Ruef and Layne conducted a limited study on the effects of the use of computers on instruction in the Social Studies. However, although the study was limited it does have some value. It should be noted at the outset that Layne is an avid computer user who believes that the computer is a useful tool. Much of the article is devoted to describing the parameters of the test and its limitations, which need not be dealt with here other than to note that a small number of students were tested. There were some other limitations that will be dealt with later. The content of the instruction focused on the U.S. Constitutional Convention and the Bill of Rights. The researcher was one of the instructors, which may have injected some bias into the administration of the experiment. The result of the test was that there was no statistical difference between the scores of students who made use of a computer database simulation and those who learned the content through a traditional instruction method.

Some limitations of the experiment included limited space in the school’s computer lab, a disruption of the students’ normal routine of instruction as well as a bit of chaos around the computers. These factors did appear to add some complications to the learning process. Although the researcher does not consider the use of the computer to have hampered instruction, the researcher believes that the traditional approach would have been as effective and less disruptive in this particular case. When some students were pressed for time they used printed copies of the material rather than the instruction afforded by the computer. The computer was a novelty item at first but the novelty wore off as time passed.

The researcher notes that in some areas the use of computers has become an across-the-curriculum skill rather than a separate subject so students as well as teachers need to have been exposed to the computer before it is introduced into other areas if it is to be used successfully. Thus there should be a cautious attitude toward the integration of computers into nonrelated areas. Teachers need to ask themselves what a computer will allow them to do that they cannot already do themselves? The time factor should also be taken into consideration. The use of computers may take more classroom time and take time out that cuts into covering the curriculum. The researcher believes that integrating the technology cannot be justified if this is the case. Some other questions that need to be asked include, how do students learn with databases, what do they need to know to use them, how do the needs of various ages differ, and why are databases so important? These questions need to be answered. The researcher ends by stating that money wasted on bandwagon fads can usually be replaced but wasted time cannot.

In reflecting on this article, it is a bit dated so some of the concerns in the article were not reported here but the questions the researcher raised remain important ones. However, many students nowadays have a higher level of knowledge of computers than when this article was first published. This is not to say that all students do, but as students become more computer literate some of the problems that came up in this study would be less of a problem. The novelty factor should probably decrease as time passes. The concern that the researcher has about the use of computers taking up more time seems somewhat odd, given that computers are actually supposed to save time. However, it is this writer’s contention that it is not that computers actually take up more time, it is just that the activities associated with computer-assisted learning tend to be more time consuming than straightforward direct instruction is. So the matter of time consumption should be addressed in terms of alternative forms of instruction compared to direct instruction and in terms of what students are actually learning in the various types of instruction, rather than seeing it as an issue of whether or not to use computer-assisted learning based on the time element.