Conscious of the need for overseas students to overcome linguistic and related difficulties many universities and other institutions of higher education have appointed specialists in English for Academic Purposes (EAP) to run pre-sessional courses to offer assistance to students for whom English is a foreign language. These courses vary for each institution. In this paper, I aim to present a general outline of the current approaches available for the EAP specialist and student. The choice is determined by numerous factors such as underlying philosophy, a student’s starting point, time, and course or discipline. By the end of the paper I shall propose a realistic approach to EAP writing. However, as I will demonstrate, choosing an approach is
not straightforward and depends upon such external factors as the requirements of a student’s discipline and the resources of the University. I will outline four different approaches, namely, the product approach, the process approach, James’ (1993) proposals for a combination of product and process, and the genre approach.
Wednesday 31 March 2010
Saturday 27 March 2010
When less is more:Students’ experiences of assessment feedback
Student dissatisfaction with feedback has been a prominent feature of the National Student Survey for the past two years. In the 2006 survey, 49% of respondents said that feedback was slow and unhelpful, prompting Bill Rammell, the Higher Education Minister, to say in response that he hoped institutions would ‘look long and hard at assessment and feedback’ (Shepherd, THES, 2006). This dissatisfaction is all the more disturbing given the prominence of feedback in pedagogic theory: as Laurillard (1993, p. 61) has said, 'action without feedback is completely unproductive for the learner'. This principle applies throughout our lives as well as in educational settings: we use intrinsic and extrinsic feedback to guide our actions and the development of our thoughts, values and ways-of-being. Whether practitioners adopts a neo-behaviourist, cognitivist, socio-constructivist or postmodern perspective on learning, feedback has a central role to play: as
reinforcement; as information from which to correct 'errors'; as guidance on sociallyconstructed standards; or as an indicator of appropriate discourse (Askew and Lodge, 2000; Fenwick, 2000). Feedback is essential to our lifelong development but its importance is perhaps greatest (and most visible) during periods of formal education: at these times, students are primed to expect assessment feedback from knowledgeable others, and to develop skills of self-assessment for themselves.
Students want .................https://mw.brookes.ac.uk/download/attachments/2851502/HEA+paper+2007+-+Student+experiences+of+assessment+feedback.pdf?version=1
reinforcement; as information from which to correct 'errors'; as guidance on sociallyconstructed standards; or as an indicator of appropriate discourse (Askew and Lodge, 2000; Fenwick, 2000). Feedback is essential to our lifelong development but its importance is perhaps greatest (and most visible) during periods of formal education: at these times, students are primed to expect assessment feedback from knowledgeable others, and to develop skills of self-assessment for themselves.
Students want .................https://mw.brookes.ac.uk/download/attachments/2851502/HEA+paper+2007+-+Student+experiences+of+assessment+feedback.pdf?version=1
The influence of feedback on learning
‘Knowing what you know and don’t know focuses learning. Students need appropriate feedback on performance to benefit from courses. In getting started, students need help in assessing existing knowledge and competence. In classes, students need frequent opportunities to perform and receive suggestions for improvement. At various points during college, and at the end, students need chances to reflect on what they have learnt, what they still have to learn, and how to assess themselves.’(Chickering & Gamson, 1987)
Y1 Nursing students appear to be aware of the need to follow certain conventions to write academic essays successfully but are unaware of what they are. Begin with language, style, format, referencing, understnading the questions etc. wikis allow the frequent opportunities that students need to perform and receive suggestions for improvement. Between sessions they have the chance to reflect on what they have learnt and what they still need to learn
Conventionally, feedback is conceptualized as an issue of ‘correction of errors’ (Bruner, 1974) or ‘knowledge of results’ in relation to learning itself; if a student is informed that she is accurate then she will learn. In this article we are concerned with how the provision of feedback affects student learning behaviour — with how feedback results in students taking action that involves, or does not involve, further learning.
BRUNER, J.S. (1974) Toward a Theory of Instruction, Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press.
CHICKERING, A.W. & GAMSON, Z.F. (1987) Seven Principles to Good Practice in Undergraduate Education, Racine, Wi.: The Johnson Foundation Inc.
Y1 Nursing students appear to be aware of the need to follow certain conventions to write academic essays successfully but are unaware of what they are. Begin with language, style, format, referencing, understnading the questions etc. wikis allow the frequent opportunities that students need to perform and receive suggestions for improvement. Between sessions they have the chance to reflect on what they have learnt and what they still need to learn
Conventionally, feedback is conceptualized as an issue of ‘correction of errors’ (Bruner, 1974) or ‘knowledge of results’ in relation to learning itself; if a student is informed that she is accurate then she will learn. In this article we are concerned with how the provision of feedback affects student learning behaviour — with how feedback results in students taking action that involves, or does not involve, further learning.
BRUNER, J.S. (1974) Toward a Theory of Instruction, Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press.
CHICKERING, A.W. & GAMSON, Z.F. (1987) Seven Principles to Good Practice in Undergraduate Education, Racine, Wi.: The Johnson Foundation Inc.
Conditions Under Which Assessment Supports Students’ Learning
ABSTRACT
Much evaluation of teaching focuses on what teachers do in class. This article focuses on the evaluation of assessment arrangements and the way they affect student learning out of class. It is assumed that assessment has an overwhelming influence on what, how and how much students study. The article proposes a set of ‘conditions under which assessment supports learning’ and justifies these with reference to theory, empirical evidence and practical experience. These conditions are offered as a framework for teachers to review the effectiveness of their own assessment practice.
Much evaluation of teaching focuses on what teachers do in class. This article focuses on the evaluation of assessment arrangements and the way they affect student learning out of class. It is assumed that assessment has an overwhelming influence on what, how and how much students study. The article proposes a set of ‘conditions under which assessment supports learning’ and justifies these with reference to theory, empirical evidence and practical experience. These conditions are offered as a framework for teachers to review the effectiveness of their own assessment practice.
Student Engagement, Visual Learning and Technology: Can Interactive
Abstract: The purpose of this action research study was to determine the effect of the use of
interactive whiteboards as an instructional tool on student engagement. Specifically, the desire was
to see if student engagement in the learning process is increased while using an interactive
whiteboard to deliver instruction. In addition, an effort was made to determine if methodology
impacts the level at which students are engaged in the learning environment when a whiteboard is
used in the classroom. In other words, does the manner in which the whiteboard is used affect the
level of student engagement? A total of ten middle school teachers and 197 students participated
in the study. In each of the ten classes, the teacher presented a lesson using an interactive
whiteboard. After the lesson, students were given a survey, and some students completed a
questionnaire. Teachers also completed a survey and questionnaire. The results of the surveys and
questionnaires indicated a strong preference for the use of interactive whiteboards in the classroom.
The results will be used to make further technology spending decisions at our school.
Introduction
As the Instructional Technology Coordinator and School Improvement Steering Committee Chairperson, I
am responsible for identifying ways that technology can be used to improve the learning environment for teachers
and students at our school. The goal is to create learning environments where students are actively engaged in the
learning process. Student engagement is one of most important factors that affect teaching and student motivation to
learn. When students are apathetic toward learning, a barrier to learning is created. One current method of
delivering instruction that may assist with engaging students in the learning process is the use of interactive
whiteboards. Thus far, our school has invested in six interactive whiteboards, along with the computers and
projectors necessary to operate them, at a cost of approximately six thousand dollars each. Our school is interested
in continuing to invest in whiteboards only if this technology is making a positive difference in the teaching and
learning environment for our teachers and students.
The whiteboard can be used to deliver instruction in a variety of ways that may be categorized based on
three modalities of learning. The first modality is visual learning. Visual learning through the use of a whiteboard
can range from the use of text and pictures to the use of animation and video. Auditory learning is the second
modality. Activities that involve auditory learning include the use of words orally for pronunciation, speeches, and
poems. The use of auditory learning might also include listening to sounds or music. The third modality of learning
is tactile. Allowing students to physically interact with the board can assist with meeting the needs of tactile
learners. Numerous software programs can be used that involve user contact with the whiteboard. The extent to
which each of these three modalities is incorporated into a lesson may determine the extent to which students are
engaged in the learning process and, thus, are motivated to learn.
My hypothesis was that instructional approaches using an interactive whiteboard will increase the level of
student engagement during the learning process in the classroom. Furthermore, the extent to which students will be
engaged will be determined by the number of learning modalities used by the teacher and the richness of those uses.
Literature Review
Of the many forms of technology now available for use by teachers with their students in the classroom,
interactive whiteboards may provide a significant potential for meeting the needs of students with diverse learning
styles and for engaging students during the learning process. The interactive whiteboard is a technology medium
that began to be used in classrooms in the late 1990’s. Whiteboards generally range in size from forty-two inches to
seventy-two inches diagonally. The boards can be wall-mounted or placed on a separately purchased stand.
