Table of Contents Author Guidelines Submit a Manuscript
Education Research International
Volume 2014 (2014), Article ID 401315, 16 pages
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2014/401315
Review Article

Interactive Whiteboards in Mathematics Teaching: A Literature Review

Centre for Instructional Psychology and Technology, K.U. Leuven, Dekenstraat 2, 3000 Leuven, Belgium

Received 17 December 2013; Revised 4 April 2014; Accepted 14 April 2014; Published 22 May 2014

Academic Editor: Stefan Fries

Copyright © 2014 Mauro De Vita et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Linked References

  1. H. J. Smith, S. Higgins, K. Wall, and J. Miller, “Interactive Whiteboards: boon or bandwagon? A critical review of the literature,” Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, vol. 21, no. 2, pp. 91–101, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  2. G. Beauchamp and J. Parkinson, “Beyond the “wow” factor: developing interactivity with the interactive whiteboard,” School Science Review, vol. 86, no. 316, pp. 97–104, 2005. View at Google Scholar
  3. S. Kennewell, “Reflections on the interactive whiteboard phenomenon: a synthesis of research from the UK,” 2006, http://www.aare.edu.au/06pap/ken06138.pdf.
  4. N. Mercer, S. Hennessy, and P. Warwick, “Using interactive whiteboards to orchestrate classroom dialogue,” Technology, Pedagogy and Education, vol. 19, no. 2, pp. 195–209, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  5. BECTA (British Educational Communications and Technology Agency), “Getting the most from your interactive whiteboard: a guide for secondary schools. Coventry, UK: BECTA,” 2004, http://www.dit.ie/lttc/media/ditlttc/documents/gettingthemost.pdf.
  6. D. Glover, D. Miller, D. Averis, and V. Door, “The evolution of an effective pedagogy for teachers using the interactive whiteboard in mathematics and modern languages: an empirical analysis from the secondary sector,” Learning, Media and Technology, vol. 32, no. 1, pp. 5–20, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  7. B. Somekh, M. Haldane, and K. Jones, “Evaluation of the primary schools whiteboard expansion project,” Tech. Rep., Department for Education and Skills, London, UK, 2007, http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20130401151715/https://www.education.gov.uk/publications/eOrderingDownload/SWEEP-Report.pdf. View at Google Scholar
  8. B. Torff and R. Tirotta, “Interactive whiteboards produce small gains in elementary students' self-reported motivation in mathematics,” Computers & Education, vol. 54, no. 2, pp. 379–383, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  9. C. Bruce, R. McPherson, F. Sabeti, and T. Flynn, “Revealing significant learning moments with interactive whiteboards in mathematics,” Journal of Educational Computing Research, vol. 45, no. 4, pp. 433–454, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  10. D. Miller and D. Glover, “Presentation or mediation: is there a need for “interactive whiteboard technology-proficient” teachers in secondary mathematics?” Technology, Pedagogy and Education, vol. 19, no. 2, pp. 253–259, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  11. K. Swan, J. Schenker, A. Kratcoski, and H. van’t Hooft, “The effects of the use of interactive whiteboards on student achievement,” in Interactive Whiteboards for Education: Theory, Research and Practice (Premier Reference Source), M. Thomas and E. C. Schmid, Eds., pp. 131–143, Information Science Reference, Hershey, NY, USA, 2010. View at Google Scholar
  12. R. Zevenbergen and S. Lerman, “Learning environments using interactive whiteboards: new learning spaces or reproduction of old technologies?” Mathematics Education Research Journal, vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 108–126, 2008. View at Google Scholar
  13. S. Kennewell, H. Tanner, S. Jones, and G. Beauchamp, “Analysing the use of interactive technology to implement interactive teaching,” Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, vol. 24, no. 1, pp. 61–73, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  14. Ofsted (Office For Standards in Education, UK), “Mathematics 2004–07: understanding the score. London: HMSO,” 2008, http://www.ofsted.gov.uk/resources/mathematics-understanding-score.
