Interactive whiteboards produce small gains in elementary students' self-reported motivation in mathematics

Computers and Education

Volumn 54, Issue 2, 2010, Pages 379-383

  Torff, Bruce ^a   Tirotta, Rose ^a  

^a HOFSTRA UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Applications in subject areas; Elementary education; Evaluation of CAL systems

Indexed keywords

ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE; APPLICATIONS IN SUBJECT AREAS; ELEMENTARY EDUCATION; ELEMENTARY STUDENTS; ENHANCING EFFECT; INTERACTIVE WHITEBOARDS; SMALL GAIN; TREATMENT GROUP;

FLUORINE CONTAINING POLYMERS; MOTIVATION; TEACHING;

STUDENTS;

EID: 71549151596     PISSN: 03601315     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.compedu.2009.08.019     Document Type: Article

References (14)

1. BECTA. (2003). What the research says about interactive whiteboards. wtrs_whiteboards.pdf Retrieved 2.06.09.
2. Beeland, W.D., Jr. (2002). Student engagement, visual learning and technology: Can interactive whiteboards help? Retrieved 2.06.09.
3. Burden, K. (2002). Learning from the bottom up - the contribution of school based practice and research in the effective use of interactive whiteboards for the FE/HE sector. Retrieved 2.06.09.
4. Damcott, D., Landato, J., Marsh, C., & Rainey, W. (2000). Report on the use of the SMART board interactive whiteboard in physical science. Retrieved 2.06.09.
5. Hall I., and Higgins S. Primary school students' perceptions of interactive whiteboards. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 21 (2005) 102-117
6. Hennessy S., Deaney R., Ruthven K., and Winterbottom M. Pedagogical strategies for using the interactive whiteboard to foster learner participation in school science. Learning, Media and Technology 32 (2007) 283-301
7. Levy, P. (2002). Interactive whiteboards in learning and teaching in two sheffield schools: A developmental study. Retrieved 2.06.09.
8. Miller D., and Glover D. The interactive whiteboard as a force for pedagogical change: The experience of five elementary schools in an English authority. Information Technology in Childhood Education Annual 1 (2002) 5-19
9. Schmid E.C. Potential pedagogical benefits and drawbacks of multimedia use in the English language classroom equipped with interactive whiteboard technology. Computers and Education 51 (2008) 1553-1568
10. Slay H., Siebörger I., and Hodgkinson-Williams C. Interactive whiteboards: Real beauty or just lipstick?. Computers and Education 51 (2008) 1321-1341
11. Smith, A. (2000). Interactive whiteboard evaluation. Retrieved 2.06.09.
12. Thompson J., and Flecknoe M. Raising attainment with an interactive whiteboard in key stage 2. Management in Education 17 (2003) 29-33
13. Wall K., Higgins S., and Smith H. 'The visual helps me understand the complicated things': Pupil views of teaching and learning with interactive whiteboards. British Journal of Educational Technology 36 (2005) 851-867
14. Weimer, M. J., (2001). The influence of technology such as a SMART board interactive whiteboard on student motivation in the classroom. Retrieved 2.06.09.