Dr. Zhang, McNeese State University, published in NATIONAL FORUM JOURNALS, www.nationalforum.com

1. NATIONAL FORUM OF TEACHER EDUCATION JOURNAL
VOLUME 21, NUMBER 3, 2011
Investigating Effectiveness of Using Handheld
Computers in Elementary Students’ Learning
Mathematics
Yixin Zhang, EdD
Professor
Burton College of Education
Department of Educational Leadership and Instructional Technology
McNeese State University
Lake Charles, LA
________________________________________________________________________
ABSTRACT
The new emerging technologies – handheld computers or mobile devises, have
increased in schools as a second wave of technologies after microcomputers. This
research contains two experimental studies examining effectiveness of using
handheld computers for the fourth and fifth grade students to learn mathematics
and survey results. Specifically, the first experiment compared the fifth grade
students who used handheld computers with those who did not use handheld
computers in learning fraction multiplication. The second experiment compared the
fourth grade students who used handheld computers with those who did not use
handheld computers in learning least common multiple. Both experiments showed
positive results in supporting the alternative hypotheses that handheld computers
could increase students’ mathematics study potentials. The survey results assessed
elementary students’ attitudes toward handheld computer use for learning
mathematics. More research is recommended to explore handheld technology
utilizations in other subject areas, such as language arts, social studies and science.
Key words: learning mathematics, elementary students, handheld computers
________________________________________________________________________
The handheld computer, or palmtop computer, also known as Personal Digital
Assistant possesses at least three features in education: (a) easy to use, (b) mobile, and (c)
relatively inexpensive. Handheld computers were inexpensive, portable, and could
accomplish most tasks that desktop computers in schools were being used for
(eSchoolNews, 2011). More and more personal digital assistant or handheld computers
1

2. NATIONAL FORUM OF TEACHER EDUCATION JOURNAL
2____________________________________________________________________________________
have been used to enhanced students‟ learning and reduce the teacher‟s workload in
schools and universities in recent years (Segall, Doolen, & Porter, 2005). Now,
practitioners need to discover what the handheld computer can offer to our students
(Kadel, 2005).
Literature Review
Handheld Applications in Education
Positive potentials of handheld computers in education have appeared in the
literature in recent years. For instance, successful gain was attained by students who
learned mathematics using mobile devices in the classroom (Goldman et al, 2004). The
handheld computer could handle 80 percent of the things a regular desktop computer
provided at only 10th of the cost (Joyner, 2003). Today, mobile technologies are a
familiar part of lives in the United Kingdom (Naismith, Lonsdale, Vavoula, & Sharples,
2010). Handheld computers benefited students in data collection for field-based research
(Adiguzel, Vannest, & Zellner, 2009).
While teachers and students had limited access to them due to higher costs of
computers, today‟s handheld computer price is only a small portion of other computers.
Handheld computers made technology more affordable and accessible. Educators should
now consider how to use the handheld computers to enhance teaching and learning (Yuen
& Yuen, 2003).
Learning through a mobile device such as Personal Digital Assistant, handheld PC,
or palm-top PC, coined as m-learning, is going to be the next wave of learning
environments (Goh & Kinshuk, 2006). In the Computer & Education (2009) report, both
elementary and secondary school teachers believed that handheld computers motivated
students‟ engagement in learning activities and catered for the weaker students. The
handheld PC can support a wide range of learning activities of all ages. How can the
teachers take advantage of this emerging technology to enhance the learner-centered
approach to learning (Naismith, Lonsdale, Vavoula, & Sharples, 2010)? Handheld
computers necessitate educational research for new foci on computer-assisted instruction
in educational settings (Penuel, Tatar, & Roschelle, 2004). The Carolina Department of
Public Instruction, USA, posed the million-dollar riddle that confounded debate over
handheld devices as instructional tools rather than instructional distractions (Ramaswami,
2008). Much debate concerning technology issues in K-12 mathematics learning and
teaching still exists and whether and how to apply handheld computers in K-12
mathematics teaching remains to further inquires (Powers, Allison, & Grassl, 2005).
Review Relevant Studies
Hooft, Diaz, and Swan (2004) surveyed 217 students to examine the use of
handheld computers and the possibility of handheld computers‟ utilization in improving
teaching and learning. Most students indicated that handheld computers were easier to
use, fun, and could be used as a learning tool. Powers, Allison, and Grassl (2005)

3. YIXIN ZHANG
________________________________________________________________________________3
examined the effectiveness of handheld computer algebra system in teaching discrete
mathematics. A total of 30 students were assigned in the experimental group using the
Handheld Computer Algebra System, and 31 students were in the control group. The
results did not find any statistical differences between the experimental and control group
students‟ mean test scores. The effect sizes showed some practical differences on the
final examination favoring the Handheld Computer Algebra System group. Corlett,
Sharples, Bull and Chan (2005) conducted an evaluation of a mobile learning organizer
among university students. The results suggested that there was a demand for institutional
support of mobile learning. Schmidt (2010) conducted a survey among students to
investigate the effects of the use of handheld CAS (Computer Algebra System). The
results showed there was no significant deference in terms of mathematics achievement
between male and female student, and the students who were measured previously as
better skilled students benefited more from CAS. This study did not carried on any
scientific experiment. Chen, J., Whittinghill, and Kadlowec (2010) did two experimental
tests and the students performed a quiz by the end of each treatment period. However, the
findings were mixed with one result showed students‟ positive effect when they received
feedbacks from handheld computers and the other result did not show significant
difference.
Teachers in Hooft, Diaz, and Swan‟s (2004) study stated that handheld computers
were an efficient tool to store and organize information and to distribute assignments to
the whole class as a communicative tool. Roschelle, et al (2010) reported that software
they developed for handheld device called TechPALS benefited students for group
feedback and social processing. Handheld computers were involved as a formative
assessment to guide a preservice teacher cohort during their mathematics methodology
course (Bennett, 2008). Wachira, Keengwe, and Onchwari (2009) described how to use
digital assistant in mathematics method class for preservice teachers. Their article
depicted some activities a personal digital assistant could support, such as scavenger hunt,
determining the formula for the circumference of a circle, and determining scale factors.
The researchers concluded that the preservice teachers showed enthusiasm while
performing those activities.
Purpose of Study
“To compete in the 21st century global economy, knowledge of and proficiency
in mathematics is critical” (The National Mathematics Advisory Panel, 2010). The
National Mathematics Advisory Panel identified and addressed mathematics issues
among pre-kindergarten through eighth grade in the country (e.g. knowledge of fractions
not developed among American students) and called for “the best use of scientifically
based research to advance the teaching and learning of mathematics.” A group of teacher
educators collaborated with the college‟s professional development school and used a
state-supported grant and other resources to purchase a large quantity of handheld
computers and distributed these to classroom teachers in the professional development
school, which was an elementary school located in the southern area of the United States.
Handheld computer technological trainings were provided to school teachers. The

