Abstract

The Effect of Smart Board on Students’ Engagement in English

Dr Sura Abbas Obaid

Volume: 12 Issue: 3 2022

Abstract:

When it comes to knowledge and information technology, the role of school and university teachers has shifted. The emphasis is now on giving the student the opportunity to participate in the learning process (Guckel and Ziemer, 2002: 54). Furthermore, the emphasis is on empowering students to become selfdirected students by providing them with the knowledge and skills to use and apply multimedia and communication technology in the learning process. Furthermore, information technology teaches students the necessary self-search skills required to successfully obtain information on the internet (Al Rewadia, 2011:66)

DOI: http://doi.org/10.37648/ijrssh.v12i03.004

Back Download

References

• Bushra Saadoon Al- Noori ( PH. D), teaching English through humor and jokes, International Journal of Advancement inSocial Science and Humanity (IJASSH) 2019, Vol. No. 8, Jul-Dece-ISSN: 2455-5150, pISSN: 2455-7722http://www.ijassh.in
• Dr. Bushra Sadoon Mohammed Alnoori (PH. D), Department of English, College of Education, Ibn Rushd for Human Sciences, Iraq. University of Baghdad; Effect of Strategopedia and attitude of Iraqi EFL college students in developing writing skills; International Journal of Research in Social Sciences and Humanities www.ijrssh.com eISSN: 2249-4642, p-ISSN: 2454-4671 (JRSSH) 2019, Vol. No. 9, Issue No. III, JulSep
• Abdulghani E., Eyhab T., & Bilal O., (2016). The Importance of using Smart Boards in Teaching Small EFL Classes. A Case Study of College of Preparatory Year Programs (PYP), Majmmah University, KSA. International Journal on Studies in English Language and Literature (IJSELL) Volume 4, Issue 5, May 2016, PP 9-17 ISSN 2347-3126 (Print) & ISSN 2347-3134 (Online) http://dx.doi.org/10.20431/2347- 3134.0405002 www.arcjournals.org.
• Abdulrahman, M., (2015). The Effectiveness of Using Smart Board Technology in Teaching English as a Foreign Language to Preparatory Year Students at Tabuk University. Education Journal. Vol. 4, No. 6, 2015, pp. 332-337. doi: 10.11648/j.edu.20150406.12.
• Anderson, R. E., & Dexter, S. (2005). School technology leadership: An empirical investigation of prevalence and effect. Educational Administration Quarterly, 41(1), 49-82. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X04269517.
• Avni, I., & Rotem, A. (2013). Significant learning 2020—Technology shapes meaning. Retrieved from http://ianethics.com/wpcontent/uploads/2013/ 09/deeper-learning-2020-AI pdf.
• Becker, C., & Lee, M. (2009). The interactive whiteboard revolution: Teaching with IWBs. Victoria, Australia: ACER Press.
• 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.
• Blau, I. (2012). The quiet revolution: Interactive whiteboards in school as the foundation for an innovative pedagogy in the 21st century. In Ma’of Uma’aseh (pp. 139- 156). Achva College. [in Hebrew].
• Dori, S., & Kurtz, G. (2015). Student’s perceptions meaningful learning via ICT. Paper presented at the 2015 Chais Annual Meeting, Open University, Raanana.
• Dror, Y., & Gershon, S. (2012). Learning with technology, survey among Israeli youth on technology-integrated learning and teaching. College of Management. Retrieved from https://www.colman.ac.il/lecturer [in Hebrew]
• Fisher, J. (2013). Starting from the child: Teaching and learning in the foundation stage. UK: McGraw-Hill Education.
• Hadad, S., & Gazit, A. (2012). Is the interactive whiteboard only a gimmick? In Y. Eshet-Alkalai, A. Caspi, S.Eden, N. Geri, Y. Yair, & Y. Kalman (Eds.), Proceedings of the Chais Conference for the Study of Innovation and Learning Technologies. Raanana: Open University. [in Hebrew].
• Hativa, N. (2015). What does the research say about good teaching and outstanding teachers. Hora’ah Ba’akademya, 5, 50-55. [in Hebrew].
• Huang, H. C. (2014). Online versus paperbased instruction: Comparing two strategy training modules for improving reading comprehension. RELC Journal, 2, 165-180. https://doi.org/10.1177/0033688214534797.
• Keengwe, J., Schnellert, G., & Mills, C. (2012). Laptop initiative: Impact on instructional technology integration and student learning. Education and Information Technologies, 17(2), 137-146. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-010-9150-8.
• Nitza D., & Roman Y., (2017). The Effect of Smart Boards on the Cognition and Motivation of Students. Higher Education Studies; Vol. 7, No. 1; 2017 ISSN 1925-4741 E-ISSN 1925-475X Published by Canadian Center of Science and Education.
• Preston, C. & - Mowbray, L. (2008, June). Use of smart boards for teaching, learning and assessment in kindergarten science. Teaching Science-the Journal of the Austrialian Science Teachers Association 54(2), 50-53. Retrieved from http://smartboardita.pbworks.com/f/smartboar d+with+kinderg artener.pff.
• Schuck, S., & Kearney, M. (2007). Exploring pedagogy with interactive whiteboards: A case study of six schools. Sydney: Sydney University of Technology.