Reference List

References

Dash, E. ( 2004, December 8). School blackboards are turning white and interactive. The New York Times. Retrieved September 30, 2012 from http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=FA0F15F839550C7B8CDDAB0994DC404482

Dash, in this New York Times article discusses the switch from the traditional blackboard and chalk to the 21^st Century world of interactive whiteboards (IWBs). She showcases teacher-student examples that have had success with the new technology. Dash also captures the initial implementation of whiteboards from a financial standpoint. This is a valuable source as it offers concrete examples of the IWB in the classroom and gives insight as to the progression of IWB being implemented in the United States.

Ferriter, B. (2010, January 6). The tempered Radical: Wasting money on whiteboards. . ..Retrieved September 30, 2012 from http://teacherleaders.typepad.com/the_tempered_radical/2010/01/wasting-money-on-whiteboards.html

Ferriter expresses in this blog how interactive white boards (IWBs) do not have any benefit in the classroom for students. Instead he thinks they are just a distraction form true teaching. He highlights that the cost of such technology and the little research done before installation is mindboggling. This blog is valuable in providing an opposing opinion to IWBs not just from a technology phobic educator but someone who has used IWB in their classroom and decided that the benefits do not out way the cost.

Interactive whiteboards in education. York: TeachLearn. Retreieved September 23, 2012

from http://www.jisc.ac.uk/uploaded_documents/Interactivewhiteboards.pdf

This report breaks down what the IWB looks like in a higher education setting. It clearly summarizes the benefits and limitations as well as the inner working of the IWB. This report was highly valuable as it provided the technical background of the new technology.

Lemov, D. (2010). Teach like a champion: Grades K-12. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Doug Lemov offers teachers tips and tricks as to how to become better teacher’s in his book. Lemov offers suggestions how to better motivate, engage and overall relay information to students in a meaningful way. Since IWBs are so focused around classroom engagement this book offered insight on how teachers become great teachers and showcases how engagement with or without technology is critical for student success.

Manny-Ikan, E., & Dagan, O. (2011). Using the Interactive White Board in Teaching and Learning – An Evaluation of the SMART CLASSROOM Pilot Project. Interdisciplinary Journal of E-Learning and Learning Objects , 7, 249-275. Retrieved September 22, 2012 from the Education Search Complete Database at http://web.ebscohost.com.mutex.gmu.edu/ehost/detail?sid=f2c9d68c-02ed-4b2d-9922-ddffc1020624%40sessionmgr13&vid=1&hid=9&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ%3d%3d#db=ehh&AN=70423570

Manny-Ikan and Dagan are Israeli researchers that took the use of interactive whiteboards outside of the country and expanded their research internationally. There research shows that IWBs do impact student engagement significantly and that teachers need a comprehensive database of help and guides along with a detailed training to help bridge the gap between technology and good classroom pedagogy. The result of this research helps support that IWB are worth the cost of the learning curve that tends to happen in conjunction with introducing the new technology within a classroom.

Michell,J., Hunter, J. & Mockler, N. (2010). Connecting classroomin rural communities through interactive whiteboards. Australian Journal of Education Technology , 26 (4), 464-476. Retreived September 30, 2012 from the Education Search Complete Database at http://mutex.gmu.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=51860893&site=ehost-live

Michell and Hunter focus their research on examining how IWB are used to connect classrooms to other satellite classroom and a group of students to a given instructor. They depict the use of video conferencing along with IWB. And furthermore take the teachers perspective as to why IWBs are in fact a benefit in the classrooms. The value of this article is expressed in how it offers a more complex way to use IWBs. It showcases the limitlessness of possibilities with the IWB and gives an example as to how IWB can better work with other forms of technology.

Moss, G., Jewitt, C., Levacic, R., Armstrong, V., Cardini, A. & Castle, F. (2007). The Interactive Whiteboards, Pedagogy and Pupil Performance Evaluation:  An Evaluation of the Schools Whiteboard Expansion (SWE) Project: London Challenge. Retrieved September 22, 2012 from http://eprints.ioe.ac.uk/905/1/Moss2007whiteboardsRR816.pdf.

London University’s report evaluates IWB from teacher and student perceptions, collaborative learning and instruction and the implications of such a technology on student performance. This extremely detailed report is highly valuable to this topic because of the depth it covers in regards to IWBs. It serves as a model that American researchers can use in determening if IWB benefit the education system in a positive way.

Murcia, K., & Sheffield, R. (2010). Talking about science in interactive whiteboard classrooms. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology , 26 (4), 417-431. Retrieved September 22, 2012 from the Education Search Complete Database at http://mutex.gmu.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=51860890&site=ehost-live

Murcia and Sheffield, discuss the IWB within science classrooms. They explain how lessons better engage students as a class and help instruction be more hands on with the use of the IWB. Creating an environment where motivated students learn. This article serves as a case study as to how IWBs engage students and make a positive difference in how they learn.

Northcote, M. (2010). Interactive whiteboards: Interactive or just whiteboards? Australian Journal of Education Technology , 26 (4), 494-510. Retrieved September 22, 2012 from the Education Search Complete Database at http://mutex.gmu.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=51860895&site=ehost-live

Northcoate’s research in the article “Interactive whiteboards: Interactive or just whiteboards?” critically examines how IWB are used during the early grades, highlights what the experts say about IWB use and ultimately observes and documents how teachers today use IWBs. This resource offers background information and easily focuses on the ways that IWB are most commonly used.