4. NATIONAL FORUM OF TEACHER EDUCATION JOURNAL
4____________________________________________________________________________________
researchers and the classroom teachers implemented this “Handheld Computer” project in
the entire school. This paper investigated the results of integrating handheld computer in
one of the elementary subjects – mathematics.
Rapid development of mobile technologies as handheld computers have
permeated into human daily life and caught educators‟ attention to take advantage of
available emerging media in improving student performance. The International Society
for Technology in Education (2011) calls K-12 students to use media applications
effectively and productively, and support individual learning and contribute to the
learning of the others. Handheld computers have become the landscape in educational
settings. Although mobile handheld devices have been increasingly used, empirical
experiments were less than 10% in research methodology on mobile handheld devices in
K-12 and higher education settings (Cheung & Hew, 2009). How then can we ensure the
innovative teaching/learning with handhelds positively and fully impact students‟
achievement?
Quantitative data were collected based on the following alternative hypotheses in
two experiments. The alternative hypothesis in Experiment 1 is that the test scores from
the fifth grade students taught fraction multiplication using handheld computers are
significantly higher than those students‟ taught without handheld computers. The
alternative hypothesis in Experiment 2 is that the test scores from the fourth grade
students taught least common multiple using handheld computers are significantly higher
than those students‟ without handheld computers. The researchers and classroom teachers
also collaboratively constructed a survey to find out students‟ attitudes towards handheld
computers in learning mathematics.
Experiment 1
The first experiment was conducted in the fifth grade mathematics classes. The
unit for the students to study was multiplying fractions. The students in the experimental
group learned multiple fractions using a handheld computer, the Palm Zire 72s, while the
students in the control group learned the same content without using handheld computers.
After completion of this unit, the same teachers gave the fraction multiplication test with
eight questions (e.g., multiply the fractions and write your answer in simplest form where
possible 2/4 * 2/5). The final mean scores were compared to determine whether there was
a significant difference in testing scores between the experimental and control groups.
Method
Subjects
Elementary school students participating in this study were from a public school
located in the Mid-South area in the U.S.A. A total of 42 fifth grade students were in the
experimental group, while 51 fifth grade students were in the control group.

5. YIXIN ZHANG
________________________________________________________________________________5
Procedure
There were five classes, Classes A, B, C, D, and E in the fifth grade, and the same
mathematics teacher taught these five classes. The quasi-experimental design was used to
simulate the true experiment. Because the students remained in the original classes in the
natural setting, this quasi-experiment might enhance its external validity (Sprinthall,
2007). The quasi-experiment shares true characteristics of interventions or treatments
(Wikipedia, 2011). There were five classes – Class A through Class E. Two classes were
randomly selected as experimental group. The teaching method of using handheld
computers was used in the experimental group in Class A and Class B. Students opened
notes in the handheld computers. They worked in notes to solve fractions. They worked
in groups to beam answers to each other after solving problems through the Palm Zire
handheld computers. In Classes C, D, and E, multiplying fractions unit was taught by the
same teacher. Mathematically, the content was identical as in the Class A and Class B.
The only difference was that the handheld computers were not used in these three classes.
Students in these three classes practiced using paper and pencil approach, and shared
their results with peers. The students in both experimental classes and control classes
took the same test containing eight fraction multiplication questions with 100 points as
maximum. Table 1 showed the test results.
Table 1
Hypothesis Test of Difference for the Students’ Results with Handheld PC Instruction and
without Handheld PC Instruction on the Subject of Fraction Multiplication
Descriptive Statistics and t-test
N Mean SD
Instruction with Handheld PC 42 61.80 32.37
Instruction without Handheld PC 51 51.70 34.05
t df Mean Difference Significant
1.43 89 10.10 NS
Note: The effect size = 0.303.
The descriptive statistics showed that the mean scores from the experiment group
(61.80) were 10.10 higher than the mean scores from the control group (51.70). The
effect size was 0.303 in favor of the experiment group scores.

6. NATIONAL FORUM OF TEACHER EDUCATION JOURNAL
6____________________________________________________________________________________
Experiment 2
The purpose of the second experiment was to compare students‟ learning
outcomes of Least Common Multiple lesson in the fourth grade classes. Equal numbers
of the students were assigned in both experimental group and the control group.
Method
Subjects
A total of 22 fourth grade students were assigned in the experimental group. In
the control group, the same number of 22 students participated in this study.
Procedure
The students in the experimental group were given handhelds to use throughout
the lesson which was taught over a two day period. The students were asked to add
fractions with unlike denominators. Once they realized this could not be done, they used
Note Pad on the palms to draw regions. After drawing two regions that represented each
of the fractions they were trying to add, they had to determine how to make the two
regions have equivalent portions. For example, if they were adding 3/4 plus 2/6, they had
to discover that they could divide both into 12ths to make them the same. After working
with drawing the regions they then moved on to practicing multiples by using the
calculator on the handheld computers. Once the students understood the mathematical
process, they paired up to solve problems. One student found the Least Common
Multiple then beamed it to his/her partner. The partner finished solving the problem by
adding the fractions and beamed it back to his/her partner. The students in the control
group did not use the handhelds. As in Experiment 1, the contents were identical
mathematically. The students in control group learned the least common multiple in
regular classroom, practicing, discussing and sharing with peers. After completion of this
unit in two days, the same test was given to both groups. Table 2 shows the test results.
Table 2
Hypothesis Test of Difference for the Students’ Results with Handheld PC Instruction and
without Handheld PC Instruction on the Subject of Least Common Multiple
Descriptive Statistics and t-test
N Mean SD
Instruction with Handheld PC 22 79.14 26.78
Instruction without Handheld PC 22 38.09 30.02
t df Mean Difference Significant
4.79 42 41.05 S***
***p < .001; effect size = 1.443.

