Researchers caution that not using evidence-based design concepts could lead to making “digital candy that is good on the surface but has little to no actual educational value.”
There is no doubt that the market for educational apps is booming. In just a few short years, we went from the invention of the iPad in 2010 to having over 80,000 apps marketed as “educational” in the Apple App Store alone by January 2015. One challenge, however, is that those developing apps and categorizing them as “educational” are not, in most cases, the researchers who actually study how children learn.
To bridge this gap, a group of learning scientists and a digital learning consultant (now the Vice President of Global Digital Content at Sesame Workshop) came together to comb through the literature on the Science of Learning to determine how we can put the education back in educational apps.
We used several well-worn principles that parents, educators, and app developers can use to determine what is truly educational, after going beyond a first glance. The results of this massive undertaking were recently published in a comprehensive report in Psychological Science in the Public Interest. Briefly, here is what we found.
1. Apps should be minds-on, not minds-off
One benefit that apps have over other types of media (e.g., television) is that apps have near instantaneous responsiveness to every swipe, tap, or even shake. But one thing app developers need to keep in mind is that this physical activity is not enough to promote learning. Research tells us that learning is maximized when children (or adults) are “minds-on” and are actively working through problems and possible solutions rather than passively watching or typing without much mental effort.
In a study of word learning, children who actively used a process of elimination to figure out what object a new label was referring to showed better learning than those who were explicitly told that same information. Apps should utilize this kind of deeper processing. Before you develop, pay attention to whether children will simply watch the screen or swipe flying fruit or if they will actively solve problems and think deeply.
2. Apps should be engaging, not distracting
One of the ‘low-hanging fruits’ when it comes to developing apps is adding in fun features – from a cow that moos when you tap it in a digital story to a hot spot that activates a game, many apps try to engage the learner with additional bells and whistles. But just like the ‘ding’ of a text message can easily distract you from the email you were about to write, children are easily distracted and research suggests that this actually takes away from learning.
A study comparing reading of electronic and traditional books found that when younger children read traditional books with their parents, parents talk more about the story and are less likely to direct the behavior of the child, for example by saying “push that button”. Further, those reading the traditional book showed increased comprehension and were better able to remember the sequences of events in the story.
This difference is likely because electronic books may distract the child with “extras” such as sound effects or games and detract from the story itself. Apps can and should be fun but as a developer, you should ask yourself whether that additional feature helps – or hinders – children’s ability to stay on task.
3. Apps should be meaningful
Children are amazing when it comes to learning. But one thing to keep in mind when developing an app is the question of what it is – really – that children are learning in any given app. While learning the ABC song is an important building block, if a child doesn’t know that there are letters that relate to those sounds and that they form our ability to communicate, this knowledge is really just a song with no deep understanding. Similarly, a child tracing the letters but seeing them simply as fun shapes does not have true conceptual understanding of the alphabet.
Research from our own labs has shown that children learn better when their parents help them play in a way that helps them to build meaning. In other words, seeing triangles in pieces of pizza is more meaningful than simply seeing them in perfectly drawn shapes on a screen with the point always at the top. Apps that teach the letters or numbers are fine, but it is crucial for children to know why this knowledge is actually important. They need to see the information in use.
4. Apps that involve social interaction support learning
Research repeatedly shows that the best resource for young children is not a fancy video, DVD, or even an app. Instead, other humans are a child’s best resource for deeper learning. We looked at one study of children’s ability to learn the meaning of a new word from different formats. They were taught the word in a live interaction, a digital interaction (think Skype), or a straightforward video. The children learned the new information best when it was presented socially – so that people actually responded to them either live or on screen. This is just one of the many studies that suggests that humans are the best at teaching other humans.
While the idea of an app can sometimes seem inherently unsocial, newer apps hitting the market encourage children to play alongside their parents or other friends. Even feeling as if they have a social relationship with famous characters like Elmo or Mickey Mouse appears to help children feel connected and has the potential to increase learning and engagement.
Finally, one last thing to ask when developing an app is – what is the context of the learning experience. When adults set up a learning experience where children are given the tools to solve a problem and the freedom to find the solution on their own, children learn much more than they do when adults give them free reign with no guidance or directly tell them what to do.
By using these evidence-based principles, motivated by decades’ worth of scientific inquiry, you can easily ensure that your app has educational potential and is not simply digital candy that is good on the surface but has little to no actual educational value.
RSS Feed of News Items