The impact of computer technology on academic achievement of young African American children.

Abstract. This study examined the relationship between academic achievement of young African American children and access to and use of computers in their school and home. The sample consists of 1,601 African American public school children who attended kindergarten and 1st grade. Results indicate that access to and use of a home computer, computer area in classrooms, child/computer ratio, software, and computers in school were positively correlated with academic achievement. In addition, frequent use of software for literacy, math, and games was positively correlated with academic achievement during kindergarten. High achievers were found to use software for literacy and math more frequently than both low and average achievers during kindergarten.

**********

The rapid growth of children's access to computers and the Internet in the United States is impressive. Statistics suggest that as of 2001, about three-quarters of children between the ages of 5 and 7 use computers at school and 56 percent use computers at home (DeBell & Chapman, 2003). However, a number of research efforts have indicated that technology access and use in U.S. schools is indeed somewhat polarized, with schools serving black, Hispanic, and low socio-economic status (SES) students tending to have the lowest access to, and the most remedial usages of, new technology (Becker, 2000; "Dividing Lines," 2001; Wenglinsky, 1998). In addition, a significant gap in home-computer ownership and Internet access exists between African American and white households (DeBell & Chapman, 2003; Fairlie, 2002; Puma, Chapin, & Pape, 2003; Solomon, 2002).

Although issues of equal access to technology are crucial, how we use computers that have been placed in the classroom is also of critical importance. The National Association for the Education of Young Children's (NAEYC) Position Statement on Technology and Young Children acknowledges that technology can enhance children's cognitive and social abilities if used appropriately (NAEYC, 1996). It recognizes that equitable access for children from low-income families, for whom the school may be the primary source of computer opportunity, may necessitate providing them with increased computing opportunities. Beyond equitable access, NAEYC recommends that technology be integrated into the learning environment as one of several support options. Digital equity for young children, therefore, includes access to computer resources that are used in developmentally appropriate ways with teachers who have the knowledge and skills to integrate technology into meaningful activities of interest and relevance to children. Equitable use means that computers are fully integrated into a developmentally appropriate curriculum and include opportunities for interaction by virtue of placement and proximity, with relatively low computer-pupil ratios, and updated equipment with telecommunications access.

Numerous studies have found that, on average, African American children arrive at kindergarten or 1st grade with lower levels of school readiness than do white children (Brooks-Gunn, Klebanov, & Duncan, 1996; Duncan, Brooks-Gunn, & Klebanov, 1994; Farkas, 2003; Lee & Burkham, 2002; Phillips, Brooks-Gunn, Duncan, Klebanov, & Crane, 1998). It has been found that low achievement patterns in the primary grades persist at higher grades, especially for African American children (Alexander & Entwistle, 1988; Jacobson, Olsen, Rice, Sweetland, & Ralph, 2001; Phillips, Crouse, & Ralph, 1998). The National Assessment of Educational Progress (Donahue, Finnegan, Lutkus, Allen, & Campbell, 2001) reported that 63 percent of African American 4th-graders read below basic levels, as compared to 27 percent of majority students. And failure to attain basic levels of reading competence contributes to lower levels of academic achievement. Phillips et al. (1998) estimate that at least half, and probably more, of the black-white gap in 12th grade would be eliminated if we could eliminate the black-white performance gap at school entry, since African American children score about one-half standard deviation below their white counterparts at the beginning of kindergarten (Lee & Burkam, 2002).