  15. A. Heinze, J. R. Star, and L. Verschaffel, “Flexible and adaptive use of strategies and representations in mathematics education,” Mathematics Education, vol. 41, no. 5, pp. 535–540, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  16. D. Miller and D. Glover, “Into the unknown: the professional development induction experience of secondary mathematics teachers using interactive whiteboard technology,” Learning, Media and Technology, vol. 32, no. 3, pp. 319–331, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  17. G. Moss, C. Jewitt, R. Levaãiç, V. Armstrong, A. Cardini, and F. Castle, “The interactive whiteboards, pedagogy and pupil performance evaluation: an evaluation of the Schools Whiteboard Expansion (SWE) Project: London Challenge,” Tech. Rep., School of Educational Foundations and Policy Studies, Institute of Education, University of London, London, UK, 2007, http://www.pgce.soton.ac.uk/ict/NewPGCE/pdfs%20IWBs/The%20interactive%20whiteboard,%20pedagogy%20and%20pupil%20performance%20evaluation.pdf. View at Google Scholar
  18. S. Higgins, C. Falzon, I. Hall et al., “Embedding ICT in the literacy and numeracy strategies,” Final Report, Newcastle University, Newcastle, UK, 2005, http://dro.dur.ac.uk/1899/1/1899.pdf?DDD29+ded4ss. View at Google Scholar
  19. A. H. Schoenfeld, “Learning to think mathematically: problem solving, metacognition, and sense-making in mathematics,” in Handbook for Research on Mathematics Teaching and Learning, D. Grouws, Ed., pp. 334–370, MacMillan, New York, NY, USA, 1992. View at Google Scholar
  20. J. L. Galvan, Writing Literature Reviews: A Guide for Students of the Social and Behavioural Sciences, Pyrczak Publishing, Los Angeles, Calif, USA, 2006.
  21. S. Merrett and J. Edwards, “Enhancing mathematical thinking with an interactive whiteboard,” MicroMath, vol. 21, no. 3, pp. 9–12, 2005. View at Google Scholar
  22. M. Thomas and C. E. Schmid, Eds., Interactive Whiteboards for Education: Theory, Research and Practice (Premier Reference Source), Information Science Reference, Hershey, NY, USA, 2010.
  23. S. Higgins, G. Beauchamp, and D. Miller, “Reviewing the literature on interactive whiteboards,” Learning, Media and Technology, vol. 32, no. 3, pp. 213–225, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  24. F. Smith, F. Hardman, and S. Higgins, “The impact of interactive whiteboards on teacher-pupil interaction in the National Literacy and Numeracy Strategies,” British Educational Research Journal, vol. 32, no. 3, pp. 443–457, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  25. B. Tataroglu and A. Erduran, “Examining students’ attitudes and views towards usage an interactive whiteboard in mathematics lessons,” Procedia—Social and Behavioral Sciences, vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 2533–2538, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  26. S. Jones and H. Tanner, “Teachers’ interpretations of effective whole class interactive teaching in secondary mathematics classrooms,” Educational Studies, vol. 28, no. 3, pp. 265–274, 2002. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  27. D. Glover, D. Miller, and D. Averis, “The impact of interactive whiteboards on classroom practice: examples drawn from the teaching of mathematics in secondary schools in England,” in Proceedings of the International Conference “The Decidable and the Undecidable in Mathematics Education”, Brno, Czech Republic, 2003, http://math.unipa.it/~grim/21_project/21_brno03_Miller-Averis.pdf.
  28. D. Miller, D. Averis, V. Door, and D. Glover, “How can the use of an interactive whiteboard enhance the nature of teaching and learning in secondary mathematics and modern foreign languages?” Tech. Rep., BECTA, 2005, https://content.ncetm.org.uk/itt/sec/KeelePGCEMaths2006/InteractiveWhiteboard&DataProj/Research/BectaReportMiller&co.pdf. View at Google Scholar
  29. D. Miller, D. Glover, and D. Averis, “Presentation and pedagogy: the effective use of interactive whiteboards in mathematics lessons,” in Proceedings of the 6th British Congress of Mathematics Education, D. Hewitt and A. Noyes, Eds., pp. 105–112, British Society for Research into Learning Mathematics, London, UK, 2005, http://www.bsrlm.org.uk/IPs/ip25-1/BSRLM-IP-25-1-14.pdf. View at Google Scholar
