Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Lecturers’ perception of interactive whiteboard for instructional delivery in tertiary institutions in Enugu State, Nigeria

  • Published:
Journal of Computers in Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The use of multimedia tools for teaching and learning has been seen to play not only a definitive role in instruction modeling but also a vital tool for concretization of abstract knowledge. Based on this premise, this study focused on lecturers’ perception of Interactive whiteboards (IWBs) for instructional delivery in tertiary institutions in Enugu State, Nigeria. Structured questionnaire was used to collect data from 252 participants randomly drawn from six tertiary institutions in Enugu State. The data collected were analyzed using descriptive statistics namely percentages and mean to answer the research questions, while ANOVA was used to test two null hypotheses at 0.05 level of significance. Results revealed that the majority of lecturers (68%) perceived IWBs as a relevant Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs) tool for instructional delivery in tertiary institutions, and 61% of the participants agreed that it makes them active in their teaching practices. Furthermore, 68% of the participants agreed to the availability of IWBs in schools. However, the ICT skills required for effective utilization of IWBs were found to be grossly lacking due to lack of institutional support and inadequate power supply which constitutes top barriers facing lecturers in utilizing ICT facilities in instructional delivery. The implication for non-utilization or underutilization of the interactive whiteboards is poor students’ learning outcomes in most courses. Hence, there is a need for retraining of lecturers to acquaint them with the technical and basic skills necessary for the effective utilization of IWBs in their teaching practices in Nigeria.

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

  • Alan, S. & Gary, J. (2011). Perception, attribution, and judgment of others. Organizational Behaviour: Understanding and Managing Life at Work 7.

  • Al-Faki, I. M., & Khamis, A. H. A. (2014). Difficulties facing teachers in using interactive whiteboards in their classes. American International Journal of Social Sciences, 3(2), 136–158.

    Google Scholar 

  • Allen, J. & Van der Velden, R. (2012). Skills for the 21st Century: Implications for Education, ROA-RM- 2012/11, Maastricht: ROA. Accepted for publication in: Higher Education: Recent Trends, Emerging Issues and Future Outlook, Nova Publishers.

  • Al-Senaidi, S., Lim, L., & Poirot, J. (2009). Barriers to adopting technology for teaching and learning in Oman. Computers & Education, 53(3), 575–590.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alwani, A. E. S. & Soomro, S. (2010). Barriers to effective use of Information Technology in Science education at Yanbu Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Resources document. Retrieved November 10, 2015, on http://cnd.intechopen.com/pdfs-wm/10062.pdf.

  • Anie, S. O. (2011). The Economic and Social Benefits of ICT Policies in Nigeria. Library Philosophy and Practice. Retrieved on February 18, 2016 from http://www.webpages.uidaho.edu/~mbolin/anie.htm.

  • Association of African Universities (2000) Report of Technical Experts meeting on the use and application of information and communication technologies in higher education institutions in Africa. Retrieved on October 10, 2015, from www.org/english/documents/aau-ictreport-p4.htm.

  • Beaumont, R. (2012). An introduction to principal component analysis & factor analysis using SPSS 19 and R (psych package). Factor Analysis and Principal Component Analysis (PCA), 24, 8–9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bell, M. A. (2002). Why use an interactive whiteboard? A baker’s dozen reasons. New York: Teacher.net gazette.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bendig, A. W. (1954). Reliability and the number of rating scale categories. Journal of Applied Psychology, 38, 38–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bingimlas, K. A. (2009). Barriers to the successful integration of ICT in teaching and learning environments: A review of the literature. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 5(3), 235–245.

    Google Scholar 

  • British Educational Communications and Technology Agency BECTA (2003). What the research says about interactive whiteboard. http://www.becta.org.uk/research. Accessed 15th April 2014.

  • British Educational Communications and Technology Agency BECTA (2004). A review of the research literature on barriers to the uptake of ICT by teachers. Resource document. Retrieved December 30, 2015, from http://dera.ioe.ac.uk/1603/1/becta_2004_barrierstouptake_litrev.pdf.

  • Butler, D. L., & Sellbom, M. (2002). Barriers to adopting technology for teaching and learning. Educause Quarterly, 2, 22–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen, W., Tan, A., & Lim, C. (2012). Extrinsic and intrinsic barriers in the use of ICT in teaching: A comparative case study in Singapore. In M. Brown, M. Hartnett, & T. Stewart (Eds.), Future challenges, sustainable futures. Wellington: Proceedings ascilite Wellington 2012.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dee, T. S. (2007). Teachers and the gender gaps in student achievement. Journal of Human Resources, 42, 528–554.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ertmer, P. A. (1999). Addressing first-and second-order barriers to change: Strategies for technology integration. Educational Technology Research and Development, 47(4), 47–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fan, A. (2010). The readiness of school of Macao to integrate IT in education and the extent of actual IT integration. International Journal of education and Development using information and Communication Technology, 6(4), 52–63.

    Google Scholar 

  • Federal Ministry of Education. (2004). Ministerial initiative in e-education for the Nigerian education system. Abuja: Federal Ministry of Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Federal Republic of Nigeria. (2013). National policy on education. Lagos: Federal Government Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glover, D., & Miller, D. (2001). Running with technology: The pedagogy impact of the large scale introduction of interactive whiteboards in one secondary school. Journal of Informative Technology for Teacher Education, 10, 257–276.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glover, D., Miller, D., Averis, D., & Door, V. (2005). The interactive whiteboard: A literature survey. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 14(2), 155–170.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goktas, Y., Gedik, N., & Beaydas, O. (2013). Enablers and barriers to the use of ICT in primary schools in Turkey: A comparative study of 2005–2011. Computers & Education, 68, 211–222.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goldstein, E. B. (2009). Sensation and perception. Cengage Learning. Retrieved March 26, 2011, from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perception.

  • Hadley, M., & Sheingold, K. (1993). Commonalities and distinctive patterns in teachers’ integration of computers. American Journal of Education, 101(3), 261–315.

  • Howland, J. L. (2013). Facts101: Textbook Key Facts. Contents Technologies Inc. Retrieved October 3, 2015, from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skill.

  • Ihmeideh, F. M. (2009). Barriers to the use of technology in Jordanian pre-school settings. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 18(3), 325–341.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jang, S.-J., & Tsai, M.-F. (2012). ‘Reasons for using or not using interactive whiteboards: Perspectives of Taiwanese elementary mathematics and science teachers’, Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 28(8), 1451–1465. Available from: http://www.ascilite.org.au/ajet/ajet28/jang.html.

  • Jegede, P.O. (2009). Issues in Informing Science and Information Technology Volume 6, Ile-Ife: Assessment of Nigerian Teacher Educators’ ICT Training Obafemi Awolowo University.

  • Jones, W. P. & Scott, A. L. (2013). Optimal number of questionnaire response categories: More may not be better. SAGE Open 1–10 DOI: 10.1177/2158244013489691 Accessed on November 17, 2016 from http://sgo.sagepub.com/content/3/2/2158244013489691.full-text.pdf+html.

  • Khan, M. S. H., Hasan, M., & Clement, C. K. (2012). Barriers to the introduction of ICT into education in developing countries: The example of Bangladesh. International Journal of Instruction, 5(2), 61–80.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leu, D. J., & Leu, D. D. (1997). Teaching with internet: Lessons from classroom. Norwood: Christopher-Gordon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levy, P. (2002). Interactive whiteboards in learning and teaching in two sheffield schools: a developmental study. Available from: http://dis.shef.ac.uk/eirg/projects/wboards.htm.

  • Lozano, L. M., García-Cueto, E., & Muñiz, J. (2008). Effect of the number of response categories on the reliability and validity of rating scales. Methodology: European Journal of Research Methods for the Behavioral and Social Sciences, 4(2), 73–79.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Margaryan, A., & Littlejohn, A. (2008). Are digital natives a myth or reality? Students’ use of technologies for learning. Retrieved March 29, 2011, from http://www.academy.gcal.ac.uk/anoush/documents/DigitalNativesMythOrReality-MargaryanAndLittlejohndraft-111208.pdf.

  • Margaryan, A., Littlejohn, A., & Vojt, G. (2011). Are digital natives a myth or reality? university students’ use of digital technologies. Computers & Education, 56(2), 429–440. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2010.09.004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mattell, M. S., & Jacoby, J. (1971). Is there an optimal number of alternatives for Likert scale items? study I: Reliability and validity. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 31, 657–674.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • National Population Commission (NPC) (2002). Sentinel survey of the national population programme baseline report, 2000. Abuja: NPC.

  • NCREL & Metiri Group. (2003). enGauge 21st century skills: Literacy in the digital age. Naperville/Los Angeles: NCREL/Metiri Group.

    Google Scholar 

  • Newsweek Magazine Report. (2008). Interactive whiteboards enhance classroom instruction and learning. Accessed September 6, 2016, from https://m.neamb.com/professional-resources/benefits-of-interactive-whiteboards.htm.

  • Nicholson, D. (2013). An analysis of pre-service primary teachers’ perceptions and attitudes towards ICT implementation. An unpublished Masters Dissertation in Education. University of Bedfordshire. Accessed from www.whiteboardblog.co.uk. Interactive Whiteboards.

  • Nikolopoulou, K., & Gialamas, V. (2013). Barriers to the integration of computers in early childhood settings: Teachers’ perceptions. Education and Information Technologies. doi:10.1007/s10639-013-9281-9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Olelewe, C. J., & Agomuo, E. E. (2016). Effects of B-learning and F2F learning environments on students’ achievement in QBASIC programming. Computers & Education, 103, 76–86. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2016.09.012.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Olelewe, C.J & Nzeadibe, C. A. (2015). Challenges facing the availability and utilization of ICT resources in post primary schools in Nsukka educational zone of Enugu State, Nigeria In Nwaokeafor, C.U (Ed). Information Communication Technology (ICT) Integration to Educational Curricula: A New Direction for Africa. Available at http://www.booktopia.com.au.

  • Ololube, N. P. (2011). Education and society: An interactive approach. Owerri: Springfield Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pacific Policy Research Center. (2010). 21st century skills for students and teachers. Honolulu: Kamehameha Schools, Research & Evaluation Division.

    Google Scholar 

  • Passey, D. (2006). Technology enhancing learning: Analyzing uses of information and communication technologies by primary and secondary school pupils with learning frameworks. Curriculum Journal, 17(2), 139–166.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pelgrum, W. J. (2001). Obstacles to the integration of ICT in education: Result from a worldwide educational assessment. Computers & Education, 37(2), 163–178.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Preston, C., Cox, M., & Cox, K. (2000). Teachers as innovators: An evaluation of the motivation of teachers to use information and communications technology. Croydon: Mirandanet.

  • Sandberg, A. (2002). Pre-school teachers’ conceptions of computers and play. Information Technology in Childhood Education Annual, 2002(1), 245–262.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schacter, D. (2011). Psychology. Newyork: Worth Publishers.

    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(4), 1553–1568.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schoepp, K. (2005). Barriers to technology integration in a technology-rich environment. Learning and Teaching in Higher Education: Gulf Perspectives, 2(1), 1–24.

    Google Scholar 

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

  • Schuck, S., & Kearney, M. (2008). Classroom-based use of two educational technologies: A sociocultural perspective, Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 8(4), 394–406. Available from: http://www.citejournal.org/articles/v8i4currentpractice2.pdf.

  • Sekaran, S. (2003). Measurement: Scaling, reliability, validity. In Research methods for business: A skill building approach. London: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, A. (1999). Interactive whiteboard evaluation. MirandaNet. http://www.mirandanet.ac.uk/pubs/smartboards.htm. Accessed April 10, 2015.

  • Smith, H. J., 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stephen, J. C., Donna, K. G., Shulamit, K., & Wendy, M. W. (2014). Women in academic science: A changing landscape. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 15(3), 75–141. doi:10.1177/1529100614541236.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Torff, B., & Tirotta, R. (2010). Interactive whiteboards produce small gains in elementary students’ self-reported motivation in mathematics. Computers & Education, 54, 379–383.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Turbill, J. (2001). A researcher goes to school: Using technology in the kindergarten literacy curriculum. Journal of Early Childhood Literacy, 1(3), 255–279.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Türel, Y. K. (2010). Developing teachers’ utilization of interactive whiteboards. In D. Gibson & B. Dodge (Eds.), Proceedings of society for information technology & teacher education international conference 2010 (pp. 3049–3054). Chesapeake: AACE.

    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 

  • UNESCO. (2003). EFA global monitoring report 2003/2004, gender and education for all. UNESCO: The Leap to equality Paris.

    Google Scholar 

  • Voogt, J., & Pareja, R. N. (2010). 21st century skills: Discussienota. Enschede: Universiteit Twente.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walker, D. (2003). Quality at the dockside. Retrieved March 10, 2015 from http://www.hpedsb.on.ac/ec/services/cst/elementary/math/document/whiteboards_research. pdf. TES Online. January 3, 2003. pp. 66–67.

  • Wall, K., Higgins, S., & Smith, H. (2005). The visual helps me understand the complicated things: Pupil views of teaching and learning with interactive whiteboards. British Journal of Educational Technology, 36(5), 851–867.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Waycott, J., Bennett, S., Kennedy, G., Dalga, B., & Gray, K. (2010). Digital divides? student and staff perceptions of information and communication technologies. Computers & Education, 54(4), 1202–1211. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2009.11.006.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williams, B. (1995). Factors contributing to successful implementation of computer technology in schools. Dissertation Abstracts International, 56(8), 3092.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wood, E., Specht, J., Willoughby, T., & Mueller, J. (2008). Integrating computer technology in early childhood education environments: Issues raised by early childhood educators. The Alberta Journal of Educational Research, 54(2), 210–226.

    Google Scholar 

  • Xia, L., & Jenny, P. (2015). Early childhood teachers’ perceived barriers to ICT integration in teaching: A survey study in Mainland, China. Journal of Computer in Education, 2(1), 61–75. doi:10.1007/s40692-014-0025-7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yamane, T. (1967). Statistic: An introductory analysis (2nd ed.). New York: Harper and Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yoloye, E. O. (2015). New technologies for teaching and learning: Challenges for higher learning institutions in developing countries. In C. U. Nwokeafor (Ed.), Information communication technology (ICT) integration to educational curricula: A new direction for Africa (pp. 250–260). Maryland: University Press of America.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yusuf, O. M. (2005). An investigation into teachers’ self-efficiency in the implementation of computer education in Nigerian secondary schools. Meridian: A Middle School Computer Technologies Journal, 8(2). Retrieved November 21, 2005, from http://www.ncsu.edu/meridian/sum2005/index.html.

  • Yusuf, O. M. (2007). Trends and barriers on the integration of information and communication technology in the Nigerian school system. Retrieved January 10, 2015, from https://www.google.com/search?q=Yusuf%2C+M.+O.+%282007%29.++Trends+and+barriers+on+the+integration+of+information+and+communication+technology+in+the+Nigerian+school+system.&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8.

Download references

Acknowledgement

Special thanks to TET fund for the Ph.D scholarship grant awarded to the lead researcher which facilitated this study. The researchers appreciate the efforts of all the lecturers who participated in this study. The researchers are also grateful to the anonymous reviewers and the editor for their significant contributions/comments that improved the manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Computer & Robotics Education, Faculty of Vocational & Technical Education, University of Nigeria, Nsukka, 410001, Enugu State, Nigeria

    Chijioke Jonathan Olelewe

  2. Department of Computer Science, School of Science Education, Federal College of Education, Eha Amufu, Enugu State, Nigeria

    Anthony Nwachukwu Okwor

Authors
  1. Chijioke Jonathan Olelewe
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Anthony Nwachukwu Okwor
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Chijioke Jonathan Olelewe.

Appendix

Appendix

See Figs. 1, 2, 3.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Olelewe, C.J., Okwor, A.N. Lecturers’ perception of interactive whiteboard for instructional delivery in tertiary institutions in Enugu State, Nigeria. J. Comput. Educ. 4, 171–196 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40692-017-0077-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40692-017-0077-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation