The views and attitudes of students participating in a one-to-one laptop initiative in Greece

Dimitris Spanos & Alivisos Sofos
Published online: 12 December 2013
# Springer Science+Business Media New York 2013
Abstract Students having participated in a one-to-one laptop initiative, indicate they
have higher motivation, greater interest at school (Bebell and Kay 2010) and feel more
organised (McKeeman 2008). This research focuses on the views and attitudes of the
students who participated in the first such initiative in Greece. The differences in the
views of boys and girls are also examined. The students completed a questionnaire with
15 Likert style statements and two open questions twice: at the beginning and at the end
of the school year 2010–2011. From the students’ responses, it can be concluded that
students like having the laptop at school: they go there with greater pleasure, they
consider the classes more enjoyable but they are bothered with the technical problems.
For gender differences, boys are more adaptable, whereas girls appreciate more the
learning possibilities of the laptop.
Keywords Media in education . Gender studies . Student attitudes . Student views .
One-to-one laptop initiative
1 Introduction
One-to-one laptop initiatives exist for more than 20 years, they are being developed and
expanded worldwide (Cuban 2006) and have been researched since the early years they
appeared. This laptop initiative is a learning environment in which all teachers and
students have access to laptops in school and at home (Pitler et al. 2004). Continuous
access to computers, enables students the use of a wide range of knowledge resources
to support their learning, communicate with classmates and teachers and become very
Educ Inf Technol (2015) 20:519–535
DOI 10.1007/s10639-013-9299-z
D. Spanos : A. Sofos
Primary Education Department, University of the Aegean, Dimoraktias 1, 85100 Rhodes, Greece
A. Sofos
e-mail: lsofos@rhodes.aegean.gr
D. Spanos (*)
Lefkosias 15, 85100 Rhodes, Greece
e-mail: dimitris.spanos@gmail.com
good users of the technological tools of the 21st century. It also provides them with
authentic tools, connected with the job market of the digital era, provides access to
more learning sources and teachers with the opportunity to experiment with new
models of teaching practices, the opportunity for students to develop work related to
the real world and overcome inequalities to the access of technology (Metiri Group
2002). The existence of internet connection at school is necessary, it is also desirable in
the homes of students (Abell 2008). Students do not need to access the technology from
the school lab (Gravelle 2003). Essentially there are two innovations. The first is the
availability of laptops and the second is the availability of the internet and hence, the
variety of resources that can be used (Drayton et al. 2010) .
In Greece, at school level, the first step was taken by a private school in Athens: the
implementation of a one-to-one laptop initiative began in 2009 and still continues to
date. The current study took place at this school. During the school year 2009–2010,
the program was implemented in the fourth grade of the Elementary school and the first
grade of Junior High school. The following year, which was the year that this study was
conducted (2010–2011), the program was extended to all grades from the fourth
Elementary to the second Junior High.
2 Literature review
Students participating in one-to-one laptop initiatives, state they like the laptop
(Lowther et al. 2008), they consider it important (Lei and Zhao 2008; Mouza 2008)
and they are excited with the opportunities the laptop provides, such as accessing the
internet (Ross et al. 2001). Because of the laptop, students also say they want to learn
more (Mims et al. 2008), they are more motivated in school in general (Rosen and
Beck-Hill 2012) and they acquire skills that will serve them in their personal and
professional lives (Rockman et al. 2000; Lowther et al. 2008; Keengwe et al. 2012).
Their ability to find a job in the future is now improved (Mims et al. 2008). Regarding
learning, they think that it has become more fun and more interesting (Zucker and Hug
2008; Grimes and Warschauer 2008; Mann 2008; Shahaf-Barzilay and Weiss 2013)
and the laptops helped them to perform better on tests (Mims et al. 2008). In conclusion,
students prefer laptops over traditional teaching (Kitchens, 2007). The students
report stronger relationships with their teachers (Light et al. 2002) and are more
interactive (Niles 2006) and communicative with them (Mouza 2008). They cooperate
better with their peers (Mann 2008) and communicate easily with them (Mouza 2008).
Students recognize that their skills in using computers are improving (Jeroski 2003;
Lowther et al. 2003; Trimmel & Bachmann 2004; Mitchell Institute 2004; Lei and
Zhao 2008; Mims et al. 2008). They feel more organized (Davis et al. 2005;
Warschauer and Grimes 2005; McKeeman 2008) and more responsible (Mann 2008).
They believe that conducting a research is easier (Davis et al. 2005), and that because of
the laptop their skills in this field are becoming more advanced (Mims et al. 2008).
Regarding school work, students state it is more pleasant (Lowther et al. 2003) and
easier (Ross et al. 2001; Mims et al. 2008; Keengwe et al. 2012). They are more pleased
with the work they deliver (Fisher and Stolarchuk 1998), which looks more professional
and of better quality (Rockman et al. 2000; Ross et al. 2001; Lowther et al. 2003;
Keengwe et al. 2012).
520 Educ Inf Technol (2015) 20:519–535
As for gender differences, findings from relevant studies generally conclude that
boys have a more positive attitude toward technology than girls, as stated by Volk and
Ming (1999). More recent studies agree with this claim, for example, Vekiri and
Chronaki (2008) found that boys have a more positive self-efficacy and value beliefs
about computers and it appeared that computers were less important in girls’ everyday
activities. According to Penuel et al. (2002), in general, girls’ attitudes toward computers
lag behind those of boys, they are less positive and more resistant to change,
even when given much broader exposure to technology through participation in a
laptop program (Penuel et al. 2002). Other studies however, found that students’
attitudes towards technology do not differ in terms of gender (Sarfo et al. 2011).
3 Material and methods
3.1 Research question
This study has the following research question: What are the students’ views and
attitudes regarding the one-to-one laptop initiative program they participate in? In
addition, it was examined if there are differences between the responses of boys and
girls. As part of the study, students’ views, attitudes and opinions about the program are
examined, as well as the the things they like and dislike about laptops in education. To
answer the research question, a pre/post comparative design was used. The students
completed a questionnaire twice: At the beginning of the school year (pre, October
2010) and at the end of the school year (post, May 2011).
