expensive.
But having said that, while this might be a great tool for college students, I would be a little more wary for elementary schools students who need to learn to read and need to put pen to paper, which leads to all kinds of cognitive advances too detailed to go into here.
Furthermore, while I'm sure having textbooks on the iPad improved efficiency, would they not have had the same efficiency (or even greater, since the keyboard is better) on a laptop? Also, I've seen other surveys that claimed that college students (surprisingly) still prefered their textbooks in print form.
In other news, students from families with higher incomes outperform students from families with lower incomes....
Because, again, a study such as this probably just asked kids with iPads how they were doing, instead of, oh, I dunno, doing a pilot program where they provided some classes with iPads to see how they performed compared to those without.
Because, obviously, whatever this so called "university" is, it probably involves a bunch of morons and Apple fanboys who couldn't be bothered to even pretend to have a way of getting useful data before telling everyone about it. Because by God that's what builds a reputation for a university-- making childish mistakes with your public projects that everyone can instantly detect!
That's pretty cool. I'd like to see more studies on the effect of the iPad on education.
In other news, tuition fees have been increased starting this year, by exactly $500.
And perhaps the researchers on this study missed correlation ≠ causation because they were busy playing Angry Birds in Stats?
There should be a study of playing Angry Birds on ipad will boost your brain.
Just noting the irony of a bunch of people deciding, sans evidence, that the methodology of the study must be useless or was very casually conducted, while immediately taking up an unsubstantiated (and apparently made up out of whole cloth) figure of "18 students" as proof of same.
Judging by all the people you've quoted throughout this thread I'd say there should be more studies about how we can get people to learn.
Exactly.
More like rich students have more resources and time for their studies than poor students struggling to pay tuition.
We lack details about the test group, but it is possible they accounted for 'the rich factor' in their study.
There should be a study of playing Angry Birds on ipad will boost your brain.
I know you are trying to be funny but there have actually been studies about using games such as sudoku and crosswords puzzles as 'brain exercise' to slow dementia and memory loss. They would probably include physics games like Angry Birds as well
One of the people he quoted has more than a decade of experience working with researchers to design exactly this sort of qualitative methodology, certainly enough to appreciate that the researchers in question have wisely chosen not to publish results at this time; more wisely, it seems, than AI's jumping to conclusion from a handful of off-the-cuff comments.
So someone who should know better jumped on the "18 students" thing without bothering to check if it were true. I guess we all make mistakes.
"Wisely chosen not to publish their results at this time"? You are truly and utterly full of shit.