As part of the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB, P.L. 107-110), the Enhancing Education Through Technology (ED Tech) program seeks to improve student academic achievement in elementary and secondary schools through the use of technology, to help students become technically literate by the 8th grade, and to ensure that teachers integrate technology into the curriculum to improve student achievement. Studies conducted on the effectiveness of technology in the classroom often have mixed results, making it difficult to generalize about technology's overall effect on improving learning (Schacter, 1999; Sivin-Kachala & Bialo, 1999). More recent reports on the use of computers for instruction are beginning to show evidence of relationships between computer use and academic achievement (Brush, Armstrong, Barbrow, & Ulintz, 1999; Wenglinsky, 1998). Other researchers are finding positive relationships between using computers and improved performances by young children (Clements & Natasi, 1993; Salerno, 1995). Laffey, Espinosa, Moore, and Lodree (2003) showed that at-risk African American children who were exposed to interactive computer technology gained mathematics knowledge significantly greater than the comparison group. Similarly, Pinkard (2001) reported greater increases in sight vocabulary in low-SES African American children who received computer instruction targeting literacy compared to their white counterparts. Clearly, there is much to be learned about the relationship between uses of computer technology and educational outcomes of young African American children.

The purpose of this study is to describe young African American children's access to computers as they start their formal schooling and the relationship between academic achievement and computer use. Specifically, this research attempted to answer the following questions: 1) What opportunities do young African American children have to use computers in the school and home? 2) Is there a relationship between academic achievement and computer resources and use? and 3) Are there differences in frequency of computer use according to academic achievement and school poverty concentration?

Method

The data for this study were derived from the kindergarten-1st grade longitudinal years of the Early Childhood Longitudinal Study, Kindergarten Class of 1998-99 (ECLS-K), a nationally representative and general purpose study on children's early education of about 22,000 public and private school children in over 1,200 kindergarten programs, sponsored by the National Center for Education Statistics (West, Denton, & Germino-Hausken, 2000). The ECLS-K study used a multistage probability sample design. The primary sampling units were geographic areas consisting of counties or groups of counties from which 1,280 public and private schools offering kindergarten programs were selected. The study includes assessments of children's academic skills; surveys of parents, teachers, and school administrators; and observational ratings of school environments by study supervisors.

The analytic sample consists of 1,601 African American children who attended 274 public schools during kindergarten and 1st grade. School comparisons are based on data provided by the school principals. Schools are classified by their concentration of low-income children. Concentration of low-income children is based on the percent of the total enrollment that is eligible for free or reduced-priced lunches. School-wide Title I participation is used when this information is missing. The criteria used to define higher poverty and lower poverty schools are the following: 1) higher poverty schools have 50 percent or more of the total school enrollment eligible for free and reduced lunch and 2) lower poverty schools have less than 50 percent of the total school enrollment eligible for free and reduced lunch. Of this sample, 64.8 percent attended higher poverty schools (n = 1,068) and 35.2 percent attended lower poverty schools (n = 533). There are slightly more boys than girls (48.4 percent) in the sample. Of the children, 93.7 percent were first-time kindergartners. Only 51.6 percent of the families lived at or above the poverty threshold level. About 65 percent of the children lived in single-parent households and the majority of the children lived in large cities or urban fringe (84 percent).

Measures

Reading and Math Skills. Direct assessment in this study is represented by children's Item Response Theory (IRT) scale scores on an individually administered cognitive test in reading and mathematics in the spring of kindergarten and 1st grade. The assessments included both multiple-choice and open-ended questions, and practice items were given for each type of question format. Children were instructed to answer questions verbally or by pointing. Test reliabilities of the IRT-based reading and math scores were quite high (between .92 and .95 for all assessments).

The reading test focused on language and literacy and was designed to measure basic skills (print familiarity, letter recognition, beginning and ending sounds, rhyming sounds, and word recognition), vocabulary (picture vocabulary), and comprehension (listening comprehension, words in context). The math test was designed to measure skills in conceptual knowledge, procedural knowledge, and problem solving. Approximately half of the math questions were related to number sense, number properties, and mathematical operations. The remaining math questions focused on measurement, geometry, spatial sense, data analysis, statistics, probability, patterns, algebra, and functions.