3.2 Data collection instruments
The questionnaire was designed based on the one used by Schaumburg (2003) in her
PhD thesis and consists of three parts. The first part contains 15 statements. Likert-type
scales are used for the student responses for each statement, which are among the most
widely used scales for measuring attitudes (Sarfo et al. 2011). Next to each statement,
there are two opposite expressions. For instance, the first statement “I use the laptop” is
followed by the expressions “not pleasantly” and “pleasantly”. The students select a
number from 1 to 5, with 1 being equivalent to “not pleasantly” and 5 to “pleasantly”.
The second part contains two open-ended questions where students indicate (1) what
they like and (2) what they do not like about the laptop. The questionnaire is completed
with basic information on students. Their gender, their class and the code name
(consisting of the first letter of their first name, the first letter of their surname and
the date they were born). The code name was used to match the questionnaires of the
first and second phase, so statistical tests could be performed. Before using the
questionnaire, it was tested in order to check its quality and structure. Test was
performed in two phases: In May 2010 it was distributed to three different schools.
At the presence of the researcher, the students completed the questionnaire and made
comments on the statements which they wanted clarification. After each visit and
before going to the next school, the questionnaire was altered the on the basis of the
comments of the students. In September 2010, the second trial phase took place at the
same elementary schools for further reform, if needed. In addition, to fully reveal the
Educ Inf Technol (2015) 20:519–535 521
views and attitudes of the students, interviews were conducted. In total, 28 randomly
selected students were interviewed. The interviews were used in conjunction with the
questionnaire for triangulation purposes.
3.3 Pilot study
Before administering the questionnaire to all of the target population in the school, a
pilot study had been done. The pilot study was performed in two phases: In May 2010,
the questionnaire was distributed in three elementary schools, classes 5 and 6 with 20 to
22 students in each class. At the presence of the researcher, the students completed the
questionnaire and made comments on the questions they felt they needed clarification
or different wording. After each visit and before going to the next school, the questionnaire
was altered on the basis of children’s observations. In September 2010, the
second trial phase took place on the same elementary schools for further reform, where
needed.
3.4 Research site
The study was conducted at a private school that started a concerted effort supported
morally and financially by the administration and management. The 2009–2010 school
year, all students in the fourth elementary and and first junior high school participated
in the one-to-one laptop program. The next school year, which was the year this
research was conducted, the program was extended to all students enrolled from fourth
elementary grade through second junior high school grade. The laptop was equipped
with a management software system that was developed by the school, which contained
easy and instant access to books, publications, booklets, digital notebooks, educational
software and various tools such as dictionaries, backup features and painting software.
In the school, all the classes have interactive whiteboards and sound systems with
external speakers. There is also a wireless network that meets the needs of internet
access during instruction. All teachers participated in seminar cycles (e.g. Bebell &
Kay, 2009; Corn 2009) designed and implemented by the school on the use of the
laptop and the interactive whiteboard. Additionally, as suggested by the literature (e.g.
Zucker and Hug 2008), there is a technical department to serve the needs of each type
of problem in student laptops, so that teachers do have to bear that additional burden.
Computers were the property of the students.
3.5 Study sample
The sample consisted of all students that participated in the laptop initiative, where all
students and teachers had their own personal laptop as part of their school daily routine,
during the school year 2010–2011. They were all the students who attended the classes
from the fourth grade Elementary to the second grade Junior High in the school this
study took place. In total, 610 participated. Overall, 448 questionnaires were collected
in the first phase of the research and 441 questionnaires in the second phase. Due to the
fact that the sample of students must be the same for both phases in order to perform
statistical tests, the questionnaires of the two phases were matched. The basis for this
was the code name of the students. After this process, 410 questionnaires remained for
522 Educ Inf Technol (2015) 20:519–535
each phase (a total of 820), which consisted the final sample: 280 for the elementary
school (107 for class 4, 85 for class 5 and 88 for class 6) and 130 for the junior high
school (54 for class 1 and 76 for class 2).
3.6 Data analysis
To code the data from the Likert scale items, for each statement, a number from 1 to 5
was stored, depending on the student’s answer. Thus, the mean and the standard
deviation could be calculated. Also, the nonparametric Wilcoxon statistical test was
performed, to identify statistical differences between the mean of the first phase and the
mean of the second phase (two ordinal variables) and the nonparametric Mann–
Whitney statistical test to identify statistical differences between the mean of the boys
and the mean of the girls (a nominal and an ordinal variable and this test was performed
twice: once for each phase). For the two open-ended questions, students wrote down
what they liked and did not like about the laptop. Only the responses of the children
that responded in the open-ended questions in both phases were analysed. To analyse
the data, students’ responses were grouped, then categories were created based on the
groups and the final variables that resulted from these categories are presented in the
results. To code the data, each category was a separate variable in which the student had
answered with a yes (in which case “1” was stored) or a no (“0” was stored). So, the
results could be expressed as percentages. The nonparametric chi-squared test was
performed to determine if the difference in the percentages of the first and second phase
is statistically significant (comparison of two nominal variables). The chi-squared was
performed again to determine whether the difference between the percentages of boys
and girls for each of the two phases is statistically significant (comparison of two
nominal variables, the test was also applied once for the first phase and once for the
second). All statistical tests were performed separately for the Elementary and for the
Junior High. Statistical test results are not shown, however, there is a reference in the
result Tables 1, 2 and 3 where the differences are statistically significant (p<0.05). To
analyse the interviews, the interview transcripts were reviewed in order to identify
themes that further enlighten the aspects of the research questions.
