Tech effectiveness in schools questioned

software, trumpets this promise: “Revolutionary Math Curricula. Revolutionary Results,” reports The New York Times.

The pitch has sounded seductive to thousands of schools across the country for more than a decade. But a review by the US Department of Education last year would suggest a much less alluring come-on: Undistinguished maths curricula. Unproven results.

Amid a classroom-based software boom estimated at $2.2 billion a year, debate continues to rage over the effectiveness of technology on learning, and how best to measure it. But it is hard to tell that from technology companies' promotional material, says The Bulletin.

Many companies ignore well-regarded independent studies that test their products' effectiveness - Carnegie's Web site, for example, makes no mention of the 2010 review, by the Education Department's What Works Clearinghouse, which analysed 24 studies of Cognitive Tutor's effectiveness, but found only four of those met high research standards.

Some firms misrepresent research by cherry-picking results, and promote surveys or limited case studies that lack the scientific rigor required by the clearinghouse and other authorities.