the effects of interactive whiteboards (iwbs) on …

J. EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY SYSTEMS, Vol. 38(3) 255-312, 2009-2010

THE EFFECTS OF INTERACTIVE WHITEBOARDS(IWBs) ON STUDENT PERFORMANCE AND LEARNING:A LITERATURE REVIEW

PETER DIGREGORIO

Suffolk County Community College, Selden, New York

KAREN SOBEL-LOJESKI

Stony Brook University, New York

ABSTRACT

Many K-12 and higher-ed schools in both the United States and the United

Kingdom have made a substantial investment in interactive whiteboard tech-

nology. Interactive whiteboards (IWBs) are generally perceived by students

and teachers as a positive addition to the classroom learning environment.

While there is support for links between IWBs and increases in student

motivation, questions remain about the relationship between IWBs, student

learning, and achievement. In this study a literature review was conducted

to better understand the research to date in this area. Several common themes

surfaced including the effect of IWBs on pedagogy, motivation, interaction,

perception, learning, and achievement. In addition, the research suggests

that these effects are related to contextual factors such as teacher training,

teacher confidence, school culture, technical support, and lesson prepara-

tion and practice time. An IWB framework is suggested and directions for

future research are also discussed.

INTRODUCTION

Interactive whiteboards (IWBs) are being integrated into many classrooms espe-

cially in Great Britain and the United States. Much of the research on IWB effects

255

� 2010, Baywood Publishing Co., Inc.

doi.10.2190/ET.38.3.b

http://baywood.com

come from Great Britain as the technology is part of a $27 billion initiative to

update all primary and secondary schools by 2015 (Schroeder, 2007). Common

themes on IWBs include effects on perception, motivation, attention, behavior,

level of interaction between student, teacher, and IWB, learning, pedagogy, and

achievement. Early evidence suggests that IWBs can have a positive effect on

teaching and learning (Glover, Miller, Averis, & Door, 2007); however, much

of this evidence is anecdotal, or based on case studies making it difficult to

generalize. Existing studies often employ methods such as focus groups, surveys,

and interviews. However, more is needed in terms of quantitative, large sample

studies. Where there is data, studies often contradict one another (Glover, Miller,

Averis, & Door, 2005b; Higgins, Beauchamp, & Miller, 2007; Martin, 2007;

Schuck & Kearney, 2007; Thompson & Flecknoe, 2003). In addition, research to

date does not often take into account the context in which IWBs are used. Nor is

this context considered in terms of how it may affect student outcomes related to

IWB usage in the classroom. Common contextual factors discussed in the current

body of work include school culture, technical support, teacher training, teacher

confidence, and time for teachers to prepare and practice lessons (Schuck &

Kearney, 2007). Contextual factors are important to consider as they help to

explain the direct and indirect links between IWB usage and student learning

and performance.

Current research also suggests that IWBs are used to reinforce current didactic

teaching practices, as teachers can easily use them as a blackboard replacement

(Schuck & Kearney, 2007). It has been noted that in order for IWB use to have

the greatest impact, there is a need for pedagogic change from the didactic to the

interactive (Miller, Glover, & Averis, 2004). If teachers are unaware of the

features of an IWB and how they link to an interactive pedagogy, often times

the IWB becomes nothing more than a technological teaching aid (Glover et al.,

2007). IWBs offer a whole new approach to pedagogy, but incorporating them

into traditional didactic teaching styles can often be accomplished easily, and

with little training (Armstrong, Barnes, Sutherland, Curran, Mills, & Thompson,

2005). The fact that IWBs are not considered a disruptive technology is both a

weakness and a strength (Schuck & Kearney, 2007). They can easily be integrated

into traditional pedagogy, and thus be seen as a positive addition to the class-

room. However, without a progression to an interactive pedagogy, long-term

motivational and achievement gains are often not realized (Higgins et al., 2007).

There is much more to the effective use of IWBs than simply ensuring that

teachers have access to the equipment (Glover, Miller, Averis, & Door, 2005a).

It is the context in which IWBs are integrated into the classroom that could

have the greatest effect.

As a result of the extensive literature review, a suggested framework in which

to consider the context and outcomes of IWB usage has been developed in

this article. It is detailed in Figure 1. The framework is comprised of sets of

variables: Environmental Factors, Interactive Whiteboard Usage, and Student

256 / DIGREGORIO AND SOBEL-LOJESKI

Outcomes. The framework suggests that the level contextual factors influence

how much interactive use of IWBs occurs and the extent to which this intera-

ction is used in pedagogy. This interaction level and pedagogy in turn influences

outcomes that are both socio-emotional and include perception and motivation

as well as performance based and include learning and achievement. The links

between contextual factors and student outcomes is discussed in detail.

Interactive Whiteboards Overview

IWBs were originally developed for office settings and are a relatively new

addition to education (Smith, Higgins, Wall, & Miller, 2005). IWBs, sometimes

referred to as electronic whiteboards or SMART Boards, are devices that connect

to a computer, which in turn are connected to a multimedia projector. The

computer image is projected on the IWB by the projector, and the user can control

and manipulate this projected image through software installed on the computer.

Similar to the way in which PDAs or smartphones are calibrated, an IWB must

be oriented so that where the user presses on the board, is accurately represented

on the screen. Some boards, such as the SMART Board, are touch-sensitive, and

others rely on an invisibly gridded whiteboard and an electronic pen. Another type

of technology that falls under the IWB category is the eBeam. This technology

consists of a receiver placed on the edge of a flat surface, and a radio-wave

emitting pen. The position of the pen with respect to the receiver is calculated by

the computer, thus allowing the pen to accurately represent the mouse location on

the flat surface. While this technology is less reliable than traditional IWBs, it

is less expensive and more portable (Slay, Siebörger, & Hodgkinson-Williams,

2008). The lower cost along with its portability make the eBeam an attractive

option for schools that want to integrate IWB technology, but may not have the

necessary funds for a more expensive and permanent solution (Slay et al., 2008).

EFFECTS OF INTERACTIVE WHITEBOARDS / 257

Figure 1. IWB framework.

Interactive

Whiteboard

Use

Level of Interaction

PedagogyLearning

Achievement

Contexual Factors

School Culture

Teacher Training

Teacher Practice and

Preparation Time

Teacher Confidence

in use of IWB

Technical Support

Perception

Motivation

Most IWBs have two modes: computer control mode and writing mode. When

the IWB is in computer control mode, a pen, or stylus, acts as the mouse, and a tap

as a mouse click. In writing mode, the pen, or stylus, acts as an actual writing

implement, with the computer producing digital ink on the projected image.

Applications of the IWB are dependent on the software that is installed and used

on the computer connected to the IWB. Some of the many applications available

include hiding and revealing, writing and manipulating text, handwriting recog-

nition, saving, retrieving, and printing notes, capturing and manipulating web

content, shading, coloring, and animation. In addition, more recent SMART Board

software allows the teacher to connect over the Internet to a library of subject-

specific flash content like a virtual calculator, virtual frog dissector, interactive

maps, and more. Many libraries are located at the IWB manufacturer’s website,

so that content can be added on a regular basis, giving teachers more options.

CONTEXTUAL FACTORS

Certain factors play a major role in how IWBs are used in education and are

sometimes called “contextual factors” (Schuck & Kearney, 2007). Schuck found

that the most common contextual factors include school culture, teacher training,

time to practice and prepare materials, teacher confidence, and technical support.

Other contextual factors to consider involve classroom setup and quality of

equipment (Higgins et al., 2007; Smith et al., 2005). The level at which school

districts or universities act on such factors varies, but the research shows that these

factors play a major role in the effects of IWB use (Schuck & Kearney, 2007).

Many studies performed on IWBs do not include contextual variables such as

the studies performed in London schools involved with the Secondary Whiteboard

Expansion Project. Some discuss a limited number of contextual factors, and

these factors are often not quantified, such as the level of interaction and teacher

training. Therefore, the results of such research are often difficult to generalize.

A detailed listing of papers that included contextual factors can be found in

Appendix A, Table 1.

School Culture

School culture has an impact on other contextual factors (Schuck & Kearny,

2007). In schools that have an IWB culture, the importance of teacher training,

practice and development time, teacher confidence, and technical support is often

realized (Schuck & Kearney, 2007). A school led by a principal with an enthu-

siasm for technology, and one that supports innovation, is essential if IWBs are

to be seen as an integral part of classroom pedagogy (Schuck & Kearny, 2007). A

whole-school approach and senior management teams that support teachers by

giving them the necessary resources to integrate IWBs into their teaching is

necessary for creating an IWB culture (Glover et al., 2005a, 2007). In addition, an

open and supportive parent-teacher culture coupled with interested students and


expectation of IWB use by teachers has also been noted as critical (Schuck

& Kearney, 2007). A whole-school approach might include easy access to the

Internet, as well as computer servers where documents can be easily saved,

retrieved, and shared by teachers (Lewin, Somekh, & Steadman, 2008).

Teacher Training

Teacher training and professional development is essential for the effective

use of IWBs (Armstrong et al. 2005; Glover et al., 2005a, 2005b, 2007; Hall &

Higgins, 2005; Lewin et al., 2008; Miller et al., 2004; Schuck & Kearney, 2007;

Shenton & Pagett, 2007; Slay et al., 2008; Smith, Hardman, & Higgins, 2006;

Smith et al., 2005; Thompson & Flecknoe, 2003; Wall, Higgins, & Smith, 2005;

Wood & Ashfield, 2008). Teacher training can be done on an as-needed basis

with self-selecting teachers. However, as with school culture, teacher training on

a whole school approach may be best. A whole school approach to training means

that teachers will be more likely to engage in the technology (Armstrong et al.,

2005) and help teachers to develop fluency (Glover et al., 2007).

Hall and Higgins (2005) note that professional development also needs to be

ongoing. It is easy for schools to fall into the trap of acquiring IWBs, installing

them, and then offering a one time technical training to teachers. Some schools

may not even offer formal training at all. Teachers may be initially interested,

and some may continue to develop skills on their own, but unfortunately this

type of training program is common but not likely to result in the effective

use of IWBs. Technical training is necessary, but training should go beyond

the device itself. Teachers need to also be trained in how to integrate the IWB

into pedagogy (Lewin et al., 2008; Schuck & Kearney, 2007; Shenton & Pagett,

2007; Smith et al., 2006). This pedagogical training should include how the

IWB can be used to teach to different learning styles (Miller et al., 2004), and

how an interactive multimodal approach may change their current pedagogic

practices (Shenton & Pagett, 2007).

Other areas that schools might incorporate into an IWB professional develop-

ment program are observation, coaching, feedback, and sympathetic discussion

groups (Smith et al., 2006). A school culture that reflects a wide “buy-in” from

teachers to the IWB concept will allow administrators and faculty to observe,

coach, and give constructive feedback to each other (Smith et al., 2006). A

sympathetic support group can help to build a sense of community and be a

place for teachers to go to share their experiences (Smith et al., 2006). By

giving teachers the proper ongoing technical and pedagogic IWB training, they

are likely to be better equipped to transform their teaching as compared to their

relatively inexperienced counterparts (Lewin et al., 2008). However, developing

the necessary skill set is only one of many contextual factors that need to

be considered. Teachers also need the time to practice and develop these skills,

which in turn may give them the confidence to put them into practice (Shenton

& Pagett, 2007).


Time and Teacher Confidence

If teachers are given the time to practice IWB usage, develop their IWB

skills, and prepare materials in conjunction with IWB features, then IWBs may

not be considered a disruptive technology (Schuck & Kearney, 2007). Formally

giving teachers time to explore the IWB can produce better results and aid in

creating an IWB culture (Schuck & Kearney, 2007). This might be accomplished

by giving teachers a reduced teaching load, paying them overtime, or giving

them in-service credits toward promotion. However, there is a trade-off in terms

of time spent on learning the IWB and time spent in other teaching-related

activities. If a school is to develop an IWB culture, then the total cost of an ongoing

IWB professional development program might include time as an expense. It

is only with time that teachers will develop fluency and confidence in using

the IWB (Shenton & Pagett, 2007). Expanding on the total school “buy-in”

concept, time also needs to be given to expert practitioners who can provide

continuous feedback to their colleagues (Smith et al., 2006). In addition to giving

teachers time to develop and practice their skills, teachers need time to develop

IWB materials (Glover et al., 2005b; Miller et al., 2004; Schuck & Kearney,

2007; Shenton & Pagett, 2007; Wood & Ashfield, 2008). These materials

could then be shared among other teachers within the school (Glover et al.,

2007), who would then need more time to review them. Giving teachers time

to practice, develop, and create will help in building and maintaining an IWB

culture. With the proper ongoing professional development program and exten-

sive time, teachers will be more likely to develop fluency and become more

confident in IWB use (Shenton & Pagett, 2007). As teacher confidence increases,

their lessons have greater impact (Miller et al., 2004). Confident use of IWBs

is important, especially since students are keenly aware of the IWB abilities of

their teachers (Slay et al., 2008).

Technical Support

Technical support is a critical contextual factor for a successful IWB imple-

mentation (Glover et al., 2005a, 2005b; Schuck & Kearny, 2007; Thompson &

Flecknoe, 2003). Hall and Higgins (2005) note that students do not like tech-

nical problems, which from their perspective cause disruption, delay, and frus-

tration. Technical problems are many times unavoidable and unforeseeable, but

by setting up a routine technology maintenance program (Miller et al., 2004),

perhaps some of these issues may be avoided.

Other Contextual Factors

In addition to the main contextual factors previously discussed, there are a

few other factors to consider. These include regular access to the technology

(Armstrong et al., 2005; Schuck & Kearney, 2007; Smith et al., 2005; Solvie,


2007), proper room arrangement and visibility (Glover et al., 2005b; Higgins

et al., 2007), proper IWB height for both teachers and students (Higgins et al.,

2007; Smith et al., 2005), and proper classroom lighting (Smith et al., 2005).

Room design should be carefully considered prior to installing an IWB. Line

of sight tests should be done and seats should be arranged so that students

have easy access to the board. The brightness of the image cast by the projector

should also be tested, and necessary room darkening equipment installed.

This may include blinds over windows, or the ability to turn off banks of lights

within the room.

Two factors that were not contained in the literature review, but should be

considered are consistency of equipment, and access to regular whiteboards.

When possible, school districts and universities should standardize on equipment

installed in their classrooms. This standardization should include one type of

IWB and software to control it, a common computer manufacturer and related

software, and a common multimedia projector manufacturer. This will aid in

creating a consistent environment for teachers, and help in creating an IWB

culture. When teachers move from room to room, the equipment will look and

feel the same, and user technical problems will be minimized. Providing standard

whiteboards in an IWB classroom is also important. Teachers often need a

traditional whiteboard in addition to the IWB for their lessons, especially for

information that needs to remain visible for the entire class period. Traditional

whiteboards can also serve as a backup, for occasions when there is a technical

problem with the IWB setup.

Summary—Contextual Factors

The contextual factors of school culture, teacher training, time to practice,

teacher confidence, and technical support are important for researchers to con-

sider when studying how IWBs are used in schools. Building a school culture

that supports interactivity and technical innovation sets the groundwork for an

IWB implementation (Schuck & Kearney, 2007). School culture, like other

kinds of organizational culture, arises from leadership attitudes and behaviors.

The school culture should include a commitment toward teacher training, time

to practice, and technical support all of which work together in forming an

IWB school culture.

INTERACTIVE WHITEBOARDS: EFFECTS

In this study, consistent themes emerged regarding the effects of IWBs. The

effect of IWBs on perception, motivation, attention, behavior, level of interaction,

learning, pedagogy, and achievement were most prevalent. Appendix B, Tables 1

through 6, contains an extensive detailed summary of research findings on IWB

effects from the literature reviewed for this study.


Much of the literature reviewed was specific to K-12 environment. Only

one study, Schroeder (2007), considered IWB effects in higher education. The

fact that little was found in the area of higher education is discussed further in

the section on directions for future research.

Perception

There is some agreement that students have a positive perception of the IWB

(Armstrong et al., 2005; Glover et al., 2005b; Martin, 2007; Miller et al., 2004;

Schuck & Kearney, 2007; Smith et al., 2005; Wall et al., 2005). However,

questions remain as to whether this perception is simply related to the novelty

factor (Glover et al., 2005b, 2007), or whether it is more long lasting. Many of

the studies in this review were not longitudinal, and were done shortly after

the IWB has been introduced to the school. Therefore, the novelty factor could

have been a strong influence. Glover et al. (2007) note that, “It is only when basic

technological fluency and pedagogic understanding have been achieved that

teachers can overcome the novelty factor” (p. 17).

There is also a perception that the use of IWBs will positively effect student

achievement (Slay et al., 2008). While this will be discussed further on, it should

be noted that while this perception exists, it is without much empirical support.

Claims have also been made that IWBs promote an interactive class (Smith

et al., 2006); however, it has also been noted that, “in many ways, the func-

tionality of the IWB can be viewed as a modern technological version of a

traditional blackboard” (Wood & Ashfield, 2008, p. 94). Schuck and Kearney

(2007) state that lessons using IWBs were perceived as “better than” other

class work. They relate this to the fact that IWBs can be perceived as easy to

use, visual, interactive, immediate, and matching the students’ digital culture.

Lastly, students are aware of a teacher’s confidence and ability using an IWB

(Slay et al., 2008). If teachers lack confidence and ability, perceptions can

change, and IWBs can be perceived as just another presentational ‘gimmick’

(Glover et al., 2005b).

Motivation, Attention, and Behavior

Motivation, attention, and behavior represent an overall student attitude in the

classroom. There is some agreement that IWBs have a positive effect on student

motivation (Armstrong et al., 2005; Glover et al., 2005b, 2007; Hall & Higgins,

2005; Higgins et al., 2007; Lewin et al., 2008; Martin, 2007; Schmid, 2006;

Schroeder, 2007; Schuck & Kearney, 2007; Shenton & Pagett, 2007; Slay et al.,

2008; Smith et al., 2006; Smith et al., 2005; Thompson et al., 2003; Wall et al.,

2005; Weimer, 2001; Wood & Ashfield, 2008). Some caution that that heightened

motivation correlated with IWBs may be due to the novelty factor and may

decrease over time (Schuck & Kearney, 2007; Slay et al., 2008; Smith et al.,

2005; Thompson & Flecknoe, 2003; Weimer, 2001), especially if the IWB is


overused (Schroeder, 2007). Some schools in the London Secondary Whiteboard

Expansion Project reported that even where teachers were using the board in

various ways, the increase in motivation was short-lived. Slay et al. (2008) caution

that pedagogic value is of significant importance in maintaining motivational

effects. To maximize student motivation, IWBs are best used in subject-specific

ways, and should be embedded into teaching and learning (Martin, 2007).

The extent to which there is interaction with the IWB influences the effects

of the IWB on motivation, attention, and behavior. It has been noted that at

the enhanced interactivity stage (see next section), behavior problems can be

overcome (Glover et al., 2005a). If students interact with the board themselves,

motivation and attention can also be increased. It has been reported that IWB

use in the K-12 sector promotes student interest and higher levels of sustained

concentration (Glover et al., 2007). Some relate this to the multimedia aspects of

the IWB, and that presentations are more visually stimulating (Hall & Higgins,

2005; Slay et al., 2008). This visual appeal is noted as one of the main con-

tributors to motivation (Smith et al., 2006). Teachers can also benefit from the

motivational effect of IWBs as some have reported that the technology has

renewed part of their enthusiasm for teaching (Schuck & Kearney, 2007).

Motivation still largely depends on the overall quality of teaching (Schroeder,

2007), not simply on a piece of technology. Support was found for a positive

relationship between IWBs and attitude. However, some studies found that

attention to task did not significantly improve even though students seemed

enthusiastic (Solvie, 2007).

Level of Interaction

Interaction is a significant factor in sustaining student motivation and interest

(Glover et al., 2005b; Higgins et al., 2007; Smith et al., 2005). However, IWBs

are not always used interactively and can reinforce teacher-centered instruction

(Higgins et al., 2007). As stated earlier, the literature to date reflects IWBs as

a relatively non-disruptive technology and can easily be used as a blackboard

replacement. Slay et al. (2008) mention that when IWBs are used in traditional

ways, the value of the IWB can be attributed simply to the use of a data projector

and computer. For some teachers, interactivity is not as important as the display

of course content in multimedia modes. In addition, teachers report one of the

main benefits as the ability to stay in front of the class while interacting with

the multimedia course content. Interactivity needs to exist between teachers and

students, students and students, and teachers and teachers (Glover et al., 2005b).

Many teachers have a tendency to dominate the IWB lesson, simply use it for

interactive whole class discussions, and not invite the students to interact with

the board themselves (Schuck & Kearney, 2007). IWBs have limited impact

when teachers do not realize that interactivity also requires a new approach to

pedagogy (Armstrong et al., 2005).


In one study, primary teachers emphasize the tactile nature of the IWB and

report that students and teachers should be interacting with the IWB (Schuck

& Kearney, 2007). This was found to be a common theme (Shenton & Pagett,

2007; Smith et al., 2005; Thompson & Flecknoe, 2003). However teachers do not

always follow this approach (Higgins et al., 2007; Smith et al., 2005). Teachers

need to use appropriate software that enhances student interaction (Armstrong

et al., 2005). One example is discussed by Thompson & Flecknoe (2003) where a

software product called Easiteach Maths was used. This software was designed

to bring students to the IWB, more directly involving them in the lesson. They

found that the IWB works best when used interactively, especially when students

interact with the board themselves. Good quality IWB software could be a

good option for teachers to incorporate interaction into pedagogy. While children

often want to interact with the board, it has been noted, however, that older

students are not as eager to leave their seats as younger students (Smith et al.,

2005). This finding has implications for the higher education sector and will

be discussed later in this study.

According to Glover, teachers who set out to use the IWB progress through

three stages of interactivity (Glover et al., 2005a, 2007). Stage one is called the

supported didactic stage. At this stage, the IWB is used as visual support, and

is not pedagogically integrated into lessons. This may cause the IWB to be seen

as a novelty over time. The second stage is called the interactive stage. This

stage is a progression from the supported didactic stage in that a variety of stimuli

are used to illustrate, develop, and test discrete concepts. The IWB becomes the

focal point of the lesson and demands attention from the students. The findings

show that teachers still show an occasional lack of confidence, but still search

for new approaches to pedagogy. At this stage teachers are more excited and

share their experiences with other teachers. The third stage is called the enhanced

interactivity stage, where the teacher looks to integrate concept and cognitive

development in a way that exploits the interactive capacity of the IWB. The IWB

is used to prompt discussions, explain processes, develop hypotheses, and test

these by varied application (Glover et al., 2005a). This stage requires careful

lesson preparation including verbal, visual, and kinesthetic activities. It also

involves learning management, the ability to store and edit lessons, and the

willingness for pedagogic change (Glover et al., 2007). Teachers are the critical

agents in mediating the IWB software and the IWB hardware to promote inter-

actions and interactivity (Higgins et al., 2007). The enhanced interactivity stage

is needed for IWB use to have the greatest impact on teaching and learning

(Glover et al., 2005a, 2007).

Learning

IWBs offer the opportunity to better match learning to different student

learning styles (Glover et al., 2005a, 2005b, 2007; Schuck & Kearney, 2007;


Slay et al., 2008; Thompson & Flecknoe, 2003; Wall et al., 2005; Weimer,

2001). These learning styles include the kinesthetic, visual, audio, active, and

verbal-social. There are, however, to date no absolute properties of an IWB have

been identified that would allow one to predict the effects they have on learning

(Armstrong et al., 2005), and the use of IWBs alone cannot lead to enhanced

learning (Glover et al., 2007). In fact, it is not clear as to how IWB use might

affect learning outcomes or concept development (Schuck & Kearney, 2007).

This is partially due to the fact that many studies were done in schools where

IWBs were a new addition to the classroom. A key factor to keep in mind is

that IWBs are a mediating artifact. The teacher, not the technology, is still the

most important element in student learning (Miller et al., 2004).

Some studies found there is limited impact of IWBs on cognitive learning

(Martin, 2007; Miller et al., 2004; Schroeder, 2007), and that IWBs may alter

the way learning takes place, but has not been shown to have a measurable

impact on learning (Higgins et al., 2007). This finding is especially prevalent

in studies where IWBs are found to be used as a blackboard replacement, and

their effect on learning is negligible (Lewin et al., 2008). On the other hand,

some studies show support for a link between IWB use and learning (Glover

et al., 2005b; Schmid, 2006; Smith et al., 2005, 2006; Solvie, 2007; Thompson

& Flecknoe, 2003; Wall et al., 2005; Wood & Ashfield, 2008), but do not

differentiate between transferrable learning versus other kinds of learning

(Martin, 2007; Mechling, Gast, & Krupa, 2007). So there are contradictions.

However, the answer may lie in the type of learning domain under study. Some

research suggests that the real impact of IWBs may lie in the affective domain,

not the cognitive domain (Schroeder, 2007). While the cognitive domain focuses

on knowledge and comprehension, the affective domain focuses on the learners’

motivation, attention, emotions, self-concept, self-esteem, and social interaction

in the learning environment. It is this type of learning that could be more impor-

tant to learning and achievement (Weimer, 2001). It may be that IWBs can

add a social dimension to learning where students can share knowledge publicly

and learn by making mistakes together (Smith et al., 2006).

Pedagogy

Pedagogy is sometimes defined differently. For example, according to Lewin,

pedagogy is defined as “the interactive process that goes on between teachers

and children” (Lewin et al., 2008, p. 293). The Merriam-Webster dictionary

defines pedagogy as, “the art, science, or profession of teaching.” No matter the

specific definition, one overall theme contained in the research reviewed is

that effective teaching with IWBs requires pedagogy to contain an element of

interactivity. Although IWBs are well adapted to whole-class teaching, when

not used interactively, IWBs can reinforce teacher-centered styles of pedagogy

(Armstrong et al., 2005; Schuck & Kearney, 2007; Smith et al., 2005, 2006). In


many cases, the underlying pedagogy of whole-class teaching remains unaffected

(Wood & Ashfield, 2008). Many teachers have uncritically absorbed IWBs into

their pre-IWB teaching practices (Smith et al., 2005). This can be attributed to

the fact that IWBs are a non-disruptive technology (Schuck & Kearney, 2007).

Effective pedagogical interactivity requires structured lesson planning, pace in

activities, and a cognitive review (Higgins et al., 2007). The role of the teacher

needs to change to one of a facilitator, which will allow more student exploration

(Hall & Higgins, 2005). This may become a barrier in cases when the teacher

wants to maintain a traditional didactic teaching style. It is also more difficult

in Great Britain where many teachers are less open to involving their students

in the lesson (Hall & Higgins, 2005). Teachers and students must work together

rather than adopting the traditional formal roles of teacher and learner (Lewin

et al., 2008). Without this pedagogical change, IWBs can be seen as a passing

presentational aid or motivational spur (Glover et al., 2007).

Glover et al. (2007) report that early research focused on the benefits of the

technology and not on how pedagogy may need to be changed. They go on to say

that the starting point for changed pedagogy is teacher awareness and imple-

mentation of interactivity. Teachers need to reach the enhanced interactivity

stage with regard to pedagogy. At this stage, there is an integration of tech-

nology, pedagogy, and learning styles. This stage can be obtained with the

following changes to pedagogy: planning for cognitive development, clear visual

representation of concepts, activities that encourage an active thinking approach,

progression, illustration, sequencing, immediate feedback, and recall to strengthen

learning (Glover et al., 2007).

Lewin et al. (2008) state that if IWBs are to have an impact, the IWB has to

be seen as a mediating artifact. Teachers must allow students to interact with the

board, and lesson plans need to be structured with associated resources accessible

any time. Two effects of IWBs on pedagogy are that teachers are putting increased

preparation time into their lessons, and they are spending more time thinking about

students’ individual learning styles (Schuck & Kearney, 2007). Lastly, teachers

need to realize that students are keenly aware of any shortcomings in their teachers

in relation to pedagogical uses of the IWB (Hall & Higgins, 2005; Slay et al.,

2008). Teachers should practice their skills and develop confidence (Hall &

Higgins, 2005; Martin, 2007; Miller et al., 2004; Schuck & Kearney, 2007; Slay

et al., 2008). Teachers should also learn to teach creatively, by including a wide

range of media such as video, animations, audio, graphics, animations and text

(Wood & Ashfield, 2008) In addition, this creative teaching should contain

relevant content for students to have ownership (Wood & Ashfield, 2008).

Achievement

There is some controversy as to the effects of IWB use and achievement.

For the purposes of this literature review, the terms “achievement” and


“attainment” are used synonymously. While achievement can be defined as an

accomplishment, and attainment can be defined as reaching a goal, they have

similar connotations.

One of the most compelling studies that showed a negligible effect of IWB

on achievement is Higgins et al. (2007). After a 2 year study, no significant dif-

ferences were found in test scores between schools using IWBs, and schools

not using IWBs. In addition, London schools in the Secondary Whiteboard

Expansion Project, where teachers were using the IWB in various ways, reported

no impact on pupil performance in the first year in which departments were

fully conversant with the technology (Higgins et al., 2007). Schuck and Kearney

(2007) also report that little or no difference was found on national test scores

in mathematics and science in UK primary schools when comparing IWB and

non-IWB classrooms. This apparent lack of effect on achievement is consistent

with other studies contained in this review (Glover et al., 2005b; Martin, 2007;

Smith et al., 2005; Solvie, 2007).

On the other hand, Lewin et al. (2008), note that positive gains were

realized in literacy, mathematics, and science for children aged 7-11. These

gains were directly related to the length of time that students had been

taught using an IWB. In addition, these gains were stronger for children of

average or above average prior attainment. There was negligible impact on

prior low attaining pupils. Thompson & Flecknoe (2003) note that significant

gains were realized using the ready made IWB program called Easiteach

Maths. They reported a 14.1% improvement in attainment in the first term, a

22.1% improvement in the second term, and a 39.4% improvement overall.

All children, regardless of prior attainment levels, made similar gains. It should

be noted that Easiteach Maths is a highly interactive software package that

involves students directly by having them use the board themselves (Thompson

& Flecknoe, 2003).

Other research suggests that dialogic teaching, or whole-class interactive

teaching, can lead to higher achievement (Smith et al., 2006). However, dia-

logic teaching can be accomplished with traditional teaching methods and

basic use of the IWB. Motivation is one of the underlying factors in learn-

ing and achievement (Weimer, 2001). While findings generally showed that

IWBs had a positive effect on motivation (Armstrong et al., 2005; Glover et al.,

2005b, 2007; Hall & Higgins, 2005; Higgins et al., 2007; Lewin et al.,

2008; Martin, 2007; Schmid, 2006; Schroeder, 2007; Schuck & Kearney,

2007; Shenton & Pagett, 2007; Slay et al., 2008; Smith et al., 2005, 2006;

Thompson & Flecknoe, 2003; Wall et al., 2005; Weimer, 2001; Wood & Ashfield,

2008), there is not much research linking this increased motivation directly

to achievement.

There is conflicting information regarding the effect of IWBs on student

achievement and attainment. This presents a challenge and more research is

needed using higher constraint research designs.


Effects Summary

Appendix B, Tables 1 through 6, contains a research summary of IWB effects

on perception, motivation, level of interaction, learning, pedagogy, and achieve-

ment. In general, IWBs are perceived positively, and studies show they can

have a positive impact on motivation. Whether this impact on perception and

motivation is just a novelty factor, and will decrease over time, or one that is longer

lasting seems to be dependent on pedagogy (Slay et al., 2008). By embedding

IWBs and interactivity into teaching and learning, the motivational effect can

be maximized (Martin, 2007). Sustaining this level of motivation and interest

can be accomplished through quality interaction between teacher and student,

student and student, and teacher and teacher. (Glover et al., 2005b). Some studies

have also linked motivational effect to achievement (Weimer, 2001). Achieve-

ment has been reported by some to be positively impacted by IWBs (Lewin

et al., 2008; Thompson & Flecknoe, 2003), while others see negligible impacts

(Glover et al., 2005b; Higgins et al., 2007; Martin, 2007; Schuck & Kearney,

2007; Smith et al., 2005; Solvie, 2007).

Implementing an interactive pedagogy, teachers may acquire the knowledge

on how to use the IWB to teach to different learning styles in the cognitive

domain, and how to incorporate the social characteristics of the affective domain.

Teachers should strive to reach the enhanced interactivity pedagogical stage

and view the IWB as a mediating artifact. Perhaps the most cost effective and

pedagogically effective way to incorporate IWBs into the classroom is to take a

two-step approach. First, allow teachers to start with just a multimedia projector

and a computer (Slay et al., 2008). Once teachers are comfortable with incor-

porating multimodal course materials into their pedagogy, they move to the

next step, and add an IWB, along with interactivity. Some teachers may simply

wish to use the presentational abilities of the computer and multimedia projector,

keep their didactic teaching style, and not make changes to their pedagogy.

Others may be willing to transform their teaching style from supported didactic

to enhanced interactivity. The IWB will have the greatest effect in classrooms

with teachers willing to make this transformation. It is important to remember

that, “good teaching remains good teaching with or without the technology;

the technology might enhance pedagogy only if the teachers and pupils engaged

in it and understood its potential in such a way that the technology is not seen

as an end in itself, but as another pedagogical means to achieve teaching and

learning goals” (Higgins et al., 2007, p. 217).

DISCUSSION—IWB FRAMEWORK MODEL

Based on the review of the literature it is posited that a more comprehensive

framework is needed to understand the effects of IWBs in the classroom. In


the framework put forward (see Figure 1), the contextual factors of school culture,

teacher training, time to practice, teacher confidence, and technical support com-

bine to influence pedagogy and level of interaction which then effect perception,

motivation, learning and achievement.

In order for IWBs to have their greatest positive influence on student learning

and achievement, an interactive school culture is needed. A culture that embraces

change and embodies a positive attitude or “buy in” to the idea of transforming

teaching and learning through IWB use, provides the foundation on which

the other parts of the framework are developed. If senior school officials are

successful in providing a clear understanding as to what is involved in creating

an interactive IWB culture, then positive IWB effects are more likely. The culture

needs to be one that is shared by all school stakeholders including adminis-

trators, teachers, staff, students, and parents. To help in creating this culture,

teachers need to be given the training and time to explore the IWB and its

uses. This training should be both technical and pedagogical. The pedagogical

training should be ongoing and assist teachers in transforming teaching through

the three stages of interactivity (Glover et al., 2005a). Educational leadership

must also factor in cost to implement the necessary framework. For IWBs to

have the greatest effect on teaching and learning, the total cost of an imple-

mentation is likely to go beyond the cost of IWB equipment alone. Therefore,

in order to develop the appropriate contextual factors necessary for successful

IWB implementation, a “return on investment” (ROI) calculation needs to

include these pieces as well.

Along with technical and pedagogical training teachers need time to practice

and develop course materials. Transitioning to an interactive pedagogy will

take time. As discussed, an interactive pedagogy is an important component if

IWBs are to be maximized for learning and achievement. Allowing teachers to

experiment with new ideas and to share these ideas with other teachers is also a

key aspect of the framework. Having a collaborative and supportive environment

should help in the transformation to an interactive pedagogy, but should also

help in creating and maintaining an open IWB culture.

With proper training, preparation, and practice time, teachers are more likely

to develop confidence in IWB use, which has been shown to affect long-term

motivation and overcome the novelty factor. Students are highly cognizant of the

technical and pedagogic abilities of their teachers and IWB use. If teachers reach

the enhanced interactivity stage, then student motivation should be maintained

over time. Without this level of confidence and pedagogical transformation, an

IWB might simply be seen as a technological tool and not a mediating artifact.

Whether it is in the cognitive domain, with IWBs lending to different learning

styles, or the affective domain, with IWBs focusing on attitude, for IWBs to have

the most effect, teachers should strive to be at the enhanced interactivity stage

(Schuck & Kearney, 2007). Effective learning can be realized more fully when


teachers value the technology and fully understand the nature of interactivity

and its pedagogic implications (Glover et al., 2007).

Providing teachers with timely technical support should help to maintain

the open IWB culture. Technical support should include both a help desk for

episodic problems as well as a regular maintenance program to help avoid

issues. Teachers might be well trained and highly motivated; however, if the

equipment doesn’t work or breaks down regularly, the educational process could

be negatively impacted.

The next part of the framework deals with the use of interactive whiteboards

particularly with the level of interaction and pedagogy. The contextual factors

influence these two mediating factors that in turn will play an important role

in the extent to which the student’s perception, motivation, learning and achieve-

ment are increased. A well-planned enhanced interactive pedagogy will have

a greater effect than a traditional didactic pedagogy with respect to IWB use.

Using an IWB as a blackboard replacement may have an initial beneficial effect,

but the research to date has shown limited long-term benefit. Incorporating

an IWB into existing pedagogy will not transform learning; it will only change

how learning takes place. Without transforming learning, long term achievement

gains are less likely to be realized.

This IWB framework is put forth based on the extensive literature review

discussed in this study. While this framework may not account for all cases,

it is put forth to help school leadership to begin the process of improving

learning and achievement outcomes within the context of the many factors

that have been found to be important contributors to success in these areas.

The research is still in its early stages and, therefore, comparatively speaking,

there are many studies that result in contradictory outcomes. Therefore, by

extending a parsimonious framework from which explanatory power for

varying results may be found, researchers may be able to further refine their

investigations.

DIRECTIONS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH

There is still a tremendous amount of work that needs to be done with regard

to the effects of IWBs on teaching and learning. Appendix C, Table 1, lists a

summary of future research findings from the studies reviewed. Much of the

research reviewed was done in the United Kingdom, a country that has invested

a great deal of money to investigate how best to incorporate IWBs and infor-

mation and communication technologies (ICT) into the classroom (Schroeder,

2007; Slay et al., 2008). More studies need to be done in the United States,

where pedagogical practices vary and students are encouraged to participate more

in lessons (Hall & Higgins, 2005).


There are many different ways in which the research has been done. All

methods help to improve our understanding of the effects of IWBs on educa-

tional outcomes. However further defining the factors put forth in the IWB

framework will help researchers more fully understand results as they relate to

one another. It is hypothesized that the contextual factors discussed have a direct

effect on the level of interaction and pedagogy used in the classroom, which

in turn have an impact on perception, motivation, learning, and achievement.

Perhaps the contextual factors posited here can be further quantified, which

would aid in future data analysis performed on IWB impacts.

All but one of the studies listed in this review deal with the K-12 sector.

More research is needed at the higher education level (Schroeder, 2007),

as more investments in IWBs are made at this level. Institutions of higher

learning often have varying school cultures, and professors who have differing

approaches to pedagogy. It has also been reported that older students are

not as eager to leave their seats (Smith et al., 2005), so this may have an impact

on the level of interactivity that can be achieved. Class size could also be a

consideration, as smaller seminar classes are quite different from larger lecture

hall classes.

