Meyer Marisa, Zosh Jennifer M, McLaren Caroline, Robb Michael, McCafferty Harlan, Golinkoff Roberta Michnick, Hirsh-Pasek Kathy, Radesky Jenny
Department of Pediatrics, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI.
Department of Human Development and Family Studies, Penn State University, Brandywine, Media, PA.
J Child Media. 2021;15(4):526-548. doi: 10.1080/17482798.2021.1882516. Epub 2021 Feb 23.
Experts have expressed concerns about the lack of evidence demonstrating that children's "educational" applications (apps) have educational value. This study aimed to operationalize Hirsh-Pasek, Zosh, et al.'s (2015) Four Pillars of Learning into a reliable coding scheme (Pillar 1: Active Learning, Pillar 2: Engagement in the Learning Process, Pillar 3: Meaningful Learning, Pillar 4: Social Interaction), describe the educational quality of commercially-available apps, and examine differences in educational quality between free and paid apps. We analyzed 100 children's educational apps with the highest downloads from Google Play and Apple app stores, as well as 24 apps most frequently played by preschool-age children in a longitudinal cohort study. We developed a coding scheme in which each app earned a value of 0-3 for each Pillar, defining lower-quality apps as those scoring ≤ 4, summed across the Four Pillars. Overall scores were low across all Pillars. Free apps had significantly lower Pillar 2 (Engagement in Learning Process) scores (t-test, < .0001) and overall scores (t-test, < .0047) when compared to paid apps, due to the presence of distracting enhancements. These results highlight the need for improved design of educational apps guided by developmental science.
专家们对缺乏证据证明儿童“教育”应用程序具有教育价值表示担忧。本研究旨在将赫什-帕塞克、佐什等人(2015年)的学习四大支柱转化为一种可靠的编码方案(支柱1:主动学习,支柱2:参与学习过程,支柱3:有意义的学习,支柱4:社会互动),描述商业可用应用程序的教育质量,并研究免费应用程序和付费应用程序在教育质量上的差异。在一项纵向队列研究中,我们分析了从谷歌应用商店和苹果应用商店下载量最高的100款儿童教育应用程序,以及学龄前儿童最常玩的24款应用程序。我们制定了一种编码方案,其中每个应用程序在每个支柱上的得分在0到3之间,将得分≤4(四个支柱得分总和)的应用程序定义为质量较低的应用程序。所有支柱的总体得分都很低。与付费应用程序相比,免费应用程序在支柱2(参与学习过程)上的得分显著较低(t检验,<.0001),总体得分也较低(t检验,<.0047),原因是存在分散注意力的增强功能。这些结果凸显了在发展科学指导下改进教育应用程序设计的必要性。