4 Results
4.1 Likert scale statements
According to the students’ responses, they like to work on projects on the laptop very
much, they cooperate with their classmates much easier and they think that the laptop
is very important for their lives. They seem to go to school and use the laptop
pleasantly and they are happy to work with the laptop. Also, the means for these
statements increase from phase one to phase two. Students also believe that since the
laptop, courses and studying for school are congenial, they seem to prefer to use the
laptop for school projects and agree with the fact that they can decide how they want to
learn. The means for these statements also increase. As expected, in the statement that
asks if girls can use the computer as well as boys, there is a big difference in the means
of boys and girls. The girls’ means are considerably higher and the differences are
Educ Inf Technol (2015) 20:519–535 523
Table 1 Means (Mn) and standard deviations (SD) for the Likert scale statements
Phase one Phase two
Boys Girls Total Boys Girls Total
Mn SD Mn SD Mn SD Mn SD Mn SD Mn SD
I use the laptop (1: not pleasantly … 5: pleasantly)
Elementary 4.29 1.01 4.25 0.88 4.26 0.94 4.34 1.03 4.23 0.92 4.28 0.97
Junior High 3.76 1.06 3.55 1.03 3.65 1.05 3.82 1.28 3.90 1.08 3.86 1.19
Because I work with the laptop, I go to school (1: not pleasantly … 5: pleasantly)
Elementary 4.39 0.91 4.17 0.94 4.27 0.93 4.35 0.90 4.21 0.95 4.28 0.93
Junior High 3.74 1.31 3.50 1.15 3.62 1.24 3.69 1.34 3.78 1.09 3.73 1.23
Reading from the laptop screen (1: does not please me … 5: pleases me)
Elementarya 3.83 1.22 3.35 1.22 3.56 1.25 3.76 1.19 3.55 1.14 3.65 1.17
Junior Highb 2.61 1.40 2.33 1.26 2.47 1.34 2.82 1.53 2.81 1.22 2.82 1.39
Working with the laptop this school year makes me (1: not happy… 5: happy)
Elementary 4.16 1.18 4.05 1.03 4.10 1.10 4.17 0.99 4.07 1.04 4.11 1.02
Junior high 3.79 1.20 3.47 1.10 3.63 1.16 3.72 1.36 3.65 1.03 3.68 1.21
Since I have the laptop, I find that the courses are (1: less pleasant … 5: more pleasant)
Elementary 4.03 1.11 3.84 1.06 3.93 1.08 3.98 1.12 3.92 1.06 3.95 1.09
Junior high 3.83 1.29 3.42 1.17 3.63 1.25 3.67 1.36 3.73 1.09 3.70 1.24
Since I have the laptop, studying for school is (1: less pleasant … 5: more pleasant)
Elementary 3.88 1.26 3.78 1.11 3.83 1.18 3.98 1.00 3.77 1.11 3.87 1.06
Junior high 3.24 1.26 2.98 1.12 3.12 1.20 3.30 1.33 3.24 0.89 3.27 1.14
…working on projects on the laptop (1: I don’t like … 5: I like)
Elementary 4.06 1.18 4.27 0.98 4.18 1.08 4.25 1.07 4.22 0.98 4.23 1.02
Junior High 4.03 1.07 3.95 1.12 3.99 1.10 4.00 1.25 4.10 0.87 4.05 1.08
For my life, knowing how to use the computer is (1: unimportant … 5: important)
Elementary 4.09 1.08 4.14 1.07 4.12 1.07 4.21 1.04 4.19 1.10 4.22 1.07
Junior higha,b 3.77 1.38 4.22 1.07 3.99 1.26 4.10 1.21 4.35 0.88 4.22 1.07
Girls can use the computer as well as boys (1: disagree … 5: agree)
Elementaryb,c 2.71 1.58 4.48 1.11 3.69 1.60 3.14 1.68 4.65 0.93 3.94 1.54
Junior highb,c 2.97 1.55 4.42 1.01 3.68 1.50 3.10 1.57 4.25 0.99 3.66 1.44
With the laptop, I can decide how I want to learn (1: disagree … 5: agree)
Elementaryc 3.81 1.26 3.68 1.06 3.74 1.16 3.92 1.19 3.64 1.17 3.77 1.19
Junior high 3.09 1.23 3.28 1.10 3.18 1.17 3.27 1.30 3.46 1.07 3.36 1.20
For school projects, I prefer to use my laptop (1: disagree … 5: agree)
Elementary 3.99 1.27 3.77 1.24 3.87 1.26 4.07 1.16 3.82 1.27 3.94 1.23
Junior High 3.58 1.48 3.61 1.40 3.59 1.44 3.63 1.41 3.78 1.31 3.70 1.37
The use of the laptop has made me want to get higher grades (1: disagree … 5: agree)
Elementarya, b, c 3.76 1.23 3.51 1.19 3.62 1.21 3.62 1.28 3.26 1.32 3.43 1.31
Junior highc 3.05 1.24 2.50 1.36 2.78 1.33 2.88 1.37 2.57 1.33 2.73 1.36
Since I have the laptop, I study for school (1: less … 5: more)
Elementarya 4.00 1.15 3.92 1.05 3.95 1.10 3.85 1.08 3.71 1.08 3.78 1.08
524 Educ Inf Technol (2015) 20:519–535
statistically significant in all cases. Students seem to have a problem reading from the
laptop screen and they feel that the laptop helps them be more organised. For the
statements that asks if since the laptop students study more or if the laptop has made
them want to get higher grades, the means are under 4 and they decrease from phase
one to phase two. All results of the two phases may be seen in Table 1.
4.2 Open-ended questions
4.2.1 What students like about the laptop
This question was left blank by 18.21 % of students of the Primary and by 29.23 % of
students of Junior High. The percentages in Table 2 were calculated from the sample
size and not from the number of students that did answer this question. One out of four
Primary students say they like that with the laptop they can play games. Less Junior
High students report they like games but their percentage increases at the second pahse.
Nearly one out of ten Primary students believe that the courses become more
interesting and enjoyable. The percentages are higher in Junior High (one out of
four students) but decrease. Elementary students appreciate the fact that because
of the laptop, they do not carry books to and from school, a smaller percentage
of Junior High students also mention this. Approximately one out of ten students
report they like the educational games and the software of the laptop, the digital
books and the digital presentations they create. The ability to access the internet
in the school class is indicated by less than one out of ten students in the first
phase but this percentage almost doubles in the second phase. Under 10 % of the
students say they like writing using the stylus and the keyboard. Fewer students
report they like that because the laptop, they experience new things, the small
size and weight of the laptop, the touch screen, the fact that they are more
organised and they read easily from the laptop.