Whiteboards allow teachers and students to interact with technology in a manner that was not previously possible.
The touch-sensitive board allows users to interact directly with applications without having to be physically at the
computer which is projecting the image onto the board. Elements of text, graphics, sound, animation, and video
help teachers create lessons that interest and engage students during the learning process (Biology, 1999). In
addition to information derived from software and the Internet, information can be typed using a computer keyboard
or handwritten directly on the board using a wide range of colors and saved for future use. Whiteboards utilize a
synchronous transmission mode. Synchronous transmission modes provide two-way interaction between the teacher
or student and the medium. This level of participation allows a wider range of participation by the student, leading
to an increased state of engagement, and an enhanced learning environment (Bryant & Hunton, 2000). Whiteboards
also have an asynchronous function, allowing captured material to be shared on paper or electronically at a later
time.
Student engagement is critical to student motivation during the learning process. The more students are
motivated to learn, the more likely it is that they will be successful in their efforts. Numerous factors influence
student motivation including parental involvement, teacher motivation and skills, and effective use of technology.
Technology can be utilized to create a motivating classroom environment where students are engaged in learning.
An environment where technology is used in innovative ways leads to improved learning and teaching (Wishart &
Blease, 1999). Classroom learning is also enhanced through the use of visuals. Visuals promote a student’s ability
to organize and process information (McKendrick & Bowden, 1999). Visuals can also be utilized to challenge
students to think on levels that require higher order thinking skills (Smith & Blankinship, 2000). Finally,
technology provides opportunities for teachers to meet the needs of students with various learning styles through the
use of multiple media (Bryant & Hunton, 2000).
The purpose of this action research study was to determine the effect of the use of the interactive
whiteboard as an instructional tool on student engagement. Specifically, the following research ques tions were
addressed:
1. Does the use of an interactive whiteboard as an instructional tool affect student engagement?
2. Does the method in which an interactive whiteboard is used as an instructional tool in the classroom affect
the degree to which students are engaged?
Methods
In order to address whether or not an interactive whiteboard engages students during the learning process,
data was collected as individual teachers used whiteboards in their classrooms. At our school, teachers utilize
whiteboards in their classrooms by signing-up on a calendar in the school media center. The ten teachers who
participated in this study were chosen based on who had signed up to use a whiteboard and on who was willing to
participate in the study. Teachers were also chosen based on the researcher’s availability to be present in the
classroom to collect data on the day the teachers had signed up to use a whiteboard. Once a teacher was chosen to
participate in the study, the appropriate consent forms were completed and filed. Consent was sought and obtained
from school and school system administration, the teachers involved, and from students and their parents. The total
number of student participants who completed surveys was 197. The total number of students who comp leted
questionnaires was 20.
Student engagement and motivation to learn was measured using two instruments. First, a survey, based on
a modified version of the Computer Attitude Questionnaire originally created by Dr. Rhonda Christensen and Dr.
Gerald Knezek (Christensen & Knezek, 1997), was given to students immediately following the use of the
whiteboard in class. The information from this survey was used to determine student attitude toward the use of a
whiteboard in the classroom. In addition, student attitude toward the use of a whiteboard in the classroom was
measured by having two students from each class complete a questionnaire. The teacher was asked to identify one
student who most likely enjoyed the use of the whiteboard and one who most likely did not. The modalities
addressed by the methods that teachers utilized in conjunction with the whiteboard were also recorded. The
researcher used a form to record this information while the teacher was conducting class; the information recorded
identified which learning modalities (visual, auditory, and tactile) were addressed through the use of the whiteboard.
Teacher attitude toward using the whiteboard as a means of delivering instruction was measured using a modified
version of the Teachers' Attitudes Toward Information Technology instrument originally created by Dr. Rhonda
Christensen and Dr. Gerald Knezek (Christensen & Knezek, 1997). In addition, questionnaires were completed by
teachers in order to determine why they choose to use the whiteboard as a means of delivering instruction, as well as
why they chose particular methods of using the whiteboard.
The data collected from surveys and questionnaires was analyzed to determine the level to which students
were engaged during the lesson being taught using the whiteboard. The results were then compared to the data
collected on the record of whiteboard use form to determine if there is a connection between the levels at which
students were motivated to learn and the method in which the whiteboard was used to deliver instruction. The
teacher surveys and questionnaire results were analyzed to determine teacher attitudes toward using the whiteboard
as an instructional tool.
Results
The dependent variable in this study was student engagement in the learning process when a whiteboard is
used in the classroom as an instructional tool. Engagement was measured as students responded to each of twenty
survey questions on a 1 to 4 scale. A response of 1 indicated that the student strongly disagreed with the statement,
2 signified disagreement, 3 agreement, and 4 strong agreement. Figure 1 below indicates the average rating of the
responses for each question.
Question Average
rating
Standard
deviation
1. I enjoy learning with a whiteboard. 3.8 0.10
2. I do not (do) like receiving instruction through a whiteboard.* 3.5 0.18
3. I will be able to get a good job if I learn how to use technology. 3.5 0.11
4. I concentrate better in class when a whiteboard is used to deliver instruction. 3.4 0.15
5. I would work harder if my teacher used the whiteboard more often. 3.2 0.22
6. I know that using technology gives me opportunities to learn many new things. 3.6 0.12
7. I can learn many things when my teacher uses a whiteboard. 3.5 0.14
8. I enjoy lessons on the whiteboard. 3.7 0.08
9. I believe that the more often teachers use whiteboards, the more I will enjoy school. 3.4 0.18
10. I believe that it is important for me to learn how to use a whiteboard. 3.2 0.11
11. I feel comfortable using a whiteboard. 3.5 0.11
12. I enjoy using the whiteboard. 3.7 0.14
13. I (do not) think that it takes a longer amount of time to learn when my teacher uses
a whiteboard.*
3.4 0.14
14. Using a whiteboard does not scare me at all. 3.5 0.22
15. Using a whiteboard (does not make) makes me nervous.* 3.5 0.21
16. Using a whiteboard is (not) very frustrating.* 3.5 0.20
17. I will (not) do as little work with technology as possible.* 3.6 0.14
18. Whiteboards are (not) difficult to use.* 3.5 0.19
19. I can(not) learn more from books that the whiteboard.* 3.3 0.16
20. I (do not) get a sinking feeling when I think of trying to use a whiteboard.* 3.7 0.10
Averages 3.48 0.15
*The scoring scale for questions 2, 13, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, and 20 was reversed. The reversed form of the question is
in parenthesis.
Figure 1: Average rating of the responses for each question
On a separate survey, teachers were asked to rate the extent to which they felt delivering instruction using a
whiteboard met each of ten qualities related to student engagement. Each quality was rated on a scale of one to
seven, with seven representing the positive end of the scale. The results of the teacher survey are included in figure
2.
Quality Important Interestin
g
Relevant Exciting Means
a lot
Appealing Fascinating Valuable Involving Needed Avg.
Rating
1 to 7
scale
6 6.8 6.8 6.6 6.3 6.8 6.2 6.4 6.7 6.2 6.48
St. dev. 0.94 0.42 0.42 0.70 0.82 0.42 1.03 0.70 0.67 0.92 0.71
Figure 2 : Teacher survey
Two students from each of the ten classes who participated in this study also completed open-ended
questionnaires. The questions and information regarding student responses are included in the following
paragraphs.
Q1. Describe what you like most when a whiteboard is used in the classroom. Most of the students
indicated that they liked being able to touch-activate applications on the boards, as well as being able to write on it
with pens or even with their fingers. In addition, one student commented, “I concentrate a lot harder when we use
the whiteboard. It teaches us a lot, but it’s lots of fun.”
Q2. Describe what you like least when a whiteboard is used in the classroom. If you could change one
thing about the way the whiteboard is used in the classroom, what would it be and why? Students mentioned a
variety of things in relation to these questions. Several indicated that it was distracting when someone bumped into
either the cart with the projector, or into the board, and the board had to be oriented again. Others mentioned that
they felt the board was somewhat difficult to write on because of a shadow effect caused when their hand blocked
the light from the projector. The researcher’s classroom observations noted some had difficulty touching the board
with only the tip of the markers, which caused stray marks to be created on the board. One student stated, “I least
like the board when you try to write. When you touch the board with your arm, it makes lines you didn’t mean to
make.” When word processing programs were used, some students mentioned difficulty being able to read the text
on the board. Other things that students mentioned they would change included the size of the legs on the stand that
holds the board and the cords that run across the floor to connect the computer to the whiteboard, to the network,
and to a power source.
Q3. Do you believe you are able to learn better when a whiteboard is used in the classroom? All of the
students responded affirmatively to this question except one. The one student who did not report positive effects
commented, “I don’t think so because I was brought up learning from books so it is going to take getting used to.”
Students who responded affirmatively mentioned that they felt they learned better because the visual aspects of the
whiteboard made it easier to understand what the teacher was teaching. They also mentioned that, when the teacher
used the whiteboard, the lessons were much more interesting. For example, one student stated, “It makes me pay
attention to the teacher more. When the teacher just stands up there and talks, I get easily distracted.”
Q4. Does the use of a whiteboard in the classroom help you to be able to pay better attention? Why or why
not? All but one of the students who completed a questionnaire responded that they felt they were able to pay better
attention when a whiteboard was used in their classrooms. Most of the comments were related to the visual and
interactive nature of the board. One student stated, “I am sometimes not able to understand the book. The teacher
explains it better when the whiteboard is up there.” Another student responded, “Yes, because you get to participate
with it more than just regular classwork.” However, one student stated, “Yes and no. I like the board because it’s
not your everyday blackboard. It’s fun to use but can be frustrating.”
Q5. Did the visuals projected on the board help you to better learn the information? Why or why not?
Many of the students responded that seeing the information helped them to understand it better. As an example, two
of the students provided almost identical quotes, “To some people, when you speak to them, it goes in one ear and
out the other. The visuals help it to stick.”
Q6. Did the use of sound help you to better learn the information? Why or why not? Not many students
responded to this question because sound was used in only six of the ten classrooms. Of those responding, most
indicated that the use of sound made the lessons more interesting. One student stated, “Ye s because it made it more
fun to listen to and it wasn’t at all boring.”
Q7. Does having the opportunity to touch and interact with the board affect your learning? Why or why
not? All students responding to this question, except one, mentioned that the use of touch affected their learning in
a positive way. One student stated, “Yes, I get into learning when it’s hands-on. When I just listen, I don’t
understand as well.” Other students mentioned that touching the board made their learning experiences more fun
and interesting. One student did comment, “It really doesn’t do anything. I still learn about the same.”
In addition to the student questionnaires, each of the ten teachers also completed an open-ended
questionnaire. The themes of the questions and a sample of teacher responses are included below:
Q1. What do you like most about teaching with a whiteboard? In response to this question, most teachers
used terms and phrases such as “engaged,” “very attentive,” “active participation,” and “increased student interest”
to describe the difference in student involvement when lessons were delivered using a whiteboard. In addition,
teachers mentioned being able to vary instruction by using the Internet and interactive software, as well as video and
sound. One teacher stated that the whiteboard helped to make “current events come to life.” Another teacher
commented, “Students’ attention is automatically on the lesson, no matter what the subject. As soon as they enter
the room and see the board, they are immediately interested in what you have planned for class that day.” Still
another teacher commented, “I enjoy seeing my students engaged. When I use the whiteboard, I tend to stay away
from lecturing. The whiteboard makes it easier to be a facilitator and allows the students more freedom to teach and
learn from each other.” The teachers also mentioned the convenience of being able to save notes and other
information to be used in the future.
Q2. What do you like least about teaching with a whiteboard? What issues, if any, do you feel need to be
resolved for the whiteboard to be a more effective tool in the classroom?
Most of the comments made by teachers were related to having to reorient the board if the cart holding the computer
and projector, or the whiteboard itself, were moved. A couple of teachers mentioned that there was a slight glare
from the projector, and that a shadow cast from your hand when you try to write makes the process of writing on the
board more difficult. Another teacher mentioned that her classroom was small and that the whiteboard took up a lot
of room. One teacher commented, “Of course, if there are problems with the technology aspect that I don’t know
how to correct, I feel very unprepared and feel like I always need a backup plan. It can be very frustrating to not
know how to fix something or operate some component.” Other comments were related to the teacher and students
tripping over the legs of the stand and having to be mindful of cords going across the floor. Many of the comments
made in response to this question were followed by suggestions related to providing a permanent, wall-mounted
whiteboard with a ceiling mounted projector in each classroom.
Q3. Do you believe using the whiteboard affects the extent to which students are engaged in the learning
process in your classroom? All of the teachers felt that the whiteboard did improve student engagement during the
lesson taught using a whiteboard. Most of the teachers attributed this to the students being able to see the
information, touch the board, and, in some cases, being able to hear sounds. One teacher commented, “Yes, because
I think students can see the whiteboard better than a chalkboard or overhead transparency, and the whiteboard
engages them more. Also, students, especially middle school age, love the opportunity to get out of their desks,
touch things, tap things, and show off. The whiteboard is great for this kind of engagement.” Another commented,
“After one lesson with the board, I feel confident that 99% of my students were engaged in the lesson. It is
especially effective with teaching classes who are working below grade level.”
Q4. Do you believe the use of a whiteboard in the classroom contributes to learning? Why or why not?
All of the teachers responded that the whiteboard does contribute to learning because it increases the attention level
of students. One typical comment was that, “the use of the whiteboard contributes to learning because today’s
students seem to be very visual and enjoy hands-on activities. The whiteboard allows for both, and students become
more involved.” Another responded, “It contributes to learning because it helps to get students interested, and
anything that interests them and keeps their attention helps them learn. It’s also a tool that easily lets students
actively participate and gets them involved in the lesson.”
Q5. In what ways, if any, does a whiteboard address the three modalities of learning: visual, auditory, and
tactile? All of the teachers recognized the use of graphics, animation, and video as helping to meet the visual needs
of students. They also recognized that allowing students to interact with the board themselves positively impacted
the needs of tactile learners. While not all teachers utilized sound when teaching with the whiteboard, all recognized
that the auditory needs of students were also positively impacted either through software or the dialogue created
between teachers and students when the whiteboard is used.
Discussion
The purpose of this action research study was to determine the effect of the use of interactive whiteboards
as an instructional tool on student engagement. Specifically, to see if student engagement in the learning process is
increased while using an interactive whiteboard to deliver instruction. In addition, an effort was made to determine
if methodology impacts the level at which students are engaged in the learning environment when a whiteboard is
used in the classroom.
The first research question addressed in this study was: Does the use of an interactive whiteboard as an
instructional tool affect student engagement? The unequivocal answer, based on the results of both the surveys and
questionnaires, is yes. On the student survey, there were no questions that were rated anything less than a three
(agree). The average for all twenty questions from all ten classes was 3.48 or midway between “agree” and
“strongly agree”. The statements with which the students agreed most often were all related to enjoying using the
whiteboard in the classroom (questions 1, 8, 12, 20). The same results were apparent on the teacher survey.
Teachers rated each of ten qualities related to using the whiteboard in the classroom on a one to seven scale, with
seven being at the positive end of the scale. Of the ten qualities measured on the survey, none received less than an
average score of six. The characteristics that were rated the highest were that instruction delivered using a
whiteboard was interesting (6.8), relevant (6.8), appealing (6.8) and involving (6.7). All of these are characteristics
that contribute to increased student engagement. The characteristics that were rated the lowest were that instruction
delivered using a whiteboard was important (6), fascinating (6.2), and needed (6.2). While these three
characteristics were rated the lowest, they each still received an average rating of six or better out of seven.
The second research question addressed in this study was: Does the method in which an interactive
whiteboard is used as an instructional tool in the classroom affect the degree to which students are engaged? The
answer to this question was determined by comparing how the whiteboard was used in the classroom to the student
responses on the survey. The manner in which the teacher used the whiteboard was recorded on a form based on the
observations of the researcher. Data that was recorded included the frequency with which text, graphics, video, and
sound were used during the course of the lesson. In addition, the number of times that students and the teacher made
physical contact by touching the board was recorded. Based on the results of the student survey, there was a
correlation between how highly the whiteboard was rated based on the type of media that was used, but not based on
how much the students were allowed to interact with the whiteboard. Somewhat surprisingly, four of the five
classes that ranked the use of the whiteboard the highest (3.5, 3.5, 3.54, 3.55) were the four classes where students
were allowed to interact with the board the least. As a matter of fact, in two of the four classes, students did not
have an opportunity to touch the whiteboard at all. However, it was also these classes that made the best use of
multimedia. The activities in these classes included interactive math software where students viewed a video and
then used math to rescue a lost camper in the woods, the use of video transmitted over the Internet to study current
events, the use of an interactive PowerPoint Jeopardy review board to review concepts learned in a science class,
and the use of Inspiration software to create a literature story concept map. Among the four classes, only six students
touched the board a total of seventeen times. In the remaining six classes, the ratings of the whiteboard by students
were almost identical (3.43, 3.44, 3.43, 3.46, 3.4), with the exception of one class (3.51). The activities in these
classes centered mostly on the use of text. The activities included either correcting grammatical mistakes in a typed
article or completing analogies. It must be noted here that it is possible that the nature of the activity, the
accompanying software and the level of engagement built into the lesson may have been factors that contributed to
the positive effect, in addition to or rather than the whiteboard in these lessons.
