Honeymoon with IWBs: A qualitative insight in primary students' views on instruction with interactive whiteboard

The main purpose of this study was to investigate the views of primary students about interactive whiteboard [IWB] use in their classes from attitudinal and pedagogical perspectives. Research was designed as an empirical approach to phenomenology. Data was collected from fifty primary students (fourth to eighth) through focus group interviews. Nvivo 9 qualitative data analysis software was used to analyze data. Results showed that students like instruction with IWB especially for such reasons/capabilities as practical and economical use, better visual presentation, and test-based use. Students were predominantly uncomfortable with the technical problems. They believed that instruction with IWB positively impacted their learning especially because of visualization and contextualization, effective presentation, test-based use, and motivational factors. Finally it was inferred that IWBs were not used to their full potential, and both technical problems and common practices indicated that teachers were still at an initial stage of transmission to instruction with IWB and they needed both technical and pedagogical training.

[1]  Nabeel A. Y. Al-Qirim,et al.  Determinants of interactive white board success in teaching in higher education institutions , 2011, Comput. Educ..

[2]  Grier Kivette Rivers.  Interactive whiteboards in third grade science instruction , 2009 .

[3]  Cynthia E. Glidden.  How to Design and Evaluate Research in Education (2nd ed.). , 1993 .

[4]  Marie F. Shoffner,et al.  Focus Groups: A Practical and Applied Research Approach for Counselors , 2007 .

[5]  Karen Murcia,et al.  Teaching for Scientific Literacy with an Interactive Whiteboard. , 2008 .

[6]  Matthew Kearney,et al.  Exploring pedagogy with interactive whiteboards: A case study of six schools. , 2007 .

[7]  Steve Higgins,et al.  'The visual helps me understand the complicated things': pupil views of teaching and learning with interactive whiteboards , 2005, Br. J. Educ. Technol..

[8]  Karen A. Sobel-Lojeski,et al.  The Effects of Interactive Whiteboards (IWBs) on Student Performance and Learning: A Literature Review , 2010 .

[9]  M Fatih Elaziz.  Attitudes of students and teachers towards the use of interactive whiteboards in EFL classrooms , 2008 .

[10]  Norman E. Wallen,et al.  How to Design and Evaluate Research in Education , 1990 .

[11]  Euline Schmid Cutrim,et al.  Using a voting system in conjunction with interactive whiteboard technology to enhance learning in the English language classroom , 2008 .

[12]  Paul Warwick,et al.  Using interactive whiteboards to orchestrate classroom dialogue , 2010 .

[13]  Yalın Kılıç Türel,et al.  Instructional interactive whiteboard materials: Designers’ perspectives , 2010 .

[14]  R. Bogdan.  Qualitative research for education : an introduction to theory and methods / by Robert C. Bogdan and Sari Knopp Biklen , 1997 .

[15]  Arthur Shenton,et al.  From 'bored' to screen: the use of the interactive whiteboard for literacy in six primary classrooms in England , 2007 .

[16]  N C Sharts-Hopko.  Focus group methodology: when and why? , 2001, The Journal of the Association of Nurses in AIDS Care : JANAC.

[17]  Ian Thompson,et al.  Collaborative research methodology for investigating teaching and learning: the use of interactive whiteboard technology , 2005 .

[18]  Rose Tirotta,et al.  Interactive whiteboards produce small gains in elementary students' self-reported motivation in mathematics , 2010, Comput. Educ..

[19]  V. Wilson.  Focus Groups: a useful qualitative method for educational research? , 1997 .

[20]  Tufan Adiguzel,et al.  Akıllı Tahtalar Ve Öğretim Uygulamaları/Smart Boards And Their Instructional Uses , 2014 .

[21]  Peggy Yuhas Byers,et al.  Focus Groups: A Qualitative Opportunity for Researchers , 1991 .

[22]  Gary Beauchamp,et al.  Teacher use of the interactive whiteboard in primary schools: towards an effective transition framework , 2004 .

[23]  Paul Warwick,et al.  In the mind and in the technology: The vicarious presence of the teacher in pupil's learning of science in collaborative group activity at the interactive whiteboard , 2010, Comput. Educ..

[24]  J. Morse.  Qualitative data analysis (2nd ed): Mathew B. Miles and A. Michael Huberman. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, 1994. Price: $65.00 hardback, $32.00 paperback. 238 pp , 1996 .

[25]  Fatih Gursul,et al.  Which one is smarter? Teacher or Board , 2010 .

[26]  O. Massey,et al.  A proposed model for the analysis and interpretation of focus groups in evaluation research. , 2011, Evaluation and program planning.

[27]  Cathy Lewin,et al.  Embedding interactive whiteboards in teaching and learning: The process of change in pedagogic practice , 2008, Education and Information Technologies.

[28]  Chris Preston,et al.  Use of "SMART" Boards for Teaching, Learning and Assessment in Kindergarten Science. , 2008 .

[29]  G. Morgan,et al.  Improving Student Engagement: Use of the Interactive Whiteboard as an Instructional Tool to Improve Engagement and Behavior in the Junior High School Classroom , 2008 .

[30]  Gary Beauchamp,et al.  Reviewing the literature on interactive whiteboards , 2007 .

[31]  Ian Hall,et al.  Primary school students' perceptions of interactive whiteboards , 2005, J. Comput. Assist. Learn..

[32]  Euline Cutrim Schmid.  Using a voting system in conjunction with interactive whiteboard technology to enhance learning in the English language classroom , 2008, Comput. Educ..

[33]  Hannah Slay,et al.  Interactive whiteboards: Real beauty or just "lipstick"? , 2008, Comput. Educ..

[34]  Ruth Wood,et al.  The use of the interactive whiteboard for creative teaching and learning in literacy and mathematics: a case study , 2008, Br. J. Educ. Technol..

[35]  S. Higgins,et al.  The Impact of Interactive Whiteboards on Teacher--Pupil Interaction in the National Literacy and Numeracy Strategies. , 2006 .

[36]  Gary Beauchamp,et al.  Interactivity in the classroom and its impact on learning , 2010, Comput. Educ..

[37]  M. Patton.  Qualitative research and evaluation methods , 1980 .

[38]  Tian-Syung Lan,et al.  A Study of Elementary School Students' Viewpoints on Interactive Whiteboard , 2011 .

[39]  Steve Higgins,et al.  Interactive whiteboards: boon or bandwagon? A critical review of the literature , 2005, J. Comput. Assist. Learn..

[40]  J. Sim,et al.  The kappa statistic in reliability studies: use, interpretation, and sample size requirements. , 2005, Physical therapy.

[41]  Murat Ateş.  ORTAÖĞRETİM COĞRAFYA DERSLERİNDE AKILLI TAHTA KULLANIMI , 2010 .

[42]  David Miller,et al.  The interactive whiteboard: a literature survey , 2005 .

[43]  J. Maxwell.  Understanding and Validity in Qualitative Research , 1992 .

[44]  Selçuk Özdemir,et al.  Board's IQ: What makes a board smart? , 2009, Comput. Educ..

[45]  D. Caulley.  Qualitative research for education: An introduction to theories and methods , 2007 .

[46]  Rosemary Callingham,et al.  Levels of use of Interactive Whiteboard technology in the primary mathematics classroom , 2011 .