Powerpoint and Pedagogy: Maintaining Student Interest in University Lectures

College Teaching

Volumn 56, Issue 1, 2008, Pages 39-44

  Clark, Jennifer ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NEW ENGLAND   (Australia)

Author keywords

lectures; PowerPoint; student interest

Indexed keywords

EID: 76449112687     PISSN: 87567555     EISSN: 19308299     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3200/CTCH.56.1.39-46     Document Type: Article

References (22)

1. Adams, D., and C. Blauer, 1998. Presentation strategies: How to deliver your message with new technologies. THE Journal (Technological Horizons in Education) 25 (7): 18-20.
2. Apple, M. W., 1991. "The New Technology: Is it part of the solution of part of the problem in education?" Computers in Schools 8 (1-3): 75.
3. Baines, L., 2000. PowerPoint for terrified teachers/teaching with the Internet: Lessons from the classroom. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy 44 (20): 184-87.
4. Frey, B. A., and D. J. Birnbaum, 2002. Learners' perceptions on the value of PowerPoint in lectures. East Lansing, MI: National Center for Research on Teacher Learning. ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED467192.
5. Gardner, H., and T. Hatch, 1990. Multiple intelligences go to school: Educational implications of the theory of multiple intelligences. CTE Technical Report Issue no. 4. http://www.edc.org/CCT/ccthome/reports/tr4.html
6. Gilroy, M., 1998. Using technology to revitalize the lecture: A model for the future. East Lansing, MI: National Center for Research on Teacher Learning. ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED437123.
7. Griggs, K., 2002. Creating dynamic multimedia presentations: Using Microsoft Power-Point. Business Communication Quarterly 65 (2): 118-21.
8. Holzl, J., 1997. Twelve tips for effective Power Point presentations for the technologically challenged. Medical Teacher 19 (3): 175-79.
9. Lowry, R. B., 1999. Electronic presentation of lectures—effect upon student performance. University Chemistry Education 3 (1): 18-21.
10. McLuhan, M., 1964. Understanding media: The extensions of man. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
11. Parks, R. P., 1999. Macro principles, Power-Point, and the Internet: Four years of the good, the bad, and the ugly. Journal of Economic Education 30 (3): 200-05.
12. Perkins, D. N., 1992. Technology meets constructivism: Do they make a marriage? In Constructivism and the Technology of Instruction: A Conversation, ed. T. Duffy and D. H. Jonassen, 45-55. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
13. Perry, A. E., 2003. PowerPoint presentations: A creative addition to the research process. English Journal 92 (6): 64.
14. Rankin, E. L., and D. J. Hoaas, 2001. The use of PowerPoint and student performance. Atlantic Economic Journal 29 (1): 113.
15. Reinhardt, L., 1999. Confessions of a technoteacher. College Teaching 47 (2): 48-50.
16. Robinson, O., 2003. Weekend 7: My career. Sydney Morning Herald, July 19-20, 1.
17. Roblyer, M. D., 2003. Integrating educational technology into teaching. 3rd ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
18. Siegle, D., and T. Foster, 2001. Laptop computers and multimedia and presentation software: Their effects on student achievement in anatomy and physiology. Journal of Research on Technology in Education 34 (1): 29-37.
19. Szabo, A., and N. Hastings, 2000. Using IT in the undergraduate classroom: Should we replace the blackboard with PowerPoint? Computers and Education 35 (3): 175-87.
20. Tufte, Edward R., 2003. The cognitive style of PowerPoint. Cheshire, CT: Graphics Press.
21. Turkle, S., 2004. How computers change the way we think. Chronicle of Higher Education, January 30, B26-28.
22. Walsh, J., and K. Frontczak, 2003. Back to basics: Non-technical tips for improving technology-based presentation skills. Tech-Trends 47 (1): 41-45.