The results of this study indicate that interactive whiteboards can be used in the classroom to increase
student engagement during the learning process. This information will be helpful to schools and school system
leaders as important decisions are made regarding future spending of technology funding. The findings of this
research will be disseminated to teachers and to building and system level administrators. Based on the results of
this study, I would recommend that interactive whiteboards be purchased with the intention that they be permanently
housed within a classroom. Doing so will eliminate many of the reservations that teachers and students had about
using whiteboards in the classroom. Specifically, wall-mounted whiteboards and ceiling-mounted projectors in
individual classrooms would eliminate teachers and students tripping over the legs of whiteboard stands and the
cords that would otherwise run along the floor. These would also eliminate the need to reorient the board due to the
board or the projector being bumped accidentally. The negative factors in configuring classrooms with wallmounted
whiteboards and ceiling-mounted projectors include the amount of funds necessary to facilitate each room
with the equipment, and the fact that the whiteboards and projectors could then no longer be shared among
classrooms.
There are many issues related to the use of the whiteboard in the classroom that still need to be examined.
First of all, before resources are utilized to begin permanently placing whiteboards in classrooms, information needs
to be gathered on whether or not all teachers prefer to have whiteboards in their classrooms. There is no need to
begin spending funds on placing whiteboards in the classrooms of teachers who do not prefer or plan to use them.
One factor that may be involved with this issue is whether or not teachers feel adequately trained to integrate
whiteboards, and technology in general, into their curricula. On the issue of resources, it would also be appropriate
to study methods of obtaining the funding to place more whiteboards into classrooms. Finally, it must be noted once
again that it is possible that the nature of the activities, the accompanying software programs and the level of
engagement built into the lessons may have been factors that contributed to the positive effect of whiteboard use in
this study, in addition to or rather than the whiteboard itself. Therefore, more study would need to be conducted on
the types and natures of lessons that are delivered in conjunction with the use of whiteboards.
The results of this study indicate that the use of interactive whiteboards in the classroom does lead to
increased student engagement. The primary reason appears to be the visual aspects of using the whiteboard.
Therefore, school and technology leaders need to be aware of the potential these whiteboards have for increasing
student achievement through increased student engagement. Effectively using this information, in conjunction with
other school improvement efforts, has the potential to greatly assist educators in their efforts to attract and maintain
student attention and to improve student achievement.
References
Anderman, L. H., & Midgley, C. (1998). Motivation and middle school students. ERIC Digest, ED421281.
Retrieved June 26, 2001 from the ERIC digest on GALILEO on the World Wide Web:
http://www.ed.gov/databases/ERIC_Digests/ed421281.html
Atkinson, E. S. (2000). An investigation into the relationship between teacher motivation and pupil motivation.
Educational Psychology, 20(1), 45-57. Retrieved June 18, 2001 from Academic Search Elite on GALILEO:
http://www.galileo.peachnet.edu
Biology comes alive at Wilson magnet high school. (1999). T.H.E. Journal, 27(4), 110. Retrieved June 22, 2001
from Academic Search Elite on GALILEO: http://www.galileo.peachnet.edu
Bryant, S. M. and Hunton, J. E. (2000). The use of technology in the delivery of instruction: imp lications for
accounting educators and education researchers. Issues in Accounting Education, 15(1), 129-163. Retrieved June
18, 2001 from Academic Search Elite on GALILEO: http://www.galileo.peachnet.edu
Christensen, R. and Knezek, G. (1997). Computer attitude questionnaire. Retrieved June 25, 2001 from the
Institute for Integration of Technology into Teaching and Learning website at the University of North Texas:
http://iittl.unt.edu/pt3II/toc.htm#_Toc498406723
Christensen, R. and Knezek, G. (1997). Teachers’ attitudes toward information technology. Retrieved June 25,
2001 from the Institute for Integration of Technology into Teaching and Learning website at the University of North
Texas: http://iittl.unt.edu/pt3II/toc.htm#_Toc498406723
McKendrick, J. H., & Bowden, A. (1999). Something for everyone? An evaluation of the use of audio-visual
resources in geographical learning in the UK. Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 23(1), 9-20. Retrieved
June 18, 2001 from Academic Search Elite on GALILEO: http://www.galileo.peachnet.edu
Smith, B. K., & Blankinship, E. (2000). Justifying imagery: multimedia support for learning through exploration.
IBM Systems Journal, 39(3/4), 749-768. Retrieved June 20, 2001 from Academic Search Elite on GALILEO:
http://www.galileo.peachnet.edu
Wishart, J., & Blease, D. (1999). Theories underlying perceived changes in teaching and learning after installing a
computer network in a secondary school. British Journal of Educational Technology, 30(1), 25-42. Retrieved June
21, 2001 from Academic Search Elite on GALILEO: http://www.galileo.peachnet.edu
interactive whiteboards as an instructional tool on student engagement. Specifically, the desire was
to see if student engagement in the learning process is increased while using an interactive
whiteboard to deliver instruction. In addition, an effort was made to determine if methodology
impacts the level at which students are engaged in the learning environment when a whiteboard is
used in the classroom. In other words, does the manner in which the whiteboard is used affect the
level of student engagement? A total of ten middle school teachers and 197 students participated
in the study. In each of the ten classes, the teacher presented a lesson using an interactive
whiteboard. After the lesson, students were given a survey, and some students completed a
questionnaire. Teachers also completed a survey and questionnaire. The results of the surveys and
questionnaires indicated a strong preference for the use of interactive whiteboards in the classroom.
The results will be used to make further technology spending decisions at our school.
Introduction
As the Instructional Technology Coordinator and School Improvement Steering Committee Chairperson, I
am responsible for identifying ways that technology can be used to improve the learning environment for teachers
and students at our school. The goal is to create learning environments where students are actively engaged in the
learning process. Student engagement is one of most important factors that affect teaching and student motivation to
learn. When students are apathetic toward learning, a barrier to learning is created. One current method of
delivering instruction that may assist with engaging students in the learning process is the use of interactive
whiteboards. Thus far, our school has invested in six interactive whiteboards, along with the computers and
projectors necessary to operate them, at a cost of approximately six thousand dollars each. Our school is interested
in continuing to invest in whiteboards only if this technology is making a positive difference in the teaching and
learning environment for our teachers and students.
The whiteboard can be used to deliver instruction in a variety of ways that may be categorized based on
three modalities of learning. The first modality is visual learning. Visual learning through the use of a whiteboard
can range from the use of text and pictures to the use of animation and video. Auditory learning is the second
modality. Activities that involve auditory learning include the use of words orally for pronunciation, speeches, and
poems. The use of auditory learning might also include listening to sounds or music. The third modality of learning
is tactile. Allowing students to physically interact with the board can assist with meeting the needs of tactile
learners. Numerous software programs can be used that involve user contact with the whiteboard. The extent to
which each of these three modalities is incorporated into a lesson may determine the extent to which students are
engaged in the learning process and, thus, are motivated to learn.
My hypothesis was that instructional approaches using an interactive whiteboard will increase the level of
student engagement during the learning process in the classroom. Furthermore, the extent to which students will be
engaged will be determined by the number of learning modalities used by the teacher and the richness of those uses.
Literature Review
Of the many forms of technology now available for use by teachers with their students in the classroom,
interactive whiteboards may provide a significant potential for meeting the needs of students with diverse learning
styles and for engaging students during the learning process. The interactive whiteboard is a technology medium
that began to be used in classrooms in the late 1990’s. Whiteboards generally range in size from forty-two inches to
seventy-two inches diagonally. The boards can be wall-mounted or placed on a separately purchased stand.
Whiteboards allow teachers and students to interact with technology in a manner that was not previously possible.
The touch-sensitive board allows users to interact directly with applications without having to be physically at the
computer which is projecting the image onto the board. Elements of text, graphics, sound, animation, and video
help teachers create lessons that interest and engage students during the learning process (Biology, 1999). In
addition to information derived from software and the Internet, information can be typed using a computer keyboard
or handwritten directly on the board using a wide range of colors and saved for future use. Whiteboards utilize a
synchronous transmission mode. Synchronous transmission modes provide two-way interaction between the teacher
or student and the medium. This level of participation allows a wider range of participation by the student, leading
to an increased state of engagement, and an enhanced learning environment (Bryant & Hunton, 2000). Whiteboards
also have an asynchronous function, allowing captured material to be shared on paper or electronically at a later
time.
Student engagement is critical to student motivation during the learning process. The more students are
motivated to learn, the more likely it is that they will be successful in their efforts. Numerous factors influence
student motivation including parental involvement, teacher motivation and skills, and effective use of technology.
Technology can be utilized to create a motivating classroom environment where students are engaged in learning.
An environment where technology is used in innovative ways leads to improved learning and teaching (Wishart &
Blease, 1999). Classroom learning is also enhanced through the use of visuals. Visuals promote a student’s ability
to organize and process information (McKendrick & Bowden, 1999). Visuals can also be utilized to challenge
students to think on levels that require higher order thinking skills (Smith & Blankinship, 2000). Finally,
technology provides opportunities for teachers to meet the needs of students with various learning styles through the
use of multiple media (Bryant & Hunton, 2000).
The purpose of this action research study was to determine the effect of the use of the interactive
whiteboard as an instructional tool on student engagement. Specifically, the following research ques tions were
addressed:
1. Does the use of an interactive whiteboard as an instructional tool affect student engagement?
2. Does the method in which an interactive whiteboard is used as an instructional tool in the classroom affect
the degree to which students are engaged?
Methods
In order to address whether or not an interactive whiteboard engages students during the learning process,
data was collected as individual teachers used whiteboards in their classrooms. At our school, teachers utilize
whiteboards in their classrooms by signing-up on a calendar in the school media center. The ten teachers who
participated in this study were chosen based on who had signed up to use a whiteboard and on who was willing to
participate in the study. Teachers were also chosen based on the researcher’s availability to be present in the
classroom to collect data on the day the teachers had signed up to use a whiteboard. Once a teacher was chosen to
participate in the study, the appropriate consent forms were completed and filed. Consent was sought and obtained
from school and school system administration, the teachers involved, and from students and their parents. The total
number of student participants who completed surveys was 197. The total number of students who comp leted
questionnaires was 20.
Student engagement and motivation to learn was measured using two instruments. First, a survey, based on
a modified version of the Computer Attitude Questionnaire originally created by Dr. Rhonda Christensen and Dr.
Gerald Knezek (Christensen & Knezek, 1997), was given to students immediately following the use of the
whiteboard in class. The information from this survey was used to determine student attitude toward the use of a
whiteboard in the classroom. In addition, student attitude toward the use of a whiteboard in the classroom was
measured by having two students from each class complete a questionnaire. The teacher was asked to identify one
student who most likely enjoyed the use of the whiteboard and one who most likely did not. The modalities
addressed by the methods that teachers utilized in conjunction with the whiteboard were also recorded. The
researcher used a form to record this information while the teacher was conducting class; the information recorded
identified which learning modalities (visual, auditory, and tactile) were addressed through the use of the whiteboard.
Teacher attitude toward using the whiteboard as a means of delivering instruction was measured using a modified
version of the Teachers' Attitudes Toward Information Technology instrument originally created by Dr. Rhonda
Christensen and Dr. Gerald Knezek (Christensen & Knezek, 1997). In addition, questionnaires were completed by
teachers in order to determine why they choose to use the whiteboard as a means of delivering instruction, as well as
why they chose particular methods of using the whiteboard.
The data collected from surveys and questionnaires was analyzed to determine the level to which students
were engaged during the lesson being taught using the whiteboard. The results were then compared to the data
collected on the record of whiteboard use form to determine if there is a connection between the levels at which
students were motivated to learn and the method in which the whiteboard was used to deliver instruction. The
teacher surveys and questionnaire results were analyzed to determine teacher attitudes toward using the whiteboard
as an instructional tool.
Results
The dependent variable in this study was student engagement in the learning process when a whiteboard is
used in the classroom as an instructional tool. Engagement was measured as students responded to each of twenty
survey questions on a 1 to 4 scale. A response of 1 indicated that the student strongly disagreed with the statement,
2 signified disagreement, 3 agreement, and 4 strong agreement. Figure 1 below indicates the average rating of the
responses for each question.
Question Average
rating
Standard
deviation
1. I enjoy learning with a whiteboard. 3.8 0.10
2. I do not (do) like receiving instruction through a whiteboard.* 3.5 0.18
3. I will be able to get a good job if I learn how to use technology. 3.5 0.11
4. I concentrate better in class when a whiteboard is used to deliver instruction. 3.4 0.15
5. I would work harder if my teacher used the whiteboard more often. 3.2 0.22
6. I know that using technology gives me opportunities to learn many new things. 3.6 0.12
7. I can learn many things when my teacher uses a whiteboard. 3.5 0.14
8. I enjoy lessons on the whiteboard. 3.7 0.08
9. I believe that the more often teachers use whiteboards, the more I will enjoy school. 3.4 0.18
10. I believe that it is important for me to learn how to use a whiteboard. 3.2 0.11
11. I feel comfortable using a whiteboard. 3.5 0.11
12. I enjoy using the whiteboard. 3.7 0.14
13. I (do not) think that it takes a longer amount of time to learn when my teacher uses
a whiteboard.*
3.4 0.14
14. Using a whiteboard does not scare me at all. 3.5 0.22
15. Using a whiteboard (does not make) makes me nervous.* 3.5 0.21
16. Using a whiteboard is (not) very frustrating.* 3.5 0.20
17. I will (not) do as little work with technology as possible.* 3.6 0.14
18. Whiteboards are (not) difficult to use.* 3.5 0.19
19. I can(not) learn more from books that the whiteboard.* 3.3 0.16
20. I (do not) get a sinking feeling when I think of trying to use a whiteboard.* 3.7 0.10
Averages 3.48 0.15
*The scoring scale for questions 2, 13, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, and 20 was reversed. The reversed form of the question is
in parenthesis.
Figure 1: Average rating of the responses for each question
On a separate survey, teachers were asked to rate the extent to which they felt delivering instruction using a
whiteboard met each of ten qualities related to student engagement. Each quality was rated on a scale of one to
seven, with seven representing the positive end of the scale. The results of the teacher survey are included in figure
2.
Quality Important Interestin
g
Relevant Exciting Means
a lot
Appealing Fascinating Valuable Involving Needed Avg.
Rating
1 to 7
scale
6 6.8 6.8 6.6 6.3 6.8 6.2 6.4 6.7 6.2 6.48
St. dev. 0.94 0.42 0.42 0.70 0.82 0.42 1.03 0.70 0.67 0.92 0.71
Figure 2 : Teacher survey
Two students from each of the ten classes who participated in this study also completed open-ended
questionnaires. The questions and information regarding student responses are included in the following
paragraphs.
Q1. Describe what you like most when a whiteboard is used in the classroom. Most of the students
indicated that they liked being able to touch-activate applications on the boards, as well as being able to write on it
with pens or even with their fingers. In addition, one student commented, “I concentrate a lot harder when we use
the whiteboard. It teaches us a lot, but it’s lots of fun.”
Q2. Describe what you like least when a whiteboard is used in the classroom. If you could change one
thing about the way the whiteboard is used in the classroom, what would it be and why? Students mentioned a
variety of things in relation to these questions. Several indicated that it was distracting when someone bumped into
either the cart with the projector, or into the board, and the board had to be oriented again. Others mentioned that
they felt the board was somewhat difficult to write on because of a shadow effect caused when their hand blocked
the light from the projector. The researcher’s classroom observations noted some had difficulty touching the board
with only the tip of the markers, which caused stray marks to be created on the board. One student stated, “I least
like the board when you try to write. When you touch the board with your arm, it makes lines you didn’t mean to
make.” When word processing programs were used, some students mentioned difficulty being able to read the text
on the board. Other things that students mentioned they would change included the size of the legs on the stand that
holds the board and the cords that run across the floor to connect the computer to the whiteboard, to the network,
and to a power source.
Q3. Do you believe you are able to learn better when a whiteboard is used in the classroom? All of the
students responded affirmatively to this question except one. The one student who did not report positive effects
commented, “I don’t think so because I was brought up learning from books so it is going to take getting used to.”
Students who responded affirmatively mentioned that they felt they learned better because the visual aspects of the
whiteboard made it easier to understand what the teacher was teaching. They also mentioned that, when the teacher
used the whiteboard, the lessons were much more interesting. For example, one student stated, “It makes me pay
attention to the teacher more. When the teacher just stands up there and talks, I get easily distracted.”
Q4. Does the use of a whiteboard in the classroom help you to be able to pay better attention? Why or why
not? All but one of the students who completed a questionnaire responded that they felt they were able to pay better
attention when a whiteboard was used in their classrooms. Most of the comments were related to the visual and
interactive nature of the board. One student stated, “I am sometimes not able to understand the book. The teacher
explains it better when the whiteboard is up there.” Another student responded, “Yes, because you get to participate
with it more than just regular classwork.” However, one student stated, “Yes and no. I like the board because it’s
not your everyday blackboard. It’s fun to use but can be frustrating.”
Q5. Did the visuals projected on the board help you to better learn the information? Why or why not?
Many of the students responded that seeing the information helped them to understand it better. As an example, two
of the students provided almost identical quotes, “To some people, when you speak to them, it goes in one ear and
out the other. The visuals help it to stick.”
Q6. Did the use of sound help you to better learn the information? Why or why not? Not many students
responded to this question because sound was used in only six of the ten classrooms. Of those responding, most
indicated that the use of sound made the lessons more interesting. One student stated, “Ye s because it made it more
fun to listen to and it wasn’t at all boring.”
