The Effect of Using an Interactive Whiteboard in the Classroom on Student Participation. Karen Vetter. Action Research. Kennesaw State University

Transcription

1 The Effect of Using an Interactive Whiteboard in the Classroom on Student Participation Karen Vetter Action Research Kennesaw State University Dr. David M. Martin

2 ActivBoards and Student Participation 2 Abstract The purpose of this action research study was to examine whether the use of an interactive whiteboard during teaching instruction had an affect on student participation in the lesson. The study was conducted in a fifth grade classroom over the course of six weeks and was broken into three weeks where the interactive whiteboard was the main instructional tool and three weeks where the interactive whiteboard was not used at all. During each phase of the study, all students in the class were observed by a certified teacher who recorded the number of times that students were considered to be off-task defined according to previously established criteria. The results from both the weeks where the interactive whiteboard was used and those weeks where it was not were then compared and analyzed using a t-test to determine the effectiveness of the intervention. Final results indicated that the use of the interactive whiteboard proved to be statistically significant for decreasing student off-task behavior during instruction. In addition, students were questioned about their personal opinions on the use of the interactive whiteboard in the classroom and resulting in positive comments across the board. Introduction As a result of the constant development of technology, the use of technology within the school systems has increased dramatically over the years. In 1994, only three percent of schools had Internet access, whereas today that number has dramatically increased and the Internet now serves as a tool for teaching. Deidre Martel from Quality Education Data emphasizes the impact that technology is having on education by stating, The use of technology in the classroom is not only here to stay, but it has an increasing presence and an increasing significance in what's going on in the classroom, (Ascione, 2005, p.1). Not only is technology finding its way into the

3 ActivBoards and Student Participation 3 classrooms, it is also being incorporated through multiple subject areas with the Georgia Performance Standards (GADOE, 2006). One of the many ways that my school has incorporated technology into the curriculum is through the implementation of interactive whiteboards. An interactive whiteboard is a large interactive display that connects to a computer and projector whereas the projector projects the computer s desktop image onto the board s surface and users control the computer using a pen or other devise. [Interactive] whiteboards allow teachers and students to interact with technology in a manner that was not previously possible. The touch-sensitive board allows users to interact directly with applications without having to be physically at the computer which is projecting the image onto the board, (Beeland, 2002, p.2). While there are several different brands of the interactive whiteboard, our school has purchased the ActivBoard. Considering the impact that the role of technology is having in the classroom, in addition to the installment of the ActivBoards, the question arises regarding the impact the ActivBoards are having on the students education. One teacher who actively uses the interactive whiteboard spoke of himself as, An orchestrator, while the students explain, and illustrate from the whiteboard, and this has changed the way in which I can involve them all in the lessons, (Averis, Glover & Miller, 2004). This motivational use of the ActivBoard is the foundation for which my research lies upon. The purpose of this study was to research the extent to which the effect the ActivBoards have on student participation and attention. Literature Review Technology has become common place in the classroom. Teachers across all grade levels are finding ways to incorporate its use into their curriculum and teaching methods. It is a

4 ActivBoards and Student Participation 4 method that is becoming firmly rooted in the delivery of curriculum (Wang, 2000). Past research indicates that students learn more content and faster with technology (Faucett, 2000). One form of technology is the interactive whiteboard. The use of an interactive whiteboard (ActivBoard or SMART board) within the classroom can potentially provide positive results in achievement as well as in student participation. The purpose of this study is to focus on the latter. In this study, student participation and attention will be referred to as having the same meaning active engagement and sustained focus in the lesson. Research conducted by Avers, Glover, and Miller during a two year period beginning in 2002 focused on student perceptions, attitudes, and attention to the use and nonuse of an interactive whiteboard during instruction. Their findings indicated that in some of the lessons where the teacher shifted from the use of the board to not using it, pupils interest waned and, at times, there were behavioral management issues that were not evident during the lesson when the interactive whiteboard was being used (Averis, Glover, & Miller, 2004). This same study also addressed the recognition that the interactive whiteboard in itself was a motivating factor solely because of the way in which teachers used it within the lesson. The incorporation of a different type of instructional method led to increased attention from the students. However, teachers also noted that the use of the interactive whiteboard still does not suggest that we shall have a lesson where all the pupils are paying attention all the time, (Averis, Glover & Miller, 2004). Student engagement is crucial to the learning process. Some students have the personal motivation to learn, while others need an external incentive to do so. When students are actively engaged in the lesson, they are demonstrating their motivation to do well. The more students are motivated to learn, the greater the chances are that they will be successful in their efforts. Multiple factors influence student motivation including teacher motivation, parental