7. YIXIN ZHANG
________________________________________________________________________________7
The data analysis in Experiment 2 showed that the mean scores from the students
taught using handheld computers were significantly higher than the mean scores from
those students taught without handheld computers. Therefore, the alternative hypothesis
was accepted.
Analysis of Survey Results
The students participating in this research took an online survey regarding their
attitudes toward handheld computer use for learning mathematics. The research
instrument Student Attitudes toward Handheld Computer Use for Learning Mathematics
was constructed by four university teacher educator specializing in educational
technology, a dean of college of education, one professor of English, and two elementary
school senior teachers.
The survey instrument contains six questions, where SD = Strongly Disagree (1
point), D = Disagree (2 points), A = Agree (3 points), and SA = Strongly Agree (4 points).
Cronbach (Cronbach, 1951) alpha was used to evaluate the internal consistency reliability
of the survey. A reliability alpha estimate of .811 was obtained for the entire six items of
students‟ attitudes toward handheld computers for learning mathematics. Table 3 shows
the responding percentages of each question.
Table 3
Student Attitudes toward Handheld Computer Use for Learning Mathematics
Level of agreement (in %)
Statement SD D A SA Missing
1. It is easier to understand math teacher 3.8 8.1 47.6 32.4 8.1
when the teacher has me use the handheld
PC.
2. I wish I would have a handheld PC to 1.9 9.0 24.3 56.2 8.6
use in every math class.
3. Every student at [School Name] should 7.6 22.4 29.5 31.9 8.6
have a handheld PC.
4. Using a handheld PC makes me feel 3.8 16.2 44.3 27.1 8.6
more confident in math class.
5. Using a handheld PC makes learning 0.0 3.8 18.1 69.5 8.6
fun.
6. I feel math is easier when our math 3.3 7.1 32.9 48.1 8.6
teacher allows us to use a handheld PC.
The result skewed toward Strongly Agree or Agree. Question #2, Question #3,
Question #5, and Question #6, have the highest percentages of Strongly Agree, Question
#1 and Question #4 have the highest percentage of Agree.

8. NATIONAL FORUM OF TEACHER EDUCATION JOURNAL
8____________________________________________________________________________________
The teachers and the researchers also collected qualitative data which were
consistent with the result from the online survey. The following highlights some of
representative comments from the fourth and fifth grade students.
 “It makes learning fun. Plus I feel like I understand math more using the handheld
PC.”
 “When I use a hand-held PC it make me feel special and help me understand what
the teacher is saying when she is explaining a math problem to us.”
 “You can use note pad and that allows you to draw on the screen and it makes it
easier to solve the problem when you write it.”
 “What it is like using a handheld in math class, that we do problems on them.
Then we beam to a classmate or teacher for her or he (sic) to check it. Sometimes
we to [we play] games on them.”
Figure 1. The students collaborating learning activities through handheld beaming
function.
Discussion
Handheld Computers Facilitating Elementary Students Learning Mathematics
The results from both empirical experiments show favorable achievements of
those students who used handheld computers when their teacher taught the unit. The
mean score difference was 10.10 with a maximum score of 100 in fraction multiplication
test. In other words, the average scores from those students who used handheld
computers in this unit had 10.10 higher scores than those students who did not use
handheld computers in this unit even though there was no statistically significant
difference. Students might perform better when they become more familiar with the
emerging technologies.

9. YIXIN ZHANG
________________________________________________________________________________9
In the second experiment among the fourth grade students, scores were
significantly higher for the students who used handheld computers than for those students
who learned the same unit, Lease Common Multiple, without using handheld computers.
This finding implies that integrating handheld technologies into mathematics classes
might enhance students‟ mathematics comprehension and performances.
The online survey reflected the students‟ actual feelings and experiences in their
mathematics classes. The high percentages of positive attitudes in Strongly Agree or in
Agree categories clearly showed that students would like to use handheld computers in
their mathematics classes. What the students overwhelmingly expressed implied that
handheld computers could be a helpful learning tool in the school.
Previous researches described handheld computers as efficient tool to store and
organize information (e.g. Hooft, Diaz, and Swan, 2004); addressed usefulness of
handheld computers, or utilized handheld computers as portable assessment tool (e.g.
Bennett, 2008). There has been relatively little experimental research conducted in
classroom settings for subject area such as mathematics. This study shed some highlights
from elementary students‟ own point of views. Two experimental researches conducted
in elementary school classrooms revealed that handheld computer could be a positive
potential learning tool to increase students‟ engagement and enhance students‟
mathematical learning.
Motivation and Collaboration
Through the teachers‟ and the researchers‟ observation and interviews, additional
phenomena of students‟ handheld computers usages were found. Students tended to
collaboration when they used handhelds. Students could easily beam data to partners,
thereby enhancing rapport with fellow students and the teacher, and promoting students‟
social skills. This benefited students in creating a student-centered learning environment
as active learners.
Result from the SRI International‟s Center for Technology in Learning survey
among 100 teachers indicated that handhelds were an effective instructional tool (Joyner,
2003). The qualitative data from the current study demonstrate positive indications that
handheld computers could facilitate students‟ mathematics comprehension from the
students‟ points of view. The quantitative data show the handheld computers provide new
learning opportunities and the emerging media facilitate students‟ learning engagements.
Epilogue
Handheld computers are becoming more common place in K-12 classrooms
(van‟t Hooft, 2003). Educators and designers might consider making a fundamental
change from the occasional use computer lab to systemically use embedded mobile
devices in the classroom. Handheld computers will continue to have great potential
impact on learning in K-12 schools (Hooft, Diaz, & Swan, 2004). More research is
recommended to explore handheld technology utilizations in other subject areas, such as
language arts, social science and science.

10. NATIONAL FORUM OF TEACHER EDUCATION JOURNAL
10____________________________________________________________________________________
References
Adiguzel, T., Vannest, K., & Zellner, R. (2009). The use and efficacy of handheld
computers for school-based data collection: A literature review. Computers in
Schools, 26(3), 187-206.
Bennett, R. K. (2008). Formative assessment in elementary mathematics: A preservice
teacher action research project. In K. McFerrin et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of
Society for Information Technology and Teacher Education International
Conference 2008 (pp. 4525-4534). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.
Chen, J., Whittinghill, D., & Kadlowec, J. A. (2010). Classes that click: Fast, rich
feedback to enhance student learning and satisfaction. Journal of Engineering
Education, 99(2), 159-168.
Cheung, W. S., & Hew, K. F. (2009). A review of research methodologies used in studies
on mobile handheld devices in K-12 and higher education settings. Australasian
Journal of Educational Technology, 25(2), 153-183.
Corlett, D., Sharples, M., Bull, S., & Chan, T. (2005). Evaluation of a mobile learning
organizer for university students. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 21(3),
162-170.
Computer & Education. (2009). Introducing pocket PC in schools: Attitudes and beliefs
in the first year. Computer & Education, 52(2), 470-480.
Cronbach, L. J. (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests.
Psychometrika, 16, 297-334.
eSchoolNews. (2011). eSchoolNews. January, 2007. Retrieved from
http://eschoolnews.com/resources/reports/hhc/
Goh, T., & Kinshuk. (2006). Getting ready for mobile learning – Adaptation perspective.
Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 15(2), 175-198.
Goldman, S. V., Pea, R., Maldonado, H., Martin, L., While, T., & the WILD TEAM
(2004). Functioning in the wireless classroom. In J. Roschelle, T-W. Chan,
Kinshuk, & S. J. H. Yang (Eds.), Proceedings of the 2nd IEEE International
Workshop on Wireless and Mobile Technologies in Education (WMTE 2004).
Mobile Support for Learning Communities. Taoyuan, Taiwan.
Hooft, M. V., Diaz, S., & Swan, K. (2004). Examining the potential of handheld
computers: Findings from the Ohio PEP project. Journal of Educational
Computing Research, 30(4), 295-311.
International Society for Technology in Education. (2011). National educational
Technology Standards (NETS.S) and Performance Indicators for Students.
Retrieved from http://www.iste.org/standards/nets-for-students.aspx
Joyner, A. (2003, September). A foothold for handhelds. American School Board Journal,
42-44.
Kadel, R. (2005). The time is right to embrace PDAs in the classroom. Learning &
Leading with Technology, 33(1), 36-37.
Naismith, L., Lonsdale, P., Vavoula, G., & Sharples, M. (2010). Literature review in
mobile technologies and learning. Retrieved from
http://www.futurelab.org.uk/research/reviews/reviews_11_and12/11_01.htm

11. YIXIN ZHANG
________________________________________________________________________________11
Penuel, W. R., Tatar, D. G., & Roschelle, J. (2004). The role of research on contexts of
teaching practice in informing the design of handheld learning technologies.
Journal of Educational Computing Research, 30(4), 353-370.
Powers, R. A., Allison, D. E., & Grassl, R. M. (2005). A study of the use of a handheld
computer algebra system in discrete mathematics. International Journal for
Technology in Mathematics Education, 12(3), 103-113.
Ramaswami, R. (2008). Fill „er up. T.H.E. Journal, 35(5), 32-38.
Roschelle, J., Rafanan, K., Bhchi, B, Estrella, G., Penuel, B, Nussbaum, M., et al. (2010).
Scaffolding group explanation and feedback with handheld technology: Impact on
students‟ mathematics learning. Education Tech Research Dev. 58, 399-419.
Schmidt, K. (2010). Mathematics education with a handheld CAS – The students‟
perspective. International Journal for Technology in Mathematics Education,
17(2), 105-110.
Segall, N., Doolen, T. L., & Porter, J. D. (2005). A usability comparison of PDA-based
quizzes and paper-and pencil quizzes. Computer & Education, 45(4), 417-432.
Sprinthall, R. C. (2007). Basic statistical analysis (8th ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
van‟t Hooft, M. (2003). Practical examples of handheld use in K-12 classrooms. Society
for Information Technology and Teacher Education International Conference
(SITE).
The National Mathematics Advisory Panel. (2011, January). ARCHIVED
INFORMATION. Retrieved from
http://www2.ed.gov/about/bdscomm/list/mathpanel/report/final-factsheet.html
Wachira, P., Keengwe, J., & Onchwari, G. (2009). Personal digital assistants (PDAs) in
mathematics teacher education. AACE Journal, 17(2), 113-125.
Wikipedia. (2011). Quasi-experimental design. Retrieved from
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quasi-experimental_design
Yuen, S. C., & Yuen, P. K. (2003,April). PDAS as educational power tools.
Techdirections, 14-17.
Acknowledgements
The researchers would like to thank classroom teachers Mrs. Michelle Lynch and
Mrs. Pam Lemoine for their teaching the units, providing the students tests, and
assistance in data collection.
BIOGRAPHICAL NOTE
Dr. Yixin Zhang is a professor of Educational Leadership and Instructional Technology
at McNeese State University, USA. His research interests include integrating
technologies into content area teaching.