Table 1 (continued)
Phase one Phase two
Boys Girls Total Boys Girls Total
Mn SD Mn SD Mn SD Mn SD Mn SD Mn SD
Junior High 3.32 1.17 3.34 1.09 3.33 1.13 3.36 1.22 3.21 1.09 3.28 1.16
The laptop helps me be more organised (1: disagree … 5: agree)
Elementary 4.03 1.15 3.95 1.04 3.99 1.09 3.98 1.06 3.93 1.00 3.95 1.03
Junior high 3.55 1.38 3.34 1.21 3.45 1.31 3.55 1.41 3.35 1.13 3.45 1.28
Now that I have the laptop, working with my classmates is (1: more difficult … 5: easier)
Elementary 3.91 1.23 3.96 0.98 3.94 1.10 4.12 1.15 4.05 1.08 4.08 1.11
Junior high 3.83 1.35 4.09 0.98 3.96 1.19 3.87 1.31 4.03 0.89 3.95 1.13
a Indicates a statistical difference between the total mean of phase one and the total mean of phase two
b Indicates a statistical difference between boys’ mean and girls’ mean (phase one)
c Indicates a statistical difference between boys’ mean and girls’ mean (phase two)
Educ Inf Technol (2015) 20:519–535 525
Table 2 Percentages of students that reported what they like about the laptop
Phase one Phase two
Boys Girls Total Boys Girls Total
I can play games
Elementary 23.02 % 25.32 % 24.29 % 25.00 % 24.32 % 24.64 %
Junior high 12.12 % 14.06 % 13.08 % 13.43 % 22.22 % 17.69 %
Courses are more interesting and/or more pleasing
Elementary 10.32 % 9.74 % 10.00 % 8.33 % 9.46 % 8.93 %
Junior higha 27.27 % 25.00 % 26.15 % 10.45 % 20.63 % 15.38 %
I carry less books and my bag is lighter
Elementary 15.08 % 14.94 % 15.00 % 10.61 % 12.84 % 11.79 %
Junior high 6.06 % 7.81 % 6.92 % 2.99 % 6.35 % 4.62 %
The use of educational games/software during the classes
Elementaryb 5.56 % 12.99 % 9.64 % 6.82 % 12.84 % 10.00 %
Junior high 7.58 % 14.06 % 10.77 % 2.99 % 17.46 % 10.00 %
Internet
Elementarya 5.56 % 7.79 % 6.79 % 15.15 % 12.84 % 13.93 %
Junior higha 6.06 % 7.81 % 6.92 % 14.93 % 14.29 % 14.62 %
Making digital presentations
Elementary 7.14 % 12.99 % 10.36 % 10.61 % 11.49 % 11.07 %
Junior high 3.03 % 7.81 % 5.38 % 2.99 % 9.52 % 6.15 %
Digital books
Elementarya 7.94 % 14.94 % 11.79 % 5.30 % 8.11 % 6.79 %
Junior highc 4.55 % 12.50 % 8.46 % 4.48 % 15.87 % 10.00 %
I write easier using the stylus or the keyboard
Elementary 10.32 % 7.14 % 8.57 % 5.30 % 8.11 % 6.79 %
Junior high 1.52 % 1.56 % 1.54 % 1.49 % 1.59 % 1.54 %
The laptop projects, either working alone or with my classmates
Elementaryc 5.56 % 5.84 % 5.71 % 2.27 % 8.78 % 5.71 %
Junior highc 9.09 % 12.50 % 10.77 % 4.48 % 15.87 % 10.00 %
I experience new things
Elementaryb 3.17 % 9.74 % 6.79 % 2.27 % 6.08 % 4.29 %
Junior high 3.03 % 7.81 % 5.38 % 0.00 % 4.76 % 2.31 %
The laptop is light/small
elementarya 5.56 % 6.49 % 6.07 % 1.52 % 2.70 % 2.14 %
Junior high 4.55 % 3.13 % 3.85 % 5.97 % 1.59 % 3.85 %
I am more organised
Elementaryc 2.38 % 5.19 % 3.93 % 0.00 % 3.38 % 1.79 %
Junior high 7.58 % 7.81 % 7.69 % 2.99 % 4.76 % 3.85 %
I read easier
Elementary 6.35 % 4.55 % 5.36 % 3.79 % 1.35 % 2.50 %
Junior high 1.52 % 0.00 % 0.77 % 2.99 % 1.59 % 2.31 %
Touch screen
526 Educ Inf Technol (2015) 20:519–535
Table 2 (continued)
Phase one Phase two
Boys Girls Total Boys Girls Total
Elementary 3.97 % 3.90 % 3.93 % 2.27 % 2.03 % 2.14 %
Junior highc 3.03 % 1.56 % 2.31 % 5.97 % 0.00 % 3.08 %
a Indicates a statistical difference between the total mean of phase one and the total mean of phase two
b Indicates a statistical difference between boys’ mean and girls’ mean (phase one)
c Indicates a statistical difference between boys’ mean and girls’ mean (phase two)
Table 3 Percentages of students that reported what they do not like about the laptop
Phase one Phase two
Boys Girls Total Boys Girls Total
Technical problems
Elementarya 13.49 % 22.08 % 18.21 % 7.58 % 9.46 % 8.57 %
Junior high 9.09 % 18.75 % 13.85 % 11.94 % 15.87 % 13.85 %
Laptop is slow
Elementarya 7.14 % 11.04 % 9.29 % 19.70 % 16.22 % 17.86 %
Junior high 16.67 % 20.31 % 18.46 % 20.90 % 20.63 % 20.77 %
My eyes hurt
Elementaryb 3.97 % 5.19 % 4.64 % 3.79 % 12.16 % 8.21 %
Junior highb 9.09 % 12.50 % 10.77 % 4.48 % 17.46 % 10.77 %
I can not have access to all websites because of the parental control software
Elementary 7.14 % 3.90 % 5.36 % 9.85 % 8.11 % 8.93 %
Junior high 6.06 % 3.13 % 4.62 % 4.48 % 3.17 % 3.85 %
Difficult to write
Elementary 7.94 % 5.19 % 6.43 % 6.06 % 12.16 % 9.29 %
Junior high 0.00 % 3.13 % 1.54 % 0.00 % 3.17 % 1.54 %
Laptop is small
Elementary 2.38 % 1.95 % 2.14 % 0.00 % 0.68 % 0.36 %
Junior high 13.64 % 15.63 % 14.62 % 7.46 % 9.52 % 8.46 %
Difficult to read from
Elementary 3.17 % 3.90 % 3.57 % 1.52 % 4.73 % 3.21 %
Junior highb 3.03 % 6.25 % 4.62 % 2.99 % 14.29 % 8.46 %
I am easily distracted
Elementary 0.00 % 1.95 % 1.07 % 1.52 % 2.03 % 1.79 %
Junior high 4.55 % 6.25 % 5.38 % 1.49 % 3.17 % 2.31 %
a Indicates a statistical difference between the total mean of phase one and the total mean of phase two
b Indicates a statistical difference between boys’ mean and girls’ mean (phase two)
Educ Inf Technol (2015) 20:519–535 527
4.2.2 What students dislike about the laptop
In this question there were also cases where students gave no answer. So, 37.32 % of
the Elementary students and 37.30 % of Junior High students did not answer this
question. Results can be seen in Table 3. At the Elementary, technical problems trouble
about two out of ten of the students at the first phase (the percentage drops considerably
at the second phase) and more than 10 % of the Junior High students. At the first phase,
the slow speed of the laptop is mentioned by one out of ten Elementary students (the
percentage almost doubles at the second phase) and by two out of ten Junior High
students. About 10 % of Junior High students and a smaller percentage of Elementary
students complain that the use of the laptop hurt their eyes. Although the small size of
the laptop is mentioned by a small portion of Elementary students, the percentage is
comparatively much higher at the Junior High. Finally, under 10 % of the students
dislike the parental control software, they report that it is difficult to read from the
screen, it is difficult to write on the laptop and they think that the laptop distracts them.
5 Discussion
5.1 Students’ views and attitudes
5.1.1 Likert scale statements
Although from the responses of the Primary school students it seems that they do not
find it very difficult to read from the screen of the laptop, the Junior High school
students have lower means. But the fact that the mean of the Junior High students
increases significantly, signifies that as the school year progresses, students become
more familiar with reading from a screen. However, this difficulty is a parameter that
must be taken into account when designing a 1:1 program. Students underlined in the
interviews that they need to have physical copies of the books at home, because they
cannot spend their entire day in front of a computer screen. Additionally, the mean of
Junior High students for the statement ‘for my life, knowing how to use the computer is
(“unimportant” … “important”)’ increases significantly. As students familiarise themselves
with the various capabilities of the laptop, their opinion is changing—more and
more students recognize the importance of using the computer for their lives in general.
Furthernore, they stated that “their participation in the laptop program will make a
wonderful addition in their CV in the future”. For Primary students, the mean of the
statement that asks if the girls can handle the computer as well as the boys increases
significantly, although the means of the boys and the girls still have major differences.
The significant increase of the means, indicates that the perception that girls can not
handle the computer equally well with the boys, decreases. Regarding the statement
that asks if the use of the laptop has made students want to get higher grades, the means
of the Junior High students are below 3 while the ones of the Elementary students are
higher and there was a significant decrease from the first to the second phase. The
laptop does not largely affect students regarding their school grades, which can be
counted as a positive outcome of 1:1 programs. Also, in the Elementary school the time
spent by students studying for school significantly declines. Therefore, one of the goals
528 Educ Inf Technol (2015) 20:519–535
set by the school administration before this implementation is achieved: less homework.
Students say they prefer and like to do work on the laptop, something that
teachers should take into account when they assign homework to the students.
Moreover, teachers should take advantage of the fact that children report that because
of the laptop they go to school happier and that the courses are more enjoyable. Most of
the students interviewed added this, too. Teachers should be able to maintain the
growing interest of students for school, courses and projects. This can be achieved
by using the internet more, by using educational software and games and by organizing
more group work (students also believe that because of the laptop, they work more
easily with their peers).
5.1.2 What students like about the laptop
Students reporting they like to play games is expected and unavoidable. The laptop the
children use in school is also their personal computer, so it makes sense that they install
and play games on it. “The school tells us that the laptop is a tool, but we have them
anyway. We like the fact that we can have both our books and our games in it”, they
commented. The laptop also seems to solve the problem of the large weight of the
students’ school bag, as they report, especially in the Elementary school. “The weight
of our bag is an important factor”, they said. It is noted that now with the laptop,
students do not have the excuse that they have forgotten to bring a book or a notebook
at school. “We now have less problems”, a student mentioned. A large proportion of the
students feel that the the courses are more interesting or more pleasing and they like
digital books. For students who are accustomed since kindergarten to being taught
through lecture in traditional blackboards using notebooks, books and pencils, it is only
reasonable that they find the use of new media at school interesting. However, this
change must necessarily be accompanied by a change in teaching in order to maintain
student interest. Already, according to what students report in this research, there is a
statistically significant reduction in the Elementary students who say they like digital
books and the fact that the laptop is light/small and in the Junior High students who say
that the classes are more pleasant with the laptop. This result differs with the first part
of the questionnaire, in which students say they like to read from the screen of the
laptop, they go to school happier because of the laptop and lessons have become more
pleasant. This can be explained because of the question being open. Students report
anything that comes to their mind when completing the questionnaire, as there isn’t a
written statement in which they must agree or disagree. All this assuming that teachers
have already tried to differentiate their teaching. Furthermore, the students say they like
the use of educational games and software. So, teachers should try to incorporate them
into their classes. However, the percentage of the students who say they like the use of
the internet in class increases statistically significantly, which is one of the reasons that
the internet is a necessary addition of a 1:1 program.