Future research should also focus beyond generic learning gains, and on

subject-specific learning (Glover et al., 2005b; Schuck & Kearney, 2007), cross-

curricular learning (Shenton & Pagett, 2007), and interdisciplinary learning.

While some subject-specific research is available, it should be expanded. Future

research in these areas should take the contextual factors and mediating vari-

ables posited here into account. Different demographic groups should also be

considered when interpreting results.

A main theme in the literature is that many studies are carried out too soon

after the technology has been introduced, and are not long term. Now that

IWBs have been integrated into many schools over longer periods of time,

studies can be revisited, and more longitudinal studies should be considered.

These longitudinal studies could then also focus on the long-term impacts of

IWBs on pedagogy, level of interaction, perception, motivation, learning, and

achievement. As discussed previously, motivational effects could be attributed

to the novelty factor, and future studies should attempt to address some of

this issue. If, as reported by Weimer (2001), motivation is one of the underlying

factors in learning and achievement, research in long-term motivation trends

is critical. Taking this one step further, understanding how increased motivation

due to IWB use is translated into learning, also needs to be addressed (Higgins

et al., 2007).

There is a perception that an IWB implementation will, by itself, be moti-

vating to both students and teachers, enhance interactivity, and increase student

learning and achievement. As discussed, some studies have found that in many

instances IWBs are used as blackboard replacements, and underlying pedagogy

remains unchanged. Some studies find achievement gains, while others do not.


It would be beneficial to understand why this perception is so widespread, and

to look at ways of correcting this view.

The added benefit of using an IWB interactively needs to be weighed against

the benefits perceived by the school, its administrators, teachers, and students

(Slay et al., 2008). Future research needs to be done in this area, and a return on

investment (ROI) model should be created. This would benefit schools interested

in IWBs, but may not have the resources necessary to properly address the

required contextual factors discussed. Schools may be investing large amounts

of money to install IWBs, and later find that the effects of these IWBs are

related only to the computer, multimedia projector, and a change to a more

multimodal pedagogy, not the IWB itself.

More research should also to be done on how IWBs impact different types

of students, including special needs students, lower attaining students, average

students, students with behavioral problems, and higher attaining students. This

research could be done in subject specific areas, and at different grade levels.

Gender, ethnic, cultural, socio-economic, and other demographic factors should

also be taken into consideration and studied.

Mechling et al. (2007) mention an interesting area for future research where

IWB technology should be compared to more traditional interactive methods

such as flash cards. The idea of teaching with less expensive manipulatives is one

that creates an interactive environment, but often does not require technology.

Motivation, learning, and achievement gains should be studied comparing the

use of IWBs and manipulatives.

An instrument that measures and assesses the impact of instructional methods

needs to be developed and studied (Schroeder, 2007). This type of instrument

would be beneficial to studying the impacts of IWB use. This instrument should

also include a way to factor in the level at which contextual factors are addressed

within a school.

Future research should also focus on the pedagogical progression from the

supported didactic stage to the interactive stage to the enhanced interactivity

stage. Investigating how one progresses and what is needed to accomplish this

progression would be beneficial to both researchers and practitioners. The

results could be used as a guideline for schools in creating an efficient training

program for teachers. In addition to teachers who create their own IWB materials,

there are a number of commercial products available. Research should consider

these commercial software products and discuss their impacts and effective-

ness more fully. Lastly, group and peer learning using IWBs should be further

researched (Schuck & Kearney, 2007).

While there is a great deal of research available on the effects of IWB use in

the classroom, a parsimonious model of the environmental or contextual factors

will help to enhance researchers’ understanding of the results. Future studies

involving IWB impacts should report on the level in which contextual factors,

such as the ones posited in the framework discussed, are addressed.



AP

PE

ND

IXA

Tab

le1

–C

on

textu

alF

acto

rs

Au

tho

r(s)

Year

Jo

urn

al

Co

nte

xtu

alF

acto

rs

Arm

str

on

g,B

arn

es,

Su

therl

an

d,C

urr

an

,

Mill

s,&

Th

om

pso

n

Glo

ver,

Mill

er,

Averi

s,&

Do

or

Glo

ver,

Mill

er,

Averi

s,&

Do

or

Glo

ver,

Mill

er,

Averi

s,&

Do

or

Hall

&H

igg

ins

Hig

gin

s,B

eau

ch

am

p,

&M

iller

Lew

in,S

om

ekh

,&

Ste

ad

man

20

05

20

05

a

20

05

b

20

07

20

05

20

07

20

08

Ed

ucatio

nalR

evie

w

Man

ag

em

en

tin

Ed

ucatio

n

Tech

no

log

y,P

ed

ag

og

y,

an

dE

du

catio

n

Learn

ing

,M

ed

iaan

d

Tech

no

log

y

Jo

urn

alo

fC

om

pu

ter

Assis

ted

Learn

ing

Learn

ing

,M

ed

iaan

d

Tech

no

log

y

Ed

ucatio

n&

Info

rmatio

n

Tech

no

log

ies

Aw

ho

leap

pro

ach

totr

ain

ing

mean

sth

at

teach

ers

will

be

mo

relik

ely

to

en

gag

ein

the

tech

no

log

yan

dw

ou

ldth

en

develo

pco

nfid

en

ce.Lo

ng

-

term

en

gag

em

en

tis

imp

ort

an

t.R

eg

ula

raccess

toIW

Bs

isim

po

rtan

t.

Imp

ort

an

tfa

cto

rsin

clu

de

train

ing

op

po

rtu

nitie

s,en

co

ura

gem

en

tfr

om

sen

ior

lead

ers

,availa

bili

tyo

feq

uip

men

t,te

ch

nic

alsu

pp

ort

,re

so

urc

e

man

ag

em

en

t,an

do

ng

oin

gp

rofe

ssio

nald

evelo

pm

en

t.

Tim

eto

pre

pare

mate

rials

,tr

ain

ing

,access

toso

ftw

are

,p

rop

er

roo

m

arr

an

gem

en

t,g

oo

dvis

ibili

ty,an

dte

ch

nic

alsu

pp

ort

are

necessary

.

Mis

sio

ners

need

toco

nvin

ce

sen

ior

man

ag

em

en

tto

pro

vid

en

ecessary

reso

urc

es.W

ho

le-s

ch

oo

lp

rofe

ssio

nald

evelo

pm

en

tto

help

teach

ers

develo

pflu

en

cy.T

each

ers

sh

ou

ldb

eab

leto

sh

are

reso

urc

es

an

d

so

ftw

are

.N

eed

tod

evelo

pan

IWB

cu

ltu

ralw

ith

insch

oo

l.

Need

up

-to

-date

eq

uip

men

t,tr

ain

ing

pro

gra

ms,co

ntin

uin

gp

rofe

ssio

nal

develo

pm

en

t,an

dte

ch

nic

alsu

pp

ort

.E

nvir

on

men

tm

ust

allo

wfo

r

incre

ased

stu

den

taccess

toth

ete

ch

no

log

y.

IWB

sm

ust

be

main

tain

ed

,p

laced

at

the

co

rrect

heig

ht

for

bo

thte

ach

ers

an

dstu

den

ts,h

ave

pro

per

ligh

tin

gan

dseatin

garr

an

gem

en

ts.

Need

bo

thte

ch

nic

alan

dp

ed

ag

og

icaltr

ain

ing

.T

ota

lsch

oo

lb

uy-in

is

need

ed

inclu

din

gaccess

tosch

oo

lserv

ers

an

dth

eIn

tern

et.

AP

PE

ND

IXA

(Co

nt’

d.)

Au

tho

r(s)

Year

Jo

urn

al

Co

nte

xtu

alF

acto

rs

Mart

in

Mech

ling

,G

ast,

&

Kru

pa

Mill

er,

Glo

ver,

&

Averi

s

Sch

mid

Sch

roed

er

Sch

uck

&K

earn

ey

20

07

20

07

20

04

20

06

20

07

20

07

Litera

cy

Jo

urn

alo

fA

utism

&

Develo

pm

en

talD

iso

rders

Pap

er

pre

sen

ted

at

Ten

thIn

tern

atio

nal

Co

ng

ress

of

Math

em

atics

Ed

ucatio

n

Co

mp

ute

rA

ssis

ted

Lan

gu

ag

eLearn

ing

Co

mm

un

icatio

ns

in

Info

rmatio

nLitera

cy

Stu

dy

do

ne

at

Th

e

Un

ivers

ity

of

Tech

no

log

yS

yd

ney

To

maxi

miz

eth

eu

se

ofIW

Bs

as

ap

ositiv

ein

flu

en

ce

on

teach

ing

,fo

ur

facto

rsm

ust

be

co

nsid

ere

d:

tech

no

log

icalflu

en

cy,a

ran

ge

ofIW

B

mate

rials

,cla

ssro

om

man

ag

em

en

tskill

sto

maxim

ize

the

att

en

tio

n

sp

an

ofstu

den

ts,an

dan

aw

are

ness

ifth

eco

mp

lex

inte

ractio

no

f

teach

ing

an

dle

arn

ing

sty

les.A

lso

need

tech

no

log

ym

ain

ten

an

ce,sta

ff

develo

pm

en

tan

dm

ate

rials

develo

pm

en

t.

Need

the

follo

win

gfa

cto

rs:

ap

rin

cip

alw

ith

en

thu

sia

sm

for

the

tech-

no

log

y,in

tere

st

ofth

estu

den

tsin

the

tech

no

log

y,a

sch

oo

lcu

ltu

reth

at

has

asu

pp

ort

ive

an

do

pen

sta

ffan

dp

are

nt

cu

ltu

re,as

well

as

an

exp

ecta

tio

nth

at

teach

ers

wo

uld

use

the

IWB

,p

rofe

ssio

nald

evelo

p-

men

tb

yth

esch

oo

lan

dco

mm

erc

ialIW

Bsu

pp

liers

,an

dtim

efo

r

teach

ers

tod

evelo

pth

eir

skill

san

dto

pre

pare

mate

rials

.P

rofe

ssio

nal

develo

pm

en

tsh

ou

ldfo

cu

so

nth

eIW

Ban

dp

ed

ag

og

y,n

ot

just

on

tech

nic

altr

ain

ing

.T

ech

nic

alsu

pp

ort

an

deasy

access

toIW

Bs

is

essen

tial.

Teach

ers

sh

ou

ldsh

are

their

reso

urc

es.


Sh

en

ton

&P

ag

ett

Sla

y,S

ieb

örg

er,

&

Ho

dg

kin

so

n-W

illia

ms

Sm

ith

,H

ard

man

,

&H

igg

ins

Sm

ith

,H

igg

ins,

Wall,

&M

iller

So

lvie

20

07

20

08

20

06

20

05

20

07

Litera

cy

Co

mp

ute

rs&

Ed

ucatio

n

Bri

tish

Ed

ucatio

nal

Researc

hJo

urn

al

Jo

urn

alo

fC

om

pu

ter

Assis

ted

Learn

ing

Ed

ucatio

nalP

hilo

so

ph

y

an

dT

heo

ry

Go

od

so

ftw

are

that

acco

mp

an

ies

the

IWB

isim

po

rtan

t.In

-serv

ice

train

ing

isim

po

rtan

t.T

each

ers

need

tim

ein

pre

pari

ng

mate

rials

.

Teach

ers

need

tob

eco

me

co

nfid

en

tu

sers

.T

rain

ing

sh

ou

ldfo

cu

so

n

ped

ag

og

icalskill

s,n

ot

just

tech

nic

alco

nfid

en

ce.

Typ

eo

fte

ch

no

log

yis

imp

ort

an

tto

men

tio

n,as

inte

ractive

pen

-based

syste

ms

are

ch

eap

er

an

dm

ore

po

rtab

le,b

ut

less

relia

ble

.O

ther

facto

rsin

clu

de

scre

en

vis

ibili

ty,IW

Bco

mp

ete

ncy,valu

eo

fm

ultim

ed

ia

co

nte

nt,

mo

tivatio

no

fte

ach

er,

an

dco

st.

Teach

ers

mu

st

co

ntin

ue

to

pra

ctice

the

skill

sth

ey

have

acq

uir

ed

fro

mp

revio

us

train

ing

cla

sses.

Th

ey

need

tim

eto

en

gag

ew

ith

the

tech

no

log

y.

Pro

fessio

nald

evelo

pm

en

tis

need

ed

en

co

ura

gin

gch

an

gin

g

ped

ag

og

icu

nd

ers

tan

din

gan

dp

ractices.T

each

ers

need

exte

nsiv

e

tim

eto

try

ou

tth

ese

new

pra

ctices

an

dg

et

feed

back

fro

mexp

ert

pra

ctitio

ners

.P

rofe

ssio

nald

evelo

pm

en

tsh

ou

ldals

oin

clu

de

ob

serv

atio

n,co

ach

ing

,sym

path

etic

dis

cu

ssio

ng

rou

ps,an

d

feed

back.

Tra

inin

gan

dsu

pp

ort

are

essen

tial.

Pro

per

vie

win

gis

essen

tial

co

nsis

tin

go

fitem

ssu

ch

as

limitin

gsu

nlig

ht,

bo

ard

heig

ht,

an

dcle

an

scre

en

san

dle

nses.U

sin

ga

go

od

co

lor

an

dfo

nt

sch

em

ein

IWB

mate

rials

isals

oim

po

rtan

tto

pro

per

vie

win

g.T

each

ers

mu

st

have

freq

uen

taccess

toth

ete

ch

no

log

y,an

dth

isaccess

sh

ou

ldb

ein

their

ow

ncla

ssro

om

.

Teach

er

inn

ovatio

nis

imp

ort

an

t,as

well

as

IWB

sp

ecific

so

ftw

are

.

Havin

gth

em

read

ilyavaila

ble

ina

sta

nd

ard

cla

ssro

om

isals

o

imp

ort

an

t.


AP

PE

ND

IXA

(Co

nt’

d.)

Au

tho

r(s)

Year

Jo

urn

al

Co

nte

xtu

alF

acto

rs

Th

om

pso

n&

Fle

ckn

oe

Wall,

Hig

gin

s,&

Sm

ith

Weim

er

Wo

od

&A

sh

field

20

03

20

05

20

01

20

08

Man

ag

em

en

tin

Ed

ucatio

n

Bri

tish

Jo

urn

alo

f

Ed

ucatio

nal

Tech

no

log

y

Sm

art

erK

ids.o

rg

researc

hstu

dy

Bri

tish

Jo

urn

alo

f

Ed

ucatio

nal

Tech

no

log

y

Tech

nic

alsu

pp

ort

an

dte

ach

er

tech

nic

alkn

ow

led

ge

isim

po

rtan

t.

Teach

ers

need

train

ing

inh

ow

tote

ach

usin

gIW

Bs

an

dco

ntr

olli

ng

the

pace

ofle

sso

ns.

Teach

ers

need

pro

cess

an

dcu

rric

ulu

m-f

ocu

sed

train

ing

,as

well

as

train

ing

inh

ow

IWB

scan

affect

stu

den

ts’u

nd

ers

tan

din

g,

rem

em

beri

ng

,an

dth

inkin

g.

Teach

ers

need

tim

eto

develo

pre

so

urc

es

for

the

IWB

scre

en

.

Teach

ers

need

the

tech

nic

alab

ility

,b

ut

mu

st

als

oh

ave

acle

ar

un

ders

tan

din

go

fch

ildre

n’s

learn

ing

an

dh

ow

this

may

be

facili

tate

d

with

wh

ole

-cla

ss

lesso

ns.T

each

ers

sh

ou

ldb

ein

vo

lved

inevery

ste

po

f

the

so

ftw

are

develo

pm

en

tsta

ge.T

he

so

ftw

are

sh

ou

ldn’t

co

ntr

olth

e

teach

er;

the

teach

er

sh

ou

ldco

ntr

olth

eso

ftw

are

.


AP

PE

ND

IXB

Tab

le1

–P

erc

ep

tio

n

Au

tho

r(s)

Year

Jo

urn

al

Perc

ep

tio

n

Arm

str

on

g,B

arn

es,

Su

therl

an

d,C

urr

an

,

Mill

s,&

Th

om

pso

n

Glo

ver,

Mill

er,

Averi

s,&

Do

or

Glo

ver,

Mill

er,

Averi

s,&

Do

or

Glo

ver,

Mill

er,

Averi

s,&

Do

or

Hall

&H

igg

ins

20

05

20

05

a

20

05

b

20

07

20

05

Ed

ucatio

nalR

evie

w

Man

ag

em

en

tin

Ed

ucatio

n

Tech

no

log

y,P

ed

ag

og

y,

an

dE

du

catio

n

Learn

ing

,M

ed

iaan

d

Tech

no

log

y

Jo

urn

alo

fC

om

pu

ter

Assis

ted

Learn

ing

Perc

ep

tio

nis

Po

sitiv

e.

Po

sitiv

estu

den

tp

erc

ep

tio

ns.S

om

eo

bserv

ers

have

rais

ed

co

ncern

s

that

the

IWB

can

just

be

an

oth

er

pre

sen

tatio

nalg

imm

ick.

“It

iso

nly

wh

en

basic

tech

no

log

icalflu

en

cy

an

dp

ed

ag

og

ic

un

ders

tan

din

gh

ave

been

ach

ieved

that

teach

ers

can

overc

om

eth

e

no

velty

facto

r”(p

.1

7).

Mu

ch

has

been

cla

imed

:g

reate

rin

tera

ctivity,in

cre

ased

en

gag

em

en

t,

mo

tivatio

nan

den

joym

en

t,all

lead

ing

toim

pro

vem

en

tis

ach

ievem

en

t.

Th

ese

cla

ims

have

mo

stly

co

me

fro

mm

an

ufa

ctu

rers

,p

olic

ym

akers

an

d,acad

em

ics.N

eed

mo

rein

pu

tfr

om

stu

den

tsd

irectly.S

tud

en

tslik

e

vers

atilit

y,m

ultim

ed

ia,an

dfu

nth

at

IWB

sp

rovid

e.T

hey

als

olik

eth

e

tactile

ele

men

tso

fth

eb

oard

an

db

ein

gab

leto

man

ipu

late

ob

jects

.

Stu

den

tsd

on

’tlik

ete

ch

nic

alp

rob

lem

san

dn

ot

bein

gab

leto

see

the

bo

ard

(su

nlig

ht)

.


AP

PE

ND

IXB

–T

ab

le1

(Co

nt’

d.)

Au

tho

r(s)

Year

Jo

urn

al

Perc

ep

tio

n

Hig

gin

s,B

eau

ch

am

p,

&M

iller

Lew

in,S

om

ekh

,&

Ste

ad

man

Mart

in

Mech

ling

,G

ast,

&

Kru

pa

Mill

er,

Glo

ver,

&

Averi

s

Sch

mid

Sch

roed

er

20

07

20

08

20

07

20

07

20

04

20

06

20

07

Learn

ing

,M

ed

iaan

d

Tech

no

log

y

Ed

ucatio

n&

Info

rmatio

n

Tech

no

log

ies

Litera

cy

Jo

urn

alo

fA

utism

&

Develo

pm

en

talD

iso

rders

Pap

er

pre

sen

ted

at

Ten

thIn

tern

atio

nal

Co

ng

ress

of

Math

em

atics

Ed

ucatio

n

Co

mp

ute

rA

ssis

ted

Lan

gu

ag

eLearn

ing

Co

mm

un

icatio

ns

in

Info

rmatio

nLitera

cy

Po

sitiv

eab

ou

tth

eim

pact

an

dp

ote

ntialo

fIW

Bs.T

his

‘feelg

oo

d’fa

cto

r

co

uld

be

rela

ted

toth

eH

aw

tho

rne

Effect.

