There’s a new working paper (summary here; PDF here) from Ofer Malamud and Cristian Pop-Eleches called “Home Computer Use and the Development of Human Capital.” As they point out, the “digital divide” (within countries and between them) can be vast, and a great deal of governmental (and non-governmental) resources are being spent to address it. (In the U.S., the authors write, “less than half of children with family incomes under $25,000 lived in a household with a computer, compared to 92 percent of those with family incomes over $100,000.”)
It is a logical assumption that the children with computer access have a huge advantage in gaining human capital, yes?
But the tricky part is untangling the cause and the effect. As we’ve written in the past, children who grow up in homes with a lot of books are likely to do better in school than kids from homes without books — but not necessarily because they spend all their time reading. The data suggest that kids from homes with lots of books simply have smarter parents.
Malamud and Pop-Eleches have found a good variable to exploit in asking a similar question about home computers; from their abstract (emphasis mine):
We collected survey data from households who participated in a unique government program in Romania which allocated vouchers for the purchase of a home computer to low-income children based on a simple ranking of family income. We show that children in households who received a voucher were substantially more likely to own and use a computer than their counterparts who did not receive a voucher. Our main results indicate that that home computer use has both positive and negative effects on the development of human capital. Children who won a voucher had significantly lower school grades in Math, English and Romanian but significantly higher scores in a test of computer skills and in self-reported measures of computer fluency. There is also evidence that winning a voucher increased cognitive ability, as measured by Raven’s Progressive Matrices. We do not find much evidence for an effect on non-cognitive outcomes. Finally, the presence of parental rules regarding computer use and homework appear to mitigate the effects of computer ownership, suggesting that parental monitoring and supervision may be important mediating factors.
So: having a computer at home helps kids develop computer skills. (Okay …) But it seems to lower their grades in math and reading.
There are a lot of lower-school educators out there who will read this with no surprise whatsoever. For all the talk about the digital divide, a lot of educators work hard to keep computers out of the classroom at an early age, to help kids develop skills without them. This is a topic we think about a lot in my home. We have a 9-year-old son who uses his computer for all kinds of stuff — games and sport fantasy leagues, yes, but also reading the news and looking up whatever his brain latches onto: volcanoes, Hitler, left-handed presidents, etc. He also happens to read a lot of books — but would he read more if there were no computer in the house? And would there be a great benefit in that? And will his computer literacy yield greater unforeseen benefits down the road?
I do find it interesting that a lot of parents I know urge their kids to get off the computer while looking down at their own Blackberrys.
(N.B.: Pop-Eleches is the same scholar whose fascinating research on abortion in Romania we wrote about in Freakonomics.)
and 
. You can also watch it on 
Word processing software is good for kids because it makes transcription mistakes less of an issue, just like with an adult. I want kids to know how to edit and improve their work, which is hugely harder with cursive and typewriters.
Multiplication games make memorization easier. Yes, kids do have to memorize them, but there’s no reason they should be bored the whole time. They’re also good ways to understand the geometry that they’re first encountering in 4th grade. (I really like starting early, they’re also doing pre-algebra).
The Web means that kids can find answers about a million things, from ancient poetry to gecko care to current ideas about economics.
All of these need informed and attentive adult supervision, but it seems inappropriate to keep kids away from such a good tool for learning.
I wonder how these results would look if controlled for houses with computers that also contained books vs. those that did not. I suspect that, in this case like any other, you’d find that what function the presence of a computer has once again is a reflection on the learning culture within the home. As previous commenters have noted, the computer is simply a tool.
A little off the point, but “had significantly lower school grades in Math, English and Romanian “; heavens, a second language. Children in my school district don’t have access to classes in a second language until high school, which is far too late.
Wonder if I can find a language tutor online….
My husband and I are both highly educated (multiple graduate professional degrees) and have and use computers at home. We don’t, however, allow our children ( 3 and
to get on the computer for any reason. I don’t see the point in having a child glued to yet another screen and television is severely rationed in our home. Needless to say, there are no game-boys , x-boxes etc. Young children should learn to interact with other human beings. They should also take these precious early years to learn to read well and widely and to enjoy the outside world (nature deficit…last child in the woods, etc.).
My child’s preschool, with the best of intentions, made a big push to have a computer in every classroom. I am at the school a lot and see absolutely no benefit from having the laptop there but I definitely see the benefit of molding clay (fine motor skills); painting pictures; going on a dinosaur hunt and on and on.
I’d agree that computers can be more a distraction than a necessity. Delving into the reasons I’d also wager that an earlier post is correct in noting that it’s a misunderstanding of the computer itself (probably coupled with the fact that computers are a good source of computer games).
I’m an art director, and a lot of people assume I’m a ‘computer guy’. I actually don’t know very much about computers or software development, but hardware and software are necessary tools for my job and as such I endeavor to make the best I can of both.
Most computer education is focused on teaching the parts of the tool (ie. the menus), which is about as useful as teaching a woodworking course by focusing on how to build your own Dremel. It isn’t the machines fault, it’s simply that technology has a way of outpacing are ability to use it properly.
I can’t afford to not let my 18 month year old son use the computer. Two weeks ago he hit a combination of keys that turned my screen 90 degrees, now until he fixes by whatever magic he used in the first place I have my computer on its side. So as you can see i need his random beating on the keyboard to turn it back.
There certainly is merit to all of this. I was fortunate enough to have access to a computer when I was 5 years old, the first one that my father bought. I was enthralled with it, and began to learn how to use and fix the machines, as well as many other skills that I now possess. Once the internet arrived, however, I began to spend more and more time with the machine, talking to people and wasting more and more time. I certainly learned a lot at first, but eventually it eroded into time that I could be doing other things. Eventually, I had to set limits on myself, or things would get out of hand. Now, it is amazing how much more time I have to do other things. Like anything else in life, it is all about balance. Parents should keep kid’s exposure to a healthy level (just like TV, video games, etc), even if they fight it (which I most certainly did). Your children will be better for it, and will learn to not spend all of their time on one thing.
If it promotes addiction to World of Warcraft…then its useless