Skip to main content

Advertisement

Springer Nature Link
Log in

Examining PRESERVICE teachers’ use of SMARTBOARD and pc tablets in lessons

  • Published:
Education and Information Technologies Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Transfer of knowledge to future generations has always been performed by people since existence of early humans. Today, with the developments in technology, education is presented in several ways and through a wide variety of tools such as two- or three-dimensional learning contents, animations, video conference lessons and interactive applications. Parallel to these developments, smartboards, tablets, virtual laboratories and cooperative learning environments have resulted in more innovative solutions in teacher training and changed the way of teaching. Education given with this type of technological tools helps make learning more permanent. The quality of education given with technological tools is determined by students’ approach to and knowledge about these tools. In the present study, the purpose was to reveal preservice teachers’ views about the use of smartboards in classes. The study was carried out with 124 preservice teachers attending different departments at Education Faculty of a state university in the Southeast of Turkey in the Fall Term of the academic year of 2016–2017. The results obtained in the study demonstrated that there were significant differences between the preservice teachers’ views about the audio-visual use of tablet computers and smartboards in classes with respect to their departments. Analysis of the research data also revealed that use of tablet computers in classes did not decrease motivation based on gender.

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

Access this article

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

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Explore related subjects

Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.

References

  • Akar, H. (2020). The effect of smart board use on academic achievement: A meta-analytical and thematic study. International Journal of Education in Mathematics, Science and Technology, 8(3), 261–273.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aldhafiri, M, D. (2020). The effectiveness of using interactive white boards in improving the Arabic listening skills of undergraduates majoring in Arabic language at Kuwaiti universities. Education and Information Technologies, 1–15.

  • Amelink, C. T., Scales, G., & Tront, J. G. (2012). Student use of the tablet PC: Impact on student learning behaviors. Advances in Engineering Education, 3(1), n1.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, R., Anderson, R., Simon, B., Wolfman, S, A., VanDeGrift, T., & Yasuhara, K. (2004, March). Experiences with a tablet PC based lecture presentation system in computer science courses. In Proceedings of the 35th SIGCSE technical symposium on Computer science education (pp. 56-60).

  • Anderson, J. E., Schwager, P. H., & Kerns, R. L. (2006). The drivers for acceptance of tablet PCs by faculty in a college of business. Journal of Information Systems Education, 17(4), 429.

    Google Scholar 

  • Armstrong, D. A. (2011). Students’ perceptions of online learning and instructional tools: A qualitative study of undergraduate students use of online tools. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology - TOJET, 10(3), 222–226.

    Google Scholar 

  • Batdi, V. (2017). Smart board and academic achievement in terms of the process of integrating technology into instruction: A study on the McA. Croatian Journal of Education: Hrvatski časopis za odgoj i obrazovanje, 19(3), 763–801.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baxter, P., & Jack, S. (2008). Qualitative case study methodology: Study design and implementation for novice researchers. The qualitative report, 13(4), 544–559.

    Google Scholar 

  • Becker, J. L., & Chen, H. (2009). Measuring privacy risk in online social networks (pp. 2095–2100). University of California, Davis. http://www.ieee-security.org/TC/W2SP/2009/papers/s2p2.pdf. Accessed 17 July 2019.

  • Beeland Jr, W, D. (2002). Student engagement, visual learning and technology: Can interactive whiteboards help?.

  • Benoit, A. (2018). Investigating the impact of interactive whiteboards in higher education: A case study. Journal of Learning Spaces, 7(1), 76–90.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blau, I. (2011). Being a smart teacher in a “smart classroom”: Assessing teacher professional development for incorporating interactive White boards at schools. Learning in the Technological Era, 63–74.

  • Bonastre, O, M., Benavent, A, P., & Belmonte, F, N. (2006, October). Pedagogical use of tablet pc for active and collaborative learning. In International Professional Communication Conference, 2006 IEEE (pp. 214-218). IEEE.

  • Brophy, S, P., & Walker, G. (2005, June). Case study of the pedagogical impact of tablet PCs as a presentation medium in large-scale engineering classrooms. In Proceedings of the American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference.