Q7. Does having the opportunity to touch and interact with the board affect your learning? Why or why
not? All students responding to this question, except one, mentioned that the use of touch affected their learning in
a positive way. One student stated, “Yes, I get into learning when it’s hands-on. When I just listen, I don’t
understand as well.” Other students mentioned that touching the board made their learning experiences more fun
and interesting. One student did comment, “It really doesn’t do anything. I still learn about the same.”
In addition to the student questionnaires, each of the ten teachers also completed an open-ended
questionnaire. The themes of the questions and a sample of teacher responses are included below:
Q1. What do you like most about teaching with a whiteboard? In response to this question, most teachers
used terms and phrases such as “engaged,” “very attentive,” “active participation,” and “increased student interest”
to describe the difference in student involvement when lessons were delivered using a whiteboard. In addition,
teachers mentioned being able to vary instruction by using the Internet and interactive software, as well as video and
sound. One teacher stated that the whiteboard helped to make “current events come to life.” Another teacher
commented, “Students’ attention is automatically on the lesson, no matter what the subject. As soon as they enter
the room and see the board, they are immediately interested in what you have planned for class that day.” Still
another teacher commented, “I enjoy seeing my students engaged. When I use the whiteboard, I tend to stay away
from lecturing. The whiteboard makes it easier to be a facilitator and allows the students more freedom to teach and
learn from each other.” The teachers also mentioned the convenience of being able to save notes and other
information to be used in the future.
Q2. What do you like least about teaching with a whiteboard? What issues, if any, do you feel need to be
resolved for the whiteboard to be a more effective tool in the classroom?
Most of the comments made by teachers were related to having to reorient the board if the cart holding the computer
and projector, or the whiteboard itself, were moved. A couple of teachers mentioned that there was a slight glare
from the projector, and that a shadow cast from your hand when you try to write makes the process of writing on the
board more difficult. Another teacher mentioned that her classroom was small and that the whiteboard took up a lot
of room. One teacher commented, “Of course, if there are problems with the technology aspect that I don’t know
how to correct, I feel very unprepared and feel like I always need a backup plan. It can be very frustrating to not
know how to fix something or operate some component.” Other comments were related to the teacher and students
tripping over the legs of the stand and having to be mindful of cords going across the floor. Many of the comments
made in response to this question were followed by suggestions related to providing a permanent, wall-mounted
whiteboard with a ceiling mounted projector in each classroom.
Q3. Do you believe using the whiteboard affects the extent to which students are engaged in the learning
process in your classroom? All of the teachers felt that the whiteboard did improve student engagement during the
lesson taught using a whiteboard. Most of the teachers attributed this to the students being able to see the
information, touch the board, and, in some cases, being able to hear sounds. One teacher commented, “Yes, because
I think students can see the whiteboard better than a chalkboard or overhead transparency, and the whiteboard
engages them more. Also, students, especially middle school age, love the opportunity to get out of their desks,
touch things, tap things, and show off. The whiteboard is great for this kind of engagement.” Another commented,
“After one lesson with the board, I feel confident that 99% of my students were engaged in the lesson. It is
especially effective with teaching classes who are working below grade level.”
Q4. Do you believe the use of a whiteboard in the classroom contributes to learning? Why or why not?
All of the teachers responded that the whiteboard does contribute to learning because it increases the attention level
of students. One typical comment was that, “the use of the whiteboard contributes to learning because today’s
students seem to be very visual and enjoy hands-on activities. The whiteboard allows for both, and students become
more involved.” Another responded, “It contributes to learning because it helps to get students interested, and
anything that interests them and keeps their attention helps them learn. It’s also a tool that easily lets students
actively participate and gets them involved in the lesson.”
Q5. In what ways, if any, does a whiteboard address the three modalities of learning: visual, auditory, and
tactile? All of the teachers recognized the use of graphics, animation, and video as helping to meet the visual needs
of students. They also recognized that allowing students to interact with the board themselves positively impacted
the needs of tactile learners. While not all teachers utilized sound when teaching with the whiteboard, all recognized
that the auditory needs of students were also positively impacted either through software or the dialogue created
between teachers and students when the whiteboard is used.
Discussion
The purpose of this action research study was to determine the effect of the use of interactive whiteboards
as an instructional tool on student engagement. Specifically, to see if student engagement in the learning process is
increased while using an interactive whiteboard to deliver instruction. In addition, an effort was made to determine
if methodology impacts the level at which students are engaged in the learning environment when a whiteboard is
used in the classroom.
The first research question addressed in this study was: Does the use of an interactive whiteboard as an
instructional tool affect student engagement? The unequivocal answer, based on the results of both the surveys and
questionnaires, is yes. On the student survey, there were no questions that were rated anything less than a three
(agree). The average for all twenty questions from all ten classes was 3.48 or midway between “agree” and
“strongly agree”. The statements with which the students agreed most often were all related to enjoying using the
whiteboard in the classroom (questions 1, 8, 12, 20). The same results were apparent on the teacher survey.
Teachers rated each of ten qualities related to using the whiteboard in the classroom on a one to seven scale, with
seven being at the positive end of the scale. Of the ten qualities measured on the survey, none received less than an
average score of six. The characteristics that were rated the highest were that instruction delivered using a
whiteboard was interesting (6.8), relevant (6.8), appealing (6.8) and involving (6.7). All of these are characteristics
that contribute to increased student engagement. The characteristics that were rated the lowest were that instruction
delivered using a whiteboard was important (6), fascinating (6.2), and needed (6.2). While these three
characteristics were rated the lowest, they each still received an average rating of six or better out of seven.
The second research question addressed in this study was: Does the method in which an interactive
whiteboard is used as an instructional tool in the classroom affect the degree to which students are engaged? The
answer to this question was determined by comparing how the whiteboard was used in the classroom to the student
responses on the survey. The manner in which the teacher used the whiteboard was recorded on a form based on the
observations of the researcher. Data that was recorded included the frequency with which text, graphics, video, and
sound were used during the course of the lesson. In addition, the number of times that students and the teacher made
physical contact by touching the board was recorded. Based on the results of the student survey, there was a
correlation between how highly the whiteboard was rated based on the type of media that was used, but not based on
how much the students were allowed to interact with the whiteboard. Somewhat surprisingly, four of the five
classes that ranked the use of the whiteboard the highest (3.5, 3.5, 3.54, 3.55) were the four classes where students
were allowed to interact with the board the least. As a matter of fact, in two of the four classes, students did not
have an opportunity to touch the whiteboard at all. However, it was also these classes that made the best use of
multimedia. The activities in these classes included interactive math software where students viewed a video and
then used math to rescue a lost camper in the woods, the use of video transmitted over the Internet to study current
events, the use of an interactive PowerPoint Jeopardy review board to review concepts learned in a science class,
and the use of Inspiration software to create a literature story concept map. Among the four classes, only six students
touched the board a total of seventeen times. In the remaining six classes, the ratings of the whiteboard by students
were almost identical (3.43, 3.44, 3.43, 3.46, 3.4), with the exception of one class (3.51). The activities in these
classes centered mostly on the use of text. The activities included either correcting grammatical mistakes in a typed
article or completing analogies. It must be noted here that it is possible that the nature of the activity, the
accompanying software and the level of engagement built into the lesson may have been factors that contributed to
the positive effect, in addition to or rather than the whiteboard in these lessons.
The results of this study indicate that interactive whiteboards can be used in the classroom to increase
student engagement during the learning process. This information will be helpful to schools and school system
leaders as important decisions are made regarding future spending of technology funding. The findings of this
research will be disseminated to teachers and to building and system level administrators. Based on the results of
this study, I would recommend that interactive whiteboards be purchased with the intention that they be permanently
housed within a classroom. Doing so will eliminate many of the reservations that teachers and students had about
using whiteboards in the classroom. Specifically, wall-mounted whiteboards and ceiling-mounted projectors in
individual classrooms would eliminate teachers and students tripping over the legs of whiteboard stands and the
cords that would otherwise run along the floor. These would also eliminate the need to reorient the board due to the
board or the projector being bumped accidentally. The negative factors in configuring classrooms with wallmounted
whiteboards and ceiling-mounted projectors include the amount of funds necessary to facilitate each room
with the equipment, and the fact that the whiteboards and projectors could then no longer be shared among
classrooms.
There are many issues related to the use of the whiteboard in the classroom that still need to be examined.
First of all, before resources are utilized to begin permanently placing whiteboards in classrooms, information needs
to be gathered on whether or not all teachers prefer to have whiteboards in their classrooms. There is no need to
begin spending funds on placing whiteboards in the classrooms of teachers who do not prefer or plan to use them.
One factor that may be involved with this issue is whether or not teachers feel adequately trained to integrate
whiteboards, and technology in general, into their curricula. On the issue of resources, it would also be appropriate
to study methods of obtaining the funding to place more whiteboards into classrooms. Finally, it must be noted once
again that it is possible that the nature of the activities, the accompanying software programs and the level of
engagement built into the lessons may have been factors that contributed to the positive effect of whiteboard use in
this study, in addition to or rather than the whiteboard itself. Therefore, more study would need to be conducted on
the types and natures of lessons that are delivered in conjunction with the use of whiteboards.
The results of this study indicate that the use of interactive whiteboards in the classroom does lead to
increased student engagement. The primary reason appears to be the visual aspects of using the whiteboard.
Therefore, school and technology leaders need to be aware of the potential these whiteboards have for increasing
student achievement through increased student engagement. Effectively using this information, in conjunction with
other school improvement efforts, has the potential to greatly assist educators in their efforts to attract and maintain
student attention and to improve student achievement.
References
Anderman, L. H., & Midgley, C. (1998). Motivation and middle school students. ERIC Digest, ED421281.
Retrieved June 26, 2001 from the ERIC digest on GALILEO on the World Wide Web:
http://www.ed.gov/databases/ERIC_Digests/ed421281.html
Atkinson, E. S. (2000). An investigation into the relationship between teacher motivation and pupil motivation.
Educational Psychology, 20(1), 45-57. Retrieved June 18, 2001 from Academic Search Elite on GALILEO:
http://www.galileo.peachnet.edu
Biology comes alive at Wilson magnet high school. (1999). T.H.E. Journal, 27(4), 110. Retrieved June 22, 2001
from Academic Search Elite on GALILEO: http://www.galileo.peachnet.edu
Bryant, S. M. and Hunton, J. E. (2000). The use of technology in the delivery of instruction: imp lications for
accounting educators and education researchers. Issues in Accounting Education, 15(1), 129-163. Retrieved June
18, 2001 from Academic Search Elite on GALILEO: http://www.galileo.peachnet.edu
Christensen, R. and Knezek, G. (1997). Computer attitude questionnaire. Retrieved June 25, 2001 from the
Institute for Integration of Technology into Teaching and Learning website at the University of North Texas:
http://iittl.unt.edu/pt3II/toc.htm#_Toc498406723
Christensen, R. and Knezek, G. (1997). Teachers’ attitudes toward information technology. Retrieved June 25,
2001 from the Institute for Integration of Technology into Teaching and Learning website at the University of North
Texas: http://iittl.unt.edu/pt3II/toc.htm#_Toc498406723
McKendrick, J. H., & Bowden, A. (1999). Something for everyone? An evaluation of the use of audio-visual
resources in geographical learning in the UK. Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 23(1), 9-20. Retrieved
June 18, 2001 from Academic Search Elite on GALILEO: http://www.galileo.peachnet.edu
Smith, B. K., & Blankinship, E. (2000). Justifying imagery: multimedia support for learning through exploration.
IBM Systems Journal, 39(3/4), 749-768. Retrieved June 20, 2001 from Academic Search Elite on GALILEO:
http://www.galileo.peachnet.edu
Wishart, J., & Blease, D. (1999). Theories underlying perceived changes in teaching and learning after installing a
computer network in a secondary school. British Journal of Educational Technology, 30(1), 25-42. Retrieved June
21, 2001 from Academic Search Elite on GALILEO: http://www.galileo.peachnet.edu
Tuesday 23 March 2010
My Assignment CO713
Hello Barbara,
Yes, formative assessment is fine.
It might be nice to talk about how the formative approach might be developed toward summative as part of the wider discussion and future work.
Best regards,
Justin
From: Barbara NICOLLS [mailto:bnicol01@bucks.ac.uk]
Sent: 23 March 2010 13:59
To: "ORG-PGCELC"
Subject: CO713: CW1 Summative Assessment and Evaluation: ORG-PGCELC
Can my assingment be on Formative assessment as the language skills component forms part of the pre-reg curriculum and there is no summative assesment as such.
Thanks
Barbara
Yes, formative assessment is fine.
It might be nice to talk about how the formative approach might be developed toward summative as part of the wider discussion and future work.
Best regards,
Justin
From: Barbara NICOLLS [mailto:bnicol01@bucks.ac.uk]
Sent: 23 March 2010 13:59
To: "ORG-PGCELC"
Subject: CO713: CW1 Summative Assessment and Evaluation: ORG-PGCELC
Can my assingment be on Formative assessment as the language skills component forms part of the pre-reg curriculum and there is no summative assesment as such.
Thanks
Barbara
Saturday 13 March 2010
Wiki pedagogy
Abstract
This article endeavours to denote and promote pedagogical experimentations concerning a Free/Open technology called a "Wiki". An intensely simple, accessible and collaborative hypertext tool Wiki software challenges and complexifies traditional notions of - as well as access to - authorship, editing, and publishing. Usurping official authorizing practices in the public domain poses fundamental - if not radical - questions for both academic theory and pedagogical practice.
The particular pedagogical challenge is one of control: wikis work most effectively when students can assert meaningful autonomy over the process. This involves not just adjusting the technical configuration and delivery; it involves challenging the social norms and practices of the course as well (Lamb, 2004). Enacting such horizontal knowledge assemblages in higher education practices could evoke a return towards and an instance upon the making of impossible public goods” (Ciffolilli, 2003).
This article endeavours to denote and promote pedagogical experimentations concerning a Free/Open technology called a "Wiki". An intensely simple, accessible and collaborative hypertext tool Wiki software challenges and complexifies traditional notions of - as well as access to - authorship, editing, and publishing. Usurping official authorizing practices in the public domain poses fundamental - if not radical - questions for both academic theory and pedagogical practice.
The particular pedagogical challenge is one of control: wikis work most effectively when students can assert meaningful autonomy over the process. This involves not just adjusting the technical configuration and delivery; it involves challenging the social norms and practices of the course as well (Lamb, 2004). Enacting such horizontal knowledge assemblages in higher education practices could evoke a return towards and an instance upon the making of impossible public goods” (Ciffolilli, 2003).
Thursday 11 March 2010
Monday 8 March 2010
skills developed through wikis
http://www.ikiw.org/2006/06/03/vicki-davis-westwood-wiki-7-what-skills-do-students-learn-from-using-the-wiki/
to wiki or to blog?
http://exploringweb2tools.wordpress.com/2009/07/26/to-wiki-or-to-blog-that-is-the-question/
Blogs Wikis
Authoring Usually one author Usually many authors
Organization Reverse chronological order By topic
Flexibility Content is not usually edited Always changing
Feedback In the form of comments Readers can comment or make edits directly on page
Content Thoughts Topic knowledge
Purpose Good for communicating information Collaborative building of knowledge
Blogs Wikis
Authoring Usually one author Usually many authors
Organization Reverse chronological order By topic
Flexibility Content is not usually edited Always changing
Feedback In the form of comments Readers can comment or make edits directly on page
Content Thoughts Topic knowledge
Purpose Good for communicating information Collaborative building of knowledge
Technology supported learning
http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Technology_Supported_Learning_&_Retention/Introduction
Using wikis to support small group work
http://www.english.heacademy.ac.uk/explore/publications/casestudies/technology/wiki_smgp.php
Developing Students’ Research And Evaluation Skills Through Closer Integration Between Research And Teaching
http://breo.beds.ac.uk/webapps/lobj-wiki-bb_bb60/wiki/cre8/_413286_1/RiT_Research_and_Evaluation_
Sunday 7 March 2010
The effects of using a wiki on student engagement and learning
Australasian Journal of
Educational Technology
2009, 25(3), 382-398
A wiki was used as part of a blended learning approach to promote collaborative learning among students in a first year university statistics class. One group of students analysed a data set and communicated the results by jointly writing a practice report using a wiki. A second group analysed the same data but communicated the results in a practice report that they wrote individually. Both groups were taught the same material. The report was used for practice as a way to support student learning and was not submitted for assessment. Both approaches improved report writing knowledge and did not differ in the mark obtained on an individually written research report subsequently submitted for assessment. The wiki approach produced higher engagement with other students, cognitive engagement, and class attendance than the individual approach. Qualitative feedback suggested some drawbacks to using a wiki. Overall participation was also low with only 2 of the 22 wiki subgroups completing all components of the practice report. The present findings suggest that student engagement, but not performance on assessment, may be enhanced when a wiki is used to support learning in higher education.
Educational Technology
2009, 25(3), 382-398
A wiki was used as part of a blended learning approach to promote collaborative learning among students in a first year university statistics class. One group of students analysed a data set and communicated the results by jointly writing a practice report using a wiki. A second group analysed the same data but communicated the results in a practice report that they wrote individually. Both groups were taught the same material. The report was used for practice as a way to support student learning and was not submitted for assessment. Both approaches improved report writing knowledge and did not differ in the mark obtained on an individually written research report subsequently submitted for assessment. The wiki approach produced higher engagement with other students, cognitive engagement, and class attendance than the individual approach. Qualitative feedback suggested some drawbacks to using a wiki. Overall participation was also low with only 2 of the 22 wiki subgroups completing all components of the practice report. The present findings suggest that student engagement, but not performance on assessment, may be enhanced when a wiki is used to support learning in higher education.
Saturday 6 March 2010
the academic writing wiki
Writing for the Reader
Books and websites on essay writing very often give you a list of dos and don'ts, but without making much attempt to explain why you're being asked to write in this way. Although this website does offer a few basic rules to follow when you're writing an essay, its emphasis is on explaining the expectations which surround university essays, and academic writing more generally, since if you understand the reasons why you need to provide referencing, for example, you're much more likely to remember actually to do it.
Books and websites on essay writing very often give you a list of dos and don'ts, but without making much attempt to explain why you're being asked to write in this way. Although this website does offer a few basic rules to follow when you're writing an essay, its emphasis is on explaining the expectations which surround university essays, and academic writing more generally, since if you understand the reasons why you need to provide referencing, for example, you're much more likely to remember actually to do it.
Web 2.0 for formative &summative assessment
https://dspace.lboro.ac.uk/dspace-jspui/bitstream/2134/4543/1/Elliott%20B.pdfAssessment 2.0
This paper proposes an update to Assessment 1.0. The updated system will embrace the Internet and, more specifically, Web 2.0 – particularly the four “big ideas” described above. It seeks to bring the 21st century into the examination room.
Characteristics of Assessment 2.0
The type of assessment activity best suited to the digital native would exhibit some or all of the following characteristics.
This paper proposes an update to Assessment 1.0. The updated system will embrace the Internet and, more specifically, Web 2.0 – particularly the four “big ideas” described above. It seeks to bring the 21st century into the examination room.
Characteristics of Assessment 2.0
The type of assessment activity best suited to the digital native would exhibit some or all of the following characteristics.
Wikis for learning and teaching: why and how?
http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/assets/bmaf/documents/events/191108_Wiki_Cubric.pdfSession objectives
To explain the motivation for using wikis in L&T
To outline the blended learning process that can be efficiently supported by wikis
To demonstrate the use of wikis in L&T (Business School experience)
To teach you the basics of wiki editing (StudyNet wiki)
To provide you with practical experience on using wikis to support and empower students in their learning inside and outside of a traditional classroom (Group activity)
To explain the motivation for using wikis in L&T
To outline the blended learning process that can be efficiently supported by wikis
To demonstrate the use of wikis in L&T (Business School experience)
To teach you the basics of wiki editing (StudyNet wiki)
To provide you with practical experience on using wikis to support and empower students in their learning inside and outside of a traditional classroom (Group activity)
Using wikis in the technical writing course
In a technical writing course for Molecular Science and Technology students of Delft University of Technology, writing groups were asked to write their research reports in a wiki. This way, the lecturers could monitor the students’ progress and the number of versions of each document was brought down to one. However, the students were not very positive about this way of writing collaboratively. To find out which requirements have to be met to incorporate writing in wikis more successfully in engineering writing education, a survey was held about the students’ attitude towards writing in a wiki. From this survey and from background literature about wikis in engineering, it becomes clear which requirements have to be fulfilled: firstly, students need to be familiarized more intensively with the technical aspects of writing in wikis. Furthermore, the advantages of wikis for collaboration and text management should be pointed out to them in more detail. Finally, writing in a wiki should resemble the writing in a familiar word processing program as much as possible. For feedback purposes, the wiki should contain reviewing options.
Evaluating Wiki as a tool to promote quality academic writing
In this study we investigated undergraduate teacher trainees' use of wikis, focusing on
the use of shared spaces to communicate ideas and generate course specific content.
We explored how students, through such activities, were to able to improve their
academic writing skills. We discuss writing as a social practice and discuss how wikis
might promote better academic writing. With data derived from student discussion
boards and a post-module e-mail questionnaire (N=35) our findings indicate that most
students raised their skill level in writing as a result of using the wiki space.
Collaborative writing was limited due to students' reluctance to change each others'
work, but students appreciated the shared environment to discuss the course. Students
reported their academic writing skills improved through use of the wiki.
the use of shared spaces to communicate ideas and generate course specific content.
We explored how students, through such activities, were to able to improve their
academic writing skills. We discuss writing as a social practice and discuss how wikis
might promote better academic writing. With data derived from student discussion
boards and a post-module e-mail questionnaire (N=35) our findings indicate that most
students raised their skill level in writing as a result of using the wiki space.
Collaborative writing was limited due to students' reluctance to change each others'
work, but students appreciated the shared environment to discuss the course. Students
reported their academic writing skills improved through use of the wiki.
academic wiki
http://quod.lib.umich.edu/cgi/t/text/text-idx?c=jep;view=text;rgn=main;idno=3336451.0010.202
Teaching & Learning with wikis
http://ascilite.org.au/conferences/perth04/procs/augar.html
Wiki security and trackingPossible problems faced when using wikis for e-learning include inappropriate posting of content and unintentional deletions. Several precautions were taken by SITWiki administrators to ensure that problems relating to the security of wiki content could be avoided if possible and could be rectified if they did occur.
The first step was the development of a set of four clear usage guidelines. Powazek (2002), advises that usage guidelines should be short, simple and written in a positive tone. Consequently, the SITWiki Commandments were developed and are depicted in Figure 8. The guidelines encouraged users to be considerate of others and be active and friendly in their wiki posts. The SITWiki Commandments appeared in a disclaimers page that is a default feature in MediaWiki. A link to the disclaimers page appears on every page in the SITWiki. In addition a link to the SITWiki Commandments was placed above the 'save button' within the editing interface. This ensured that users were reminded about the usage guidelines every time they made a post on the wiki.
Wiki security and trackingPossible problems faced when using wikis for e-learning include inappropriate posting of content and unintentional deletions. Several precautions were taken by SITWiki administrators to ensure that problems relating to the security of wiki content could be avoided if possible and could be rectified if they did occur.
The first step was the development of a set of four clear usage guidelines. Powazek (2002), advises that usage guidelines should be short, simple and written in a positive tone. Consequently, the SITWiki Commandments were developed and are depicted in Figure 8. The guidelines encouraged users to be considerate of others and be active and friendly in their wiki posts. The SITWiki Commandments appeared in a disclaimers page that is a default feature in MediaWiki. A link to the disclaimers page appears on every page in the SITWiki. In addition a link to the SITWiki Commandments was placed above the 'save button' within the editing interface. This ensured that users were reminded about the usage guidelines every time they made a post on the wiki.
Wikis - a tool for distributive writing
http://www.ukcle.ac.uk/resources/ict/wikis.html
Wikis can thus be used for formative feedback, where tutors can give feedback on work in draft form. They can also be used for summative assessment, where the final product is submitted for high-stakes assessment. Wikis can also be used by teachers for more instructional uses, where short articles or comments are generated by a teacher and made available for a class. Such resources may be used as background reading to lectures, tutorials, workshops, student activities, etc.
Wikis can thus be used for formative feedback, where tutors can give feedback on work in draft form. They can also be used for summative assessment, where the final product is submitted for high-stakes assessment. Wikis can also be used by teachers for more instructional uses, where short articles or comments are generated by a teacher and made available for a class. Such resources may be used as background reading to lectures, tutorials, workshops, student activities, etc.
Wiki as a teaching tool
http://ijello.org/Volume3/IJKLOv3p057-072Parker284.pdf
Perhaps the most common pedagogical application of wikis is supporting writing instruction
(Lamb, 2004). Using a wiki as a writing tool maximizes the advantages of reflection, reviewing,
publication, and of observing cumulative written results as they unfold (Fountain, 2005).
Lamb (2004) reports that a wiki called "Why Use Wikis to Teach Writing" lists a number of the
medium’s strengths for the teaching of writing skills:
• wikis stimulate writing ('fun' and 'wiki' are often associated);
• wikis provide a low-cost but effective communication and collaboration tool (with an
emphasis on text rather than software);
• wikis promote the close reading, revision, and tracking of preliminary work;
• wikis discourage 'product oriented writing' while facilitating 'writing as a process'; and
• wikis ease students into writing for a wider audience
Perhaps the most common pedagogical application of wikis is supporting writing instruction
(Lamb, 2004). Using a wiki as a writing tool maximizes the advantages of reflection, reviewing,
publication, and of observing cumulative written results as they unfold (Fountain, 2005).
Lamb (2004) reports that a wiki called "Why Use Wikis to Teach Writing" lists a number of the
medium’s strengths for the teaching of writing skills:
• wikis stimulate writing ('fun' and 'wiki' are often associated);
• wikis provide a low-cost but effective communication and collaboration tool (with an
emphasis on text rather than software);
• wikis promote the close reading, revision, and tracking of preliminary work;
• wikis discourage 'product oriented writing' while facilitating 'writing as a process'; and
• wikis ease students into writing for a wider audience
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)