5.1.3 What students dislike about the laptop
At the Elementary school, there is a statistically significant reduction of students who
report technical problems as something they do not like. It is possible that as the year
progresses, students become more familiar with their laptop, they face fewer technical
Educ Inf Technol (2015) 20:519–535 529
problems and thus become less annoyed. However, this reference by the students,
which was stated in the interviews as well, reinforces the claim that schools
implementing 1:1 programs must have a technical department. There is a technical
department at the school this research took place, and yet students felt that technical
problems are a difficulty. On the other hand, Junior High school students report in a
much larger percentage that they do not like the speed of the laptop and they think it is
slow. These two issues seem to have no solution. Selecting as fast and as large as
possible laptops is something that needs to be taken into account by schools, even if it
means that they will cost more. Regarding parental control software, the fact that
students dislike that they do not have access to all websites can only be positive.
Therefore, it is advisable for schools to invest in such software, so that they can better
monitor their students. Also, in the interviews some students expressed concerns about
their handwriting. “We have to know how to use the pencil or the pen”, they said. For
this reason, the laptop program should not start too early, for instance no sooner than
the fourth grade. Additionally, from time to time teachers could ask the students to use
their pens and notebooks.
5.2 Differences between the responses of boys and girls
5.2.1 Likert scale statements
In a statement that asks about how pleasantly students go to school because of
the laptop, there is a statistically significant difference in the first phase for the
Elementary students: boys seem to go to school more pleasantly than girls.
These differences are smoothed out in the second phase. Regarding reading
from the laptop screen, the means of the girls are lower. Junior High school
girls also have a significantly higher mean in the statement that asks whether is
important to use the computer. In the second phase the difference is also
smoothed out. The statement where students answer if the use of the laptop
has made them want to get higher grades, although the means are low and
decreasing, boys have significantly higher means than girls. Consequently, boys
are more affected by using the laptop to impove their school performance. Not
surprisingly, in the statement that asks whether girls can handle the computer as
well as boys can, there is a significant difference in the means of boys and
girls, which is noted in both phases.
5.2.2 What students like about the laptop
Significantly more girls than boys report that they like: the educational games and
software of the laptop, the fact that with the laptop they experience new things
(Elementary, first phase) and the digital books (Junior High, second phase).
Whereas, in the second phase of this study, significantly more boys than girls
report that they like: school work with the laptop (Elementary and Junior High),
that they are more organised (Elementary) and the touch screen (Junior High).
These results agree with the first part of the questionnaire, where more boys said
they prefer the use of the laptop for school work (Elementary) and that the laptop
helps them be more organised (Junior High).
530 Educ Inf Technol (2015) 20:519–535
5.2.3 What students dislike about the laptop
In the second phase of the study, statistically significantly more girls report that their
eyes hurt (Elementary and Junior High) and that they find it difficult to read from the
laptop screen (Junior High). Conclusively, for girls making the transition from analogue
to digital book is harder.
5.3 Comparison with other studies
5.3.1 Likert scale statements
Elementary school students of this study are happy to work with the laptop and the
mean of this statement increases from phase one to phase two. The same was reported
by 96.50 % of the students of McNairy County Laptop Program (Mims et al. 2008),
86 % of the students of Wireless Writing Project (Jeroski 2003) and 79.6 % of the
students of Anytime, Anywhere Learning (Ross et al. 2001). At the evaluation of
Freedom to Learn (Lowther et al. 2008), the percentage of students who are happy
with the laptop was 85.9 % for the first year, for the second year the percentage
increased (87.8 %) and the third year it slightly declined (83.7 %). In this study,
students report that they like to work on school projects involving the laptop. 88.5 %
of the students of the Maine Learning Technology Initiative also claimed that school
work is more fun (Gravelle 2003) and in another 2-year study, 74 % of the students said
that school work is more interesting (Grimes and Warschauer 2008). 61.1 % of the
students of the McNairy County Laptop Program, felt that their projects are better when
they use the laptop, 70 % of them said that school work is easier when using it and
62.50 % of them are more motivated to work on it (Mims et al. 2008). 83 % of the
Maine Learning Technology Initiative students agreed that school work is easier
because of the laptop, 79 % said that school work is more interesting and 60 % are
more motivated to work on projects with the laptop (Mitchell Institute 2004). School
work was reported as more interesting because of the laptop by 74 % of the students of
Fullerton School District (Warschauer and Grimes 2005), while Anytime, Anywhere
Learning students thought school work is easier (mean: 4.9) and more fun/interesting
(mean: 4.8) (Rockman et al. 2000). In addition, students in this study prefer to use the
laptop for school work. 81 % of the students of the Maine Learning Technology
Initiative agreed with this statement (Gravelle 2003) while the mean of the same
statement of the students of Anytime, Anywhere Learning was 4.6 (Rockman et al.
2000). In this study, students report using the laptop pleasantly. The students of
Wireless Writing Project agree and the mean of the same statement was 3.60 with 4
being the most positive response (Jeroski 2003). Also, students in this research report
that the laptop makes them more organised. In other studies, the percentage of students
who also reported this is 75 % (Grimes andWarschauer 2008), 91 % (Mabry and Snow
2006) and 75 % (Warschauer and Grimes 2005). Because of the laptop, cooperating
with the classmates on team projects has become easier. In agreement with this finding
of this study are 67 % of the students of McNairy County Laptop Program (Mims et al.
2008). Differentiation was observed in Anytime, Anywhere Learning, where for the
same statement, 54.2 % of the students answered “somewhat” and just 30.4 % replied
“yes” (Ross et al. 2001), in Freedom to Learn, where the positive responses were given
Educ Inf Technol (2015) 20:519–535 531
by just 48.2 %, 49.3 % and 47.4 % of students for the 3 years of the evaluation
respectively (Lowther et al. 2008) and in Henrico County Public School’s Laptop
Computing Initiative where the mean was 2.67 with 4 being the most positive response
(Mann 2008). For the statement ‘the use of the laptop has made me want to get higher
grades’ of this study, the mean of Elementary students is 3.62 and 3.43 (phase one and
two) and the mean of Junior High is 2.78 and 2.73. In agreement with the statement are
61.7 % of the students of McNairy County Laptop Program (Mims et al. 2008), 54 %
of the students of Maine Learning Technology Initiative (Mitchell Institute 2004),
24.2 % of the students of Anytime, Anywhere Learning (Ross et al. 2001) and
41.7 %, 34.7 % and 37.1 % of the students of Freedom to Learn for the 3-year research
respectively (Lowther et al. 2008).
5.3.2 What students like about the laptop
At the program of Crossriver School District, the majority of students (56 %) in the
same open-ended question said that the laptop made school work easier and faster due
to the use of the internet. The next most common response was the games and web
browsing (16 %) (Lowther et al. 2003). The percentage of students that report games in
this study is similar. 34.6 % of the students of Singapore Tablet PC program, think that
having the laptop is convenient and they like the fact that they carry it wherever they
want, 26.1 % of the students like that they work quickly, efficiently and easily, 12 %
report that they learn better and 8.4%like laptop projects and presentations (Bienkowski
et al. 2005). Comparatively, the small size and weight of the laptop which facilitates its
transfer as well as the better learning are referred by the students of this study but at
lower percentages (less than 5 %). There is agreement in the percentages of students that
say they like school work and presentations. The most frequent answer given by the
students of Anytime, Anywhere Learning was that the laptop helped them learn useful
computers related skills. Other responses, common with this study, are that the laptop
helps with school work, it gives students access to information from the internet and
helps students becomemore organised (Ross et al. 2000). In a girls’ school in New York,
the students believed that with the computers they can make better quality projects,
search for information more easily and that laptops helped them stay organised (Abrams
1999). In comparison, students in this study also mention they become organised.
5.3.3 What students dislike about the laptop
Students of the laptop program North Carolina 1–1 Learning Technology in the
corresponding open question, mentioned as major problems the short battery life and
the fact that they had to carry an extra bag for the laptop, because when placed in the
same bag with books, some screens break due to the pressure of books in laptop screen
(Corn 2009). In this research, students do not mention these matters. Regarding the
battery life, all the classes in the school where this study was conducted have several
outlets around the class. In addition, the laptop model used by the students is highly
resistant to pressure and can withstand falls from a certain height without damage, so,
students can carry the laptop in their school bag. In the program of Crossriver School
District, almost half (42 %) of the students responded that the laptop was heavy and
difficult to carry. Less common responses referred to the risk of breaking the laptop,
532 Educ Inf Technol (2015) 20:519–535
that the laptop is slow, its maintenance and learning how to use it (Lowther et al. 2003).
About these statements, there is agreement with the students of this study in the fact that
they do not like that the laptop is slow, which is reported by more than 10 % of Primary
students and about 20 % of Junior High students. When students of Anytime, Anywhere
Learning were asked about their difficulties with the laptop, there was a general
agreement that it was heavy; other less frequently reported answers included the
recurring technical problems and students who do not have sufficient computer skills
(Ross et al. 2000). In this study, the technical problems are reported by approximately
15 % of the students, but they do not seem to have problems on how to use the laptop.
In the evaluation of Singapore Tablet PC program, students mentioned the battery life
(43.7 %), the weight of the laptop (18.1 %), the technical problems (14.7 %), the slow
speed (12.0 %) and distraction (8.3 %) (Bienkowski et al. 2005). Students of this study
agree about the technical problems and the slow speed (percentages are also similar)
and distraction (percentages in this study are below 4 %).
6 Conclusion
The Elementary school students use their laptop agreeably, they go to school with
greater pleasure because of the laptop and they are happy to work with it. They think
that because of the laptop, the courses are more pleasant, they like the laptop projects,
they become more organised and it is easier for them to cooperate with their classmates.
What they like best on the laptop are the games and the fact that they no longer carry
books. They also like the use of the internet in class, the digital presentations, the
educational games/software and they believe that the classes have become more
pleasant with the laptop. They would like their laptop to be faster and dislike the
technical problems that occur. The Junior High students are more moderate in their
responses. They like to work on the laptop, they consider that because of it they can
easier collaborate with their classmates and they use the laptop congenially. They like
the fact that the classes have become more pleasant, they like playing games as well as
the educational games and software, the internet, the digital books and the laptop
projects. What seems to bother them is the speed of the laptop, the technical issues and
the small size of the laptop. Some of them reported that its use hurt their eyes.
Regarding the differences between boys and girls, while both genders enjoy participating
in a one-to-one laptop initiative, boys seem to like the laptop more than girls;
they can read from the laptop screen easier and the laptop improves more effectively
their school performance. Girls, on the other hand, appreciate more the educational
software, the digital books and the new learning opportunities.
References
Abell Foundation (2008). One-to-one computing in public schools: lessons from “laptops for all” programs.
Accessed at 22/05/2010 http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED505074.pdf
Abrams, R. (1999). Laptop computers in an all-girls school: hearing the student voice in an evaluation of
technology use', in AERA. Paper presented at the 2000 meeting of the American Educational Research
Association. Accessed at 27/08/2010 http://www.notesys.com/Copies/Hewitt_AERA2000v5.pdf
Educ Inf Technol (2015) 20:519–535 533
Bebell, D., & Kay, R. E. (2010). One to One Computing: A Summary of the Quantitative Results from the
BerkshireWireless Learning Initiative. The Journal of Technology, Learning, and Assessment, 9(2), 1–60.
Bienkowski,M. A., Haertel, G., Yamaguchi, R.,Molina, A., Adamson, F., & Peck-Theis, L. (2005). Singapore
tablet PC program study: Executive summary and final report. Arlington: SRI International, Inc.
Corn, J. O. (2009). Evaluation report on the progress of the North Carolina 1:1 learning technology initiative
(Year 2). Raleigh: Friday Institute for Educational Innovation, North Carolina State University.
Cuban, L. (2006). The laptop revolution has no clothes. Education Week. Accessed at: 25/09/2012 http://www.
edweek.org/ew/articles/2006/10/18/08cuban.h26.html
Davis, D., Garas, N., Hopstock, P., Kellum, A., & Stephenson, T. (2005). Henrico county public schools iBook
survey report. Arlington: Development Associates, Inc.
Drayton, B., Falk, J. K., Stroud, R., Hobbs, K., & Hammerman, J. (2010). After installation: ubiquitous
computing and high school science in three experienced, high-technology schools. The Journal of
Technology, Learning, and Assessment, 9(3), 1–57.
Fisher, D. & Stolarchuk, E. (1998). The effect of using laptop computers on achievement, attitude to science
and classroom environment in science. Proceedings Western of the “Australian Institute for Educational
Research” Forum 1998. Western Australian Institute for Educational Research.
Gravelle, P. B. (2003). Early evidence from the field—The Maine learning technology initiative: impact on the
digital divide. Portland: Center for Education Policy, Applied Research, and Evaluation, University of
Southern Maine.
Grimes, D., & Warschauer, M. (2008). Learning with laptops: a multi-method case study. Journal of
Educational Computing Research, 38(3), 305–332.
Jeroski, S. (2003). Wireless writing project. school district No. 60 (Peace River North) research report: phase
II. Vancouver: Horizon Research & Evaluation, Inc.
Keengwe, J., Schnellert, G., & Mills, C. (2012). Laptop initiative: impact on instructional technology
integration and student learning. Education and Information Technologies, 17(2), 137–146.
Kitchens, A. (2007). Using laptops to teach data analysis in seventh-grade mathematics. Ph. D. Thesis,
Valdosta State University.
Lei, J., & Zhao, Y. (2008). One-to-one computing: what does it bring to schools? Journal of Educational
Computing Research, 39(2), 97–122.
Light, D., McDermott, M., & Honey, M. (2002). Project Hiller: the impact of ubiquitous portable technology
on an urban school. New York: Center for Children and Technology, Education Development Center.
Lowther, D. L., Inan, F. A., Strahl, J. D., & Ross, S. M. (2008). Does technology integration “work” when key
barriers are removed? Educational Media International, 45(3), 189–206.
Lowther, D. L., Ross, S. M., & Morrison, G. R. (2003). When each one has one: the influences on teaching
strategies and student achievement of using laptops in the classroom. Educational Technology Research
and Development, 51(3), 23–44.
Mabry, L., & Snow, J. Z. (2006). Laptops for high-risk students: empowerment and personalizationing a
standards-based learning environment. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 32(4), 289–316.
Mann, D. (2008). Documenting outcomes from Henrico county public school’s laptop computing initiative:
2005-06 through 2007-08. Final technical report. Ashland: Interactive, Inc.
McKeeman, L. A. (2008). Τhe role of a high school one-to-one laptop initiative in supporting content area
literacy, new literacies and critical literacy. Ph. D. Thesis, Kansas State University.
Metiri Group. (2002).Οne-to-one computing research framework. Los Angeles: Apple Computer/Henrico County.
Mims, C., Lowther, D. L., Strahl, J. D., Franceschini, L. A., & Zoblotsky, T. A. (2008). ΜcNairy county laptop
program 2007–2008 evaluation report. Michigan: Center for Research in Educational Policy.
Mitchell Institute. (2004). Οne-to-one laptops in a high school environment. Portland: Senator George J.
Mitchell Scholarship Research Institute.
Mouza, C. (2008). Learning with laptops: implementation and outcomes in an urban, under-privileged school.
Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 40(4), 447–472.
Niles, R. (2006). A study of the application of emerging technology: teacher and student perceptions of the
impact of one-to-one laptop computer access. Ph. D. Thesis, Wichita State University.
Penuel, W. R., Kim, D. Y., Michalchik, V., Lewis, S., Means, B., Murphy, R., Korbak, C., Whaley, A., Allen,
J. E. (2002). Using technology to enhance connection between home and school. A Research synthesis.
Planning and Evaluation Service, U.S. Department of Education
Pitler, H., Flynn, K., & Gaddy, B. (2004). Is a laptop initiative in your future? Aurora:Mid-continent Research
for Education and Learning.
Rockman, et al. (2000). More complex picture: laptop use and impact in the context of changing home and
school access. San Francisco: Microsoft Corporation, Toshiba America Information Systems.
534 Educ Inf Technol (2015) 20:519–535
Rosen, Y., & Beck-Hill, D. (2012). Intertwining digital content and a one-to-one laptop environment in
teaching and learning: lessons from the time to know program. Journal of Research on Technology in
Education, 44(3), 225–241.
Ross, S. M., Lowther, D. L., & Morrison, G. R. (2001). Anytime anywhere learning: final evaluation of the
laptop program: year 2.Memphis: Center of Research in Educational Policy, The University ofMemphis.
Ross, S. M.,Morrison, G. R., Lowther, D. L.,&Plants, R. T. (2000). Anytime anywhere learning: final evaluation
of the laptop program. Memphis: Center of Research in Educational Policy, The University of Memphis.
Sarfo, K. F., Amartei, A. M., Adentwi, K. I., & Brefo, C. (2011). Technology and gender equity: rural and
urban students’ attitudes towards information and communication technology. Journal of Media and
Communication Studies, 3(6), 221–230.
Schaumburg, H. (2003). Konstruktivistischer Unterricht mit Laptops? Eine Fallstudie zum Einfluss mobiler
Computer auf die Methodik des Unterrichts. Ph. D. Thesis, Freie Universitat Berlin.
Shahaf-Barzilay, R., & Weiss, D. (2013). Student motivation and engagement in 1:1 digital learning with
“time to know” (T2K) – highlight results from cross country studies. Oslo: Paper presented at the EDEN
Annual Conference.
Trimmel, M., & Bachmann, J. (2004). Cognitive, social, motivational and health aspects of students in laptop
classrooms. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 20(2), 151–158.
Vekiri, I., & Chronaki, A. (2008). Gender issues in technology use: perceived social support, computer selfefficacy
and value beliefs, and computer use beyond school. Computers & Education, 51, 1392–1404.
Volk, K. S., & Ming, Y. W. (1999). Gender and technology in Hong Kong: a study of pupils’ attitudes toward
technology. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 9, 57–71.
Warschauer, M., & Grimes, D. (2005). First year evaluation report: Fullerton school district laptop program.
Orange: Fullerton School District.
Zucker, A. A., & Hug, S. T. (2008). Teaching and learning physics in a 1:1 laptop school. Journal of Science
Education and Technology, 17(6), 586–594.
Educ Inf Technol (2015) 20:519–535 535