This research studied the impact of technology integration during science lessons to help prepare fourth graders in a suburban elementary school for the Kansas State Science Assessment. The three instructional methods considered were inquiry-based learning and direct instruction without technology use; inquiry-based learning and direct instruction using laptops; inquirybased learning and direct instruction using an interactive whiteboard. Sixty-one fourth-grade students participated in this study and were divided into three experimental conditions: science classes A, B, and C. Each class received six, 50-minute science test review sessions over a twoweek period. The review sessions alternated each day between direct instruction and inquirybased learning. During the direct instruction sessions, Class A received direct instruction while using an interactive whiteboard; Class B received direct instruction while using laptops; Class C was the control group, and direct instruction was similar to a lecture format. No technology was used with Class C. The inquiry-based learning sessions were the same for all three classes. Science-based pre- and post-tests were administered during the study along with a technology use survey. Data from the Kansas State Reading, Math, and Science assessments were also considered. To determine if performances on the researcher-generated science tests were related to each other, partial correlations controlling for reading and math skills were computed for each group of students. Statistically significant relations between pre- and post-test science knowledge emerged only for the students in the no technology group. Gain scores were also calculated using the Kruskal Wallis test to determine the amount of change between pre- and post-intervention scores. Results indicated that significant group differences between pre- and post-test scores in science content knowledge did not emerge. Next, Kruskal Wallis statistical test was used to determine if there were group differences in use of computers for homework and for non-school work. No statistically significant differences emerged. Lastly, to determine if the gains from preto post-test made by the entire sample (not subgroups) were statistically significant, a onesample Kolmogorov-Smirnov test was used. Results indicated that gains made by the entire sample between pre- and post-tests were statistically significant.