  • Brown, C., & Czerniewicz, L. (2010). Debunking the ‘digital native’: Beyond digital apartheid, towards digital democracy. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 26(5), 357–369.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bürg, O., & Mandl, H. (2004). Akzeptanz von E-Learning in Unternehmen (Forschungsbericht Nr. 167). München: Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität, Department Psychologie, Institut für Pädagogische Psychologie.

  • Cabus, S. J., Haelermans, C., & Franken, S. (2017). SMART in mathematics? Exploring the effects of in-class-level differentiation using SMARTboard on math proficiency. British Journal of Educational Technology, 48(1), 145–161.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carbonara, N. (2005). Information and communication technology and geographical clusters: opportunities and spread. Technovation, 25(3), 213–222.

  • Casas, I., Ochoa, S, F., & Puente, J. (2009, July). Using tablet PCs and pen-based technologies to support engineering education. In International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction (pp. 31-38). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.

  • Chau, K. T., Zainuddin, D. A. B., Ling, S. K., Ng, L. M., & Yang, J. (2020). The perception of teachers towards smart Board Technology in a Malaysian Primary School. International Journal of Information and Education Technology, 10(6), 405–409.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clarke, B., Svanaes, S., & Zimmermann, S. (2013). One-to-one tablets in secondary schools: An evaluation study. Tablets for schools.

  • Cogill, J. (2002). How is the interactive whiteboard being used in the primary school and how does this affect teachers and teaching. Retrieved November, 6, 2009.

    Google Scholar 

  • Corlett, D., Sharples, M., Bull, S., & Chan, T. (2005). Evaluation of a mobile learning organiser for university students. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 21(3), 162–170.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cuban, L., Kirkpatrick, H., & Peck, C. (2001). High access and low use of technologies in high school classrooms: Explaining an apparent paradox. American Educational Research Journal, 38(4), 813–834. https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312038004813.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cunningham, P., Sexton, S., and Williams, J. (2009). Why come to class? Posting notes from Tablet PC lectures. Proceedings of the 2009 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition.

  • Davidovitch, N., & Yavich, R. (2017). The effect of smart boards on the cognition and motivation of students. Higher Education Studies, 7(1), 60.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Vita, M., Verschaffel, L., & Elen, J. (2018a). The power of ınteractive whiteboards for secondary mathematics teaching: Two case studies. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 47(1), 50–78.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Vita, M., Verschaffel, L., & Elen, J. (2018b). Towards a better understanding of the potentialofinteractivewhiteboardsinstimulatingmathematicslearning. Learning Environments Research, 21(1), 81–107.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dempsey, J, V. (1996). Instructional applications of computer games.

  • Dori, S., & Kurtz, G. (2015). Student’s perceptions meaningful learning via ICT. In Chais Annual Meeting, Open University, Raanana.

  • Dündar, H., & Akçayır, M. (2014). Implementing tablet pcs in schools: Students’ attitudes and opinions. Computers in Human Behavior, 32, 40–46.

    Google Scholar 

  • El-Gayar, O., Moran, M., & Hawkes, M. (2011). Students' acceptance of tablet PCs and implications for educational institutions. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 14(2), 58–70.

    Google Scholar 

  • Enriquez, A. G. (2010). Enhancing student performance using tablet computers. College Teaching, 58(3), 77–84.

  • Ertmer, P. A., Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. T., Sadik, O., Sendurur, E., & Sendurur, P. (2012). Teacher beliefs and technology integration practices: A critical relationship. Computers & Education, 59(2), 423–435.

    Google Scholar 

  • Felder, R. M., & Brent, R. (2009). Active learning: An introduction. ASQ Higher Education Brief, 2(4), 1–5.

    Google Scholar 

  • Flanagan, S., Bouck, E. C., & Richardson, J. (2013). Middle school special education teachers’ perceptions and use of assistive technology in literacy instruction. Assistive Technology, 25(1), 24–30.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fokides, E., Atsikpasi, P., & Karageorgou, D. (2020). Tablets, plants, and primary school students: A study. Technology, Knowledge and Learning, 1–29.

  • Franklin, T. (2011). Mobile learning: At the tipping point. Turkish Online Journal Of Educational Technology-TOJET, 10(4), 261–275.

    Google Scholar 

  • Galligan, L., Loch, B., McDonald, C., & Taylor, J. A. (2010). The use of tablet and related technologies in mathematics teaching. Australian Senior Mathematics Journal, 24(1), 38–51.

    Google Scholar 

  • Geer, R., & Barnes, A. (2007). Cognitive concomitants of interactive board use and their relevance to developing effective research methodologies. International Education Journal., 8(2), 92–102.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glover, D., Miller, D., Averis, D., & Door, V. (2007). 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, 32(1), 5–20.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gray, L., Thomas, N., & Lewis, L. (2010). Teachers’ use of educational technology in US public schools: 2009.

  • Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2005). Eight paradoxes in the implementation process of e-learning in higher education. Higher Education Policy, 18(1), 5-5-29. https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.hep.8300069.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hadlington, L., White, H., & Curtis, S. (2019). “I cannot live without my [tablet]”: Children's experiences of using tablet technology within the home. Computers in Human Behavior, 94, 19–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hall, I., & Higgins, S. (2005). Primary school students' perceptions of interactive whiteboards. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 21(2), 102–117.

  • Hamhuis, E., Glas, C., & Meelissen, M. (2020). Tablet assessment in primary education: Are there performance differences between TIMSS’paper-and-pencil test and tablet test among Dutch grade-four students?. British journal of educational technology.

  • Herguner, S. (2017). Prospective EFL Teachers' emotional intelligence and tablet computer use and literacy. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology-TOJET, 16(4), 56–64.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hulls, C. C. (2005, October). Using a tablet PC for classroom instruction. In Proceedings Frontiers in Education 35th Annual Conference (pp. T2G-T2G). IEEE.

  • Ifenthaler, D., & Schweinbenz, V. (2013). The acceptance of tablet-PCs in classroom instruction: The teachers’ perspectives. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(3), 525–534.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ilgar, M, Z., & Ilgar, S, C. (2013). Nitel bir araştırma deseni olarak gömülü teori (Temellendirilmiş Kuram).

  • Judge, S., & Simms, K. A. (2009). Assistive technology training at the pre-service level: A national snapshot of teacher preparation programs. Teacher Education and Special Education, 32(1), 33–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koile, K., & Singer, D. (2006, April). Development of a tablet-pc-based system to increase instructor-student classroom interactions and student learning. In Proc. of Workshop on the Impact of Pen-Based Technology on Education (WIPTE’06).

  • Kong, S, C. (2012, March). Using mobile devices for learning in school education. In 2012 IEEE Seventh International Conference on Wireless, Mobile and Ubiquitous Technology in Education (pp. 172-176). IEEE.

  • Köse, S., Gencer, A. S., & Gezer, K. (2007). Meslek Yüksekokulu Öğrencilerinin Bilgisayar ve. Pamukkale Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 21(21), 44–54.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kurt, A. A., Abdullah, K. U. Z. U., Dursun, Ö. Ö., GÜLLEPINAR, F., & Gültekin, M. (2013). FATİH projesinin pilot uygulama sürecinin değerlendirilmesi: Öğretmen görüşleri. Journal of Instructional Technologies & Teacher Education, 2(1).

  • Lai, Y.-O. (2019). The application of meta-analytic SEM on exploring factors that ınfluence teachers’ usage of ınteractive whiteboard. Pedagogical Research, 4(3), em0038. https://doi.org/10.29333/pr/5854.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li, S., Pow, J. C., Wong, E. L., & Fung, A. W. (2010). Empowering student learning through tablet PCs: A case study. Education and Information Technologies, 15(3), 171–180.

    Google Scholar 

  • Liao, Y, K. (2013, October). The effect of IWB on student academic achievement in Taiwan: A meta-analysis. In E-Learn: World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education (pp. 1999-2007). Association for the Advancement of computing in education (AACE).

  • Litzler, M. F., & Laborda, J. G. (2016). Students’ opinions about ubiquitous delivery of standardized English exams. Porta Linguarum: revista internacional de didáctica de las lenguas extranjeras, 1, 99–110.

    Google Scholar 

  • López, O. S. (2010). The digital learning classroom: Improving English language learners’ academic success in mathematics and reading using interactive whiteboard technology. Computers & Education, 54(4), 901–915.

