Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

Inking Pedagogy

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Revolutionizing Education with Digital Ink

Part of the book series: Human–Computer Interaction Series ((HCIS))

  • 1283 Accesses

Abstract

Technology-enhanced instructional delivery is increasingly becoming the norm in the delivery of the engineering curriculum. Electronic inking is one such technology that has proven to afford enhanced learning experiences such as supporting note taking and sharing, including real-time distributed conversation. However, despite its proven benefits including other classroom technologies, several institutions still struggle with university-wide implementation or department-wide adoption. We review the key developments that some signature engineering schools have undertaken to foster the use of inking technology in the last two decades. We also examine the different aspects of inking as a classroom tool that makes learning in the 21st Century more enriching. While there are a plethora of studies that highlight computer use or other novel technologies in education, we demonstrate a couple of success stories and best practices for implementing inking technology in science and engineering disciplines. Findings from the review indicate that effective integration of inking pedagogies in delivering instruction spurs higher student engagement with content which in turn contributes to better learning outcomes/gains.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. 1.

    Gilfus Educational Group, Education strategy, research and implementation; http://www.gilfuseducationgroup.com/.

References

  1. Amelink CT, Scales G, Tront JG (2012) Student use of the tablet PC: impact on student learning behaviors. Adv Eng Educ 3(1):1–17

    Google Scholar 

  2. Barber DA (2012) 5 higher ed tech trends for 2012 [Online Article]. Campus Technology Digital Magazine. Accessed 14 Jan 2016

    Google Scholar 

  3. Berg BL, Lune H (2004) Qualitative research methods for the social sciences. Pearson, Boston

    Google Scholar 

  4. Cooper H, Dorr N (1996) Conducting a meta-analysis. In: Leong FTL, Austin JT (eds) The psychology research handbook. Sage, Thousand Oaks

    Google Scholar 

  5. Craik FI, Lockhart RS (1972) Levels of processing: a framework for memory research. J Verbal Learn Verbal Behav 11(6):671–684

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Creswell JW (2013) Research design: qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks

    Google Scholar 

  7. Dodds K, Callender D, Henry C (2012) Making a case for technology in academia. Coll Res Libr. pp crl12-380

    Google Scholar 

  8. Driscoll MP, Driscoll MP (2005) Psychology of learning for instruction. Allyn & Bacon, Needham Heights

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  9. Easterday M, Lewis DR, Gerber E (2013) Formative feedback in digital lofts: learning environments for real world innovation. In: AIED Workshops. Citeseer

    Google Scholar 

  10. Fons J (2010) A year without paper: tablet computers in the classroom. Phys Teach 48(7):481–483

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Frolik J, Weller T, Flikkema P, Haden C (2010) Implementing an inverted classroom using table pcs for content development. In: Reed RH, Berque DA (eds) The impact of tablet PCs and pen-based technology on education: going mainstream. Purdue University Press, West Lafayette, pp 21–29

    Google Scholar 

  12. Galligan L, Loch B, McDonald C, Taylor JA (2010) The use of tablet and related technologies in mathematics teaching. Aust Sr Math J 24(1):38–51

    Google Scholar 

  13. Garrick RD, Koon M (2010) Using tablet PCs and pen-based technology to address poor student performance in an engineering technology class. The impact of tablet PCs and pen-based technology on education: going mainstream. Purdue University Press, West Lafayette, p 176

    Google Scholar 

  14. Iding M, Crosby ME (2013) Going beyond access: on-line education in Hawaii and the Pacific islands. Educ Inf Technol 18(2):245–252

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Kadiyala M, Crynes BL (2000) A review of literature on effectiveness of use of information technology in education. J Eng Educ 89(2):177–189

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Kettunen J et al (2011) Innovation pedagogy for universities of applied sciences. Creat Educ 2(01):56–62

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Kothaneth S (2012) The relationship between organizational culture, usability, and instructional technology acceptance. Ph.D. thesis. Retrieved from Virginia Tech ETD database

    Google Scholar 

  18. Krippendorff K (2012) Content analysis: an introduction to its methodology. Sage, Thousand Oaks

    Google Scholar 

  19. Lam J, Duan CG (2012) A review of mobile learning environment in higher education sector of Hong Kong: technological and social perspectives. Hybrid learning. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 165–173

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  20. Lam P, Tong A (2012) Digital devices in classroom-hesitations of teachers-to-be. Electron J e-Learn 10(4):387–395

    Google Scholar 

  21. Maclaren P, Singamemni S, Wilson DL (2012) Technologies for engineering education. In: Global congress on manufacturing and management, GCMM2012

    Google Scholar 

  22. McLaughlin JE, Roth MT, Glatt DM, Gharkholonarehe N, Davidson CA, Griffin LM, Esserman DA, Mumper RJ (2014) The flipped classroom: a course redesign to foster learning and engagement in a health professions school. Acad Med 89(2):236–243

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Mohammadi-Aragh M, Williams C (2013) Students’ perceptions of tablet PC interaction techniques. Comput Educ 23(2)

    Google Scholar 

  24. Moore E, Hayes M (2008) Enhancing distributed learning environments with tablet PC technology and software. In: Proceedings of the 2008 American society for engineering education annual conference and exposition

    Google Scholar 

  25. Moore E, Utschig TT, Haas K, Klein B, Yoder P, Zhang Y, Hayes MH et al (2008) Tablet PC technology for the enhancement of synchronous distributed education. IEEE Trans Learn Technol 1(2):105–116

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Price E, Simon B (2009) Ubiquitous presenter: a tablet PC-based system to support instructors and students. Phys Teach 47(9):570–573

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Romney C et al (2011) Tablet PC use in freshman mathematics classes promotes stem retention. In: Frontiers in education conference (FIE), 2011. IEEE, pp F1J–1

    Google Scholar 

  28. Salomon G (1990) Cognitive effects with and of computer technology. Commun Res 17(1):26–44

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  29. Shulman LS (2005) Signature pedagogies in the professions. Daedalus 134(3):52–59

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. St. Clair S, Baker NC (2003) Faculty use and impressions of courseware management tools: a national survey. J Eng Educ 92(2):123–131

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Sutherland I (1963) Sketchpad: a man-machined graphical communication system. Ph.D. thesis, University of Cambridge. Demonstrated on MIT’s Lincoln Lab

    Google Scholar 

  32. Sutherland IE (1964) Sketch pad a man-machine graphical communication system. In: Proceedings of the SHARE design automation workshop. ACM, pp 6–329

    Google Scholar 

  33. Zammit K (2013) Using information and communication technologies to engage students in the later years of schooling in learning content and literacy: case studies of three teachers. Educ Inf Technol 18(2):205–214

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Zhao Y, Pugh K, Sheldon S, Byers J (2002) Conditions for classroom technology innovations. Teach Coll Rec 104(3):482–515

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This work is based on research supported by the National Science Foundation Grant #1140425, funding the Transforming Undergraduate Education in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (TUES) research in Virginia Tech’s College of Engineering. The opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. College of Engineering, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA, USA

    Dale Pokorski, Catherine Amelink & Glenda Scales

  2. Learning Sciences and Technologies, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA, USA

    David Okoth, Vaishali Nandy & Julaine Fowlin

Authors
  1. Dale Pokorski
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. David Okoth
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Vaishali Nandy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Julaine Fowlin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Glenda Scales
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to David Okoth .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas, USA

    Tracy Hammond

  2. Dept of Computer Science & Engineering, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas, USA

    Stephanie Valentine

  3. Raytheon BBN Technologies, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA

    Aaron Adler

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Pokorski, D., Okoth, D., Nandy, V., Fowlin, J., Amelink, C., Scales, G. (2016). Inking Pedagogy. In: Hammond, T., Valentine, S., Adler, A. (eds) Revolutionizing Education with Digital Ink. Human–Computer Interaction Series. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-31193-7_19

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-31193-7_19

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-31191-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-31193-7

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics