The Effects of Interactive Whiteboard Technology in Community College Developmental Math Education

Text-only Preview

  1. The Effects of Interactive Whiteboard Technology in Community College Developmental Math Instruction Jonathan Wong University of Hawaii at Manoa
  2. About the Presenter
    • Jonathan K. Wong
    • Technology Coordinator, Honolulu Community College
    • M.Ed Educational Technology Candidate, University of Hawaii at M?noa
  3. About the Presentation
    • What is an IWB
    • Math Education Challenge at the Community Colleges
    • The Action Research Study Design
    • The Action Research Study Results
    • Conclusions and Recommendations
  4. IWBs and You?
    • I ’ve never heard of the IWB
    • I ’ve h eard of or seen the IWB but have not used one before
    • I use the IWB in my classroom
  5. What Brings You Here?
    • Curious about IWBs in general
    • Curious about IWBs in math education
    • Curious about IWBs in community colleges
    • Curious about IWBs in math education at the community college level
    • Wanted to hear me speak
  6. IWBs
  7. IWBs
    • Interactive display screen connected to a computer and projector which displays your computer screen
    • Allows for annotation of computer display
    • Allows for unlimited writing space
    • Allows for integration of learning objects and digital manipulatives
    • Allows for lecture files to be saved and posted or recorded
  8. The Problem
    • Developmental math = High School Algebra equivalent courses
    • Poor retention rates in developmental math -- only 30% will pass and move to the next level
    • Math is a “gatekeeper” to all majors
    • Low enrollment in 2nd year courses
  9. The Intervention
    • Implementation of Interactive White Boards in the math curriculum
    • Literature on IWB, based on K-12 studies, show increased student engagement
      • Multimedia format appropriate for digital natives
      • Immersive learning objects for student-centered, higher-level learning
  10. The Study
    • 5 pilot sections of Math 25 taught by 3 instructors in the Spring 2010 semester
    • Methods
      • Classroom Observations
      • Demographic/attitudinal survey
      • Faculty focus group
      • Classroom attendance data
  11. Classroom Observations
    • Counting the frequency of engaged and non-engaged behaviors
    • Engaged
      • Taking notes
      • Asking questions
      • Replying to teachers questions
    • Non-Engaged
      • Sleeping
      • Carrying side conversations
      • Texting/playing games
  12. Attitudinal Survey
    • Did the IWB usage allow you to understand the course material better?
    • Did the IWB usage make the material more interesting?
    • Did the IWB usage make you more interested in listening to the presentation?
  13. Attitudinal Survey (cont.)
    • Did the IWB usage allow you to interact with the material more?
    • Did the IWB usage allow you to learn math better?
    • Free response section on how the IWB helped their learning
  14. Faculty Focus Group
    • How has the IWB helped to improve your teaching
    • How have you incorporated the IWB? What specific tools do you use?
    • Has there been a noticeable change in student engagement and performance?
  15. Classroom Attendance Data
    • Percentage rate of attendance for Math 25 classes in previous terms starting from Spring 2008 (pre-IWB)
    • Percentage rate of attendance in the Spring 2010 semester from beginning of term through mid-March 2010 (post-IWB)
  16. Results: Classroom Observation
    • Instructor’s used the IWB more as a projection medium
    • IWB had some effect on student engagement.
      • Students would ask instructor to recall a previous example
    • Teaching style was the biggest determinant of student engagement
      • Fill in the blank notes
      • Instructor breaking up lectures with sample problems and walking around room
    • It’s the teacher, not the tool
  17. Results: Attitudinal Survey
    • Did the IWB usage allow you to understand the course material better?
      • 84% agreed
    • Did the IWB usage make the material more interesting?
      • 82% agreed
    • Did the IWB usage make you more interested in listening to the presentation?
      • 75% agreed
    • Did the IWB usage allow you to interact with the material more?
      • 69% agreed
    • Did the IWB usage allow you to learn math better?
      • 76% agreed
  18. Results: Attitudinal Survey Free-Response
    • Made notes easier to read
      • “ It helps me pay attention because the numbers are bigger.”
    • Use of highlighting notes made it easier to follow the problem solving process
      • “ I think that the ability to highlight helps a lot because it helps me to be able to quickly spot key points in the lesson.”
    • Ability to recall previous notes enhanced learning and clarification
      • “ You can go back and check something in case you don’t understand something.”
  19. Results: Attitudinal Survey Free-Response (cont).
    • Great for visual learners
      • “ I’m a visual learner, so seeing the problems helped me.”
    • Get through material faster
      • “ I feel we as a class finish more material throughout the day because it’s more useful than the chalkboard.”
    • No effect on motivation
      • “ The instructor’s way of teaching helps me learn a lot better. Not the whiteboard.”
  20. Results: Faculty Focus Group
    • Feedback Related to Engagement
      • Use of different color inks makes it easy to highlight key points
      • Student’s always ask to “go back to previous example”
    • Feedback Not-Related to Engagement
      • Timesaver, no need to write out examples or notes, can cover more material and provide more 1-on-1 assistance
      • No chalk dust!
      • More training needed; not enough time to master the IWB beyond the basic tools
    • Feedback related to Student Performance
      • No real effect on grades as students still do not do or turn in homework
  21. Results: Classroom Attendance
  22. Conclusion
    • There is an increase in student engagement through the use of the IWB over courses that do not use it
      • Clearer visuals
      • Clearer explanation of concepts
      • Ability to recall previous examples and notes
    • The IWB is just a tool, it is the instructor’s teaching style and usage of various engagement techniques that really impact student engagement
    • More faculty training is needed to show best practices in incorporating the IWB further to create more immersive learning
  23. Recommendations
    • Conduct additional faculty development on how to incorporate the IWB into instruction beyond just being a projection tool
    • Repeat study and measure academic performance as well as engagement
  24. Questions