    Google Scholar 

  • Malkawi, N. A. M. (2017). The effect of using smart board on the achievement of tenth grade students in English language and on verbal interaction during teaching in public schools. International Research in Education, 5(1), 197–208.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mambaeva, V. (2018). Comparative study of English language teaching settings of MONE and IB schools (Turkey). Doktora Tezi, Bilkent University, Ankara.

  • Mang, C. F., & Wardley, L. J. (2012). Effective adoption of tablets in post-secondary education: Recommendations based on a trial of iPads in university classes. Journal of Information Technology Education, 11(1), 301–317.

    Google Scholar 

  • McEntyre, M. (2006). The effects interactive whiteboards have on student motivation. http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/messages/downloadsexceeded.html. Accessed 17 July 2019.

  • Montrieux, H., Vanderlinde, R., Schellens, T., & De Marez, L. (2015). Teaching and learning with mobile technology: A qualitative explorative study about the introduction of tablet devices in secondary education. PLoS One, 10(12), e0144008.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nikolopoulou, K. (2007). Early childhood educational software: Specific features and issues of localization. Early Childhood Education Journal, 35(2), 173–179.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oigara, J., & Keengwe, J. (2013). Students’ perceptions of clickers as an instructional tool to promote active learning. Education and Information Technologies, 18(1), 15–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Otterborn, A., Schönborn, K., & Hultén, M. (2019). Surveying preschool teachers’ use of digital tablets: General and technology education related findings. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 29(4), 717–737.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pamuk, S., Çakır, R., Ergun, M., Yılmaz, H, B., & Ayas, C. (2013). Öğretmen ve öğrenci bakış açısıyla tablet PC ve etkileşimli tahta kullanımı: FATİH Projesi değerlendirmesi. http://dokuman.bilgisayardersi.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/M45 %C3%96%C4%9Fretmen-ve-%C3%96%C4%9Frenci-Bak%C4%B1%C5%9F-A%C3%A7%C4%B1s%C4%B1yla-Tablet-PC-ve-etkile%C5%9Fimli-tahta-kullan%C4%B1m%C4%B1-fatih-projesi-de%C4%9Ferlendirmesi.pdf.

  • Park, S. Y. (2009). An analysis of the technology acceptance model in understanding university students' behavioral intention to use e-learning. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 12(3), 150–162.

    Google Scholar 

  • Polat, S., & Özcan, A. (2014). Akıllı Tahta Kullanımıyla İlgili Sınıf Öğretmenlerinin Görüşleri. Kastamonu Eğitim Dergisi, 22(2), 439–455.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prensky, M. (2003). Overcoming educators' digital immigrant accents: A rebuttal. The Technology Source, 7(3).

  • Reboli, D. (2007, March). Introducing a tablet PC into any classroom: Bringing ideas from a high school into a college classroom. In Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference (pp. 3319–3324). Jacksonville: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE).

  • Rossing, J, P., Miller, W., Cecil, A, K., & Stamper, S, E. (2012). iLearning: The future of higher education? Student perceptions on learning with mobile tablets. https://scholarworks.iupui.edu/handle/1805/7071

  • Saillard, E, K. (2009). NVIVO 8 ile nitel araştırma projeleri. Anı Yayıncılık.

  • Schaal, S., Grübmeyer, S., & Matt, M. (2012). Outdoors and online-inquiry with mobile devices in pre-service science teacher education. World Journal on Educational Technology, 4(2), 113–125.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schuck, S., & Kearney, M. (2007). Exploring pedagogy with interactive whiteboards: A case study of six schools. Verified OK.

  • Shen, D., Laffey, J., Lin, Y., & Huang, X. (2006). Social influence for perceived usefulness and ease-of-use of course delivery systems. Journal of Interactive Online Learning, 5(3), 270–282.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shi, Y., Zhang, J., Yang, H., & Yang, H, H. (2020). Effects of interactive whiteboard-based instruction on students’ cognitive learning outcomes: A meta-analysis. Interactive Learning Environments, 1-18.

  • Smart Technologies Inc. (2004). Interactive whiteboards and learning: A review of classroom case studies and research literature. Retrieved from http://www.smarterkids.org/research

  • Sommerich, C., Ward, R., Sikdar, K., Payne, J., & Herman, L. (2007). A survey of high school students’ with ubiquitous access to tablet PCs. Ergonomics, 50(5), 706–727.

    Google Scholar 

  • Starkings, S., & Krause, L. (2008). Chalkboard to smartboard – Maths going green? MSOR Connections, 7(4), 13–15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Starkman, N. (2006). The wonders of interactive whiteboards: No cutting-edge classroom is complete without one. T H E Journal, 33(10), 36–39.

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Tront, J., Filer, K., Scales, G., & Prey, J. (2009). Implementing a tablet PCs requirement program. In American Society for Engineering Education. American Society for Engineering Education.

  • Twining, P., Evans, D., Cook, D., Ralston, J., Selwood, I., Jones, A., ... & Kukulska-Hulme, A. (2005). Tablet PCs in schools: Case study report: A report for Becta by the Open University. http://oro.open.ac.uk/6407/

  • Twining, P., Evans, D., Cook, D., Selwood, I., Jones, A., Underwood, J., et al. (2006). Should there be a future for tablet PCs in schools? Journal of Interactive Media in Education, 20, 1–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Uslu, O., & Bümen, N. T. (2012). Effects of the professional development program on Turkish teachers: Technology integration along with attitude towards ICT in education. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 11(3), 115–127.

    Google Scholar 

  • Uzoğlu, M., & Bozdoğan, A. E. (2015). Investigation of primary school students’ attitudes toward tablet computers according to different variables Ortaokul öğrencilerinin tablet bilgisayarlara yönelik tutumlarının çeşitli değişkenlere göre incelenmesi. Journal of Human Sciences, 12(1), 539–553.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vannatta, R. A., & Fordham, N. (2004). Teacher dispositions as predictors of classroom technology use. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 36(3), 253–271.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wall, K., Higgins, S., & Smith, H. (2005). The visual helps me understand the complicated things. Pupil views of teaching and learning with interactive whiteboards. British Journal of Educational Technology, 36(5), 851–867.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang, S. K., Hsu, H. Y., Campbell, T., Coster, D. C., & Longhurst, M. (2014). An investigation of middle school science teachers and students use of technology inside and outside of classrooms: Considering whether digital natives are more technology savvy than their teachers. Educational Technology Research and Development, 62(6), 637–662.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wise, J. C., Toto, R., & Lim, K. Y. (2006, October). Introducing tablet PCs: Initial results from the classroom. In Proceedings. Frontiers in education. 36th Annual conference (pp. 17–20). IEEE.

  • Xu, H, L. (2011). It makes the whole learning experience better”: Student feedback on the use of the ınteractive whiteboard in learning chinese at tertiary level. Asian Social Science, 7,11,20–34.

  • Yalman, M. (2013). EĞİTİM FAKÜLTESİ ÖĞRENCİLERİNİN BİLGİSAYAR DESTEKLİ UZAKTAN EĞİTİM SİSTEMİ (MOODLE) MEMNUNİYET DÜZEYLERİ. Electronic Turkish Studies, 8(8).

  • Yalman, M. (2015). Preservice teachers’ views about e-book and their levels of use of e-books. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 176, 255–262.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yau, H, K., & Leung, Y, F. (2016, March). Gender difference of self-efficacy and attitudes towards the use of technology in learning in Hong Kong higher education. In Proceedings of the International MultiConference of Engineers and Computer Scientists (Vol. 2).

  • Yin, R, K. (2003). Case study research: Design and methods (Vol. 5).

  • Zheng, J., & Li, S. (2020). What drives students’ intention to use tablet computers: An extended technology acceptance model. International Journal of Educational Research, 102, 101612.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zittle, F. (2004). Enhancing native American mathematics learning: The use of Smartboard-generated virtual manipulatives for conceptual understanding. In EdMedia: World Conference on Educational Media and Technology (pp. 5512-5515). Association for the Advancement of computing in education (AACE).

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Education Faculity, Computer and instructional technology department, Dicle Universitey, Diyarbakır, Turkey

    Murat Yalman & Bulent Basaran

Authors
  1. Murat Yalman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  2. Bulent Basaran
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Murat Yalman.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Yalman, M., Basaran, B. Examining PRESERVICE teachers’ use of SMARTBOARD and pc tablets in lessons. Educ Inf Technol 26, 1435–1453 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-020-10292-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-020-10292-3

Keywords