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