The above points, taken together, do not support the conclusion that the article is claiming "the computer merely augmented an existing understanding of mathema

The above points, taken together, do not support the conclusion that the article is claiming "the computer merely augmented an existing understanding of mathematics". She was a fifth-grade student at a public school in Boston. This indicates that she had a sufficient understanding of mathematics to reach that grade level, and had previously been instructed by the traditional method. The result being low test scores. We're not talking tabula rasa here, we're talking about a regular student with a poor grasp of the subject matter. Additionally, the text you've placed in quotes is meaningfully different from the post you're replying to. They do support the conclusion that the student had no demonstrable understanding of mathematics, and that through using the computer, she gained a demonstrable understanding of mathematics. This contradicts your earlier post, which implied that this was (for unspecified reasons) not an effective method of teaching math skills.