As we head into the new year, we wanted to take a minute to reflect on the findings of Getting a Read on the App Stores, our most recent survey of the apps stories and what they mean for parents who are looking to facilitate the literacy development of their young children -- and the developers who are creating apps for these users.
When we embarked on this study in 2014, our teams at the Cooney Center and New America, led by Sarah Vaala and Anna Ly, decided to put ourselves into the shoes of parents looking for great apps for their kids. If we were looking for some high-quality educational apps for young children (which we defined as from birth to age 8) to teach them literacy skills, what would we find?
Parents are finding most of the apps that they download from browsing the app stores. With that in mind, we wanted to learn more about what they were likely to encounter while browsing the most popular paid and free apps in the Apple App Store, Google Play, and Amazon Appstore. Among the literacy apps for children, what kinds of apps were among the most popular? How much information would a parent find while browsing the app stores to help them make decisions? And once an app had been downloaded, what would our families find? We also scanned the award-winning or highly-reviewed apps lists at three of the expert review sites, Common Sense Media, the Children’s Technology Review and Parents’ Choice to see what kind of overlap there might be in these lists—did experts agree that the most popular apps in the marketplace were the best?
After digging into the data for months, we realized there are key factors which help a parent make informed decisions. And prepared with the right kind of knowledge, developers can help parents find their apps too. Here are some highlights of what we found that we think might be of interest.
- Parents are likely to find different apps depending on where they lookThe featured or most popular apps on an app store may be very different from those highlighted by review sites. We found that the most popular apps may not be as highly rated as other apps for any number of reasons—so we encourage parents to look beyond the lists of top apps in the storefronts. Explore expert review sites like Common Sense Media, and ask teachers and librarians for recommendations.
- Parents are looking for age-appropriate apps for their childrenApproximately 40% of apps did not provide a specific age range or developmental stage in their descriptions. Of those that did, 90% were aimed at preschool-age children. This suggests that parents should cast a wider net when searching for apps for older children, tapping expert review sites or librarians and teachers for advice.
- Most apps do not mention specific benchmarks of educational qualityWas there a child development or literacy expert on the team that produced this app? Is there a guiding curriculum or educational theory? What kind of research has been conducted to support an app’s claims to teach specific skills or concepts? We found that these questions were largely unanswered in the descriptions of the apps that we analyzed. While this does not necessarily suggest that there was no research conducted by or on behalf of the developers whose apps we looked at, parents and educators would feel more confidence downloading apps for their children that provide evidence of efficacy.
- Research suggests that children learn well through co-useUnfortunately, few apps are designed to enable more than one participant to engage with an app. Does an app encourage an older user to play along? Can users create content together? The benefits of “joint media engagement” are significant when generations “learn together.”
- Share feedbackParents and educators have the power to influence design! They should be more active to voice questions and concerns with individual developers or about the app stores in general. Whether by leaving a review, contacting a developer, or leaving feedback for the app stores in general, we suggest that parents can help push the market for high quality apps.