Teach

ers

with

access

toIW

Bs

are

perc

eiv

ed

by

stu

den

tsto

be

twic

eas

read

ilyavaila

ble

toh

elp

du

rin

gth

eco

urs

eo

fa

lesso

n,w

hile

teach

ers

with

ou

taccess

toIW

Bs

follo

wm

ore

rou

tin

gle

sso

ns

with

few

er

co

llab

ora

tive

activitie

s.S

tud

en

tsp

erc

eiv

eth

eir

cla

ss

as

po

sitiv

ew

hen

teach

ers

use

the

IWB

well

an

dare

co

mp

ete

nt

inits

use.W

hen

on

ly

used

on

occasio

n,te

ach

ers

seem

tob

em

ore

ten

tative

an

dstu

den

ts

lack

co

nfid

en

ce.

Stu

den

tsp

erc

eiv

eth

eIW

Bm

uch

mo

reas

aco

mp

ute

rth

an

a

wh

iteb

oard

.

Stu

den

tsvalu

eIW

Bs

for

their

vers

atilit

y,m

ultim

ed

iacap

ab

ilities,an

d

fun

an

dg

am

es.


Sch

uck

&K

earn

ey

Sh

en

ton

&P

ag

ett

Sla

y,S

ieb

örg

er,

&

Ho

dg

kin

so

n-W

illia

ms

Sm

ith

,H

ard

man

,

&H

igg

ins

Sm

ith

,H

igg

ins,

Wall,

&M

iller

So

lvie

Th

om

pso

n&

Fle

ckn

oe

20

07

20

07

20

08

20

06

20

05

20

07

20

03

Stu

dy

do

ne

at

Th

e

Un

ivers

ity

of

Tech

no

log

yS

yd

ney

Litera

cy

Co

mp

ute

rs&

Ed

ucatio

n

Bri

tish

Ed

ucatio

nal

Researc

hJo

urn

al

Jo

urn

alo

fC

om

pu

ter

Assis

ted

Learn

ing

Ed

ucatio

nalP

hilo

so

ph

y

an

dT

heo

ry

Man

ag

em

en

tin

Ed

ucatio

n

Teach

ers

an

dstu

den

tssu

gg

est

that

there

isan

imp

rovem

en

tin

lesso

ns

inw

hic

hIW

Bs

are

used

.T

each

ers

,stu

den

ts,an

dsch

oo

l

ad

min

istr

ato

rsfe

elIW

Bs

are

ben

eficia

lb

ecau

se

they

are

easy

tou

se,

they

are

vis

ual,

inte

ractive,im

med

iate

,an

dm

atc

hto

stu

den

ts’d

igital

cu

ltu

re.Lesso

ns

usin

gth

eIW

Bw

ere

perc

eiv

ed

as

‘bett

er

than

’o

ther

cla

ssro

om

wo

rk.

Th

ere

isan

assu

mp

tio

nth

at

IWB

use

will

imp

act

po

sitiv

ely

on

learn

ers

’

ach

ievem

en

ts.S

tud

en

tsare

aw

are

ofa

teach

er’s

co

nfid

en

ce

an

d

ab

ility

usin

gan

IWB

.

Acla

imm

ad

eb

yco

mm

en

tato

rsis

that

IWB

scan

pro

mo

tean

inte

ractive

cla

ss.

Litera

ture

revie

wsta

tes

that

evid

en

ce

inm

an

ystu

die

sare

inth

efo

rmo

f

su

rveys,in

terv

iew

s,an

dq

uestio

nn

air

es

rela

ted

tote

ach

ers

’an

d

stu

den

ts’p

erc

ep

tio

ns

ofIW

Bu

se.T

hese

are

info

rmalm

eth

od

s,so

inte

rpre

tatio

ns

sh

ou

ldb

eta

ken

with

cau

tio

n.A

lso

,th

eau

tho

rsw

ere

un

ab

leto

fin

dan

yri

go

rou

sstu

die

so

nIW

Bu

se

an

dth

eir

imp

act

on

att

ain

men

tan

dch

an

ges

incla

ssro

om

inte

ractio

n.Litera

ture

sta

tes

a

cle

ar

pre

fere

nce

for

IWB

use

by

bo

thstu

den

tsan

dte

ach

ers

.


AP

PE

ND

IXB

–T

ab

le1

(Co

nt’

d.)

Au

tho

r(s)

Year

Jo

urn

al

Perc

ep

tio

n

Wall,

Hig

gin

s,&

Sm

ith

Weim

er

Wo

od

&A

sh

field

20

05

20

01

20

08

Bri

tish

Jo

urn

alo

f

Ed

ucatio

nal

Tech

no

log

y

Sm

art

erK

ids.o

rg

researc

hstu

dy

Bri

tish

Jo

urn

alo

f

Ed

ucatio

nal

Tech

no

log

y

Overa

llco

mm

en

tsare

po

sitiv

efr

om

stu

den

tso

nth

eu

se

ofIW

Bs

to

teach

the

meta

co

gn

itiv

ep

rocess.

“In

man

yw

ays,th

efu

nctio

nalit

yo

fth

eIW

Bco

uld

be

vie

wed

as

a

mo

dern

tech

no

log

icalvers

ion

ofa

trad

itio

nalb

lackb

oard

”(p

.9

4).


AP

PE

ND

IXB

Tab

le2

–M

oti

vati

on

/A

tte

nti

on

/B

eh

avio

r

Au

tho

r(s)

Year

Jo

urn

al

Mo

tivatio

n/

Att

en

tio

n/

Beh

avio

r

Arm

str

on

g,B

arn

es,

Su

therl

an

d,C

urr

an

,

Mill

s,&

Th

om

pso

n

Glo

ver,

Mill

er,

Averi

s,&

Do

or

Glo

ver,

Mill

er,

Averi

s,&

Do

or

Glo

ver,

Mill

er,

Averi

s,&

Do

or

Hall

&H

igg

ins

Hig

gin

s,B

eau

ch

am

p,

&M

iller

20

05

20

05

a

20

05

b

20

07

20

05

20

07

Ed

ucatio

nalR

evie

w

Man

ag

em

en

tin

Ed

ucatio

n

Tech

no

log

y,P

ed

ag

og

y,

an

dE

du

catio

n

Learn

ing

,M

ed

iaan

d

Tech

no

log

y

Jo

urn

alo

fC

om

pu

ter

Assis

ted

Learn

ing

Learn

ing

,M

ed

iaan

d

Tech

no

log

y

IWB

sare

mo

tivatio

nalb

ecau

se

pu

pils

can

inte

ract

with

it.

At

the

en

han

ced

inte

ractivity

sta

ge,b

eh

avio

rp

rob

lem

sare

usu

ally

overc

om

ed

ue

toseq

uen

ce

an

dp

ace

ofle

arn

ing

.

An

imp

roved

an

din

tere

stin

gp

resen

tatio

nh

as

astr

on

gm

otivatio

nal

effect.

Mo

tivatio

nalg

ain

sals

oh

elp

stu

den

tsw

ith

learn

ing

pro

ble

ms.

So

me

litera

ture

sh

ow

sa

link

betw

een

the

cap

acity

ofth

eIW

B

tech

no

log

yto

en

liven

pre

sen

tatio

nan

dm

otivate

pu

pil

part

icip

atio

n.

IWB

use

inK

-12

secto

rp

rom

ote

sstu

den

tin

tere

st

an

dm

ore

su

sta

ined

co

ncen

tratio

n.S

tud

en

tm

otivatio

nan

du

nd

ers

tan

din

gcan

be

foste

red

for

tho

se

with

sp

ecia

led

ucatio

nn

eed

s.

Stu

den

tssay

mu

ltim

ed

iaasp

ects

ofIW

Bh

old

their

att

en

tio

n,in

cre

ase

their

en

gag

em

en

tan

dm

otivatio

n.

IWB

sare

wid

ely

cla

imed

tom

otivate

stu

den

ts,re

su

ltin

gin

imp

rovem

en

tin

att

en

tio

nan

db

eh

avio

r.Lo

nd

on

sch

oo

lsin

the

Seco

nd

ary

Wh

iteb

oard

Exp

an

sio

np

roje

ct,

wh

ere

teach

ers

used

the

bo

ard

sin

vari

ou

sw

ays,re

po

rted

that

an

incre

ase

inm

otivatio

nw

as

sh

ort

-liv

ed

.


AP

PE

ND

IXB

–T

ab

le2

(Co

nt’

d.)

Au

tho

r(s)

Year

Jo

urn

al

Mo

tivatio

n/

Att

en

tio

n/

Beh

avio

r

Lew

in,S

om

ekh

,&

Ste

ad

man

Mart

in

Mech

ling

,G

ast,

&

Kru

pa

Mill

er,

Glo

ver,

&

Averi

s

Sch

mid

Sch

roed

er

20

08

20

07

20

07

20

04

20

06

20

07

Ed

ucatio

n&

Info

rmatio

n

Tech

no

log

ies

Litera

cy

Jo

urn

alo

fA

utism

&

Develo

pm

en

talD

iso

rders

Pap

er

pre

sen

ted

at

Ten

thIn

tern

atio

nal

Co

ng

ress

of

Math

em

atics

Ed

ucatio

n

Co

mp

ute

rA

ssis

ted

Lan

gu

ag

eLearn

ing

Co

mm

un

icatio

ns

in

Info

rmatio

nLitera

cy

Imp

roved

en

thu

sia

sm

an

datt

en

tio

n.

To

maxi

miz

em

otivatio

n,te

ch

no

log

yn

eed

sto

be

used

insu

bje

ct-

sp

ecific

ways

an

dem

bed

ded

inte

ach

ing

an

dle

arn

ing

.S

tud

yn

ote

d

little

ch

an

ge

inb

eh

avio

ro

fsp

ecia

ln

eed

sch

ildre

n.H

igh

er

ach

ievin

g

gir

lsp

art

icip

ate

dm

ost

freq

uen

tly

in‘p

ositiv

e’b

eh

avio

rsfo

llow

ed

by

hig

her

ach

ievin

gb

oys.P

ositiv

eeffects

on

mo

tivatio

nw

ere

no

ted

.

Gro

up

arr

an

gem

en

tactivity

on

ala

rge

inte

ractio

nscre

en

makes

imag

es

mo

revis

ible

an

din

cre

ase

att

en

tio

nto

the

task.

Stu

den

tsre

co

gn

ize

the

po

ten

tialfo

rIW

Bs

tora

ise

their

mo

tivatio

nfo

r

sh

ari

ng

kn

ow

led

ge

with

their

co

urs

em

ate

sb

ym

ean

so

fin

div

idu

alo

r

gro

up

pre

sen

tatio

ns.

Th

ew

ay

inw

hic

hin

form

atio

nis

pre

sen

ted

on

an

IWB

thro

ug

hth

e

use

ofco

lor

an

dm

ovem

en

tis

seen

by

stu

den

tsto

be

mo

tivatin

g

an

dre

info

rces

co

ncen

tratio

nan

datt

en

tio

n.T

he

no

velty

facto

rcan

dim

inis

hif

used

inevery

lesso

n,an

dm

uch

dep

en

ds

on

the

overa

ll

qu

alit

yo

fte

ach

ing

.


Sch

uck

&K

earn

ey

Sh

en

ton

&P

ag

ett

Sla

y,S

ieb

örg

er,

&

Ho

dg

kin

so

n-W

illia

ms

Sm

ith

,H

ard

man

,

&H

igg

ins

Sm

ith

,H

igg

ins,

Wall,

&M

iller

20

07

20

07

20

08

20

06

20

05

Stu

dy

do

ne

at

Th

e

Un

ivers

ity

of

Tech

no

log

yS

yd

ney

Litera

cy

Co

mp

ute

rs&

Ed

ucatio

n

Bri

tish

Ed

ucatio

nal

Researc

hJo

urn

al

Jo

urn

alo

fC

om

pu

ter

Assis

ted

Learn

ing

Stu

den

tsw

ere

gen

era

llyo

n-t

ask

an

dm

otivate

d.S

tud

en

tm

otivatio

n

an

den

gag

em

en

tis

en

han

ced

.M

otivatio

nals

ore

late

sto

teach

ers

as

they

loo

kto

pre

sen

tle

sso

ns

ina

mo

revis

ually

stim

ula

tin

gan

d

inte

ractive

way.T

each

ers

rep

ort

ed

that

IWB

sh

ad

ren

ew

ed

their

en

thu

sia

sm

for

teach

ing

.In

man

ycases,all

ofth

ese

fin

din

gs

co

uld

be

at

least

part

ially

att

rib

uta

ble

toth

en

ovelty

effect.

IWB

sare

hig

hly

mo

tivatin

gto

stu

den

tsan

dkeep

them

on

task.

Learn

ers

love

toh

ave

tech

no

log

yas

they

can

rela

teto

it.T

his

incre

ases

the

mo

tivatio

nalb

en

efit

ofIW

Bs.A

tten

tio

ncan

wear

off

du

e

toth

en

ovelty

facto

r,w

hic

his

wh

yp

ed

ag

og

icvalu

eis

ofu

tmo

st

imp

ort

an

ce.

Researc

hsu

gg

ests

thatd

ialo

gic

teac

hin

gle

ad

sto

diffe

ren

tle

vels

of

part

icip

atio

nan

den

gag

em

en

t.IW

Bs

are

mo

tivatin

gb

ecau

se

of

str

on

gvis

ualan

dco

ncep

tualap

pealo

fth

ein

form

atio

nd

isp

layed

,

an

dth

ep

hysic

alin

tera

ctio

nasp

ect.

Th

ew

idely

cla

imed

ad

van

tag

e

with

reg

ard

tom

otivatio

nis

that

IWB

sin

co

rpo

rate

larg

evis

ual

imag

es.

Litera

ture

revie

wh

as

fou

nd

that

stu

den

tsare

mo

tivate

din

IWB

lesso

ns

becau

se

ofth

eh

igh

levelo

fin

tera

ctio

nan

dstu

den

tsen

joy

inte

ractin

gp

hysic

ally

with

the

bo

ard

by

man

ipu

latin

gte

xt

an

d

imag

es.T

here

are

so

me

co

ncern

sab

ou

tth

en

ovelty

facto

rw

ith

IWB

s,as

stu

den

tsb

eco

me

accu

sto

med

with

its

use.H

ow

ever,

an

exp

eri

men

talstu

dy

sh

ow

ed

that

mo

tivatio

nim

pro

ved

ina

cla

ss

usin

gan

IWB

.


AP

PE

ND

IXB

–T

ab

le2

(Co

nt’

d.)

Au

tho

r(s)

Year

Jo

urn

al

Mo

tivatio

n/

Att

en

tio

n/

Beh

avio

r

So

lvie

Th

om

pso

n&

Fle

ckn

oe

Wall,

Hig

gin

s,&

Sm

ith

Weim

er

Wo

od

&A

sh

field

20

07

20

03

20

05

20

01

20

08

Ed

ucatio

nalP

hilo

so

ph

y

an

dT

heo

ry

Man

ag

em

en

tin

Ed

ucatio

n

Bri

tish

Jo

urn

alo

f

Ed

ucatio

nal

Tech

no

log

y

Sm

art

erK

ids.o

rg

researc

hstu

dy

Bri

tish

Jo

urn

alo

f

Ed

ucatio

nalT

ech

no

log

y

IWB

sallo

wth

eau

tho

rto

co

mb

ine

teach

er

mo

delin

go

flit

era

cy

tasks

with

stu

den

tin

vo

lvem

en

t.T

he

au

tho

rim

ag

ined

that

by

incre

asin

g

stu

den

ts’att

en

tio

n,ach

ievem

en

tw

ou

ldin

cre

ase

as

well.

Th

isw

as

no

t

as

su

ccessfu

las

ho

ped

.S

tud

en

tatt

en

tio

nto

task

was

no

tsig

nific

an

tly

imp

roved

du

rin

gIW

Ble

sso

ns

even

tho

ug

hstu

den

tsap

peare

d

en

thu

sia

stic.

Resu

lts

sh

ow

acru

de

ind

icatio

nth

at

beh

avio

rd

idim

pro

ve

an

dth

at

pu

pils

were

mo

rem

otivate

dan

do

nta

sk

du

rin

gth

ele

sso

ns.R

ed

uc-

tio

ns

inn

eg

ative

beh

avio

rw

ere

sig

nific

an

t.C

ou

ldb

eatt

rib

ute

dto

the

no

velty

facto

r,b

ut

there

was

no

no

ticeab

led

ecre

ase

inen

thu

sia

sm

over

tim

e.O

ver

use

ofth

eIW

Bw

ith

little

stu

den

tin

tera

ctio

ncan

lead

to

bo

red

om

an

dsu

bseq

uen

td

isru

ptive

beh

avio

r.

Stu

den

tsb

elie

ve

that

co

ncen

tratio

nw

as

aid

ed

by

the

use

ofIW

Bs.

Stu

den

tsw

ere

hig

hly

mo

tivate

d,an

dth

isw

as

ind

icate

das

akey

facto

r

imp

actin

go

nth

estu

den

ts’m

eta

co

gn

itiv

ep

rocess.

Stu

dy

tom

easu

rem

otivatio

nim

pact

su

gg

ests

that

mo

tivatio

nm

ay

be

affecte

db

yth

eu

se

ofIW

Bs

at

least

initia

lly.It

was

difficu

ltto

dete

rmin

e

ifth

iseffect

isa

tem

po

rary

on

e.M

otivatio

nis

an

un

derl

yin

gfa

cto

rin

learn

ing

an

dach

ievem

en

t.T

here

isso

me

evid

en

ce

ofa

rela

tio

nsh

ip

betw

een

stu

den

tm

otivatio

nan

dstu

den

tp

erf

orm

an

ce.

Pre

vio

us

researc

hh

igh

ligh

tsth

em

otivatio

nalim

pact

ofIW

Bs

on

stu

den

ts.


AP

PE

ND

IXB

Tab

le3

–L

eve

lo

fIn

tera

cti

on

Au

tho

r(s)

Year

Jo

urn

al

Levelo

fin

tera

ctio

n

Arm

str

on

g,B

arn

es,

Su

therl

an

d,C

urr

an

,

Mill

s,&

Th

om

pso

n

Glo

ver,

Mill

er,

Averi

s,&

Do

or

Glo

ver,

Mill

er,

Averi

s,&

Do

or

20

05

20

05

a

20

05

b

Ed

ucatio

nalR

evie

w

Man

ag

em

en

tin

Ed

ucatio

n

Tech

no

log

y,P

ed

ag

og

y,

an

dE

du

catio

n

Teach

ers

need

tou

se

the

ap

pro

pri

ate

so

ftw

are

that

affo

rds

inte

ractio

nan

dth

ism

ay

no

tb

each

ieved

ifth

eIW

Bis

seen

as

a

pre

sen

tatio

nto

olo

nly

.IW

Bs

are

least

effective

an

dh

ave

limited

imp

act

wh

en

teach

ers

do

no

tre

aliz

eth

at

inte

ractivity

req

uir

es

an

ew

ap

pro

ach

top

ed

ag

og

y.

3sta

ges

are

no

ted

:su

pp

ort

ed

did

ac

tic

–IW

Bis

used

as

vis

ualsu

pp

ort

wh

ich

cau

ses

stu

den

tsto

see

the

IWB

as

an

ovelty,in

tera

ctive

–

pro

gre

ssio

nfr

om

su

pp

ort

ed

did

ac

tic

wh

ere

avari

ety

ofstim

uli

are

used

toill

ustr

ate

,d

evelo

p,an

dte

st

dis

cre

teco

ncep

ts,evid

en

ce

of

occasio

nalla

ck

ofco

nfid

en

ce,fu

llp

ote

ntialis

no

td

evelo

ped

,

en

thu

sia

sm

isg

row

ing

,e

nh

an

ce

din

tera

ctivi

ty–

ch

an

ge

ofth

inkin

g,

teach

er

loo

ks

toin

teg

rate

co

ncep

tan

dco

gn

itiv

ed

evelo

pm

en

t

ina

way

that

exp

loits

the

inte

ractive

cap

acity

ofth

ete

ch

no

log

y.

Teach

ing

can

on

lyb

een

han

ced

ifin

tera

ctivity

isu

nd

ers

too

d.

Inte

ractivity

isre

co

gn

ized

as

the

key

tob

oth

learn

ing

an

dsu

sta

ined

inte

rest.

Inte

ractivity

need

sto

exi

st

betw

een

teach

ers

an

dstu

den

ts,

stu

den

tsan

dstu

den

ts,an

dte

ach

ers

an

dte

ach

ers

.


AP

PE

ND

IXB

–T

ab

le3

(Co

nt’

d.)

Au

tho

r(s)

Year

Jo

urn

al

Levelo

fin

tera

ctio

n

Glo

ver,

Mill

er,

Averi

s,&

Do

or

Hall

&H

igg

ins

Hig

gin

s,B

eau

ch

am

p,

&M

iller

20

07

20

05

20

07

Learn

ing

,M

ed

iaan

d

Tech

no

log

y

Learn

ing

,M

ed

iaan

d

Tech

no

log

y

Learn

ing

,M

ed

iaan

d

Tech

no

log

y

Inte

ractivity

ism

ost

effectively

su

sta

ined

thro

ug

heffective

qu

estio

nin

g

as

well

as

aw

ider

ran

ge

ofactivity

inle

sso

ns.In

tera

ctivity

need

s

tob

eb

oth

teach

er-

stu

den

tan

dstu

den

t-stu

den

tw

hic

hm

ay

req

uir

ea

ch

an

ge

incla

ssro

om

pra

ctice.3

sta

ges

are

no

ted

:su

pp

ort

ed

did

ac

tic

–IW

Bis

used

as

vis

ualsu

pp

ort

wh

ich

cau

ses

stu

den

tsto

see

the

IWB

as

an

ovelty,in

tera

ctive

–p

rog

ressio

nfr

om

su

pp

ort

ed

did

ac

tic

wh

ere

avari

ety

ofstim

uli

are

used

toill

ustr

ate

,d

evelo

p,an

dte

st

dis

cre

teco

ncep

ts,evid

en

ce

ofo

ccasio

nalla

ck

ofco

nfid

en

ce,

full

po

ten

tialis

no

td

evelo

ped

,en

thu

sia

sm

isg

row

ing

,e

nh

an

ce

d

inte

rac

tivi

ty–

ch

an

ge

ofth

inkin

g,te

ach

er

loo

ks

toin

teg

rate

co

ncep

t

an

dco

gn

itiv

ed

evelo

pm

en

tin

aw

ay

that

exp

loits

the

inte

ractive

cap

acity

ofth

ete

ch

no

log

y.E

nh

an

ced

inte

ractivity

can

be

ach

ieved

thro

ug

hle

sso

np

rep

ara

tio

n(b

uild

ing

on

use

ofverb

al,

vis

ual,

an

d

kin

esth

etic),

lesso

nstr

uctu

re,le

arn

ing

man

ag

em

en

t,sto

rin

gan

d

ed

itin

gle

sso

ns,p

ed

ag

og

icch

an

ge.

Th

eco

ncep

to

fin

tera

ctivity

need

sto

be

accu

rate

lyan

do

pera

tio

nally

defin

ed

for

teach

ers

.

Man

ytim

es

IWB

sare

no

tu

sed

inte

ractively

,an

dcan

rein

forc

e

teach

er-

cen

tere

din

str

uctio

n.In

tera

ctivity

isth

ekey

tob

oth

learn

ing

an

dsu

sta

ined

inte

rest.

Tech

niq

ues

toen

han

ce

inte

ractivity

inclu

de:

dra

gan

dd

rop

,h

ide

an

dre

veal,

co

lor,

sh

ad

ing

,h

igh

ligh

tin

g,m

atc

hin

g

ofeq

uiv

ale

nt

term

s,m

ovem

en

to

ran

imatio

n,an

dim

med

iate

feed

back.

Teach

ers

are

the

cri

ticalag

en

tsin

med

iatin

gth

eso

ftw

are

an

du

sin

g

the

tech

no

log

yto

pro

mo

tein

tera

ctio

ns

an

din

tera

ctivity.


Lew

in,S

om

ekh

,&

Ste

ad

man

Mart

in

Mech

ling

,G

ast,

&

Kru

pa

Mill

er,

Glo

ver,

&

Averi

s

Sch

mid

Sch

roed

er

Sch

uck

&K

earn

ey

20

08

20

07

20

07

20

04

20

06

20

07

20

07

Ed

ucatio

n&

Info

rmatio

n

Tech

no

log

ies

Litera

cy

Jo

urn

alo

fA

utism

&

Develo

pm

en

talD

iso

rders

Pap

er

pre

sen

ted

at

Ten

thIn

tern

atio

nal

Co

ng

ress

of

Math

em

atics

Ed

ucatio

n

Co

mp

ute

rA

ssis

ted

Lan

gu

ag

eLearn

ing

Co

mm

un

icatio

ns

in

Info

rmatio

nLitera

cy

Stu

dy

do

ne

at

Th

e

Un

ivers

ity

of

Tech

no

log

yS

yd

ney

Litera

ture

sta

tes

insu

ffic

ien

tevid

en

ce

toid

en

tify

the

actu

alim

pact

of

IWB

so

nle

arn

ing

inte

rms

ofcla

ssro

om

inte

ractio

n.

Usin

gIW

Bs

as

an

ad

jun

ct,

rath

er

than

an

inte

gra

ted

ele

men

tin

teach

ing

,m

inim

izes

inte

ractio

nan

dth

em

atc

hin

go

fte

ach

ing

toth

e

learn

ing

need

s.T

he

key

tostim

ula

tin

gu

se

ofIW

Bs

isa

well-

paced

lesso

nth

at

maxi

miz

es

the

inte

ractivity

ofth

eb

oard

.

Man

yp

rim

ary

teach

ers

em

ph

asiz

ed

the

tactile

natu

reo

fth

eIW

B.

Stu

den

tsm

ust

be

inte

ractin

gw

ith

the

bo

ard

,n

ot

just

the

teach

er.

Th

e

ab

ility

tod

yn

am

ically

man

ipu

late

an

dan

no

tate

ob

jects

was

str

essed

.

Man

yte

ach

ers

sim

ply

use

the

IWB

inth

efo

rmo

fin

tera

ctio

nfo

rw

ho

le

cla

ss

dis

cu

ssio

ns.O

bserv

ers

fou

nd

the

main

ben

efit

fro

mth

eb

oard

is

no

tth

eab

ility

top

rovid

ein

tera

ctivity,b

ut

top

rep

are

,o

rgan

ize,an

d

sto

rele

sso

ns

with

access

tou

sefu

lre

so

urc

es.


AP

PE

ND

IXB

–T

ab

le3

(Co

nt’

d.)

Au

tho

r(s)

Year

Jo

urn

al

Levelo

fin

tera

ctio

n

Sh

en

ton

&P

ag

ett

Sla

y,S

ieb

örg

er,

&

Ho

dg

kin

so

n-W

illia

ms

Sm

ith

,H

ard

man

,

&H

igg

ins

Sm

ith

,H

igg

ins,

Wall,

&M

iller

20

07

20

08

20

06

20

05

Litera

cy

Co

mp

ute

rs&

Ed

ucatio

n

Bri

tish

Ed

ucatio

nal

Researc

hJo

urn

al

Jo

urn

alo

fC

om

pu

ter

Assis

ted

Learn

ing

IWB

sallo

wch

ildre

nan

dte

ach

ers

toin

tera

ct

with

it,b

ut

this

will

no

t

necessari

lyp

rom

ote

an

inte

ractive

sty

leo

fte

ach

ing

an

dle

arn

ing

.

Man

yte

ach

ers

have

ate

nd

en

cy

tod

om

inate

the

wh

iteb

oard

lesso

n,

giv

ing

stu

den

tsfe

win

vitatio

ns

tou

se

the

bo

ard

them

selv

es.

Wh

en

used

intr

ad

itio

nalw

ays,th

evalu

eo

fth

eIW

Bcan

be

att

rib

ute

d

sim

ply

toth

eu

se

ofa

data

pro

jecto

ran

da

co

mp

ute

r.In

tera

ctivity

per

se

did

no

tseem

as

imp

ort

an

tas

the

mu

ltim

ed

iad

isp

lay

ofco

urs

e

co

nte

nt.

So

me

teach

ers

vie

wth

eIW

Bas

ab

lackb

oard

rep

lacem

en

t

wh

ere

oth

ers

vie

wit

as

asu

pp

ort

for

inte

ractive,p

art

icip

ato

ry,an

d

co

op

era

tive

learn

ing

.T

he

mo

st

reco

gn

ized

ben

efit

ofth

eIW

Bw

as

the

ab

ility

for

teach

ers

tosta

yin

fro

nt

ofth

ecla

ss,a

po

sitio

no

fau

tho

rity

,

wh

ilestill

inte

ractin

gw

ith

the

tech

no

log

y.T

his

aid

sin

pro

per

cla

ssro

om

man

ag

em

en

t(b

ein

gin

fro

nt

ofth

ecla

ss).

Th

eid

ea

ofd

ialo

gic

teac

hin

gsh

ou

ldre

pla

ce

the

term

so

fin

tera

ctive

or

wh

ole

cla

ss

teach

ing

.A

dia

log

icc

lassro

om

has

the

essen

tialfe

atu

res

ofb

ein

gco

llective,re

cip

rocal,

an

dcu

mu

lative.

Litera

ture

revie

wh

as

fou

nd

that

stu

den

tsare

mo

tivate

din

IWB

lesso

ns

becau

se

ofth

eh

igh

levelo

fin

tera

ctio

nan

dstu

den

tsen

joy

inte

ractin

g

ph

ysic

ally

with

the

bo

ard

by

man

ipu

latin

gte

xt

an

dim

ag

es.E

vid

en

ce

als

osu

gg

ests

that

no

tall

teach

ers

invo

lve

stu

den

tsto

this

exte

nt.

Invo

lvin

gstu

den

tsso

metim

es

red

uces

the

pace

ofth

ele

sso

ns

an

dcan

cau

se

bo

red

om

.A

lso

so

me

rep

ort

ssta

teth

at

old

er

stu

den

tsare

no

tas

eag

er

tole

ave

their

seats

as

yo

un

ger

stu

den

ts.It

isfe

ltb

yso

me


So

lvie

Th

om

pso

n&

Fle

ckn

oe

Wall,

Hig

gin

s,&

Sm

ith

Weim

er

Wo

od

&A

sh

field

20

07

20

03

20

05

20

01

20

08

Ed

ucatio

nalP

hilo

so

ph

y

an

dT

heo

ry

Man

ag

em

en

tin

Ed

ucatio

n

Bri

tish

Jo

urn

alo

f

Ed

ucatio

nal

Tech

no

log

y

Sm

art

erK

ids.o

rg

researc

hstu

dy

Bri

tish

Jo

urn

alo

f

Ed

ucatio

nalT

ech

no

log

y

that

IWB

sin

cre

ase

stu

den

t-te

ach

er

inte

ractio

n,h

ow

ever,

this

can

be

do

ne

ino

ther

ways

no

tin

vo

lvin

gth

eIW

B.T

he

qu

alit

yo

fth

isin

tera

ctio

n

mu

st

als

ob

ead

dre

ssed

,n

ot

on

lyth

efr

eq

uen

cy.

Cri

ticalen

gag

em

en

tis

po

ssib

leif

teach

ers

mo

ve

aw

ay

fro

mu

sin

g

IWB

sas

an

att

en

tio

ng

ett

ing

devic

e,to

on

eo

factive

stu

den

t

en

gag

em

en

tin

litera

cy

activitie

s.

Astu

dy

used

are

ad

ym

ad

eap

plic

atio

ncalle

dE

asite

ac

hM

ath

sw

hic

h

help

ste

ach

ers

deliv

er

math

lesso

ns

via

the

IWB

.E

asite

ac

hw

as

develo

ped

sp

ecific

ally

tob

rin

gin

tera

ctivity

an

dg

reate

rstu

den

t

invo

lvem

en

tto

lesso

ns

by

havin

gstu

den

tsin

tera

ct

with

the

bo

ard

.T

he

bo

ard

wo

rks

best

wh

en

used

inte

ractively

,p

art

icu

larl

yw

hen

stu

den

ts

use

the

bo

ard

sth

em

selv

es.

IWB

scan

be

avalu

ab

leto

olfo

rte

ach

ing

stu

den

tsab

ou

tm

eta

co

g-

nitio

n:

thin

kin

gab

ou

tle

arn

ing

.S

tud

en

tso

verw

helm

ing

lyw

an

tto

be

ab

leto

inte

ract

with

the

bo

ard

them

selv

es.

Ina

case

stu

dy,it

was

fou

nd

that

teach

ers

did

no

tseek

toen

gag

e

ch

ildre

nin

hig

her

levelth

inkin

gth

rou

gh

dis

cu

ssio

nan

din

tera

ctio

n,

an

dstu

den

tsto

ok

on

ap

assiv

ero

le.O

pp

ort

un

itie

sfo

rin

tera

ctio

nan

d

dis

cu

ssio

nw

ere

limited

,an

dm

ultim

ed

iare

so

urc

es

rep

laced

the

teach

er.


AP

PE

ND

IXB

Tab

le4

–L

earn

ing

Au

tho

r(s)

Year

Jo

urn

al

Learn

ing

Arm

str

on

g,B

arn

es,

Su

therl

an

d,C

urr

an

,

Mill

s,&

Th

om

pso

n

Glo

ver,

Mill

er,

Averi

s,&

Do

or

Glo

ver,

Mill

er,

Averi

s,&

Do

or

Glo

ver,

Mill

er,

Averi

s,&

Do

or

20

05

20

05

a

20

05

b

20

07

Ed

ucatio

nalR

evie

w

Man

ag

em

en

tin

Ed

ucatio

n

Tech

no

log

y,P

ed

ag

og

y,

an

dE

du

catio

n

Learn

ing

,M

ed

iaan

d

Tech

no

log

y

IWB

scan

be

seen

as

inte

rest

en

han

cers

inste

ad

ofa

new

ap

pro

ach

to

learn

ing

.T

here

are

no

ab

so

lute

pro

pert

ies

ofth

eIW

Bth

at

allo

wu

sto

pre

dic

tth

eeffects

itw

illh

ave

on

learn

ing

.W

hat

stu

den

tsle

arn

rela

tes

to

ho

wa

tech

no

log

yis

used

inth

ecla

ssro

om

an

dte

ach

ers

’an

dstu

den

ts’

perc

ep

tio

ns

ofh

ow

itcan

be

used

.P

hysic

alin

tera

ctio

nw

ith

text

an

d

lan

gu

ag

eis

po

werf

ulto

the

learn

er.

IWB

so

ffer

flexi

bili

ty,seq

uen

tialit

y,an

dth

em

atc

hin

go

fle

arn

ing

to

stu

den

tle

arn

ing

sty

les.

Lo

ng

-term

learn

ing

gain

so

utw

eig

hm

an

ag

em

en

tp

rob

lem

sas

teach

ers

beco

me

incre

asin

gly

mo

reco

mp

ete

nt

with

the

tech

no

log

y.K

inesth

etic

learn

ing

ari

ses

fro

mm

ovem

en

t,co

lor,

an

dth

elin

kag

eo

fd

iag

ram

san

d

verb

alan

no

tatio

ns

inth

ed

evelo

pm

en

to

fco

ncep

ts.T

he

IWB

has

been

used

tolin

kte

ach

ing

an

dle

arn

ing

sty

les

tostu

den

tn

eed

s.Lin

ks

are

no

ted

betw

een

the

cap

acity

ofth

eIW

Bte

ch

no

log

yan

dits

ab

ility

to

rein

forc

ele

arn

ing

.In

tera

ctivity

an

dth

en

atu

reo

fq

uestio

nin

gh

ave

to

ch

an

ge

too

ptim

ize

learn

ing

gain

s.

Th

eu

se

ofIW

Bte

ch

no

log

yalo

ne

can

no

tle

ad

toen

han

ced

learn

ing

.

IWB

use

inK

-12

secto

rp

rom

ote

sm

ore

effective

learn

ing

wh

en

tech

no

l-

og

yis

used

tosu

pp

ort

vari

ety

ofle

arn

ing

sty

les.E

ffective

learn

ing

has

been

realiz

ed

wh

ere

teach

ers

valu

eth

ete

ch

no

log

yan

dfu

llyu

nd

ers

tan

d

the

natu

reo

fin

tera

ctivity

an

dits

ped

ag

og

icim

plic

atio

ns.E

ffective

learn

-

ing

isin

hib

ited

wh

ere

the

IWB

isg

iven

an

ovelty

valu

eb

yth

ete

ach

er.


Hall

&H

igg

ins

Hig

gin

s,B

eau

ch

am

p,

&M

iller

Lew

in,S

om

ekh

,&

Ste

ad

man

Mart

in

Mech

ling

,G

ast,

&

Kru

pa

Mill

er,

Glo

ver,

&

Averi

s

Sch

mid

20

05

20

07

20

08

20

07

20

07

20

04

20

06

Jo

urn

alo

fC

om

pu

ter

Assis

ted

Learn

ing

Learn

ing

,M

ed

iaan

d

Tech

no

log

y

Ed

ucatio

n&

Info

rmatio

n

Tech

no

log

ies

Litera

cy

Jo

urn

alo

fA

utism

&

Develo

pm

en

talD

iso

rders

Pap

er

pre

sen

ted

at

Ten

thIn

tern

atio

nal

Co

ng

ress

of

Math

em

atics

Ed

ucatio

n

Co

mp

ute

rA

ssis

ted

Lan

gu

ag

eLearn

ing

Inte

ractivity

can

assis

tle

arn

ing

.IW

Bs

may

alter

the

way

learn

ing

takes

pla

ce,b

ut

really

has

no

measu

rab

leim

pact.

IWB

sh

ave

tob

eu

sed

an

dseen

as

am

ed

iatin

gart

ifact.

Ifth

ey

are

used

as

ag

lori

fied

bla

ckb

oard

or

as

an

occasio

nally

an

imate

dp

assiv

e

wh

iteb

oard

,th

en

there

will

be

little

effect

on

stu

den

tle

arn

ing

.

Litera

ture

sta

tes

insu

ffic

ien

tevid

en

ce

toid

en

tify

the

actu

alim

pact

of

IWB

so

nle

arn

ing

inte

rms

ofcla

ssro

om

inte

ractio

no

ru

po

natt

ain

men

t

an

dach

ievem

en

t.A

stu

dy

with

inte

ractive

Big

Bo

oks

sh

ow

ed

no

patt

ern

on

wri

tin

gp

erf

orm

an

ce.T

he

Haw

tho

rne

Effect

may

have

influ-

en

ced

resu

lts.S

tud

en

tsd

idn

ot

tran

sfe

rle

arn

ing

into

their

ow

nw

ork

.

Stu

dy

ind

icate

sin

cre

ased

co

rrect

read

ing

an

dm

atc

hin

go

fw

ord

sets

usin

gS

MA

RT

Bo

ard

tech

no

log

y.N

ot

su

reif

this

learn

ing

is

tran

sfe

rrab

leto

new

mate

rial.

Usin

gIW

Bs

as

an

ad

jun

ct,

rath

er

than

an

inte

gra

ted

ele

men

tin

teach

ing

,m

inim

izes

inte

ractio

nan

dth

em

atc

hin

go

fte

ach

ing

toth

e

learn

ing

need

s.In

astu

dy

itw

as

fou

nd

that

inte

rms

ofle

arn

ing

an

d

un

ders

tan

din

g,stu

den

tre

actio

nsu

gg

ests

that

the

use

ofIW

Bs

mad

e

no

diffe

ren

ce

toth

eir

exp

eri

en

ce.T

his

ind

icate

sth

at

the

teach

er

rath

er

than

the

tech

no

log

yis

the

mo

st

imp

ort

an

tele

men

t.

Stu

dy

ind

icate

sth

at

IWB

scan

be

an

effective

too

lfo

rin

itia

tin

gan

d

facili

tatin

gth

ele

arn

ing

pro

cess,esp

ecia

llyw

here

stu

den

tp

art

icip

atio

n

isen

co

ura

ged

.


AP

PE

ND

IXB

–T

ab

le4

(Co

nt’

d.)

Au

tho

r(s)

Year

Jo

urn

al

Learn

ing

Sch

roed

er

Sch

uck

&K

earn

ey

Sh

en

ton

&P

ag

ett

Sla

y,S

ieb

örg

er,

&

Ho

dg

kin

so

n-W

illia

ms

20

07

20

07

20

07

20

08

Co

mm

un

icatio

ns

in

Info

rmatio

nLitera

cy

Stu

dy

do

ne

at

Th

e

Un

ivers

ity

ofT

ech

no

log

y

Syd

ney

Litera

cy

Co

mp

ute

rs&

Ed

ucatio

n

Mo

st

stu

die

sd

on

ot

sh

ow

mu

ch

ofan

incre

ase

inle

arn

ing

inco

gn

itiv

e

are

as;

mo

reo

ften

they

po

int

toin

cre

ases

inth

eaffe

ctive

do

main

.T

he

affe

ctive

do

main

focu

ses

on

learn

er’

sm

otivatio

ns,att

en

tio

n,an

d

em

otio

nalre

sp

on

se

tole

arn

ing

.It

als

ofo

cu

ses

on

self-c

on

cep

t,self-

este

em

,an

dso

cia

lin

tera

ctio

nin

the

learn

ing

en

vir

on

men

t.M

an

y

stu

die

ssh

ow

ap

ositiv

eim

pact

on

stu

den

ts’affective

learn

ing

.

Itis

no

tyet

cle

ar

ho

wIW

Bu

se

mig

ht

affect

learn

ing

ou

tco

mes

or

co

ncep

td

evelo

pm

en

t.T

his

isd

ue

toth

efa

ct

that

mu

ch

ofth

ere

searc

h

so

far

has

been

co

nd

ucte

din

sch

oo

lsw

here

IWB

sare

are

cen

t

ad

ditio

n,an

dn

ot

yet

inte

gra

ted

into

cla

ssro

om

pra

ctice.T

he

vers

atilit

y

ofth

eIW

Bm

akes

itp

ossib

leto

cate

rto

stu

den

tsw

ith

diffe

ren

t

backg

rou

nd

san

dle

arn

ing

sty

les.F

or

IWB

sto

have

asig

nific

an

tim

pact

on

teach

ing

an

dle

arn

ing

ou

tco

mes,te

ach

ers

mu

st

be

at

the

en

han

ce

d

inte

rac

tive

sta

ge.

So

me

stu

den

tscla

imth

at

bein

gab

leto

mo

ve

an

din

tera

ct

with

ob

jects

on

the

bo

ard

help

sth

em

learn

.

Th

eIW

Bis

seen

as

an

effective

too

lfo

rin

itia

tin

gan

dfa

cili

tatin

gth

e

learn

ing

pro

cess,esp

ecia

llyw

hen

learn

ers

co

uld

use

the

IWB

them

selv

es.T

he

tim

elo

st

tryin

gto

dia

gn

ose

tech

nic

alp

rob

lem

san

d

use

the

bo

ard

pro

perl

ycan

detr

act

fro

mth

ele

arn

ing

exp

eri

en

ce.It

is

arg

ued

that

IWB

ssu

pp

ort

aw

ider

ran

ge

ofle

arn

ing

sty

les,b

ut

this

is

rela

ted

toth

evari

ety

ofd

iffe

ren

tre

so

urc

es

availa

ble

usin

gth

eto

ol.


Sm

ith

,H

ard

man

,&

Hig

gin

s

Sm

ith

,H

igg

ins,

Wall,

&M

iller

So

lvie

Th

om

pso

n&

Fle

ckn

oe

20

06

20

05

20

07

20

03

Bri

tish

Ed

ucatio

nal

Researc

hJo

urn

al

Jo

urn

alo

fC

om

pu

ter

Assis

ted

Learn

ing

Ed

ucatio

nalP

hilo

so

ph

y

an

dT

heo

ry

Man

ag

em

en

tin

Ed

ucatio

n

Itis

su

gg

este

dth

at

mo

rein

tera

ctive

form

so

fw

ho

lecla

ss

teach

ing

will

help

inra

isin

glit

era

cy

an

dn

um

era

cy

sta

nd

ard

s,th

us

rais

ing

learn

ing

perf

orm

an

ce.IW

Bs

ad

da

so

cia

ld

imen

sio

nto

learn

ing

wh

ere

stu

den

ts

can

sh

are

kn

ow

led

ge

pu

blic

lyan

dle

arn

by

makin

gm

ista

kes

tog

eth

er.

Stu

den

tin

tere

st

inle

arn

ing

was

en

han

ced

becau

se

ofth

eele

men

to

f

su

rpri

se

that

IWB

sb

rin

gto

lesso

ns.

Th

ere

are

two

bro

ad

cate

go

ries:

IWB

sas

ato

olfo

ren

han

cin

g

learn

ing

,an

das

ato

olto

su

pp

ort

learn

ing

.IW

Bs

pro

vid

efo

ra

mo

re

so

cia

lco

nstr

uctivis

tvie

wo

fle

arn

ing

wh

ere

the

teach

er

acts

as

the

med

iato

rb

etw

een

the

stu

den

tsan

dth

eso

ftw

are

.T

he

litera

ture

do

es

rela

teth

ep

hysic

alan

dta

ctile

natu

reo

fIW

Bs

with

the

rein

forc

em

en

to

fle

arn

ing

esp

ecia

llyw

hen

stu

den

tsu

se

the

bo

ard

them

selv

es.H

ow

ever,

itis

deb

ata

ble

wh

eth

er

ph

ysic

alin

tera

ctio

nitself

en

han

ces

learn

ing

,o

ther

than

tom

otivate

stu

den

tsto

pay

mo

re

att

en

tio

n.

Th

eau

tho

rfo

un

dth

at

by

ad

din

gco

mp

on

en

tsen

gag

ing

the

stu

den

tssu

ch

as

so

cia

lin

tera

ctio

n,stu

den

tco

llab

ora

tio

n,str

ate

gy

use,

an

dsu

pp

ort

ind

ecis

ion

makin

g,co

ntin

ued

use

ofth

eIW

Ben

gag

ed

learn

ing

.S

tud

en

tsm

an

ipu

late

dte

xto

nth

eb

oard

,an

dth

eau

tho

ru

sed

vis

uald

isp

lays

an

dg

rap

hic

too

lsto

en

han

ce

the

litera

cy

cla

sses.

IWB

use

had

asig

nific

an

tp

ositiv

eim

pact

on

bo

thte

ach

ing

an

d

learn

ing

inth

ecla

ssro

om

.T

he

bo

ard

help

ste

ach

tod

iffe

ren

tle

arn

ing

sty

les

inclu

din

g,kin

esth

etic,au

dio

,an

dvis

ualle

arn

ers

.IW

Bs

pro

mo

te

active

learn

ing

.


AP

PE

ND

IXB

–T

ab

le4

(Co

nt’

d.)

Au

tho

r(s)

Year

Jo

urn

al

Learn

ing

Wall,

Hig

gin

s,&

Sm

ith

Weim

er

Wo

od

&A

sh

field

20

05

20

01

20

08

Bri

tish

Jo

urn

alo

f

Ed

ucatio

nal

Tech

no

log

y

Sm

art

erK

ids.o

rg

researc

hstu

dy

Bri

tish

Jo

urn

alo

f

Ed

ucatio

nal

Tech

no

log

y

Man

ystu

den

tsfe

elth

at

the

IWB

help

ed

toin

itia

tean

dfa

cili

tate

learn

ing

.IW

Bu

se

als

oassis

ted

their

un

ders

tan

din

g.S

tud

en

tsals

ofe

lt

that

the

IWB

ap

peale

dto

their

vis

ual,

au

dito

ryan

dverb

al-so

cia

l

learn

ing

sty

les.S

tud

en

tsm

en

tio

ned

the

valu

eo

fIW

Bs

inte

ach

ing

math

em

atics,E

ng

lish

,an

dscie

nce.

Mo

tivatio

nis

an

un

derl

yin

gfa

cto

rin

learn

ing

an

dach

ievem

en

t.T

here

isso

me

evid

en

ce

ofa

rela

tio

nsh

ipb

etw

een

stu

den

tm

otivatio

nan

d

stu

den

tp

erf

orm

an

ce.IW

Bs

allo

wte

ach

ing

toa

wid

era

ng

eo

fle

arn

ing

sty

les.

Ifth

eIW

Bis

used

as

the

focu

san

dh

ub

ofin

tera

ctio

n,it

isp

ossib

le

that

learn

ing

op

po

rtu

nitie

sm

ay

be

su

pp

ort

ed

an

den

han

ced

ina

mean

ing

fulw

ay.


AP

PE

ND

IXB

Tab

le5

–P

ed

ag

og

y

Au

tho

r(s)

Year

Jo

urn

al

Ped

ag

og

y

Arm

str

on

g,B

arn

es,

Su

therl

an

d,C

urr

an

,

Mill

s,&

Th

om

pso

n

Glo

ver,

Mill

er,

Averi

s,&

Do

or

Glo

ver,

Mill

er,

Averi

s,&

Do

or

20

05

20

05

a

20

05

b

Ed

ucatio

nalR

evie

w

Man

ag

em

en

tin

Ed

ucatio

n

Tech

no

log

y,P

ed

ag

og

y,

an

dE

du

catio

n

IWB

su

pp

ort

sw

ho

lecla

ss

teach

ing

co

ncep

t.W

hen

no

tu

sed

inte

r -

actively

,IW

Bs

can

rein

forc

ete

ach

er-

cen

tere

dsty

les

ofd

eliv

ery

.R

ath

er

than

tran

sfo

rmin

gp

ed

ag

og

y,IW

Bs

can

be

easily

assim

ilate

din

to

exi

stin

gp

ed

ag

og

y.IW

Bs

are

least

effective

an

dh

ave

limited

imp

act

wh

en

teach

ers

do

no

tre

aliz

eth

at

inte

ractivity

req

uir

es

an

ew

ap

pro

ach

top

ed

ag

og

y.M

an

yte

ach

ers

are

likely

tou

se

the

IWB

as

an

exte

nsio

no

f

are

gu

lar

wh

iteb

oard

.H

elp

ed

tob

reak

do

wn

the

barr

iers

betw

een

stu

den

tsan

dn

orm

alte

ach

er

sp

ace.T

each

ers

are

the

cri

ticalag

en

tsin

med

iatin

gth

eso

ftw

are

.

At

the

inte

rac

tive

sta

ge

,th

ere

isa

linkin

go

fte

ch

no

log

yan

dp

ed

ag

og

y.

At

the

en

han

ce

din

tera

ctivi

tysta

ge

,th

ere

isan

inte

gra

tio

no

fte

ch

no

log

y,

ped

ag

og

y,an

dle

arn

ing

sty

les.

Mis

sio

ne

rsare

teach

ers

wh

on

ot

on

lyu

nd

ers

tan

dth

ete

ch

no

log

y,b

ut

als

oh

ave

the

ab

ility

tosee

ho

wit

can

be

used

toth

eir

ad

van

tag

e,an

d

freq

uen

tly

develo

pso

ftw

are

tom

eet

learn

ing

situ

atio

ns

an

dfo

ste

r

ped

ag

og

icch

an

ge.Te

nta

tive

s,la

ck

tech

no

log

icalskill

,b

ut

thro

ug

h

on

e-t

o-o

ne

co

ach

ing

can

develo

pco

nfid

en

ce

an

dm

ove

ah

ead

.

Lu

dd

ite

ssee

the

tech

no

log

yas

ath

reat.

Need

tom

ove

fro

md

idactic

to

the

inte

ractive,an

dfr

om

the

use

ofth

eIW

Bas

an

ad

jun

ct

tou

se

as

an

inte

gra

ted

ele

men

tin

tole

sso

np

lan

nin

gan

dth

ecla

ssro

om

.A

ste

ach

ers

beco

me

mo

reflu

en

t,th

eIW

Bb

eco

mes

the

focu

so

fch

an

ged

ap

pro

ach

es

top

ed

ag

og

y.U

nle

ss

the

IWB

iso

nly

used

as

atr

ad

itio

nal

pre

sen

tatio

nd

evic

e,te

ach

ing

pra

ctice

mu

st

ch

an

ge.


AP

PE

ND

IXB

–T

ab

le5

(Co

nt’

d.)

Au

tho

r(s)

Year

Jo

urn

al

Ped

ag

og

y

Glo

ver,

Mill

er,

Averi

s,&

Do

or

Hall

&H

igg

ins

20

07

20

05

Learn

ing

,M

ed

iaan

d

Tech

no

log

y

Jo

urn

alo

fC

om

pu

ter

Assis

ted

Learn

ing

Earl

yre

searc

hfo

cu

sed

on

ben

efits

ofth

ete

ch

no

log

yra

ther

than

on

ho

wp

ed

ag

og

ym

ay

need

tob

ech

an

ged

.W

ith

ou

tth

is,IW

Bs

can

be

seen

as

ap

assin

gp

resen

tatio

nalaid

or

mo

tivatio

nalsp

ur.

Th

e

sta

rtin

gp

oin

tfo

rch

an

ged

ped

ag

og

yis

teach

er

aw

are

ness

an

d

imp

lem

en

tatio

no

fin

tera

ctivity.E

nh

an

ce

din

tera

ctivi

tycan

be

ob

tain

ed

with

the

follo

win

gch

an

ges

top

ed

ag

og

y:

pla

nn

ing

for

co

gn

itiv

ed

evelo

pm

en

t,cle

ar

vis

ualre

pre

sen

tatio

no

fco

ncep

ts,

activitie

sth

at

en

co

ura

ge

an

active

thin

kin

gap

pro

ach

,p

rog

ressio

n,

illu

str

atio

n,seq

uen

cin

g,im

med

iate

feed

back,an

dre

call

tostr

en

gth

en

learn

ing

.

Stu

den

tsare

keen

lyaw

are

ofan

ysh

ort

co

min

gs

inth

eir

teach

ers

in

rela

tio

nto

ped

ag

og

icalu

ses

ofth

eIW

B.In

ord

er

tore

aliz

eth

e

po

ten

tialo

fth

eIW

B,te

ach

ers

need

tob

eco

nfid

en

tin

their

use.

Stu

den

tsw

ou

ldlik

eto

have

mo

reaccess

tou

sin

gth

eb

oard

them

selv

es.T

his

lead

sto

mo

reexp

lora

tory

learn

ing

.A

ste

ach

ers

beg

in

tou

se

the

IWB

,th

eir

trad

itio

nalte

ach

ing

pra

ctices

giv

ew

ay

ton

ew

mo

reflexi

ble

on

es.T

here

iscle

arl

ya

po

wer,

sta

tus

an

dco

ntr

olis

su

ein

an

IWB

cla

ssro

om

.T

he

teach

er

role

need

sto

ch

an

ge

tom

ore

ofa

facili

tato

r,an

dallo

wfo

rm

ore

exp

lora

tio

n.T

his

can

be

difficu

ltas

teach

ers

are

un

der

pre

ssu

reto

get

thro

ug

hth

ecu

rric

ulu

man

dra

ise

sta

nd

ard

san

datt

ain

men

t.T

his

ism

ore

ofan

issu

ein

Gre

at

Bri

tain

than

inth

eU

Sw

here

teach

ers

are

less

op

en

toth

en

otio

no

fm

ore

pu

pil

part

icip

atio

n.


Hig

gin

s,B

eau

ch

am

p,

&M

iller

Lew

in,S

om

ekh

,&

Ste

ad

man

Mart

in

20

07

20

08

20

07

Learn

ing

,M

ed

iaan

d

Tech

no

log

y

Ed

ucatio

n&

Info

rmatio

n

Tech

no

log

ies

Litera

cy

IWB

sare

well

ad

ap

ted

tow

ho

le-c

lass

teach

ing

.E

ffective

ped

ag

og

ical

inte

ractivity

req

uir

es

str

uctu

red

lesso

np

lan

nin

g,p

ace

inactivitie

s,an

d

aco

gn

itiv

ere

vie

w.“G

oo

dte

ach

ing

rem

ain

sg

oo

dte

ach

ing

with

or

with

ou

tth

ete

ch

no

log

y;

the

tech

no

log

ym

igh

ten

han

ce

the

ped

ag

og

y

on

lyif

the

teach

ers

an

dp

up

ilsen

gag

ed

init

an

du

nd

ers

too

dits

po

ten

tialin

su

ch

aw

ay

that

the

tech

no

log

yis

no

tseen

as

an

en

din

itself

bu

tas

an

oth

er

ped

ag

og

icalm

ean

sto

ach

ieve

teach

ing

an

d

learn

ing

go

als

”(p

.2

17

).A

ste

ach

ers

beco

me

mo

reflu

en

t,th

ey

reco

gn

ize

the

link

top

ed

ag

og

icalch

an

ge,an

db

eco

me

acata

lyst

for

furt

her

ch

an

ge.

Ped

ag

og

yis

defin

ed

as

“bein

gth

ein

tera

ctive

pro

cess

that

go

es

on

betw

een

teach

ers

an

dch

ildre

n,in

this

case

inp

lan

ned

learn

ing

”

(p.2

93

).T

each

ers

need

toad

just

their

sty

leto

be

mo

rein

clu

siv

ean

d

co

op

era

tive

insu

pp

ort

ing

learn

ing

.T

each

er

an

dstu

den

tm

ust

wo

rk

tog

eth

er

rath

er

than

ad

op

tin

gth

etr

ad

itio

nalfo

rmalro

les

ofte

ach

er

an

dle

arn

er.

Th

isis

mo

reco

mm

on

with

yo

un

ger

ch

ildre

n,an

d

beco

mes

less

freq

uen

tw

hen

teach

ing

old

er

ch

ildre

n.If

teach

ing

with

IWB

sis

tow

ork

well,

the

IWB

has

tob

eu

sed

as

am

ed

iatin

gart

ifact.

Teach

ers

mu

st

als

oallo

wstu

den

tsto

inte

ract

with

the

IWB

.Lesso

n

pla

ns

mu

st

be

str

uctu

red

,w

ith

asso

cia

ted

reso

urc

es

an

dcan

no

wb

e

sto

red

an

daccessib

lean

ytim

e.T

hre

ep

ed

ag

og

icsta

ges:S

tag

e1

–

teach

ers

fitt

ing

new

tech

no

log

ies

into

exi

stin

gp

ed

ag

og

y,S

tag

e2

–

teach

ers

en

gag

ing

inco

llab

ora

tive

exp

lora

tio

n,S

tag

e3

–te

ach

ers

usin

gth

ete

ch

no

log

yskill

fully

an

din

tuitiv

ely

thu

sexte

nd

ing

an

d

exp

an

din

gexi

stin

gp

ed

ag

og

y.H

igh

levels

ofte

ch

nic

alexp

ert

ise

are

no

tn

ecessary

totr

an

sfo

rmp

ed

ag

og

y.

Wh

ole

-cla

ss

teach

ing

an

dh

avin

gstu

den

tsin

tera

ct

with

the

bo

ard

slo

wed

do

wn

the

pace

ofle

sso

ns.

Co

nfid

entuse

isess

entia

lfo

rsu

ccess

.


AP

PE

ND

IXB

–T

ab

le5

(Co

nt’

d.)

Au

tho

r(s)

Year

Jo

urn

al

Ped

ag

og

y

Mech

ling

,G

ast,

&

Kru

pa

Mill

er,

Glo

ver,

&

Averi

s

Sch

mid

Sch

roed

er

20

07

20

04

20

06

20

07

Jo

urn

alo

fA

utism

&

Develo

pm

en

talD

iso

rders

Pap

er

pre

sen

ted

at

Ten

thIn

tern

atio

nal

Co

ng

ress

of

Math

em

atics

Ed

ucatio

n

Co

mp

ute

rA

ssis

ted

Lan

gu

ag

eLearn

ing

Co

mm

un

icatio

ns

in

Info

rmatio

nLitera

cy

Th

ere

isa

need

for

ped

ag

og

icch

an

ge

fro

mth

ed

idactic

toth

e

inte

ractive,an

dfr

om

usin

gm

ed

iaas

avis

ualsu

pp

ort

,to

the

inte

gra

tio

n

ofm

ed

iain

tole

sso

np

lan

nin

gan

dIW

Bu

se.A

ste

ach

ers

beco

me

mo

re

aw

are

ofth

era

ng

eo

fw

ays

ofw

ork

ing

with

IWB

s,th

ey

gain

co

nfid

en

ce

an

dle

sso

ns

have

gre

ate

rim

pact.

Earl

yevid

en

ce

su

gg

ests

that

IWB

s

are

au

sefu

l“p

rop

”fo

rte

ach

ers

loo

kin

gto

exp

an

dth

eir

teach

ing

to

diffe

rin

gle

arn

ing

sty

les,b

ut

realg

ain

sm

ay

on

lyb

ere

aliz

ed

wh

en

go

od

teach

ers

are

pro

vid

ed

with

the

necessary

tim

e,re

so

urc

es,an

d

train

ing

.

Th

ere

isa

po

int

ofco

nflic

tb

etw

een

teach

er

an

dstu

den

tu

se

ofth

e

tech

no

log

y.S

om

ete

ach

ers

pre

fer

am

ore

trad

itio

nalcla

ssro

om

,an

d

stu

den

tsp

refe

rle

sso

ns

wh

ere

they

mo

ve

betw

een

usin

gth

eIW

Ban

d

their

desks.S

om

estu

den

tsw

an

ted

tou

se

the

bo

ard

toh

ide

an

dd

eal

with

their

difficu

ltie

sin

div

idu

ally

,w

hile

oth

er

stu

den

tsw

an

ted

tocre

ate

asen

se

ofco

mm

un

ity,an

dw

ork

ou

td

ifficu

ltie

sw

ith

the

help

ofth

e

gro

up

.If

IWB

sare

totr

an

sfo

rmp

ed

ag

og

y,d

ialo

gu

eb

etw

een

stu

den

ts

an

dte

ach

ers

isessen

tial.


Sch

uck

&K

earn

ey

Sh

en

ton

&P

ag

ett

20

07

20

07

Stu

dy

do

ne

at

Th

e

Un

ivers

ity

of

Tech

no

log

yS

yd

ney

Litera

cy

Researc

hsu

gg

ests

that

IWB

sare

main

lyb

ein

gu

sed

tore

info

rce

cu

rren

tte

ach

ing

ap

pro

ach

es

su

ch

as

the

teach

er

as

the

cen

tral

au

tho

rita

tive

exp

ert

.T

he

fact

that

IWB

sare

no

ta

dis

rup

tive

tech

no

log

yis

bo

tha

weakn

ess

an

da

str

en

gth

.T

he

imp

act

ofIW

Bs

was

mo

st

po

sitiv

ein

term

so

fth

ein

cre

ased

pre

para

tio

nth

at

teach

ers

were

pu

ttin

gin

toth

eir

lesso

ns.T

each

ers

als

osaid

that

they

were

sp

en

din

gm

ore

tim

eth

inkin

gab

ou

tth

eir

stu

den

ts’in

div

idu

alle

arn

ing

sty

les

as

are

su

lto

fu

sin

gth

eIW

B.T

each

ers

pla

ya

cri

ticalro

lein

en

su

rin

geffective

use

ofIW

Bs

as

ped

ag

og

icalto

ols

at

all

sta

ges.

Th

ety

pe

ofp

ed

ag

og

icalap

pro

ach

that

teach

ers

take

with

IWB

sla

rgely

dep

en

ds

ofatt

itu

de,an

da

will

ing

ness

toem

bed

the

tech

no

log

yin

to

their

teach

ing

sty

le.T

his

isd

ep

en

den

to

nco

nte

xtu

alfa

cto

rs(l

iste

din

Tab

le1

).T

each

ers

need

tob

eat

the

en

han

ce

din

tera

ctive

sta

ge

have

the

tim

efo

rp

lan

nin

gan

dp

rep

ara

tio

n.T

here

was

str

on

gem

ph

asis

on

the

incre

ased

pace

ofle

sso

ns

resu

ltin

gfr

om

the

ab

ility

toq

uic

kly

access

mate

rials

on

the

IWB

.T

each

ers

belie

ve

that

the

IWB

em

bra

ces

ch

ildre

n’s

dig

italcu

ltu

re.T

each

er

co

nfid

en

ce

with

the

IWB

isim

po

rtan

t.

Sm

all

gro

up

wo

rkw

as

infr

eq

uen

tly

used

inIW

Bin

str

uctio

n.

Ing

en

era

l

there

was

little

use

ofth

efu

llp

ote

ntialo

fIW

Bs.

IWB

scan

po

ten

tially

offer

am

ultim

od

alap

pro

ach

tote

ach

ing

litera

cy.

Teach

ers

gen

era

llysee

the

IWB

as

an

ew

item

inth

eir

teach

ing

too

lkit

rath

er

than

so

meth

ing

that

mig

ht

ch

an

ge

their

teach

ing

meth

od

olo

gy.T

he

po

ten

tialfo

rIW

Bs

ism

ore

ob

vio

us

insu

bje

cts

oth

er

than

litera

cy.


AP

PE

ND

IXB

–T

ab

le5

(Co

nt’

d.)

Au

tho

r(s)

Year

Jo

urn

al

Ped

ag

og

y

Sla

y,S

ieb

örg

er,

&

Ho

dg

kin

so

n-W

illia

ms

Sm

ith

,H

ard

man

,

&H

igg

ins

20

08

20

06

Co

mp

ute

rs&

Ed

ucatio

n

Bri

tish

Ed

ucatio

nal

Researc

hJo

urn

al

Teach

ers

rep

ort

on

the

IWB

’seffic

ien

cy,flexib

ility

,vers

atilit

y,an

dth

e

ab

ility

toaccess

mu

ltim

ed

iaco

nte

nt

wh

ileb

ein

gab

leto

man

ag

eth

e

cla

ss

mo

reeasily

.In

cases

wh

ere

teach

ers

did

n’t

have

the

pro

per

IWB

skill

s,th

ete

ch

no

log

yw

as

po

orl

yu

sed

.S

tud

en

tsare

keen

lyaw

are

of

this

deficie

ncy.T

each

ers

mu

st

co

ntin

ue

top

ractice

the

skill

sth

ey

have

acq

uir

ed

fro

mp

revio

us

train

ing

cla

sses.It

issu

gg

este

dth

at

ala

pto

p

an

dd

ata

pro

jecto

rare

aw

ort

hw

hile

investm

en

tan

dth

ead

van

tag

eo

f

imp

roved

cla

ssro

om

vis

ibili

tyto

co

mp

ute

r-b

ased

co

nte

nt

was

the

main

facto

r,n

ot

the

bo

ard

.K

no

wle

dg

eo

fIW

Bskill

sd

oes

no

tm

ean

that

they

are

bein

gap

plie

d.P

erh

ap

sth

eb

est

way

toin

co

rpo

rate

IWB

sin

to

teach

ing

an

dle

arn

ing

isto

firs

tro

llo

ut

aco

mp

ute

rw

ith

ad

ata

pro

jecto

r.A

llow

teach

ers

tob

eco

me

co

mfo

rtab

lew

ith

this

tech

no

log

y,

then

after

ayear

or

so

,(a

fter

teach

ers

have

pro

ven

that

they

co

uld

an

d

wan

ted

toin

co

rpo

rate

the

tech

no

log

yin

toth

eir

teach

ing

)g

ive

them

an

IWB

.T

ech

no

log

ies

sh

ou

ldn

ot

be

imp

osed

as

they

can

have

dis

rup

tive

effects

.T

each

ers

need

tim

eto

en

gag

ew

ith

the

tech

no

log

yan

dfin

d

ways

that

itcan

be

used

tosu

itth

eir

ped

ag

og

icstr

ate

gie

s.

Researc

hsu

gg

ests

thatd

ialo

gic

teac

hin

gstr

ate

gie

sare

often

no

t

imp

lem

en

ted

,as

mo

retr

ad

itio

nalp

att

ern

so

fw

ho

lecla

ss

inte

ractio

n

are

used

.S

tud

yfo

un

dth

at

IWB

lesso

ns

co

nta

ined

mo

rew

ho

lecla

ss

teach

ing

an

dle

ss

gro

up

wo

rk.IW

Ble

sso

ns

had

sig

nific

an

tly

mo

re

op

en

qu

estio

ns,an

sw

ers

fro

mstu

den

ts,an

devalu

atio

n.T

his

incre

ased

the

pace

ofth

ele

sso

ns.N

og

en

der

diffe

ren

ces

were

fou

nd

on

freq

uen

cy

ofan

sw

eri

ng

qu

estio

ns,b

ut

overa

llth

isn

um

ber

was

hig

her

am

on

gIW

Ble

sso

ns.T

his

effect

did

no

tla

st

the

seco

nd

year.


Sm

ith

,H

igg

ins,

Wall,

&M

iller

So

lvie

Th

om

pso

n&

Fle

ckn

oe

Wall,

Hig

gin

s,&

Sm

ith

20

05

20

07

20

03

20

05

Jo

urn

alo

fC

om

pu

ter

Assis

ted

Learn

ing

Ed

ucatio

nalP

hilo

so

ph

y

an

dT

heo

ry

Man

ag

em

en

tin

Ed

ucatio

n

Bri

tish

Jo

urn

alo

f

Ed

ucatio

nal

Tech

no

log

y

Stu

dy

fin

ds

su

pp

ort

for

so

me

IWB

cla

ims,b

ut

no

fun

dam

en

talch

an

ge

inu

nd

erl

yin

gp

ed

ag

og

y.IW

Bs

do

no

tp

rovid

ea

tech

no

log

icalfix

in

ord

er

tob

rin

gab

ou

ta

fun

dam

en

talch

an

ge

inth

eu

nd

erl

yin

g

ped

ag

og

yo

fw

ho

lecla

ss

teach

ing

.

Teach

ing

them

es

inclu

de

flexi

bili

ty,vers

atilit

y,m

ultim

ed

ia/m

ultim

od

al

pre

sen

tatio

n,effic

ien

cy,su

pp

ort

ing

pla

nn

ing

,an

din

tera

ctivity

an

d

part

icip

atio

nin

lesso

ns.

IWB

sfa

cili

tate

wh

ole

cla

ss

dis

cu

ssio

ns

wh

ich

lead

tosh

ari

ng

ofid

eas

an

dg

en

era

tio

no

fth

eo

ries.

Facin

gth

ecla

ss

wh

ilete

ach

ing

isre

po

rted

as

am

ajo

rad

van

tag

eas

teach

ers

can

sp

en

dm

ore

tim

efo

cu

sin

go

nstu

den

ts.

Th

isis

als

oa

mo

re

co

mfo

rtab

lep

ed

ag

og

icsta

nce

for

teach

ers

.S

om

elit

era

ture

sta

teth

at

IWB

use

has

far

fro

mtr

an

sfo

rmed

cla

ssro

om

pra

ctice.

Man

yte

ach

ers

have

un

cri

tically

ab

so

rbed

IWB

sin

toth

eir

pre

-IW

Bte

ach

ing

pra

ctices.

IWB

sfa

cili

tate

pre

para

tio

no

fle

sso

ns

an

dn

avig

atio

nto

sp

ecific

co

mp

on

en

tsd

uri

ng

instr

uctio

n.T

he

au

tho

r’s

initia

lu

se

ofIW

Bs

as

a

too

lto

gain

an

dm

ain

tain

att

en

tio

ntr

an

sfo

rmed

over

tim

eas

ato

olfo

r

en

gag

ing

stu

den

tsin

the

lesso

n.T

he

au

tho

rre

co

nsid

ere

dh

is

ped

ag

og

icalp

ractice

an

dtr

an

sfo

rmed

his

teach

ing

pra

ctice.

Stu

dy

used

are

ad

ym

ad

eap

plic

atio

ncalle

dE

asite

ac

hM

ath

sw

hic

h

help

ste

ach

ers

deliv

er

math

lesso

ns

via

the

IWB

.


AP

PE

ND

IXB

–T

ab

le5

(Co

nt’

d.)

Au

tho

r(s)

Year

Jo

urn

al

Learn

ing

Weim

er

Wo

od

&A

sh

field

20

01

20

08

Sm

art

erK

ids.o

rg

researc

hstu

dy

Bri

tish

Jo

urn

alo

f

Ed

ucatio

nal

Tech

no

log

y

Researc

hin

dic

ate

sth

at

itis

the

skill

an

dp

rofe

ssio

nalkn

ow

led

ge

ofth

e

teach

er

wh

om

ed

iate

sth

ein

tera

ctio

nb

etw

een

the

tech

no

log

yan

dth

e

stu

den

tsin

wh

ole

-cla

ss

lesso

ns.T

he

qu

alit

yo

fth

ete

ach

ing

inth

ese

wh

ole

-cla

ss

lesso

ns

dete

rmin

es

its

su

ccess.R

esearc

hsh

ow

s,

ho

wever,

that

IWB

use

isn

ot

tran

sfo

rmin

gth

eu

nd

erl

yin

gp

ed

ag

og

yo

f

wh

ole

-cla

ss

teach

ing

,as

itre

main

sla

rgely

un

affecte

d.T

each

ers

mu

st

teach

cre

atively

,b

yin

clu

din

ga

wid

era

ng

eo

fm

ed

iasu

ch

as

vid

eo

,

an

imatio

ns,g

rap

hic

s,an

dte

xt.T

his

cre

ative

teach

ing

mu

st

co

nta

in

rele

van

tco

nte

nt

for

stu

den

tsto

have

ow

ners

hip

.T

he

pace

ofle

sso

ns

can

be

main

tain

ed

usin

gan

IWB

as

teach

ers

can

navig

ate

thro

ug

h

mate

rialq

uic

kly

.


AP

PE

ND

IXB

Tab

le6

–A

ch

ieve

me

nt

Au

tho

r(s)

Year

Jo

urn

al

Ach

ievem

en

t

Arm

str

on

g,B

arn

es,

Su

therl

an

d,C

urr

an

,

Mill

s,&

Th

om

pso

n

Glo

ver,

Mill

er,

Averi

s,&

Do

or

Glo

ver,

Mill

er,

Averi

s,&

Do

or

Glo

ver,

Mill

er,

Averi

s,&

Do

or

Hall

&H

igg

ins

Hig

gin

s,B

eau

ch

am

p,

&M

iller

20

05

20

05

a

20

05

b

20

07

20

05

20

07

Ed

ucatio

nalR

evie

w

Man

ag

em

en

tin

Ed

ucatio

n

Tech

no

log

y,P

ed

ag

og

y,

an

dE

du

catio

n

Learn

ing

,M

ed

iaan

d

Tech

no

log

y

Jo

urn

alo

fC

om

pu

ter

Assis

ted

Learn

ing

Learn

ing

,M

ed

iaan

d

Tech

no

log

y

Th

ere

isalm

ost

no

evid

en

ce

ofm

easu

red

gain

sin

stu

den

tp

rog

ress

an

d

lon

g-t

erm

ach

ievem

en

tas

are

su

lto

fch

an

ged

teach

ing

an

dle

arn

ing

ap

pro

ach

es.T

his

islik

ely

toch

an

ge

with

furt

her

researc

h.

Itis

still

the

qu

alit

yo

fte

ach

ing

that

en

su

res

pro

gre

ss;

the

IWB

alo

ne

do

es

no

tg

uara

nte

eit.

IWB

sap

pear

toh

ave

an

eg

ligib

leeffect

instu

den

tatt

ain

men

t.A

fter

a2

year

stu

dy,th

ere

were

no

sig

nific

an

td

iffe

ren

ces

inte

st

sco

res

betw

een

sch

oo

lsu

sin

gIW

Bs

an

dsch

oo

lsin

the

co

mp

ari

so

ng

rou

p.Lo

nd

on

sch

oo

lsin

the

Seco

nd

ary

Wh

iteb

oard

Exp

an

sio

np

roje

ct,

wh

ere

teach

ers

used

the

bo

ard

sin

vari

ou

sw

ays,re

po

rted

no

imp

act

on

pu

pil

perf

orm

an

ce

inth

efirs

tyear

inw

hic

hd

ep

art

men

tsw

ere

fully

co

nvers

an

t

with

the

tech

no

log

y.


AP

PE

ND

IXB

–T

ab

le6

(Co

nt’

d.)

Au

tho

r(s)

Year

Jo

urn

al

Ach

ievem

en

t

Lew

in,S

om

ekh

,&

Ste

ad

man

Mart

in

Mech

ling

,G

ast,

&

Kru

pa

Mill

er,

Glo

ver,

&

Averi

s

Sch

mid

Sch

roed

er

20

08

20

07

20

07

20

04

20

06

20

07

Ed

ucatio

n&

Info

rmatio

n

Tech

no

log

ies

Litera

cy

Jo

urn

alo

fA

utism

&

Develo

pm

en

talD

iso

rders

Pap

er

pre

sen

ted

at

Ten

thIn

tern

atio

nal

Co

ng

ress

of

Math

em

atics

Ed

ucatio

n

Co

mp

ute

rA

ssis

ted

Lan

gu

ag

eLearn

ing

Co

mm

un

icatio

ns

in

Info

rmatio

nLitera

cy

Po

sitiv

eg

ain

sin

litera

cy,m

ath

em

atics,an

dscie

nce

for

ch

ildre

nag

ed

7-1

1w

hic

hw

as

dir

ectly

rela

ted

toth

ele

ng

tho

ftim

eth

at

they

had

been

tau

gh

tw

ith

an

IWB

.T

hese

gain

sw

ere

str

on

ger

for

ch

ildre

no

favera

ge

or

ab

ove

avera

ge

pri

or

att

ain

men

t.T

here

was

als

oa

lack

ofim

pact

on

the

pro

gre

ss

oflo

wp

rio

ratt

ain

men

tp

up

ils.

Litera

ture

sta

tes

insu

ffic

ien

tevid

en

ce

toid

en

tify

the

actu

alim

pact

of

IWB

so

nle

arn

ing

inte

rms

ofcla

ssro

om

inte

ractio

no

ru

po

natt

ain

men

t

an

dach

ievem

en

t.S

ho

rtd

ura

tio

no

fstu

dy

did

no

tallo

wan

accu

rate

measu

rem

en

to

fach

ievem

en

t.

Th

eo

retically

,if

the

IWB

isu

sed

so

that

lesso

ns

offer

vari

ety

,ch

alle

ng

e

an

din

tera

ctivity,stu

den

tach

ievem

en

tw

illb

een

han

ced

.


Sch

uck

&K

earn

ey

Sh

en

ton

&P

ag

ett

Sla

y,S

ieb

örg

er,

&

Ho

dg

kin

so

n-W

illia

ms

Sm

ith

,H

ard

man

,

&H

igg

ins

Sm

ith

,H

igg

ins,

Wall,

&M

iller

So

lvie

Th

om

pso

n&

Fle

ckn

oe

20

07

20

07

20

08

20

06

20

05

20

07

20

03

Stu

dy

do

ne

at

Th

e

Un

ivers

ity

of

Tech

no

log

yS

yd

ney

Litera

cy

Co

mp

ute

rs&

Ed

ucatio

n

Bri

tish

Ed

ucatio

nal

Researc

hJo

urn

al

Jo

urn

alo

fC

om

pu

ter

Assis

ted

Learn

ing

Ed

ucatio

nalP

hilo

so

ph

y

an

dT

heo

ry

Man

ag

em

en

tin

Ed

ucatio

n

Th

ere

isn

ot

su

ffic

ien

tevid

en

ce

incu

rren

tlit

era

ture

tosh

ow

links

betw

een

IWB

use

an

dp

erf

orm

an

ce

att

ain

men

t.It

has

been

fou

nd

that

there

was

little

or

no

diffe

ren

ce

on

natio

nalte

st

sco

res

inm

ath

em

atics

an

dscie

nce

inU

Kp

rim

ary

sch

oo

ls.O

ther

stu

die

sh

ave

co

nclu

ded

that

there

ap

pears

tob

en

oevid

en

ce

linkin

gin

cre

ased

pu

pil

att

ain

men

t

with

the

use

ofIW

Bs.

Researc

hsu

gg

ests

thatd

ialo

gic

teac

hin

gcan

lead

toh

igh

er

levels

of

stu

den

tach

ievem

en

t.

Th

ere

do

es

no

tap

pear

tob

ean

yem

pir

icalevid

en

ce

linkin

gIW

Bs

use

an

datt

ain

men

t.

Th

eau

tho

rim

ag

ined

that

by

incre

asin

gstu

den

ts’att

en

tio

n,

ach

ievem

en

tw

ou

ldin

cre

ase

as

well.

Th

isw

as

no

tas

su

ccessfu

las

ho

ped

.

Stu

dy

used

are

ad

ym

ad

eap

plic

atio

ncalle

dE

asite

ac

hM

ath

sw

hic

h

help

ste

ach

ers

deliv

er

math

lesso

ns

via

the

IWB

.

Th

ere

was

a1

4.1

%im

pro

vem

en

tin

att

ain

men

tin

firs

tte

rm,a

22

.1%

imp

rovem

en

tin

the

seco

nd

term

,an

da

39

.4%

imp

rovem

en

to

vera

ll.A

ll

ch

ildre

n,re

gard

less

ofp

rio

ratt

ain

men

tm

ad

esim

ilar

gain

salth

ou

gh

low

er

pri

or

ach

ievem

en

tstu

den

tsm

ad

ea

hig

her

pro

po

rtio

nalg

ain

.


AP

PE

ND

IXB

–T

ab

le6

(Co

nt’

d.)

Au

tho

r(s)

Year

Jo

urn

al

Ach

ievem

en

t

Wall,

Hig

gin

s,&

Sm

ith

Weim

er

Wo

od

&A

sh

field

20

05

20

01

20

08

Bri

tish

Jo

urn

alo

f

Ed

ucatio

nal

Tech

no

log

y

Sm

art

erK

ids.o

rg

researc

hstu

dy

Bri

tish

Jo

urn

alo

f

Ed

ucatio

nal

Tech

no

log

y

Mo

tivatio

nis

an

un

derl

yin

gfa

cto

rin

learn

ing

an

dach

ievem

en

t.T

here

isso

me

evid

en

ce

ofa

rela

tio

nsh

ipb

etw

een

stu

den

tm

otivatio

nan

d

stu

den

tp

erf

orm

an

ce.


AP

PE

ND

IXC

Tab

le1

–D

ire

cti

on

sfo

rF

utu

reR

ese

arc

h

Au

tho

r(s)

Year

Jo

urn

al

Dir

ectio

ns

for

Fu

ture

Researc

h

Arm

str

on

g,B

arn

es,

Su

therl

an

d,C

urr

an

,

Mill

s,&

Th

om

pso

n

Glo

ver,

Mill

er,

Averi

s,&

Do

or

Glo

ver,

Mill

er,

Averi

s,&

Do

or

Glo

ver,

Mill

er,

Averi

s,&

Do

or

Hall

&H

igg

ins

20

05

20

05

a

20

05

b

20

07

20

05

Ed

ucatio

nalR

evie

w

Man

ag

em

en

tin

Ed

ucatio

n

Tech

no

log

y,P

ed

ag

og

y,

an

dE

du

catio

n

Learn

ing

,M

ed

iaan

d

Tech

no

log

y

Jo

urn

alo

fC

om

pu

ter

Assis

ted

Learn

ing

Need

toco

nsid

er

bo

thth

ete

ch

no

log

yan

dth

ep

ed

ag

og

yo

fin

tera

ctivity.

Need

tob

ett

er

researc

hIW

Bfe

atu

res

su

ch

as

sto

rag

ean

dre

trie

valo

f

data

an

dle

sso

np

lan

s;

po

ten

tialg

ain

sfr

om

pri

ntin

gan

dp

ostin

gto

the

web

of

IWB

mate

rial.

Diffe

rin

gp

erc

ep

tio

ns

based

on

gen

der.

Need

bo

th

gen

eri

can

dsu

bje

ct-

sp

ecific

investig

atio

no

fle

arn

ing

gain

s.N

eed

to

investig

ate

the

link

betw

een

co

ncep

tsan

dco

gn

itiv

ed

evelo

pm

en

tin

an

IWB

-ric

hen

vir

on

men

t.N

eed

tore

searc

hlo

ng

-term

ach

ievem

en

tg

ain

s

as

are

su

lto

fch

an

ged

teach

ing

an

dle

arn

ing

ap

pro

ach

es.N

eed

tolo

ok

into

wh

eth

er

the

co

sts

ofeq

uip

men

t,tr

ain

ing

,so

ftw

are

,m

ain

ten

an

ce,

an

dsu

pp

ort

have

bro

ug

ht

an

ticip

ate

dg

ain

s(R

OI)

.


AP

PE

ND

IXC

–T

ab

le1

(Co

nt’

d.)

Au

tho

r(s)

Year

Jo

urn

al

Dir

ectio

ns

for

Fu

ture

Researc

h

Hig

gin

s,B

eau

ch

am

p,

&M

iller

Lew

in,S

om

ekh

,&

Ste

ad

man

Mart

in

Mech

ling

,G

ast,

&

Kru

pa

Mill

er,

Glo

ver,

&

Averi

s

Sch

mid

20

07

20

08

20

07

20

07

20

04

20

06

Learn

ing

,M

ed

iaan

d

Tech

no

log

y

Ed

ucatio

n&

Info

rmatio

n

Tech

no

log

ies

Litera

cy

Jo

urn

alo

fA

utism

&

Develo

pm

en

talD

iso

rders

Pap

er

pre

sen

ted

at

Ten

thIn

tern

atio

nal

Co

ng

ress

of

Math

em

atics

Ed

ucatio

n

Co

mp

ute

rA

ssis

ted

Lan

gu

ag

eLearn

ing

Need

bett

er

stu

die

so

nIW

Bu

se

an

dlo

w-a

ttain

ing

,very

yo

un

gp

up

ils.

Need

tolo

ok

into

ho

win

cre

ased

mo

tivatio

nd

ue

toIW

Bu

se

is

tran

sla

ted

into

learn

ing

.N

eed

tolo

ok

into

the

dir

ectio

nth

at

teach

ers

need

tom

ove

toen

su

reth

at

the

pro

ven

ch

an

ges

that

IWB

sh

ave

on

inte

ractio

nan

dp

ed

ag

og

y,tr

an

sla

teto

an

incre

ase

inle

arn

ing

.

Lo

ng

itu

din

alstu

die

sare

necessary

.N

eed

toin

vestig

ate

ho

wIW

Bs

can

be

used

mo

reeffectively

for

teach

ing

wri

tin

g.N

eed

tolo

ok

at

wh

ich

str

ate

gie

sare

effective

inen

han

cin

gth

ep

rog

ress

ofall

learn

ers

.

Need

toco

mp

are

IWB

tech

no

log

yto

mo

retr

ad

itio

nalsetu

ps

su

ch

as

flash

card

sfo

rte

ach

ing

sig

ht

wo

rdre

ad

ing

.S

ho

uld

als

om

ore

fully

exa

min

ein

tera

ctive

an

dm

ulti-m

ed

iafe

atu

res

ofte

ch

no

log

yfo

r

deliv

eri

ng

instr

uctio

nto

stu

den

tsw

ith

diffe

rin

gab

ilities.


Sch

roed

er

Sch

uck

&K

earn

ey

Sh

en

ton

&P

ag

ett

Sla

y,S

ieb

örg

er,

&

Ho

dg

kin

so

n-W

illia

ms

20

07

20

07

20

07

20

08

Co

mm

un

icatio

ns

in

Info

rmatio

nLitera

cy

Stu

dy

do

ne

at

Th

e

Un

ivers

ity

of

Tech

no

log

yS

yd

ney

Litera

cy

Co

mp

ute

rs&

Ed

ucatio

n

Man

ystu

die

sare

do

ne

inth

eK

-12

secto

r,an

dm

ore

researc

h

need

sto

be

do

ne

inco

lleg

ean

du

niv

ers

ity

sett

ing

s.T

he

develo

p-

men

to

fan

instr

um

en

tto

measu

rean

dassess

the

imp

act

of

instr

uctio

nalm

eth

od

s,su

ch

as

IWB

use,is

need

ed

.N

eed

stu

die

s

investig

atin

gth

eco

gn

itiv

ean

dlo

ng

-term

effects

ofIW

Bu

se

inth

e

cla

ssro

om

.

Ho

wd

oes

ped

ag

og

yw

ith

IWB

sch

an

ge

over

tim

e?

Ho

ware

learn

ing

ou

tco

mes

influ

en

ced

by

IWB

use?

Ho

wd

ote

ach

ers

vie

wIW

Bs

in

term

so

fits

use

as

ate

ch

no

log

icalto

olo

rp

ed

ag

og

icalto

ol?

Stu

die

s

are

need

ed

toassess

key

learn

ing

ou

tco

mes

after

IWB

sh

ave

been

em

bed

ded

incla

ssro

om

pra

ctice.N

eed

toevalu

ate

ben

efits

ofIW

B

use

acro

ss

all

su

bje

ct

are

as.N

eed

lon

g-t

erm

lon

gitu

din

alstu

die

s.

Need

mo

refo

rmalstu

die

s,ra

ther

than

rely

ing

on

an

ecd

ota

levid

en

ce.

Wh

at

are

imp

licatio

ns

for

stu

den

tte

ach

ers

?N

atu

reo

fm

otivatio

nn

eed

s

tob

ein

vestig

ate

d.H

ow

can

IWB

sb

eu

sed

insm

all

gro

up

wo

rkan

d

peer

learn

ing

?

Th

eco

mm

erc

ializ

atio

no

fp

ed

ag

og

icalto

ols

need

sto

be

reco

gn

ized

an

dre

searc

hed

.U

sin

gIW

Bs

ina

cro

ss-c

urr

icu

lar

ap

pro

ach

need

sto

be

ad

dre

ssed

.

IfIW

Bs

are

go

ing

tob

eu

sed

with

trad

itio

nald

idactic

teach

ing

meth

od

s,sh

ou

ldsch

oo

lssim

ply

invest

ina

co

mp

ute

ran

da

data

pro

jecto

ras

the

inte

ractive

natu

reo

fth

eIW

Bis

no

tu

sed

?T

he

ad

ded

ben

efit

ofin

tera

ctivity

need

sto

be

weig

hed

up

ag

ain

st

the

ben

efits

perc

eiv

ed

by

the

sch

oo

l,its

ad

min

istr

ato

rs,te

ach

ers

,

an

dstu

den

ts.


AP

PE

ND

IXC

–T

ab

le1

(Co

nt’

d.)

Au

tho

r(s)

Year

Jo

urn

al

Dir

ectio

ns

for

Fu

ture

Researc

h

Sm

ith

,H

ard

man

,

&H

igg

ins

Sm

ith

,H

igg

ins,

Wall,

&M

iller

So

lvie

Th

om

pso

n&

Fle

ckn

oe

Wall,

Hig

gin

s,&

Sm

ith

Weim

er

Wo

od

&A

sh

field

20

06

20

05

20

07

20

03

20

05

20

01

20

08

Bri

tish

Ed

ucatio

nal

Researc

hJo

urn

al

Jo

urn

alo

fC

om

pu

ter

Assis

ted

Learn

ing

Ed

ucatio

nalP

hilo

so

ph

y

an

dT

heo

ry

Man

ag

em

en

tin

Ed

ucatio

n

Bri

tish

Jo

urn

alo

f

Ed

ucatio

nal

Tech

no

log

y

Sm

art

erK

ids.o

rg

researc

hstu

dy

Bri

tish

Jo

urn

alo

f

Ed

ucatio

nal

Tech

no

log

y

Researc

his

need

ed

toco

llect

em

pir

icalevid

en

ce

on

the

pro

cess

of

teach

ing

an

dle

arn

ing

usin

gIW

Bs.A

go

od

pla

ce

tosta

rtis

tolo

ok

at

the

inte

rsectio

nb

etw

een

tech

nic

alan

dp

ed

ag

og

icin

tera

ctivity.

Th

eeffect

ofIW

Bs

on

mo

tivatio

nin

the

lon

g-t

erm

need

sto

be

ad

dre

ssed

.


REFERENCES

Armstrong, V., Barnes, S., Sutherland, R., Curran, S., Mills, S., & Thompson, I. (2005).

Collaborative research methodology for investigating teaching and learning: The use

of interactive whiteboard technology. Educational Review, 57(4), 457-469.

Glover, D., Miller, D., Averis, D., & Door, V. (2005a). Leadership implications of using

interactive whiteboards. Management in Education, 18(5), 27-30.

Glover, D., Miller, D., Averis, D., & Door, V. (2005b). The interactive whiteboard: A

literature survey. Technology, Pedagogy & Education, 14(2), 155-170.

Glover, D., Miller, D., Averis, D., & Door, V. (2007). The evolution of an effective

pedagogy for teachers using the interactive whiteboard in mathematics and modern

languages: An empirical analysis from the secondary sector. Learning, Media, &

Technology, 32(1), 5-20.

Hall, I., & Higgins, S. (2005). Primary school students’ perceptions of interactive white-

boards. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 21(2), 102-117.

Higgins, S., Beauchamp, G., & Miller, D. (2007). Reviewing the literature on interactive

whiteboards. Learning, Media, & Technology, 32(3), 213-225.

Lewin, C., Somekh, B., & Steadman, S. (2008). Embedding interactive whiteboards in

teaching and learning: The process of change in pedagogic practice. Education &

Information Technologies, 13(4), 291-303.

Martin, S. (2007). Interactive whiteboards and talking books: A new approach to teaching

children to write? Literacy, 41(1), 26-34.

Mechling, L., Gast, D., & Krupa, K. (2007). Impact of SMART Board Technology: An

investigation of sight word reading and observational learning. Journal of Autism

& Developmental Disorders, 37(10), 1869-1882.

Miller, D., Glover, D., & Averis, D. (2004). Panacea or prop: The role of the inter-

active whiteboard in improving teaching effectiveness. Paper presented at the

Tenth International Congress of Mathematics Education, Copenhagen, July. Available

online at: http://www.icme-organisers.dk/tsg15/Glover_et_al.pdf (accessed February

12, 2009).

Schmid, E. (2006). Investigating the use of interactive whiteboard technology in the

English language classroom through the lens of a critical theory of technology.

Computer Assisted Language Learning, 19(1), 47-62.

Schroeder, R. (2007). Active learning with interactive whiteboards: A literature review

and a case study for college freshmen. Communications in Information Literacy, 1(2),

64-73.

Schuck, S., & Kearney, M. (2007). Exploring pedagogy with interactive whiteboards:

A case study of six schools (Sydney, University of Technology Sydney). Available

online at: http://www.ed-dev.uts.edu.au/teachered/research/iwbproject/pdfs/iwbreport

web.pdf (accessed February 12, 2009).

Shenton, A., & Pagett, L. (2007). From ‘bored’ to screen: The use of the interactive

whiteboard for literacy in six primary classrooms in England. Literacy, 41(3), 129-136.

Slay, H., Siebörger, I., & Hodgkinson-Williams, C. (2008). Interactive whiteboards: Real

beauty or just “lipstick”? Computers & Education, 51(3), 1321-1341.

Smith, F., Hardman, F., & Higgins, S. (2006). The impact of interactive whiteboards on

teacher–pupil interaction in the National Literacy and Numeracy Strategies. British

Educational Research Journal, 32(3), 443-457.


Smith, H., Higgins, S., Wall, K., & Miller, J. (2005). Interactive whiteboards: Boon

or bandwagon? A critical review of the literature. Journal of Computer Assisted

Learning, 21(2), 91-101.

Solvie, P. (2007). Leaping out of our skins: Postmodern considerations in use of an

electronic whiteboard to foster critical engagement in early literacy lessons. Educa-

tional Philosophy & Theory, 39(7), 737-754.

Thompson, J., & Flecknoe, M. (2003). Raising attainment with an interactive whiteboard

in Key Stage 2. Management in Education, 17(3), 29-33.

Wall, K., Higgins, S., & Smith, H. (2005). ‘The visual helps me understand the compli-

cated things’: Pupil views of teaching and learning with interactive whiteboards.

British Journal of Educational Technology, 36(5), 851-867.

Weimer, M. J. (2001) The influence of technology such as SMART board interactive

whiteboard on student motivation in the classroom. Available online at: http://smarter

kids.org/research/paper7.asp (accessed February 12, 2009).

Wood, R., & Ashfield, J. (2008). The use of the interactive whiteboard for creative

teaching and learning in literacy and mathematics: A case study. British Journal of

Educational Technology, 39(1), 84-96.

Direct reprint requests to:

Mr. Peter DiGregorio

Suffolk County Community College

1001 Crooked Hill Rd.

Brentwood, NY 11717

e-mail: [email protected]


Copyright of Journal of Educational Technology Systems is the property of Baywood Publishing Company, Inc.

and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright

holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.

the effects of interactive whiteboards (iwbs) on …

Documents