Logo programming language (WWC intervention report, Elementary School Mathematics)
What Works Clearinghouse, Institute of Education Sciences, US Department of Education · 2007
grade Dreviewindependentnot-applicable
Sample
Zero studies met design standards
Population
US elementary school mathematics.
Design
A federal systematic review under the What Works Clearinghouse Elementary School Mathematics protocol, screening designs against WWC standards. It is included not for an estimate but for the count.
Key findings
No studies of the Logo programming language were found that fell within the scope of the Elementary School Mathematics review protocol AND met WWC design standards — zero. The Clearinghouse was therefore unable to draw any research-based conclusions about the effectiveness or ineffectiveness of Logo. After roughly 25 years of Logo in schools, and 65 studies pooled by Liao & Bright, not one met a standard federal design bar for the outcome Papert most directly promised.
Genetic confound
Not applicable — a count of studies meeting design standards.
Replication notes
A federal evidence review; nothing to replicate.
Effects
| Outcome | Metric | Value | Measure | Timing | Vs | Horizon | Class |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Elementary school mathematics | studies meeting WWC design standards | 0 | administrative | not applicable | none | not-applicable | attainment |
Cited by
- Does learning to code improve general thinking?no effectconf: mediumgc: low