Computer Resources and Use. Data were collected through parent interviews and teacher and school administrator questionnaires. School administrators and kindergarten and 1st-grade teachers completed paper and pencil questionnaires that asked about availability and adequacy of different computer resources. Teachers were asked to rate the adequacy of their computer equipment and software on a 4-point Likert-type scale (1 = never adequate; 4 = always adequate). In addition, kindergarten and 1st-grade teachers indicated the frequency with which children in their classroom as a whole used computers for several instructional purposes, including to learn reading, writing, or spelling; to learn math; to learn social studies; to learn science concepts; to learn keyboard skills; to create art; for fun (games); and for Internet/local area network (LAN) access. School administrators also provided counts on the total number of computers in the school and the number of classrooms with different computer resources. Parents provided information on whether there was a home computer that their child used and whether their child accessed the Internet from home.

Results

The Availability of Computers and Use of Computer Resources in Classrooms and Home

Almost all young African American children had access to a variety of computer resources in their schools and classrooms (see Table 1). During kindergarten and 1st grade, all African American children attended schools that had at least one computer. Ninety-one percent of children used computers in kindergarten, and over three-quarters had computer areas in their classrooms and attended schools with student access to computer labs and CD-ROM drives. More than half attended schools that provided student access to local area networks (LANs) and the Internet and had kindergarten teachers who attended a computer/technology workshop in the past year. Only 34 percent of the schools had a full-time computer specialist. Particularly noteworthy is that only 29 percent of the children had home computers that they used.

African American kindergartners' access to computer resources at school also was examined in terms of the school's child/computer ratio--that is, the number of children enrolled in the school divided by the total numbers of computers in the school--and the percent of classrooms in the school that had various computer resources available for student use. On average, the public schools that African American kindergartners attended had one computer for every eight children in the school. Almost half of the classrooms in children's schools had LAN (47 percent) and Internet (41 percent) access, while 65 percent had computers with CD-ROM hardware.

The data revealed that as students moved from kindergarten to 1st grade (see Table 1), access to computer resources became more available. A greater percentage of African American children attended schools that provided access to computers with LANs, CD-ROM drives, and Internet access. In addition, more children had computer areas in their classrooms in 1st grade and the child/computer ratio improved during 1st grade; there was one computer for every seven children. Children's access to and use of home computer resources also increased to 40 percent during 1st grade. However, the adequacy of computer equipment and software decreased from kindergarten to 1st grade. Changes in availability may be due not only to the change in grade level but also to the general growth in computer resources from 1999 to 2000.

The availability of computer resources at school also was examined in terms of how African American children used computers in their classroom on a weekly basis for various instructional purposes. Table 2 reflects this data on how frequently the computer was used for both higher and lower poverty schools. Findings show that as students move from kindergarten into 1st grade, they use more reading/writing/ spelling software on a weekly basis. However, students used instructional software for math, social studies, science, games, art, and keyboard less as they advanced to 1st grade. The only exception was an increase in use of math software for children attending higher poverty schools in 1st grade, compared to kindergarten.

Parents were asked questions about the frequency that their children used computers in the home and the types of activities children were involved in when they used home computers. For children who used home computers, computer use averaged 3.5 days a week during both kindergarten and 1st grade. Approximately 90 percent of children in both kindergarten and 1st grade who used home computers used them to learn skills or to play educational games. In addition, of kindergartners who used home computers, 68 percent used them for art while 10 percent used them to access the Internet.

Relationship Between Academic Achievement and Computer Resources and Use

Intercorrelations among academic achievement variables, computer resources, and frequency of computer use variables indicated that access to and use of a home computer, computer area in classrooms, software, child/ computer ratio, and computers in school were positively correlated with academic achievement during kindergarten and 1st grade (see Table 3). In addition, frequent use of software for literacy, math, and games in kindergarten was positively correlated with academic achievement. No significant correlations were found between frequent use of software during 1st grade and academic achievement.

