Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Investigating K-12 teachers’ use of electronic board in the classroom in the Central South of United States

  • Published:
Education and Information Technologies Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Examining classroom teachers’ use of electronic boards is crucial due to the rapid widespread replacement of traditional blackboards in schools. This study focuses on K-12 teachers’ use of electronic boards in the classroom, quantitatively in four subscales – presentation, motivation, engagement, and assessment, and teachers’ attributes – grade levels, ages, and years of teaching. The results reveal that correlation coefficients of presentation, motivation, engagement, and assessment, are significantly correlated. Elementary teachers tend to feel more comfortable in using electronic boards than middle school teachers. Teachers’ self-efficacy and attitudes towards electronic board are significant factors in students’ motivation and engagement. Qualitative data present most teaching activities and their desires to improve their more efficient usage of electronic board. Limitation of study and recommendation for further research are provided.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Al-Qirim, N. (2011). Determinants of interactive white board success in teaching in higher education institutions. Computers & Education, 56(3), 827–838.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Amaro-Jimenez, C., & Beckett, G. (2010). Interactive Whiteboards: All-in-one Tool for ESL Teaching and Learning. In J. Sanchez & K. Zhang (Eds.), Proceedings of E-Learn: World Conference on e-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education 2010 (pp. 2331–2337). Chesapeake: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE).

    Google Scholar 

  • Cabus, S. J., Haelermans, C., & Franken, S. (2017). SMART in mathematics? Exploring the effects of in-class-level differentiation using SMARTboard on math proficiency. British Journal of Educational Technology, 48(1), 145–161.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chamblee, G. (2016). Interactive Whiteboards Research and the Mathematics Classroom: A LearnTechLib Review. In G. Chamblee & L. Langub (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference 2016 (pp. 2484–2489). Chesapeake: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE) https://www.learntechlib.org/p/172043/.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen, S. H., & Tsai, M. Y. (2013). Using the interactive whiteboards to teach picture books: The case of Taiwan. Online Submission, 6(11), 86–92.

    Google Scholar 

  • ClassFlow. (2018). Retrieved from https://classflow.com/ July 30, 2018.

  • Deaney, R., Chapman, A., & Hennessy, S. (2009). A case-study of one teacher’s use of an interactive whiteboard system to support knowledge co-construction in the history classroom. Curriculum Journal, 20(4), 365–387.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DeSantis, J. D. (2013). Exploring the effects of professional development for the interactive whiteboard on teachers’ technology self-efficacy. Journal of Information Technology Education Research, 12, 343–362.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Essig, D. (2011). A Case Study of Interactive Whiteboard Professional Development for Elementary Mathematics Teachers (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Walden University.

  • Fekonja-Peklaj, U., & Marjanovic-Umek, L. (2015). Positive and negative aspects of the IWB and tablet computers in the first grade of primary school: A multiple-perspective approach. Early Child Development and Care, 185(6), 996–1015.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gillen, J., Littleton, K., Twiner, A., Staarman, J. K., & Mercer, N. (2008). Using the interactive whiteboard to resource continuity and support multimodal teaching in a primary science classroom. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 24(4), 348–358.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holmes, K. (2009). Planning to teach with digital tools: Introducing the interactive whiteboard to pre-service secondary mathematics teachers. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 25(3), 351–365.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ipek, I., & Sozcii, O. F. (2016). Preferences and attitudes for using interactive whiteboards in different courses and learning. European Journal of Contemporary Education, 15(1), 173–184.

    Google Scholar 

  • Karsenti, T. (2016). The interactive whiteboard: Use, benefits, and challenges. A survey of 11,683 students and 1,131 teachers. Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology, 42(5), 1–22.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kelley, G. P. (2014). Factors that have an effect on students’ scores on the Florida algebra 1 end-of-course assessment in algebra 1 classrooms using interactive whiteboard tools. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Florida.

  • Kuykendall, B., Janvier, M., Kempton, I., & Brown, D. (2012). Interactive Whiteboard Technology: Promise and Reality. In T. Bastiaens & G. Marks (Eds.), Proceedings of E-Learn: World Conference on e-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education 2012 (pp. 685–690). Chesapeake: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE) https://www.learntechlib.org/p/41669/.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewin, C., Somekh, B., & Steadman, S. (2008). Embedding interactive whiteboards in teaching and learning: The process of change in pedagogic practice. Journal of Education & Information Technologies., 13(4), 291–303.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liang, T. H., Huang, Y. M., & Tsai, C. C. (2012). An investigation of teaching and learning interaction factors for the use of the interactive whiteboard technology. Educational Technology & Society, 15(4), 356–367.

    Google Scholar 

  • Link, T. (2012). The effect of interactive whiteboard-based instruction on mathematics performance of English learners. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). St. John's University, New York.

  • Lopez, O. (2010). The digital learning classroom: Improving English language learners’ academic success in mathematics and reading using interactive whiteboard technology. Computers & Education, 54, 901–915.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lopez, O., & Krockover, C. (2014). Contextual factors relevant to elementary teachers using interactive whiteboards in mathematics classroom discourse. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 25(3), 405–426.

    Google Scholar 

  • McQuillan, K., Northcote, M., & Beamish, P. (2012). What matters most when students and teachers use interactive whiteboards in mathematics classrooms? Australian Primary Mathematics Classroom, 17(4), 3–7.

    Google Scholar 

  • Murcia, K. (2010). Multi-modal representations in primary science: What's offered by interactive whiteboard technology? Teaching Science, 56(1), 23–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Murcia, K., & Sheffield, R. (2010). Talking about science in interactive whiteboard classrooms. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 26(4), 417–431.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oigara, J. (2017). Teaching and learning with Smart Board technology in the elementary classroom. In P. Resta & S. Smith (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference 2017 (pp. 896–899). Chesapeake: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE).

    Google Scholar 

  • Olsen, A., LeMire, S., & Baker, M. (2011). The impact of self-efficacy and peer support on student participation with interactive white boards in the middle school math class. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 30(2), 163–178.

    Google Scholar 

  • Öz, H. (2014). Teachers’ and students’ perceptions of interactive whiteboards in the English as a foreign language classroom. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 13(3), 156–177.

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Park, J. (2014). Pre-service and in-service teachers’ perceptions toward white board system prior to actual experience. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 2(3), 262–270.

    Google Scholar 

  • Park, S., Kim, K., Everson, J., & Mushegan, A. (2011). The effect of interactive whiteboards on kindergarten students’ learning: Findings from two case studies. In M. Koehler & P. Mishra (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference 2011 (pp. 1630–1633). Chesapeake: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE) https://www.learntechlib.org/p/36530/.

    Google Scholar 

  • Phelps, R. J. (2012). Perceptions of the effectiveness of interactive whiteboards on student engagement. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Edgewood College.

  • Rains, C. S. (2011). Effect of interactive whiteboard instruction on 5th grade standardized test scores in the area of mathematics (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Walden University.

  • Rosetti, J. (2012). Analyzing the perceptions and use of interactive whiteboards by prekindergarten teachers in presentation of classroom Lessons (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Walden University.

  • Sad, S. N., & Ozhan, U. (2012). Honeymoon with IWBs: A qualitative insight in primary students’ views on instruction with interactive whiteboard. Computers & Education, 59(4), 1184–1191.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schmid, E. C. (2008). Potential pedagogical benefits and drawbacks of multimedia use in the English language classroom equipped with interactive whiteboard technology. Computers & Education, 51, 1553–1568.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sheffield, C. C. (2015). Struggling to move beyond projection: A case study of instructional use of an interactive white board in elementary social studies. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 15(4), 541–567.

    Google Scholar 

  • SMART Board. (2018). Retrieved from https://home.smarttech.com/ July 30, 2018.

  • Šumak, B., Pušnik, M., Heričko, M., & Šorgo, A. (2017). Differences between prospective, existing, and former users of interactive whiteboards on external factors affecting their adoption, usage and abandonment. Computers in Human Behavior, 72, 733–756.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Swan, K., Schenker, J., & Kratcoski, A. (2008). The effects of the use of interactive whiteboards on student achievement. In J. Luca & E. Weippl (Eds.), Proceedings of EdMedia: World Conference on Educational Media and Technology 2008 (pp. 3290–3297). Chesapeake: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE) https://www.learntechlib.org/p/28842/.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tunaboylu, C., & Demir, E. (2017). The effect of teaching supported by interactive whiteboard on Students’ mathematical achievements in lower secondary education. Journal of Education and Learning, 6(1), 81–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Türel, Y. K., & Johnson, T. E. (2012). Teachers’ belief and use of interactive whiteboards for teaching and learning. Educational Technology & Society, 15(1), 381–394.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang, J., Cheon, J., Hamman, D., & Han, S. (2015). Identifying the relationships among teachers’ perceptions and the use of interactive whiteboard and students’ learning performance. In D. Rutledge & D. Slykhuis (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference 2015 (pp. 3475–3482). Chesapeake: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE).

    Google Scholar 

  • Whyburn, L., & Way, J. (2012). Student perceptions of the influence of IWBs on their learning in mathematics. Australian Educational Computing, 27(1), 23–27.

    Google Scholar 

  • Xu, H., & Moloney, R. (2011). Perceptions of interactive whiteboard pedagogy in the teaching of Chinese language. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 27(2), 307–325. Australasian Society for Computers in Learning in Tertiary Education.

  • Yang, J. Y., & Teng, Y. W. (2014). Perceptions of elementary school teachers and students using interactive whiteboards in English teaching and learning. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 25(1), 125–154.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

I would like to thank Mrs. Stacy Dellafosse for data collection, and Mrs. Onyx Zhang for proof-reading this manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Education Professions, McNeese State University, Lake Charles, Louisiana, 70609, USA

    Yixin Zhang

Authors
  1. Yixin Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yixin Zhang.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendix

Appendix

1.1 Interactive white board research instrument

The purpose of this survey is to facilitate research regarding how teacher and student use Promethean Board in classrooms. All your responses will be reported as group data without identifying specific participants.

Thank you very much for your participation.

figure a

PEDAGOGY

Write a teaching activity when you integrate Promethean Board:

STUDENT OUTCOME

Write something that you think integrating Promethean Board improves students’ learning:

IMPROVEMNT

Write something that, you believe, could help you better utilize Promethean Board in your class:

After reading each following statement, please indicate the extent to which you disagree or agree by selecting a number.

 

Strongly Disagree = 1

Disagree = 2

Agree = 3

Strongly Agree = 4

1. I make my presentation more effectively when I use Promethean Board.

1

2

3

4

2. Promethean Board can motivate students’ interests.

1

2

3

4

3. Students get more engaged when I use Promethean Board.

1

2

3

4

4. Using ActivExpression, I can pin point quickly what students have learned for the unit I have taught.

1

2

3

4

5. I do not feel nervous using Promethean Board.

1

2

3

4

6. I have a positive attitude towards Promethean Board.

1

2

3

4

7. I prefer to use Promethean Board as a presentation tool.

1

2

3

4

8. Students’ motivation level is higher when I use Promethean Board.

1

2

3

4

9. I need time to engage students in learning activities when I use Promethean Board.

1

2

3

4

10. ActiveExpression is more effective than using paper regarding classroom assessment.

1

2

3

4

11. I feel comfortable using Promethean Board.

1

2

3

4

12. I believe that Promethean board is a useful teaching tool.

1

2

3

4

13. Comparing Promethean Board and other presentation media, I choose Promethean Board.

1

2

3

4

14. Comparing Promethean Board and other media, students’ are more motivated when Promethean Board is used.

1

2

3

4

15. Students’ engagement level is higher when I use Promethean Board.

1

2

3

4

16. ActivExpression allows me to know those students who need more help.

1

2

3

4

17. I do not feel timid using Promethean Board.

1

2

3

4

18. I believe that using Promethean Board would promote my students’ learning.

1

2

3

4

19. Using Promethean Board to present content information can get students’ attention easily.

1

2

3

4

20. When I use Interactive Promethean Board, I need less time to motivate students.

1

2

3

4

21. Students are more willing to participate in classroom activities when I use Promethean Board.

1

2

3

4

22. ActiveExpression allows me to collect quantitative data regarding students’ acquisition of content information I have taught.

1

2

3

4

23. I feel confident using Promethean Board.

1

2

3

4

24. I believe that using Promethean Board would increase teaching efficiency.

1

2

3

4

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Zhang, Y. Investigating K-12 teachers’ use of electronic board in the classroom in the Central South of United States. Educ Inf Technol 24, 825–841 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-018-9800-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-018-9800-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation