THE LEVEL OF INTERACTIVITY IN THE USE OF INTERACTIVE WHITE BOARD IN OGUN STATE SECONDARY SCHOOL

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

Study Background

 Four years ago, the teachers within a rural Georgia town received an interactive whiteboard (IWB) in their classrooms with very little training to accompany this new technology. There was a great deal of excitement from the teachers and students who had these new tools installed in their classrooms. The feelings from both teachers and students were positive but unsure of what these changes would mean to the current pedagogical trends.

I noticed that my students became more interested in daily lessons, as I was able to provide my students with instant real world information and display it directly on the board. The typical lessons may have involved traditional textbook curriculum, but these statewide standards could now be taught through the use of the interactive whiteboard and modern media. Students could see how science was important in their daily lives.

Current developments in disease research, environmental concerns and endangered species rehabilitation could now be presented in the classroom to give "real world" meaning to age-old standards. The Internet provides the classroom teacher with up to date connections between the standards and current discoveries.

With the IWB, one can present “real time” nature of technology. When students are not in school they are deeply ingrained in a world where they have access to high-speed global network where they can have instant communications and engaging multimedia. Our students today have the ability to access enormous quantities of information thorough computers, mobile phones and social networks. Information on demand, multitasking, and collaboration all act as calling cards for our students today.

Unfortunately, when they enter the classroom all too often it means they must “power down” (Betcher & Lee, 2009).

Rationale

 From this introduction to new technology, I began to feel as if the students in my classrooms, which were now using the IWB technology, were more successful than what had been experienced before its use. Using the IWB, I saw classroom overall averages increased and fewer students in the class were having difficulties understanding the concepts. Classroom behavior also appeared to improve, as fewer students were redirected during a lesson. What was different? Certainly the material was the same. This instructor had been teaching for 20 years and very little else had changed when comparing instructional practices used in the classroom. Had the teacher changed due to this new technology and had it changed her attitude? Were students more successful due to the attitude of the teacher or did the student attitudes change? Is it possible that the use of this new technology had created some changes in how the material was being conveyed to the students?

These questions and others have fueled the desire to research the influence of the IWB on instruction. This researcher believes that comparing data from classrooms, which rely heavily on this technology with data from classrooms with ones that continue to use a traditional non-technology driven instructional method, will provide insight into what may influence the academic achievement of students. Any classroom methods, which increase student achievement, can only be seen as an advantage to both the teacher and the student. Understanding how the students might be affected in a positive way would support the need for this technology to be spread throughout other classrooms and supported by local systems through financial means as well as training for the educators.

There are potential disadvantages brought about by the introduction of this new technology. When new equipment is introduced, it is often expensive. Although the technology provides valuable resources, there are often apprehensions, which necessitate and examination of the actual needs and desired wants of the classroom teacher. Is the request based on equipment that is ‘technology- led’ (i.e., it is introduced because it is available) or is it ‘education-led’ (i.e., it is introduced by the teacher) because it is known to meet the professional needs of teachers and the educational needs of children better than existing educational tools (Gillen, Kleine, Staarman, Littleton, Mercer, & Twiner, 2007)?

Today there are wide ranges of multimedia Internet resources available for classroom use and it is the shifting status of traditional resources that disturbs learners’ and teachers’ established ways of framing knowledge and learning (Somekh, 2007).

Teachers may also resent change if the findings require them to abandon their own practices for ones that they are less comfortable with. As posited by Somekh (2007), these changes may be even more debatable when related to technology. The entire relationship between teacher and student changes from facilitator of knowledge to co- learner and advisor.

It was the goal that through this research the researcher would gain a better understanding of technology's influence on instruction. Using the data reported from this research study, the potential benefits from the use of technology will be explored. This information is important to provide a rationale to support the best design instructional methods for the success of all students. This project considers the following research questions:

1. Does the use of interactive whiteboards as an instructional method improve achievement on science curricula as measured by teacher-generated assessments when compared to traditional/non-technological classroominstruction?
2. Is there a long lasting effect on a student’s long-term achievement of the content as a result of the method ofinstruction?

A small body of research has explored the use of the IWB and its influence on instruction. According to Marzano's Preliminary Report of the Evaluation Study of the Effects of Promethean Active Classroom on Student Achievement (2009), there is a significant difference in achievement in some students taught using the interactive whiteboard lead instruction. When using the interactive whiteboard in the classroom, it is easier to establish student understanding, reinforce learning, and make connections to relevant information found in the text material (Haldane, 2005). Another major benefit to the use of the IWB is the ability for simultaneous teacher and student interaction with text, images, and audio. According to Kozma (1994), inclusion of pictures and diagrams alongside text helps to increase recall. When pictures illustrate information central to the text, or if they represent new content that is important to the overall message, interactive whiteboards can be credited with aiding informational recollections (Haldane, 2007).

Statement of the Problem

 Science scores on the Criterion-Referenced Competency Test (CRCT) in one rural southeastern Georgia town have not shown significant gains in all demographic areas since the new content standards were introduced in 2005. Meanwhile, each classroom has been equipped with the interactive whiteboard technology necessary to support a 21^st century classroom and motivate students to achieve. While there are a few of the teachers who have become quite adept in using the IWB and in preparing integrated lesson activities which utilize the technology to its fullest potential, there are still many educators in this middle school who do not use the technology to the best of its ability to promote student achievement. A number of the teachers are not convinced that the IWB enables their students to be more successful than traditional/non-technological classroom instructional methods.

Problem in Perspective

 The critical problem, which has been left unsolved, is an evaluation of the effectiveness of the IWB in the classroom as an effective pedagogical method. Lack of training or lack of preparation time may be two of the key issues preventing teachers from “modernizing” their current teaching methods and adopting positive attitudes or a belief in technology led instructional methods. What is known is that some classroom teachers in this school are using the technology to a great degree and suggesting that students are more interested in the lessons and likewise achievement appears to be improving. However, there have been no studies for the use of the IWB technology in this school district and only a few studies in the United States have explored the relationships between the integration of technology, test score improvement, and the attitudes regarding its use.

Today’s students survive in a technology-laden society. The use of technology brings cultures together and has become a vital part of today’s youth. Media and telecommunications help to make those connections. Students with poor technological skills will experience difficulties when faced with survival in the competitive and universal environment of the future. Tools such as web-based instruction, computer- mediated communication, web quests, CD-ROM, and audio and video streaming are used in twenty first century classrooms as means to blend learning styles with new ways of consuming knowledge (Sleeter & Tettegah, 2002).

If students are going to be prepared to achieve in society today, classrooms will need to use instructional methods that are current and engaging to their learning styles because these students are learning differently in the age of technology. To examine the impact of the IWB on student achievement this study measured the achievement level from post-test and delayed post-test assessments.

Conceptual Underpinnings for the Study

Evaluation of instructional methods is often based on the assessment of the students, especially in the current high stakes testing era. If the students are successful, then the curriculum and accompanying pedagogical methods are considered to be successful too. However, it is unclear who is at fault when students are not successful. Some argue that educators must change the curriculum, the curriculum’s audience, or the methods used to teach the chosen curriculum. These are all important ideas to consider.

The research presented in this study aimed to offer suggestions for classroom pedagogy and curriculum, which will enable students to achieve greater academic success.

Since the early 1990s, increasing student access to high-end technology has become a national priority, underscored by Presidents, Presidential candidates, governors, state legislatures, and corporate leaders (Peck, Cuban, & Kirkpatrick, 2002). Responding to this call for technological excellence, schools have dramatically lowered the student to computer ratio. Most technology enthusiasts believe that technology, especially computers, present students and teachers with educational resources to improve instruction (Peck et al., 2002). The Internet, for example, allows students to access enormous amounts of information and quite literally, to bring the world to their desktops (Peck et al., 2002).

When a teacher has access to technology such an interactive whiteboard, different presentations of the material become possible. For example, an entire class may participate in worldwide classroom connections and activities instead of only engaging one individual at a time sitting at a computer. By using the IWB technology, students have the ability to increase their interactivity with the curriculum within the classroom thus participating in a learner-centered curriculum with the focus in on the needs and concerns of the individual (Schiro, 2008).

According to Reardon (2002), it may be difficult to prove if interactive whiteboards boost student grades, however he hypothesizes they improve students’ attitude toward learning and ability to understand complex concepts. What is known is that when students learn using technology, this fosters the learning environment, making the students want to learn. Students are very motivated by interactive lessons, especially when using technology. They often comment on the fact that they are able to understand much better by constructing their own knowledge rather than being told. Students remember these types of lessons and this may promote an increased understanding the lesson. The interactive nature of the whiteboard creates excitement for both staff and students. Students are very enthusiastic and want to have a hands-on role in their learning (Smith, 2000). Since humans are social creatures who historically have learned that by working together through using tools, much can be accomplished. Utilizing pedagogical methods, which capitalize on these qualities, is a critical way to promote improved instruction and learning outcomes. The current learning theories support student engagement and consider it to be a key factor of knowledge construction. These pedagogical learning theories include constructivism, active learning, and whole class teaching (Smith, 2000).

Constructivism relies on the learner to select and transform information, construct hypotheses to make decisions, and synthesize learning through personalization of knowledge. Active learning engages learners in the learning process through reading, writing, discussion, analysis, synthesis, and evaluation, rather than passively absorbing instruction (e.g., lecture model of instruction). Whole class teaching brings the entire class together, focuses their attention, and provides structured teacher-focused group interaction (Smith, 2000). Constructivist learning is essentially active. Education brings previous knowledge and present new patterns of information. Each new fact or experience is incorporated into a living web of understanding that exists in that person’s mind already. In the end, learning is neither passive nor simply objective (Abbott & Ryan, 2006).

Perhaps one of the biggest challenges of computer-integrated learning has been maintaining active interaction with students while they sit in front of computer screens. Interactive whiteboards provide a large workspace for hands-on work with multi-media resources to help overcome information and communications technology (ICT) boredom. Using the IWB provides enough space for everyone to see and therefore promotes interaction in both teacher-directed and group-based activities. The IWB fosters interaction with the tool at the front of the class and everyone can feel involved because of its size. This classroom pedagogy shifts the responsibility from the teacher to the student, thereby requiring the teachers to be more comfortable with students becoming active learners. The interactive nature of the product and its supplementary software allow for the development of classroom activities that are engaging for students (SMART Boards, 2004). Due to this social nature of classroom pedagogy, this research is based on sociocultural theory set in a post-positivism constructivist framework.

Theoretical Framework

Sociocultural and Constructivist Theory

 Current ideas of sociocultural theory draw heavily on the work of Vygotsky (1986). According to Tharp and Gallimore (1988), the view of the sociocultural perspective has profound implications for teaching, schooling, and education. A key feature of this view of human development is that higher order thinking skills develop from social interaction. Vygotsky argues that studying one individual cannot lead to a complete understanding of a child’s development. He suggests that we must also examine the social world in which that individual has developed. When participating in activities that require cognitive and communicative functions, children are drawn into the use of  these functions in ways that nurture and scaffold them. Vygotsky believed that learning was embedded within social events and occurs while the child interacts with the environment and those in it (Vygotsky & Cole, 1978).

In 1989, UNICEF drafted and passed the first legally binding international instrument to incorporate the full range of human rights (civil, cultural, economic, political and social) for children under the age of eighteen. The leaders wanted to make sure that the world recognized that children have human rights too. Article 12 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child document calls for an emphasis on the entitlement of children for having their voice heard. Children and young people have a right to be involved in the decisions that affect them. The rights of the child extend from decisions affecting them as individuals, to decisions that affect them as a group.

Educators in the classrooms today recognize the importance of the student- centered environment advocated by constructivist theory and how it empowers the teaching-learning process in order to promote higher-order thinking skills (Rakes, Fields, & Cox, 2006). According to the research reports in Judson’s (2006) work, there is an indication that constructivist teachers are more likely to use technology in their classrooms and incorporate technology into their lessons more often than teachers who follow other philosophies or theories of learning. There is a definite association between teachers who have student-centered beliefs about instruction and how often they use technology as a way to enhance student learning. “This relationship between technology use and constructivist teaching practices suggests that constructivist-minded teachers advocate technology as a worthwhile learning tool in their student-centered classrooms” (Judson, 2006, para. 10).

Since 1989, there has been increased educational research investigating and consulting pupils about different aspects of schooling (Wall, Higgins, & Smith, 2005). Educators and policy makers make strong claims for IWB value, but there has been little research on how, if at all, they influence established pedagogic practices, communicative processes, and educational goals (Gillen et al., 2007). By conceptualizing the IWB from a sociocultural perspective as a tool or ‘mediating artifact’ (Wertsch et al., 1993) in school classroom practices, educators aim to take into account the connection between the pedagogical practices of teachers, the communication between teachers and pupils and what the IWB brings to those relationships (Gillen et al., 2007).

The current research study is positioned within a theoretical perspective onteaching and learning which draws mainly from sociocultural theories of learning (Cole & Engstrom, 1993; Vygotsky, 1978; Wertsch, 1991). An important aspect of sociocultural theory is the claim that tools mediate all human action. Educators interpret the idea of a tool to incorporate a wide range of artifacts (e.g., pen, paper, computer) and semiotic systems (e.g., language, graphs, diagrams). Within this framework, the idea of person- acting-with-meditational-means (Wertsch, 1991) expands the view of what a person can do and also suggests that a person might be constrained by their situated and mediated action (Armstrong et al., 2005). Thus, one hypothesis is that the use of technology such as the IWB may foster learning experiences and outcomes, whereas the use of simple pen and paper my limit learning because it is not aligned with the current learning styles which children are now accustomed.

Sociocultural theory preempts the cultural aspects of human action. Socio cultural theory acknowledges that “activities do not exist in seclusion [rather] they are part of broader systems of relationships in which they have meaning” (Murphy, Sharp, & Whitelegg, 2006, p. 5). Within the socio cultural exemplar, learning is seen as the process of engaging in a community of practice. In this view knowledge is developed in social as well as cognitive ways through the use of cultural tools learned by working alongside more expert members (Lave, 1993). There are several aspects of this socio cultural classroom, which are important to take into account. First, the teacher and students work within a local classroom culture, which is influenced by local, national, and global factors. Within this context, the teacher and students bring to the classroom a history of experiences, which relate to their previous cultures of learning and tool use. When faced with a new technology, as a typical constructivist, a teacher is likely to make sense of it in terms of previous experiences of older technologies. This suggests that many teachers are likely to use digital whiteboards as an extension of the non-digital whiteboard (Armstrong et al., 2005). Tools that make up the culture define the possibilities for learning (Lave, 1993).

Constructivism

 In recent years, variations in learners’ knowledge have produced a view of learning and a related group of teaching approaches that have been loosely considered constructivist. Glover and Miller (2002) have shown that IWB use in both primary and secondary schools promotes pupil interest, more sustained concentration, and more effective learning. This suggests that teachers need to be aware of the ways in which such technology can be used to support a variety of learning styles. In terms of patterns of working, when teachers were asked how the interactive whiteboard had affected their teaching, just over 70% reported that they were doing more teaching of the whole class together instead of using group or individual instruction (Higgins, 2010).

Teachers realize that their learners’ have different ideas about the information they receive in the classroom. Advocates of engaged pedagogy must be able to identify and develop ways in which teachers might help learners understand. Both the National Science Education Standards (NRC, 1996) and Benchmarks for Science Literacy (AAAS, 1993) recommend attending to students' conceptual difficulties. Those recommendations derive from research on learning, which indicates that better learning results from identifying and addressing students' preconceptions (NRC, 1999). Despite this research, there is concern that such findings are not significantly influencing classroom practice (Hurd, 1991; White & Klapper, 1994). To address this lack of continuity between research and practice, there has been a wave of research where attention was focused on teachers’ learning of constructivist pedagogy in ways that are in line with constructivist views of learning (Bell, 1993; Cosgrove, 1995). The current research study will address the connection between visual learning and the effect on student achievement as a result of different instructional formats.

Most post-positivists are constructivists who believe that we each construct our view of the world based on our perceptions of it. Because perception and observation are fallible, our constructions must be imperfect. Post-positivists reject the idea that any individual can see the world perfectly as it really is. We are all biased and all of our observations are affected (Trochim, 2006). To prevent possible bias and any possible influence, the researcher in the current study worked closely with the classroom teacher to prepare lessons for each class.

Background

 There are a number of factors, as articulated above, which can influence reasons why interactive technology may or may not be improving instruction. In Figure 1, variables that could influence the research in this project are illustrated. This main focus of this investigative project is on the affect the IWB technology has on student achievement. It would be unwise to not consider outside variables, which may impact a student’s success or failure. One measure of a student’s success is by examining the scores that students receive on their Criterion Referenced Competency Testing (CRCT). Since a teacher’s attitude toward classroom pedagogy can and often do influence individual students in both their attitudes and motivation, it is important to understand how these factors also influence learning outcomes such as the CRCT. The introduction of the IWB technology into a classroom may have positive effects on all of the variables found within a classroom, thus enabling student achievement of content The researcher was also aware that as the project progressed, variable influence was not singularly directional but multidirectional and had the potential to alter the research process

If successful student achievement is the goal in today’s classroom, teachers should utilize tools should that ensure that outcome. Evaluation of classroom pedagogical methods such as the interactive whiteboards and interactive lessons is important to determine how technology can affect successful student achievement. The world in which the learner needs to operate does not approach one in the form of different subjects, but as a complex myriad of facts, problems, dimensions, and perceptions (Ackerman, 1996). Knowledge should not be divided into different subjects or compartments, but should be discovered as an integrated whole (McMahon, 1997). When a classroom has an interactive whiteboard, all of these student-knowledge interactions are possible. Using the IWB allows an entire class to participate in online activities at the same time through the use of active votes and clickers. By using the IWB technology, students’ have the ability increase their interactivity with the curriculum and the classroom. It is not completely understood what impact this may have on student learning. What is known is that when students learn together it fosters the learning environment by exciting the students through shared learning experiences. This has the potential to improve the sociocultural nature of the classenvironment.

Purpose of the Study

The purpose of this quantitative study is to compare achievement of students in classrooms using the IWB as an instructional method to students who are instructed primarily with traditional textbook teaching which involves students reading orally in a large group setting. This study took place with a group of seventh grade students at a rural central Georgia middle school.

The central research question is based on the inconclusive impact of the IWB method of instruction on student achievement. In addition, this study will examine if the IWB utilized instruction results in long- term understanding as determined by a delayed post-test when compared to the control group’s assessment results.

Research Questions and Null Hypothesis:

RQ₁: Does the use of interactive whiteboards as an instructional method improve achievement on science curricula as measured by teacher-generated assessments when compared to traditional/non-technological classroom instruction?

H_A1: There will be a significant improvement in seventh grade science achievement as measured by teacher-generated assessments due to the use of interactive whiteboards as an instructional method when compared to traditional/non technological classroom instruction.

RQ₂: Is there a long lasting effect on a student’s long-term achievement of the content as a result of the method of instruction?

H_A2: There will be a significant difference of academic achievement effects on a student’s long-term achievement of the content as a result of the method of instruction as measured by a delayed post-test. This will support the addition of the IWB as a positive influential pedagogical method.

Methodology

Quantitative methods were used in this study to determine the impact of the use of the interactive whiteboard on student achievement. The initial quantitative research data came from student testing. This research collected data from four classroom groups and was used to determine the effect IWB use has on student achievement. A single teacher’s classroom was the source of data collection. There were two control classes and two experimental ones. The students were selected based on their inclusion in the classrooms of the teacher participating in this research. Traditionally, this teacher (Teacher X) does not use the IWB in his classroom during the teaching of lessons.

A pre and post-test were given to both classes covering a science content standard which students in previous years had not done well on. The researcher was involved with the instructor of this class to assist in the construction of the pre and post-test to ensure that the class standard was assessed with reliability and validity.

The control group was taught the content with traditional/non-technological classroom instruction using the textbook while the same teacher instructed the experimental group, but used the IWB as the tool to guide instruction of the same material. The researcher, along with the classroom teacher, constructed lessons for each class to ensure their accuracy and continuity of content-based curriculum on the specific science standard. In addition, the lessons were designed to teach the same content, with the only variable for instruction being the use of the IWB. Post-test assessment grades were compared between the two groups to determine if there was a significant difference in test scores. Approximately three weeks later, at the end of the semester, the groups were tested again using a delayed post-test to determine if there was a significant retention of information between the two groups.

Study Design and Overview

In this study, data was collected from a rural town in Georgia with a population of approximately 22,000. This study used a socio-cultural theory alongside a post-positivism constructivist framework to examine the impact of the interactive whiteboard technology on student achievement. A seventh grade science teacher was the teacher participant in the study and instruction occurred with his students. Two classes were instructed using the IWB technology and two classes using traditional/non-technological classroom instruction. Each student was given a pre-test. The students were heterogeneously grouped so students of all abilities participated in the study. The lessons were taught over a period of two days.

Working with the classroom teacher, the researcher designed a standards-based lesson that taught the same information but used two different methods. Planning the lesson together was done to try to ensure equality of instruction, however the attitude of the teacher may be an uncontrolled variable, which may lead to a perception that one instructional method is preferred over another. The design of the curriculum by both the researcher and the teacher was also done to ensure impartiality of instruction in the classroom. This assisted in establishing that teacher attitude did not become a variable of influence on the research data of student achievement in the primary section of the research.

Each student was given a post-test to determine student achievement. The research designer also compared the content standard chosen by the teacher to the delayed post-test to check for long-term achievement of the content. When comparing the data, students who had any increase of achievement from the pre to the post-test were to be considered as showing some form of achievement. The research will rely on pre and post-test data to compare traditional teaching to IWB teaching and to evaluate which classroom instructional method had a greater impact on student success. The data from test results, collected from the students participating in this study were compared using a t –test. During the collection of data and discussion with Teacher X, an additional discussion with a para-professional was conducted in order to further validate his descriptions of Teacher X’s pedagogy. Along with those personal interviews, the researcher conducted a comparison of graphic organizers from students who participated in the study.

Limitations

Limitations include a number of issues, which are based on the nature of the sample chosen for this study and the academic climate of the time period of the study. In terms of the students, this study involves students with special needs, as they are included in the population of participants. However, students who do not take the CRCT due to special needs established through their IEP (Individual Education Plan) restrictions were not included in this research. It was assumed that students in the classroom were heterogeneously grouped by gender, race, and academically ability. Another issue was that the sample population was small with only about 60% of the students returning letters ofassent.

In terms of the teacher participant, the lack of IWB training was a limitation as was the time needed to construct new lessons to utilize the technology to design technology-based lessons. It was also assumed that the instructor would make every attempt to instruct both groups to the best of his ability with positive outcomes the goal no matter what instructional methods were used.

Assumptions

The key assumption was that the classroom teacher chosen for this project would respond positively to the participation and follow the lesson plans as they were written. Students in the classes were not made aware of the differences of lesson instruction and therefore were not persuaded to react in any certain manner. Although it is not unusual for students in this school to participate in pre and post-tests, due to the anonymous nature of data collection, students were kept unaware that pre- test and post-test scores will be compared.

Definition of Terms

IWB= Interactive Whiteboard. An interactive whiteboard is a touch-sensitive screen that works in conjunction with a computer and a projector. The first interactive whiteboard was manufactured by SMART Technologies Inc. in 1991.

Educators were the first people to recognize the interactive whiteboard’s potential as a tool for learning, meeting and presenting, and they continue to comprise the largest user base for this technology, particularly in the United States and the United Kingdom (SMART Technologies Inc.,2005).

ICT= ICT (information and communications technology - or technologies) is an umbrella term that includes any communication device or application, encompassing: radio, television, cellular phones, computer and network hardware and software, satellite systems and so on, as well as the various services and applications associated with them, such as videoconferencing and distance learning. ICTs are often spoken of in a particular context, such as ICTs in education, health care, or libraries (Kumar, 2008).

Constructivism = Theories of social constructivism, combined with advances in ICTs are introducing new ways of learning. Social Constructivism is defined as a process by which students make meaning through culture and language. Learning is seen as a social and collaborative activity that is facilitated rather than directly taught by the teacher. Building on constructivist theories, where students are involved in building their own knowledge, social constructivism adds an interactive dimension. This approach is influenced by the work of Vygotsky who believed that children learn from within themselves and as well as from influences in their social or cultural environment.

Although Vygotsky focused on the role of speech and not on the role of new technologies, the fact that computers, (e.g., e-mail, discussion boards, increasingly support communication chat rooms, and Virtual Worlds) has led to his work influencing theories of learning in the information age (Holmes, Tangney, Fitzgibbon, & Savage, 2001).

CRCT= Criterion Referenced Competency Test. The CRCT is designed to measure how well students acquire the skills and knowledge described in the Georgia Performance Standards (GPS). The assessments yield information on academic achievement at the student, class, school, system, and state levels. This information is used to diagnose individual student strengths and weaknesses as related to the instruction of the GPS, and to gauge the quality of education throughout Georgia (Georgia Department of Education, 2010).

Sociocultural= In this research, the term sociocultural will mean the combination of social and cultural elements found brought into the classroom due to the students within the class.

Traditional/non-technological classroom instruction= For the purpose of this study, traditional/non-technological classroom instruction will mean that the only teaching materials used within the classroom are textbooks, chalk boards, pencils, and paper. No technology assistance in the forms of video, IWB, or any computer resources will be a part of this type of pedagogy.

OAS= Online Assessment System-The Georgia Department of Education (GaDOE) provides the OAS as a dedicated resource for schools, districts, classroom teachers, students and parents that allows for ongoing classroom instruction and student learning. This website allows educators to have access to test items aligned to the state mandated curriculum to develop assessments that inform teaching and learning. This system is another resource available and designed to help all Georgia educators, students and parents as part of our common goal to lead the nation in improving student achievement.

Summary

It was the intention of the researcher to gather evidence to identify the influence of the interactive whiteboard as an instructional method on student achievement. The visibility of the students’ academic success in the classroom using the interactive whiteboard technology should open teachers up to the idea of using the IWB technology as a viable resource. Administrators, Board of Education members, and parents will be able to examine the positive influence this type of teaching can have on student’s classroom performance. They may be more open to support the technology both financially and by allowing teachers the time to plan and be trained to use this new tool.

Sharing is caring!