Differences in Computer Use According to Achievement and School Poverty Concentration

Data analyses were conducted to detect any differences between subgroups of African American children according to academic achievement in reading and mathematics, in relation to school poverty concentration. Planned comparisons were made among groups of children identified as High Achievers, Average Achievers, and Low Achievers in reading or math. Thus, six groups were identified by a priori cut scores. High Achievers were defined when a child was above the 66th percentile of the sample mean on reading or mathematics achievement. Average Achievers were defined as scoring between the 33rd and 66th percentile of the sample mean on reading or mathematics achievement. Low Achievers were defined as falling below the 33rd percentile of the sample mean on reading or mathematics achievement.

To determine whether frequency of computer use was related to achievement, a series of one-way ANOVAs were conducted, with achievement group status in relation to school poverty concentration as the independent variable, and frequency of computer use to learn reading/writing/ spelling skills and computer use to learn math as the dependent variable at both the end of kindergarten and 1st grade. Comparisons among the three groups of children attending higher poverty schools indicated significant group differences in using computers to learn reading/writing/spelling skills during kindergarten, F(2, 1012) = 3.61, p < .05. No significant differences between subgroups of children attending higher poverty schools were found on frequency of computer use to learn reading/writing/spelling skills during 1st grade and computer use to learn math during kindergarten and 1st grade. These results indicated that high achievers in reading used computers to learn reading/ writing/spelling skills significantly more than both low achievers and average achievers during kindergarten.

Univariate analyses displayed significant group differences with respect to children attending lower poverty schools in using computers to learn reading/writing/spelling skills during kindergarten, F(2, 498) = 5.88, p < .01, and in using computers to learn mathematics during kindergarten, F(2, 500) = 4.94, p < .01. There were no significant group differences in using computers to learn reading/writing/spelling skills and mathematics during 1st grade. Significant post hoc comparisons revealed that high achievers used computers more for both reading/writing/spelling skills and mathematics compared to the low achieving group. There were no significant differences between the high achievers and average achievers in using computers.

In addition, a series of one-way ANOVAs was used to test for academic group differences and presence of a computer area in the classroom during kindergarten and 1st grade. For children attending higher poverty schools, significant group differences were found during kindergarten for both the reading achievement groups, F(2,999) = 3.12, p < .05, and math achievement groups, F(2,998) = 9.24, p < .001. No significant group differences were found in availability of computer areas in classrooms during 1st grade. Significant post hoc comparisons revealed that high achievers in both reading and mathematics had computer areas more available in their classrooms compared to the average and low achiever groups. For example, 86 percent of children who were high math achievers had computer areas in their classrooms, compared to 75 percent of children who were low math achievers.

For children attending lower poverty schools, significant group differences were found during kindergarten for the mathematics achievement groups, F(2,497) = 5.40, p < .01. High achievers had computer areas in their classrooms significantly more than both average and low achievers (91 percent vs. 87 percent and 79 percent respectively). Again, no significant group differences were found in availability of computer areas in classrooms during 1st grade.

Discussion

Most schools offer young African American children the opportunity to access computers. Findings show that availability of computer resources at schools and home increased from kindergarten to 1st grade. However, the adequacy of computers and software decreased from kindergarten to 1st grade. More than two-thirds of all African American children attended classrooms where computers were used for various instructional purposes at least once a week. The majority of computer time was spent using software for literacy and math for both kindergarten and 1st grade. A positive relationship was found between African American children's academic achievement, frequency of computer use, presence of a computer area in the classroom, child/computer ratio, and access to a home computer. Of interest, however, is how these effects tend to fade during 1st grade. Academic achievement in reading and mathematics during 1st grade was not significantly related to frequency of software use for different instructional purposes.

Another benchmark for computer access is if classrooms have at least one computer for every four students (Becker, 2000). Even though the number of computers per child increased from kindergarten to 1st grade, few schools actually met this standard. During kindergarten, only 17 percent of classrooms had at least one computer per four children. A slightly better percentage of schools met this goal during 1st grade (23 percent). Of interest is that as the ratio of computers per child improved from kindergarten to 1st grade, the relationship between academic achievement and child/computer ratio is more significantly correlated.

Furthermore, a major concern related to the differential access to and use of technology in schools was that high-achieving African American children used software more frequently compared to low-achieving children. Computer time is often used as a reward for good behavior, a reward after a task is completed, or part of a classroom reward system. Thus, high achievers may be using software more frequently because of good behavior and task completion. In addition, high achievers were more likely to have computer areas in their classrooms during kindergarten compared to both average and low achievers. As a result, a technological underclass may emerge in our public school system. Thus, the manner in which computers are used, as well as computer access, for African American students should be addressed in order to improve their educational opportunities. It is also extremely important that teachers provide equitable time for all students to experiment with the technology and not view the computer or a particular computer program as more suitable for one group of children than another.

Developmentally appropriate practice calls for technology to be integrated into the learning environment (NAEYC, 1996). One way to do this is through the use of learning centers. Although centers have a long history in preschool classrooms, primary grade teachers have not always felt that they are appropriate in the elementary school. However, this study's findings have shown that the presence of computer areas in kindergarten and 1st grade is associated with academic achievement. The high percentage of schools reporting the presence of computer labs in the school, an apparent conflict with recommendations regarding developmentally appropriate use of technology resources, is of further concern.

Software for fun and games during kindergarten was found to be associated with academic achievement during both kindergarten and 1st grade. Research has shown that the kind of software children use provides vastly different educational outcomes (Clements, 1994; Haugland, 1992). Using technology to engage students more actively in learning is not limited to reading and mathematics. This finding reinforces the role of play and learning for young children.

Home access to computers will be a continued area of inequity in American society and schools remain an important initial entry point of access, especially among African American children. While children's access to home computer use increased from kindergarten to 1st grade, African American children still had less access to home computers compared to white children (Becker, 2000; DeBell & Chapman, 2003). However, many children in this sample came from lower-SES homes. Thus, home computer ownership may be due also to SES differences. However, the presence of a computer in the home is important to young African American children's achievement. This corroborates the findings of Lee and Burkam (2002), who found that the presence of a home computer explained statistically some of the black/white achievement gap as children began kindergarten.

More than 60 percent of kindergarten and 1st-grade teachers attended a computer/ technology workshop during the school year. Because of the rapid proliferation of computers in schools during the last few years, many teachers feel uncomfortable using computers and are unaware of the teaching and learning pedagogies that computers and the Internet are able to support. Professional development is a critical ingredient in effective use of technology in the classroom. These findings indicate that many teachers are not receiving the professional development opportunities to better prepare them to use technology in their teaching.

A major limitation of this study is the lack of specific information on the quality of young children's computer use or the specific software children are using at school and in their homes. As a secondary data analysis, the construction of the use of computer resources measures is confined to the questions that were already included in the teacher survey. For example, the teacher questionnaires only asked about the frequencies of computer use for different instructional purposes in their classroom as a whole. It is not known how much time children spent using computers. A second limitation is that although the school and classroom indicators provided the overall level of resources available to students in the school they attended, they do not provide direct information on whether certain computer resources were actually available to the sampled children. A third limitation is that young children's access to and use of computer resources are compared from kindergarten in the spring of 1999 to the 1st grade in the spring of 2000. Differences that are detected between the two grade levels may be due to children's change in grade level. Differences found across grade levels also may be credited to the increase of computer resources from 1999 to 2000. For instance, the proportion of instructional rooms with Internet access in U.S. public schools rose, from 64 percent in 1999 to 77 percent in 2000 (Cattagni & Farris, 2001).

Thoughtful educators agree that computer access and literacy have become vital and necessary for every student to excel, both in school and in life. If we assume that academic achievement is facilitated by access to computers both at home and at school, the gap in access to computer technology is cause for concern. All children deserve the opportunity to have access to technological resources that can supplement their learning experiences as well as build the competency with technology they will need for full participation in society. These findings suggest that bridging the digital divide for African American children can have an impact on children's academic performance.

References

Alexander, K., & Entwistle, D. (1988). Achievement in the first 2 years of school: Patterns and processes. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 53(2, Serial No. 218).

Becker, H.J. (2000). Who's wired and who's not: Children's access to and use of computer technology. The Future of Children: Children and Computer Technology, 10(2), 44-75.

Brooks-Gunn, J., Klebanov, P., & Duncan, G. (1996). Ethnic differences in children's intelligence test scores: Role of economic deprivation, home environment, and maternal characteristics. Child Development, 67, 396-408.

Brush, T. A., Armstrong, J., Barbrow, D., & Ulintz, L. (1999). Design and delivery of integrated learning systems: Their impact on student achievement and attitudes. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 21, 475-486.

Cattagni, A., & Farris, E. (2001). Internet access in US. public schools and classrooms: 1994-2000 (NCES 2001-071). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics, U.S. Department of Education.

Clements, D. (1994). The uniqueness of the computer as a learning tool: Insights from research. In J. Wright & D. Share (Eds.), Young children: Active learners in a technological age (pp. 31-50). Washington, DC: National Association for the Education of Young Children.

Clements, D., & Natasi, B. (1993). Electronic media and early childhood education. In B. Spodak (Ed.), Handbook of research on the education of young children (pp. 251-275). New York: Macmillan.

DeBell, M., & Chapman, C. (2003). Computer and Internet use by children and adolescents in 2001 (NCES 2004-014). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics, U.S. Department of Education.

Dividing Lines. (2001, May 10). Education Week, 20, 12-13.

Donahue, P. L., Finnegan, F. J., Lutkus, A. D., Allen, N. L., & Campbell, J. R. (2001). The nation's report card. Fourth-grade reading 2000 (NCES 2001-499). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Research and Improvement, National Center for Education Statistics.

Duncan, G., Brooks-Gunn, J., & Klebanov, P. K. (1994). Economic deprivation and early childhood development. Child Development, 65, 296-318.

Fairlie, R. (2002). Race and the digital divide. Chicago: Joint Center for Poverty Research.

Farkas, G. (2003). Racial disparities and discrimination in education: What do we know, how do we know it, and what do we need to know? Teachers College Record, 105, 1119-1146.

Haugland, S. (1992). Effects of computer software on preschool children's developmental gains. Journal of Computing in Childhood Education, 2, 3-15.

Jacobson, J., Olsen, C., Rice, J. K., Sweetland, S., & Ralph, J. (2001). Educational achievement and black-white inequality. Statistical Analysis Report 2001-061 (July). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics, U.S. Department of Education.

Laffey, J. M., Espinosa, L., Moore, J., & Lodree, A. (2003). Supporting learning and behavior of at-risk young children: Computers in urban education. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 35(4), 423-440.

Lee, V. E., & Burkham, D. T. (2002). Inequality at the starting gate: Social background differences in achievement as children begin school. Washington, DC: Economic Policy Institute.

National Association for the Education of Young Children. (1996). NAEYC position statement on technology and young children: Ages three through eight. Young Children, 51(6), 11-16.

No Child Left Behind (NCLB, P.L. 107-110). (2002). The facts: 21st century technology. Available online at www.nochildleftbehind.gov/start/ facts/21centtech.html.

Phillips, M., Crouse, J., & Ralph, J. (1998). Does the black-white test score gap widen after children enter school? In C. Jencks & M. Phillips (Eds.), The black-white test score gap (pp. 229-272). Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution.

Phillips, M., Brooks-Gunn, J., Duncan, G., Klebanov, P., & Crane, J. (1998). Family background, parenting practices, and the black-white test-score gap. In C. Jencks & M. Phillips (Eds.), The black-white test score gap (pp. 103-148). Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution.

Pinkard, N. (2001). Rappin' Reader and Say Say Oh Playmate: Using children's childhood songs as literacy scaffolds in computer-based learning environments. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 25(1), 17-34.