  30. C. Jewitt, G. Moss, and A. Cardini, “Pace, interactivity and multimodality in teachers' design of texts for interactive whiteboards in the secondary school classroom,” Learning, Media and Technology, vol. 32, no. 3, pp. 303–317, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  31. G. Beauchamp, S. Kennewell, H. Tanner, and S. Jones, “Interactive whiteboards and all that jazz: the contribution of musical metaphors to the analysis of classroom activity with interactive technologies,” Technology, Pedagogy and Education, vol. 19, no. 2, pp. 143–157, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  32. P. Serow and R. Callingham, “Levels of use of interactive whiteboard technology in the primary mathematics classroom,” Technology, Pedagogy and Education, vol. 20, no. 2, pp. 161–173, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  33. R. Wood and J. Ashfield, “The use of the interactive whiteboard for creative teaching and learning in literacy and mathematics: a case study,” British Journal of Educational Technology, vol. 39, no. 1, pp. 84–96, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  34. R. Zevenbergen and S. Lerman, “Pedagogy and interactive whiteboards: using an activity theory approach to understand tensions in practice,” in Mathematics: Essential Research, Essential Practice, K. Beswick and J. Watson, Eds., Proceedings of the 30th Annual Conference of the Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia, pp. 853–864, MERGA, Adelaide, Australia, 2007, http://www98.griffith.edu.au/dspace/bitstream/handle/10072/18685/49294_1.pdf?sequence=1. View at Google Scholar
  35. D. Glover and D. Miller, “Optimising the use of interactive whiteboards: an application of developmental work research (DWR) in the United Kingdom,” Professional Development in Education, vol. 35, no. 3, pp. 469–483, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  36. D. Miller, D. Glover, and D. Averis, “Enabling enhanced mathematics teaching with interactive whiteboards,” Final Report, National Centre for Excellence in the Teaching of Mathematics, Keele University, Keele, UK, 2008, http://www.keele.ac.uk/media/keeleuniversity/fachumsocsci/sclpppp/education/interactivewhiteboard/ncetmreport-1.pdf. View at Google Scholar
  37. K. Holmes, “Planning to teach with digital tools: introducing the interactive whiteboard to pre-service secondary mathematics teachers,” Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, vol. 25, no. 3, pp. 351–365, 2009. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  38. D. Miller and D. Glover, “Enhanced interactivity in secondary mathematics,” in Interactive Whiteboards for Education: Theory, Research and Practice, M. Thomas and E. C. Schmid, Eds., pp. 118–130, Information Science Reference, Hershey, NY, USA, 2010. View at Google Scholar
  39. Z. Lavicza and Z. Papp-Varga, “Integrating GeoGebra into IWB-equipped teaching environments: preliminary results,” Technology, Pedagogy and Education, vol. 19, no. 2, pp. 245–252, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  40. R. Straesser, “Cabri-géomètre: does Dynamic Geometry Software (DGS) change geometry and its teaching and learning?” International Journal of Computers For Mathematical Learning, vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 319–333, 2001. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  41. D. Essig, A case study of interactive whiteboard professional development for elementary mathematics teachers [Doctoral dissertation], UMI Dissertation Publishing no. 3450045, ProQuest, Ann Arbor, Mich, USA, 2011.
  42. M. K. Stein and M. Smith, “Reflections on practice: selecting and creating mathematical tasks: from research to practice,” Mathematics Teaching in the Middle School, vol. 3, no. 5, pp. 344–350, 1998. View at Google Scholar
  43. G. Salomon and D. Ben-Zvi, “The difficult marriage between education and technology: is the marriage doomed?” in Instructional Psychology: Past, Present, and Future Trends, L. Verschaffel, F. Dochy, M. Boekaerts, and S. Vosniadou, Eds., pp. 209–222, Elsevier, Oxford, UK, 2006. View at Google Scholar
  44. K. Littleton, “Research into teaching with whole-class interactive technologies: emergent themes,” Technology, Pedagogy and Education, vol. 19, no. 2, pp. 285–292, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus