Teachers’ Perception of Interactive White Boards: A Case Study

Year 2013, Volume: 9 Issue: 2, 353 - 365, 28.10.2013

Fatih Saltan Kürşat Arslan

Abstract

Interactive whiteboards (IWBs) are touch-sensitive new generation boards controlled by a computer that is connected to a digital projector (Saltan and Arslan, 2009). In many countries, teachers have begun to use this instructional tool in primary and high schools. In order to investigate teachers’ perceptions and acceptance towards IWBs, this case study was conducted in a primary school in Turkey. 34 teachers from different subject matters participated in the present study. Data were collected through a questionnaire consisting of three parts -- perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use and attitude towards interactive white boards. Descriptive statistic was utilized to analyze the data. Mainly frequencies and percentages were run on the likert-type questions. Results showed that teachers found interactive whiteboard relatively easy to use and useful, in addition they had a positive attitude toward the IWB. However means of the perceived ease of use and attitude toward IWB is lower than perceived usefulness.

Keywords

Interactive white board, Smart board, Teacher perceptions, Teacher acceptance

Teachers’ Perception of Interactive White Boards: A Case Study

Abstract

Öğretmenlerin etkileşimli tahtaya yönelik algıları: Bir durum çalışması. Etkileşimli tahtalar bir bilgisayar tarafından kontrol edilen ve görüntünün bir projektör aracılığıyla yansıtıldığı yeni nesil dokunmatik tahtalardır (Saltan ve Arslan, 2009). Türkiye’de son yıllarda bu eğitim aracı, ilköğretimde ve lisede kullanılmaya başlanmıştır. Öğretmenlerin etkileşimli tahtaya karşı algılarını ve kabullenmelerini ölçmek için bir ilköğretim okulunda bu durum çalışması yapıldı. Bu çalışmaya değişik branşlarda 34 öğretmen katıldı ve veri üç kısımdan oluşan bir anket aracılığıyla toplandı. Bu kısımlar; algılanan faydalılık, algılanan kullanım kolaylığı, ve etkileşimli tahtaya karşı tutum dan oluşmaktadır. Veri analizi betimleyici istatistik yönetimi kullanılarak yapıldı. Sonuçlar öğretmenlerin etkileşimli tahtayı faydalı ve kullanımını kolay bulduklarını göstermektedir. Ayrıca etkileşimli tahtaya karşı olan tutumlarının olumlu olduğu saptanmıştır. Fakat algılanan kullanım kolaylığı ve etkileşimli tahtaya karşı olan tutumun ortalamasının, algılanan yararlılığın ortalamasından düşük olduğu saptanmıştır. 

Keywords

Etkileşimli tahta, etkileşimli tahta, Öğretmenlerin algısı, Öğretmenlerin kabullenmeleri

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.
• Austin N. (2003) Mighty white. The Guardian, 7 January 2003.
• Becta (2003) What the research says about interactive whiteboards. Available at: http://www.becta.org.uk/research. Accessed 15th June 2003.
• Boyle J. (2002) Virtual magic. Times Educational Supplement, 26 April 2002.
• Çınar, A. (2002). Teachers' computer use at basic education schools: identifying contributing factors. Masters' Thesis, Middle East Technical University, ANKARA.
• Devrim Özdemir (2004). The Effect of Educatıonal Ideologıes On Technology Acceptance, Masters' Thesis, Middle East Technical University, ANKARA.
• Gillen J., Kleine Staarman J., Littleton K., Mercer N. & Twiner A. (2007) A ‘learning revolution’? Investigating pedagogic practice around interactive whiteboards in British primary classrooms. Learning, Media and Technology 32, 234–256.
• Greiffenhagen C. (2000) Interactive whiteboards in mathematics education: possibilities and dangers paper Presented at WGA 11 (ICME-9): 2. The Use of Technology in Mathematics Education.
• Haldane, M. (2007) Interactivity and the digital whiteboard: Weaving the fabric of learning. Learning, Media and Technology. 32(3) Pages 283-301.
• Heather J. Smith, Steve Higgins, Kate Wall & Jen Miller (2005), Interactive whiteboards: boon or bandwagon? A critical review of the literature, Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 21, pp91–101
• Hennessy, S., Deaney, R., Ruthven, K., & Winterbottom, M. (2007). Pedagogical strategies for using the interactive whiteboard to foster learner participation in school science.Learning Media and Technology, 32(3), 283–301.
• Paul Jen-Hwa Hu, Theodore H.K. Clark and Will W. Ma (2003), Examining technology acceptance by school teachers: a longitudinal study.Information & Management 41 (2003) 227–241
• Saadé, R., & Galloway, I. (2005). Understanding intention to use multimedia information systems for learning. Issues in Informing Science and Information Technology, 2, 287-296. Available at http://2005papers.iisit.org/I23f15Saad.pdf
• Saltan, F. & Arslan, K. (2009). A New Teacher Tool, Interactive White Boards: A Meta Analysis. Soceity for Information Technology & Teacher Education. Charleston, South Carolina - March 2 - 6, 2009.
• Smith, Higgins,Wall & Miller (2005),Interactive whiteboards: boon or bandwagon? A critical review of the literature. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 21, pp91–101
• June L., Chun-sheng Y., Chang L.,and James E. Y. (2003), Technology acceptance model for wireless Internet. Electronic Networking Applications and Policy, Volume 13 Number 3 2003 pp206-222
• Wood, R. & Ashfield, J. (2007) The use of the interactive whiteboard for creative teaching and learning in literacy and mathematics: a case study, British Journal of Educational Technology, Online Early Articles, DOI: 10.1111/j.1467852007.00703.