5 ActivBoards and Student Participation 5 involvement, school and classroom environment, teacher skills, and effective use of technology. Technology can be used to create a motivating classroom environment where students are engaged in learning. An interactive whiteboard, the ActivBoard, is one piece of technology that can potentially increase student participation. Several studies have been conducted to evaluate the correlation between the use of an interactive whiteboard as a delivery tool for instruction and student participation or engagement in the lesson. One such study, conducted by Solvie in 2001 was conducted in a first grade classroom where student attention was assessed during reading literacy lessons. Analysis of the data revealed there was not a significant difference in student attention when lessons were presented with the whiteboard as compared to student attention to lessons presented without the whiteboard. In the spring of 2002, a study examining the impact of interactive whiteboards as a resource for teaching and learning in grades six and seven was conducted and found opposing results to Solvie s study, (Latham, 2002). One of the focuses of Latham s research was to identify the impact of the interactive whiteboard on the quality of teaching and learning for all pupils involved. The results indicated that the use of interactive whiteboards as a resource was effective in providing potential for all pupils to be actively involved in teaching and learning. It was also discovered that the interactive whiteboard provided potential for teachers to structure and manage interactive teaching and learning, with improved levels of concentration and fewer distractions, (Latham, 2002). An eighth grade American history teacher, Weimer, conducted a study where the focus was on the motivational factor of the use of SMART boards in his classroom. The SMART boards are a brand of the interactive whiteboard, similar to the ActivBoard. The qualitative

6 ActivBoards and Student Participation 6 analysis of his research indicated that the students who participated in his study were highly motivated by the use of the SMART board during instruction (Weimer, 2001). In addition to Weimer s study, Miller also comments on how the interactive whiteboard contributes as a motivating factor in the classroom. He indicated that research highlights that the whiteboard serves as an intrinsic stimulation that presents content in a different way that ensures understanding and retention, (Averis, Glover, & Miller, 2004) Beeland (2002) conducted a research study to examine the effect of the use of interactive whiteboards as an instructional tool on student engagement. Specifically, the desire was to see if student engagement in the learning process is increased while using an interactive whiteboard to deliver instruction, (p. 1). Beeland s purpose for researching and methodology are the building blocks behind the research conducted in my classroom. Student responses to his surveys and questionnaires indicated the positive impact that the interactive whiteboard has on student participation and involvement in the classroom during instruction. In Beeland s research, when asked, Does the use of a whiteboard in the classroom help you to be able to pay better attention? Why or why not? all but one of the students said yes. One student even commented, It makes me pay attention to the teacher more. When the teacher just stands up there and talks, I get easily distracted (Beeland, 2002). Bell provides a baker s dozen reasons why the interactive white board is an effective tool to use in teaching. During her doctoral studies the interactive whiteboard became her focus and like many other researchers before her, her study showed statistically significant improvement in student attitudes towards both using computers in instruction and towards writing instruction, (Bell, 2002, p. 1). Bell also notes that the interactive whiteboard is a colorful tool and that

7 ActivBoards and Student Participation 7 research indicates that students respond to displays where color is employed, and marking can be customized both in the pen and in the highlighter features to display a number of different colors. Increasing student motivation and participation in the learning process are essential and key benefits. Research indicates that these benefits are present in the use of the interactive white board when used during instruction. Since the interactive whiteboard has the ability to interact with the computer, websites and videos are streamed onto the board and create visual presentations. The opportunity for students to physically interact with the board exists, allowing an increased engagement with the learning material. According to Kennewell (2001) this increases motivation and provides learning gains. Studies also report that since the interactive whiteboards have the capacity to post and present student work, discussions can be conducted and the focus on student created material keeps the class on task, (BECTA, 2003). Overall, the research supports the use of an interactive whiteboard to increase student participation in the classroom. Methodology This study addresses both quantitatively and qualitatively the effects an interactive whiteboard, the ActivBoard, has on student participation. This study took place at an elementary school in the suburban area of a larger southeastern city in the United States. The school has an average enrollment of 850 students ranging from Kindergarten to fifth grade. The ethnic makeup of the school includes 52% Caucasian, 21% Hispanic, 15% African American, 5% multiracial, and 4% Asian. The students involved in the study were from my second period Social Studies and Science class. During a nine-week grading period, approximately four and one-half weeks are focused on Social Studies instruction, and the remaining four and one-half weeks of instruction

8 ActivBoards and Student Participation 8 are concentrated on Science content. The class is comprised of twenty students, eleven boys and nine girls. (See Figure 1.) The ethnic diversity of the class includes 12 Caucasian, 4 African- American, 2 Hispanic, 1 Asian, and 1 mixed student. (See Figure 2.) Figure 1 Figure 2 Gender Distribution Mixed 5% Ethnic Distribution Male Female Hispanic 10% African- American 20% Asian 5% Caucasian 60% Caucasian African-American Hispanic Asian Mixed 0 Male Female Observations by a certified teacher were made over the course of a six week period. This colleague recorded the number of times that students were not participating in the lesson as defined below. A certified teacher was asked to doing the observing in order that the teacher may be able to devote all of her attention to the lesson at hand. An equal number of lessons were taught to the fifth grade class incorporating use of an interactive whiteboard (ActivBoard) and without use of the ActivBoard during the six week observational period. Student participation was identified as 1) looking at the speaker, 2) looking at the ActivBoard, 3) looking at related material, and 4) manipulating props and materials used to present content during the lessons. (See Figure 3.) When students were not engaged in one of the previously mentioned definitions of participation, a tally mark was made next to their name. Students were not aware that observations of their behavior were being made as it was common for this colleague and other guests to enter the room at random to make general observations.

9 ActivBoards and Student Participation 9 Figure 3 Calendar of Events Week 1 Instruction WITHOUT the ActivBoard Date: Week 2 Instruction WITH the ActivBoard Date: Week 3 Instruction WITHOUT the ActivBoard Date: Week 4 Instruction WITH the ActivBoard Date: Week 5 Instruction WITHOUT the ActivBoard Date: Week 6 Instruction WITH the ActivBoard Date: Tallies of Number of Times Students Observed to be not Participating (Participating defined as looking at the speaker, looking at the ActivBoard, looking at related material, manipulating props & material used to present content.) Day 1 Day 2 Data was collected on student attention by the certified teacher by tallying the number of times during a sixty-minute lesson students were not attentive, as defined above. The teacher observed students during two of the five weekly lessons throughout the study. The teacher observing and recording data was not the teacher instructing the fifth grade students. Students were asked to attend and participate in the lessons by responding orally and in writing to material presented. The ActivBoard was used to present lessons one week and it was not used the following observational week. This pattern continued for a total of six weeks, so that the ActivBoard was used as the primary tool for presenting content for three of the six weeks. Observations were made twice each week for a total of twelve observations. Data collected by the observing teacher was gathered and the number of times that

10 ActivBoards and Student Participation 10 students were off-task was compared to the number of students in the class, thereby giving a percentage of off-task and on-task behavior for each lesson. The six lessons that used the ActivBoard as the instructional tool were then compared to the six lessons that did not involve the ActivBoard. The on- and off-task behaviors during each method of instruction were compared using a t-test; the t-test provided a measure of the significance in behaviors between the two methodologies. Student engagement and motivation to learn was measured using two separate instruments. Immediately following the use of the whiteboard in class, a survey, based on a modified version of the Computer Attitude Questionnaire originally created by Dr. Rhonda Christensen and Dr. Gerald Knezek (Christensen & Knezek, 1997), was given to students. This survey provided information to determine student attitude toward the use of a whiteboard in the classroom. (See Figure 4.)

11 ActivBoards and Student Participation 11 Figure 4 Strongly Disagree Disagree 1. I enjoy learning when the teacher uses an ActivBoard I like receiving instruction when the teacher uses an ActivBoard Using an ActivBoard makes me nervous I concentrate better in class when an ActivBoard is used to deliver instruction I know that using technology gives me opportunities to learn many new things Using an ActivBoard is very frustrating I enjoy using the ActivBoard I believe that the more often teachers use Activboards, the more I will enjoy school I believe that it is important for me to learn how to use an ActiBoard I feel comfortable using an ActivBoard I enjoy lessons on the ActivBoard I think that it takes a longer amount of time to learn when my teacher uses an ActivBoard I will be able to get a good job if I learn how to use technology I can learn many things when my teacher uses an ActivBoard Agree Strongly Agree A response of 1 indicates that the student strongly disagrees with the statement, 2 signifies disagreement, 3 agreement, and 4 strongly agrees. The purpose of this study was to determine student attitude toward the use of the ActivBoard in the classroom. This information was not compared to the data collected on student behavior (as defined below); rather it was used as an additional informational tool for the teacher to use in guiding future lessons using the ActivBoard. The average answer to each question on the questionnaire was calculated to determine the class mean to each question. Overall implications can then be made from these results.

12 ActivBoards and Student Participation 12 Results The overall results from the student participation survey conducted by the teacher are cited below in Figure 5. Figure 5 Tallies of Number of Times Students Observed to be not Participating Calendar of Events (Participating defined as looking at the speaker, looking at the ActivBoard, looking at related material, manipulating props & material used to present content.) Day 1 Day 2 Totals Week 1 Instruction WITHOUT the ActivBoard Date: 10/22-10/26 Week 2 Instruction WITH the ActivBoard Date: 10/29-11/2 Week 3 Instruction WITHOUT the ActivBoard Date: 11/5-11/9 Week 4 Instruction WITH the ActivBoard Date: 11/12-11/16 Week 5 Instruction WITHOUT the ActivBoard Date: 11/26-11/30 Week 6 Instruction WITH the ActivBoard Date: 12/3-12/7 8 (Tues) 3 (Mon) 7 (Tues) 2 (Tues) 6 (Mon) 3 (Mon) 5 (Thurs) 3 (Thurs) 5 (Fri) 45 minutes (Fire Drill) 2 (Thurs) 3 (Thurs) 0 (Thurs) Figure 5 displays the overall off-task behavior for the class. Student off-task behavior was consistently higher during the weeks of instruction without the ActivBoard.

13 ActivBoards and Student Participation 13 The Descriptive Statistics for the overall data is as follows: Totals w/out the AB Totals WITH the AB Mean 1.7 Mean 0.65 Standard Error Standard Error Median 1 Median 0 Mode 0 Mode 0 Standard Deviation Standard Deviation Sample Variance Sample Variance Kurtosis Kurtosis Skewness Skewness Range 7 Range 3 Minimum 0 Minimum 0 Maximum 7 Maximum 3 Sum 34 Sum 13 Count 20 Count 20 Figure 6 below shows the overall results of off-task behavior during instruction with and without the use of the Activboard. The totals are the combined totals from the two days of observation each week. Figure 6 Off-Task Behaviors Observed During Lessons With and Without the Use of the Activboard # of Off Task 6 Behaviors Week Number Without the Activboard With the Activboard During the three weeks where instruction took place without the ActivBoard, the class as a whole (over a two day period) was noted to be off-task a combined total of 13, 12, and 9 times

14 ActivBoards and Student Participation 14 respectively. During the opposing three weeks, where the ActivBoard was used during instruction, the off-task behavior dropped to 6, 4, and 3 noted occurrences respectively. Figure 7 below illustrates the off-task behavior per student for instruction with the ActivBoard (AB) and instruction without the ActivBoard over the entire six week period. Figure 7 Total Off-Task Behavior Per Student Number of Off-Task Behaviors Student Number Totals w/out the AB Totals WITH the AB Students five, six, and fifteen had greater number of occurrences where they were noted to be off-task in comparison to the other students. These students typically require more focused attention during any lesson, but it can be noted that they had fewer off-task behaviors during instruction with the ActivBoard. A t-test was conducted to compare the total off-task behaviors of students during instruction with the use of the ActivBoard and instruction without the use of the ActivBoard. The t-test results provided a p-value of indicating that the ActivBoard provided significant improvements in student on task behavior.

15 ActivBoards and Student Participation 15 The results for the student questionnaire are charted below in Figure 9. The average answer to each question was calculated by adding the selected response from each student and dividing it by the total number of student responses (20). Figure 9 1. I enjoy learning when the teacher uses an ActivBoard I like receiving instruction when the teacher uses an ActivBoard I concentrate better in class when an ActivBoard is used to deliver instruction I know that using technology gives me opportunities to learn many new things I enjoy using the ActivBoard I believe that the more often teachers use Activboards, the more I will enjoy school I believe that it is important for me to learn how to use an ActivBoard I feel comfortable using an ActivBoard I enjoy lessons on the ActivBoard I will be able to get a good job if I learn how to use technology I can learn many things when my teacher uses an ActivBoard Using an ActivBoard makes me nervous Using an ActivBoard is very frustrating I think that it takes a longer amount of time to learn when my teacher uses an ActivBoard. 1.4 The results from the student questionnaire are divided into two groups. The top group, coded in blue, are positive response questions, where a score of 4 was the highest response. The bottom group, coded in green, are negative response questions, whereas a score of 1 would be the highest response. The results indicate that the students who participated in the survey enjoy the use of the ActivBoard as an instructional tool and believe that it helps to provide additional opportunities for learning. The student responses also validate that they understood the questions being asked of them and realize the scoring tool. The students also feel that the ActivBoard is

16 ActivBoards and Student Participation 16 easy to use and that technology in general will benefit them in the long run. Some comments from students regarding the use of the ActivBoard include, I like before tests, when my teacher lets us play a very fun Jeopardy game to help us with questions on the test, and, It s fun when you get to go up and use the ActivBoard. All of the comments from the students regarding the use of the ActivBoard are positive except for two. These two children stated, We don t get to use it a whole lot, and (the teacher) should let people be more interactive with the ActivBoard. So even though the ActivBoard is being effectively used as an additional tool, the students would like to have more personal interaction with the board themselves and several of them do not see the need to learn how to use the ActivBoard. When questioned about their opinions toward this statement, they indicated that while they enjoyed using the ActivBoard in class, they felt that knowing how to operate it was not going to necessarily benefit them in the long term. Conclusions The use of an interactive whiteboard as an instructional tool in a fifth grade classroom proved to be statistically significant in increasing student participation. The results of significance show a p-value of for the comparison of the weeks with and without the use of the ActivBoard. The objective of this study was to examine the effectiveness of using and interactive whiteboard, ActivBoard, to increase student participation in the classroom. I felt that the students would appreciate the greater opportunities to use the Activboard as they have demonstrated past excitement and eagerness in using it. While the results indicate statistical significance in using the ActivBoard to increase student participation, I feel that there are several factors that affect these results. For starters, the

