1 of 1

Student Perceptions of Math Instruction Using

an Interactive Whiteboard In an Elementary Classroom

*Deanna J. Genesi, M.Ed. * Michael W. Firmin, Ph.D.

Participants:

The participants used in this study were the students assigned by normal scheduling at the

end of the previous school year. Data was collected data from19 out of 20 students in the

class, with the exception being one autistic student who is in a Life Skills class 95-99%

of each school day. The public school was located in a rural, Northeastern region of the

United States and students mostly were Caucasian and of estimated middle class

socioeconomic backgrounds with a generally equal distribution of male and female students.

Method:

This study lasted eight weeks, each phase lasting for two weeks, the study was conducted

using an ABAB design. Alternate use of the IWB occurred according to the following

pattern:

2 weeks IWB/ 2 weeks no IWB/ 2 weeks IWB / 2 weeks no IWB

With the exception of special circumstances (holidays or special presentations), math class

occurred daily for 1 hour. The lessons covered during the eight-week period included a

variety of topics. When implementing the IWB into lessons, PowerPoint, animations,

and occasional Internet sites enhanced the visuals used as well as further engaged students

in learning. When teaching without the IWB, the overhead, chalkboard, and posters were

used in order to supplement the didactic teaching with visuals.

During the eight-week study, students wrote in their personal journals at least three times

per week to describe their experiences in regards to the technology that was or was not

used in that particular lesson. At the end of the eight weeks, the students were interviewed

and asked to share their perceived benefits and limitations of the IWB. Students also were

asked to share any ideas that they might have for improvement in the IWB’s usage in the

classroom. Semi structured interviews were used when querying the children’s views

regarding their classroom experiences. All interviews were tape recorded and transcribed

for later analysis

Data Analysis:

Triangulation occurred by comparing the two data sources: student journals and individual

interviews. Saturation occurred, as students shared the same general themes. Analysis

involved constant comparison techniques, whereby the students’ responses were related

among each other, appraising for similar words, phrases, and constructs. Themes reported

represent the consensus of all the participants in the study. The study’s internal validity

was enhanced through generating a data audit, the inclusion of an independent reviewer of

the study who was apart from the data collection process, and member checking.

Results:

  1. Engaging. Students clearly expressed the engaging aspects of the IWB as

one of its main benefits. These reasons included increasing attention span,

being a fun and new piece of technology, and offering variety in classroom

instruction.

2. Increased Interaction. Students also found the IWB interesting as a result

of its multimedia aspects. The students expressed their desire to write on the

IWB and they enjoyed the animations and the interactive elements of the IWB.

3. Improved Visuals. The IWB proved to be a useful tool in improving

classroom instruction when compared to the overhead by enhancing both

visuals and notes. Visuals were described as more colorful and more detailed

on the IWB. As a result, these high quality visuals were perceived by students

to improve learning.

4. Limitations. As with any piece of educational technology, limitations exist.

To assess this, students were asked to explain any problems or distractions that

they noticed regarding the IWB’s classroom use. When using the IWB for a

prolonged period of time, the projector would sometimes overheat and shut off

in the middle of a lesson. Sometimes a message appeared on the screen,

indicating that the projector was overheating. This meant that the screen

would be shutting down soon, giving several minutes to finish the exercise of

the moment on the IWB.

Students also noted that there were times when the cords to the computer

and/or projector would become loose, thereby causing the green light on the

IWB board to turn to red. (The red light indicated that a cord was loose

somewhere. As long as the red light was on, no actions could be taken on the

interactive whiteboard.) Sometimes it would take several tries in order to

figure out which cord was loose.

Having to align the IWB was another limitation students discussed. Another

limitation mentioned by students involved using the four colored pens to write

on the IWB. Some students found difficulty in moving objects on the board

when they used the IWB.

Moving/dragging data when the children used the IWB was another noted

limitation noted by the children. Encouraging them to use their fingernails,

rather than fingertips helped remediate this frustration.

For a copy of the M.Ed. thesis, contact s1206379@cedarville.edu

Literature Review:

Since IWBs are relatively new and the use of IWBs is still rising in

classrooms, a present paucity of research literature exists regarding its

effectiveness. Hall and Higgins (2005) and Wall, Higgins, and Smith (2005)

published two seminal studies completed in British primary classrooms. Hall

and Higgins (2005) indicated that IWBs were viewed favorably by both

students and teachers. They also noted its versatility and multimedia

capabilities. The IWB’s versatility stems from its ability to present a range

of resources from a Word document to video clips. Also, its multimedia

capabilities tend to draw students of all learning types. Students found the

multi-sensory environment of color, sound, and movement engaging, and

they believed that it aided their learning. Proper use of the board increases

interactivity in the classroom, which results in engagement and enjoyment.

Research by Wall et al. (2005) also focused on the IWB’s effect on teaching

and learning with year six students (between ages 10 and 11). Both positive

and negative comments were noted. Students viewed IWBs positively

because they alleged that it facilitated and initiated learning. A common

remark by students in providing feedback was that they enjoyed the chance

to use the board themselves. The students also commented that the IWBs

aided the teacher in explaining concepts.

Negative aspects of the IWBs included technical difficulties and limited

student access. Some students also complained that they could not always

view the board due to its size or the sun’s glare. Another negative view held

by teachers was the lack of training. Hall and Higgins (2005) and Wood et al.

(2005) both noted the salient need for teacher training on this new piece of

technology. This element is crucial to ensure effectual integration into the

classroom. Venezky (2004) also affirmed that professional development is

essential for integration of technology and learning.

Research Focus:

The action research focused on elementary students’ perceptions of a class-

room IWB. The research was conducted in a qualitative manner with a quasi-

experimental design. It was an inductive approach whereby the data was

collected in the form of written journals and interviews. In analyzing the

data, we sought to assess themes regarding the perceived benefits and

limitations of the IWB. We also looked for areas where students

communicated needed improvement. As a field study, the research was

conducted in the natural environment of a third grade classroom.

PC Overall Effectiveness

PC Academic Problems

PC MH Evaluation

PC Psychotic symptoms

PC Depressed Individual