Puma, M., Chapin, D., & Pape, A. (2003). E-Rate and the digital divide: A preliminary analysis from the integrated studies of educational technology. Washington, DC: The Urban Institute.

Salerno, C. (1995). The effect of time on computer-assisted instruction for at-risk students. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 28(1), 85-97.

Schacter, J. (1999). The impact of education technology on student achievement: What the most current research has to say. Santa Monica, CA: Milken Exchange on Education Technology. (ERIC No. ED 430 537)

Sivin-Kachala, J., & Bialo, E. R. (1999). 1999 research report on the effectiveness of technology in schools (6th ed.). Washington, DC: Software and Information Industry Association.

Solomon, G. (2002). Digital equity: It's not just about access anymore. Technology & Learning, 22, 18-26.

Wenglinsky, H. (1998). Does it compute?: The relationship between educational technology and student achievement in mathematics. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Services.

West, J., Denton, K., & Germino-Hausken, E. (2000). America's kindergartners. Findings from the Early Childhood Longitudinal Study, Kindergarten Class of 1998-99, Fall 1998. NCES 2000-070. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics.

Author's Note: This research was supported by a grant from the American Educational Research Association, which receives funds for its "AERA Grants Program" from the National Science Foundation and the U.S. Department of Education (National Center for Education of the Office of Educational Research and Improvement) under NSF Grant #REC-9980573. Opinions reflect those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the granting agencies.

Sharon Judge

University of Tennessee 

Table 1

Percent of Kindergarten and 1st-Grade African American Children's
Access to Computer Resources

Computer Resources                            Kindergarten   1st Grade
                                                   %             %

School computer resources for student use
  Computer lab in school                          80.4         81.2
  Local area networks (LAN)                       56.5         62.1
  CD-ROM drives                                   80.0         83.4
  Wide area networks (WAN, Internet)              58.0         71.6
Teacher/classroom resources
  Computers used in classroom                     91.1         96.8
  Computer area in classroom                      82.9         90.2
  Teacher attended computer workshop              64.1         65.2
  Always adequate computer equipment              52.5         44.6
  Always adequate computer software               40.5         37.3
Home computer resources
  Child has access to and uses a home
    computer                                      28.5         40.1
  Child has access to and uses the Internet
     at home                                       2.9           --

-- Data were not collected

Table 2

Percent of Kindergartners and 1st-grade African American Children
Who Used Computers in Their Classrooms on a Weekly Basis fbr Various
Instructional Purposes

                              Kindergarten

                        High Poverty    Low Poverty

   Instructional             %               %
      Software

To read/write/spell         70.1            71.3
To learn math               61.7            67.9
For social studies          20.6            24.9
For science concepts        21.5            26.4
For keyboard skills         44.2            41.2
To create art               33.1            39.6
For games                   59.5            61.5

                                1st Grade

                        High Poverty    Low Poverty

   Instructional             %               %
      Software

To read/write/spell         72.1            73.7
To learn math               64.5            65.8
For social studies          17.4            19.4
For science concepts        16.8            19.3
For keyboard skills         42.7            34.7
To create art               22.1            27.5
For games                   49.4            52.1

Table 3. Pearson Correlations of Academic Achievement and Computer
Resources and Use (N =1,601)

Variables                         1        2        3         4

1. Read IRT Kindergarten          --
2. Math IRT Kindergarten          74 **    --
3. Read IRT First Grade           75 **    67 **    --
4. Math IRT First Grade           63 **    76 **    72 **     --
5. Home Computer K                20 **    20 **    18 **     17 **
6. Home Computer First            22 **    22 **    20 **     21 **
7. Computer Area K                11 **    12 **    13 **     11 **
8. Computer Area First            04       07 **    07 **     08 **
9. Ratio Computer/Child K         02       02       01        02
10. Ratio Computer/Child First   -05      -09 **   -09 **    -08 **
11. Computer Access K             03       06 *     05        05
12. Computer Access First         01       03       06 *      02
13. Software Access K             03       06 *     05        05
14. Software Access First         05       05       06 **     04
15. Read Software K               06 **    07 **    06 *      06 *
16. Math Software K               07 **    10       06 *      08 **
17. Game Software K               06 *     08 **    06 *      06 *
18. Read Software First          -03      -02       00       -01
19. Math Software First          -01      -01      -02        01
20. Game Software First           00       02       03        01

Variables                         5        6        7         8

1. Read IRT Kindergarten
2. Math IRT Kindergarten
3. Read IRT First Grade
4. Math IRT First Grade
5. Home Computer K                --
6. Home Computer First            44 **    --
7. Computer Area K                09 **    10 **    --
8. Computer Area First            03       05       40 **     --
9. Ratio Computer/Child K         00       01      -13 **    -07 *
10. Ratio Computer/Child First   -02       00      -37 **    -27 **
11. Computer Access K             07 **    04      -43 **     21 **
12. Computer Access First         07       04       31 **     48 **
13. Software Access K            -07 **    04       43        22 **
14. Software Access First        -08 **    08 **    37 **     36 **
15. Read Software K              -06 *     01       37 **     05
16. Math Software K              -05 *     03       29 **     07 *
17. Game Software K              -02       04       38 **     12 **
18. Read Software First           04      -06 *    -02        12 **
19. Math Software First           02      -06 *    -02        09 **
20. Game Software First           00       04       12 **     21 **

Variables                         9        10       11       12

1. Read IRT Kindergarten
2. Math IRT Kindergarten
3. Read IRT First Grade
4. Math IRT First Grade
5. Home Computer K
6. Home Computer First
7. Computer Area K
8. Computer Area First
9. Ratio Computer/Child K         --
10. Ratio Computer/Child First    33 **     --
11. Computer Access K            -06       -25 **    --
12. Computer Access First        -03       -31 **    32 **    --
13. Software Access K            -06       -26 **    99 **    32
14. Software Access First         00       -25 **    24 **    79 **
15. Read Software K              -06 *     -26 **    32 **    13 **
16. Math Software K              -11 **    -24 **    26 **    10 **
17. Game Software K              -11 **    -21 **    23 **    08 **
18. Read Software First          -04       -24 **   -02       06
19. Math Software First           00       -19 **   -03       01
20. Game Software First          -10 **    -14 **   -06 *     10 **

Variables                        13       14         15       16

1. Read IRT Kindergarten
2. Math IRT Kindergarten
3. Read IRT First Grade
4. Math IRT First Grade
5. Home Computer K
6. Home Computer First
7. Computer Area K
8. Computer Area First
9. Ratio Computer/Child K
10. Ratio Computer/Child First
11. Computer Access K
12. Computer Access First
13. Software Access K             --
14. Software Access First         24 **     --
15. Read Software K               31 **     19 **    --
16. Math Software K               26 **     17 **    76 **    --
17. Game Software K               23 **     14 **    53 **    57 **
18. Read Software First           00        00       08 **    06 *
19. Math Software First          -02       -03       11 **    13 **
20. Game Software First          -06 *      17 **    02 **    01

Variables                         17     18       19      20

1. Read IRT Kindergarten
2. Math IRT Kindergarten
3. Read IRT First Grade
4. Math IRT First Grade
5. Home Computer K
6. Home Computer First
7. Computer Area K
8. Computer Area First
9. Ratio Computer/Child K
10. Ratio Computer/Child First
11. Computer Access K
12. Computer Access First
13. Software Access K
14. Software Access First
15. Read Software K
16. Math Software K
17. Game Software K              --
18. Read Software First          -02     --
19. Math Software First          -03     71 **    --
20. Game Software First           03     27 **    34 **   --

Note. Decimals have been removed from the correlation coefficients.
* p <.05, * p <.01.