17 ActivBoards and Student Participation 17 overall off-task behavior was down across the board for all lessons due in part to the nature of the lessons. Recognizing that there was going to be another teacher in my room throughout the lessons, there was greater detail put into the lesson plans. From hands-on activities to readalouds each lesson was creative, unique and overall attention getting. Secondly, prior to this study, the Activboard was used primarily as a supplemental instructional tool. From viewing maps to review games the ActivBoard never dominated the lesson and the students did not have as much hands on experience with it. However, during the study the ActivBoard drove the lesson and the students demonstrated a great desire to interact with it. In addition to the lesson designs being limitations, the size of the class and the length of the study affected the results. Only having data for a cumulative of six sessions without the ActivBoard and six with the Activboard does not give a thorough overall picture. Not only was the class size and study time limited, one observed session was cut short due to a fire drill. While these limitations exist I feel that this research is worthwhile and I would repeat it with some variations. For starters, I would videotape the class during the instruction and then go back and evaluate the number of off-task behaviors observed. I would also do this research over a greater length of time and with all three of my classes in order that I will have more data to analyze. The ActivBoard is just one piece of technology that can enhance any lesson. When students are motivated to learn they will ultimately be more successful. I will continue to do whatever it takes to supply that motivation.

18 ActivBoards and Student Participation 18 References Ascione, L. (2005) Teachers tech use on the rise. eschool news. Retrieved on October 31, 2007 from Averis, D., Glover, D., & Miller, D. (2004) Motivation: The contribution of interactive whiteboards to teaching and learning in mathematics. Retrieved September 15, 2007, from Beeland, W. D., Jr. (2002). Student engagement, visual learning and technology: Can interactive whiteboards help? Retrieved July 12, 2007, from Bell, M.A. (2000). Impact of the electronic interactive whiteboard on student attitudes and achievement in eighth grade writing instruction. Retrieved on October 31, 2007 from Bell, M. A. (2002).Why use an interactive whiteboard? A baker s dozen reasons! Teachers.Net Gazette, 3 (1), Retrieved on October 31, 2007 from British Educational Communications and Technology Agency. (2003). What the research says about interactive whiteboards. Retrieved on November 13, 2007 from Faucett, G. (2000). Do students learn better with technology? It depends on how you define learning! Learning and Technology. Retrieved October 31, 2007 from /index.html#students Georgia Department of Education. (2006) Grade 5 performance standards. Retrieved on June 28, 2007, from

19 ActivBoards and Student Participation 19 Harler, C., 2000, Supporting the technology-enabled classroom, Journal of Telecommunications in Higher Education, 4(4), 8-11 Johnson, M.J., Schwab, R.L., & Foa, L. (1999). Technology as a change agent for the teaching process. Theory into Practice, 8(31), Kennewell, S. (2001). Interactive whiteboards yet another solution looking for a problem to solve? Information Technology in Teacher Education, 39, 3-6. Latham, P. (2002). Teaching and learning primary mathematics: The impact of interactive whiteboards. Beam Education. Retrieved July 12, 2007, from Liu, H.Y., Wang, J.K., & Liang, T.W. (2003).Wireless and mobile technologies to enhance teaching and learning. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 19(3), McCormack, M., & Ward, M. (2003). Technology and classroom instruction. Arkansas Educational Research and Policy Studies Journal, 3(1), Means, B. (2001). Technology use in tomorrow's schools. Educational leadership, Solvie, P. A. (2001). The digital whiteboards as a tool in increasing student attention during early literacy instruction. Smarter Kids Foundation. Retrieved July 12, 2007, from Wang, S. (2000). Multimedia and some of its technical issues. International Journal of Instructional Media, 27(3), Weimer, M.J. (2001). The influence of technology such as a SMART board interactive whiteboard on student motivation in the classroom. Retrieved on October 31, 2007 from

20 ActivBoards and Student Participation 20 Appendix A Student # Week 1 NO Activboard Week 3 NO Activboard Week 5 NO Activboard Totals Week 2 Activeboard Week 4 Activboard Week 6 Activboard Totals Totals