Abstract
In this study, it was aimed to investigate teachers’ acceptance and use of interactive whiteboard (IWB), technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK), transition to use IWB effects on teacher performance. A causal pattern was used based on the structural equation model established the causal relationship between the factors in the study. The study group of the study consisted of 305 teachers who worked in primary, secondary and high school in Turkey. Data were collected via 4 scales as Acceptance and Use of IWB Scale, TPACK Practical Scale, IWB Transition Framework Scale, and Teacher Performance Scale. In the analysis of the data were used simple linear regression analysis, multiple regression analysis and structural equation model was tested with path analysis. TPACK has positive effects on acceptance and use of IWB and teacher performance; acceptance and use of IWB has positive effects on IWB transition and teacher performance; IWB transition has a positive effect on teacher performance. These findings showed that a model based on the relationship between teacher performance and teachers’ acceptance and use of IWB, TPACK, IWB transition can be created. In the context of technology integration, it is concluded that teacher performance is related to TPACK, acceptance and use of IWB, IWB transition. In this respect, it can be said that the TPACK and IWB usage are positively reflected on their performance. From these results, may conjecture that is important to have TPACK and use IWB in the development of teacher performance.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Abbitt, J. T. (2011). An investigation of the relationship between self-efficacy beliefs about technology integration and technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) among preservice teachers. Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education, 27(4), 134–143. https://doi.org/10.1080/21532974.2011.10784670.
Albaaly, E., & Higgins, S. (2012). The impact of IWB technology on medical students’ achievement in ESL essay writing: An early study in Egypt. The Language Learning Journal, 40(2), 207–222. https://doi.org/10.1080/09571736.2010.543953.
Anderson, J. C., & Gerbing, D. (1984). The effect of sampling error on convergence, improper solutions, and goodness-of-fit indices for maximum likelihood confirmatory factor analysis. Psychometrika, 49, 155–173. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02294170.
Ay, Y. (2015). Evaluation of teachers' technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) within the framework of practical model (unpublished doctoral dissertation). Eskişehir: Eskişehir Osmangazi University.
Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84, 191–215. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.84.2.191.
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: W.H. Freeman.
Bauer, J., & Kenton, J. (2005). Toward technology integration in the schools: Why it isn't happening. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 13(4), 519 https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ723724.
Beauchamp, G. (2004). Teacher use of the interactive whiteboards in primary schools: Towards an effective transition framework. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 13(3), 328–348. https://doi.org/10.1080/14759390400200186.
Beauchamp, G., & Parkinson, J. (2005). Beyond the ‘wow’ factor: Developing interactivity with the interactive whiteboard. School Science Review, 86(316), 97–103 http://www.ase.org.uk/journals/school-science-review/2005/03/316/?
Behrend, T. S., Wiebe, E. N., London, J. E., & Johnson, E. C. (2011). Cloud computing adoption and usage in community colleges. Behaviour & Information Technology, 30(2), 231–240. https://doi.org/10.1080/0144929X.2010.489118.
Belland, B. R. (2009). Using the theory of habitus to move beyond the study of barriers to technology integration. Computers & Education, 52, 353–364. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2008.09.004.
Choy, D., Wong, A. F. L., & Gao, P. (2009). Student teachers’ intentions and actions on integrating technology into their classrooms during student teaching: A Singapore study. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 42(2), 175–195 https://www.learntechlib.org/p/108580/.
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.
Eğitimi Araştırma ve Geliştirme Dairesi (EARGED). (2006). Okulda performans yönetimi modeli. Ankara: Milli Eğitim Basımevi Müdürlüğü.
Erbas, A. K., Ince, M., & Kaya, S. (2015). Learning mathematics with interactive whiteboards and computer-based graphing utility. Educational Technology & Society, 18(2), 299–312 https://www.jstor.org/stable/jeductechsoci.18.2.299.
Ertmer, P. A. (1999). Addressing first-and second-order barriers to change: Strategies for technology integration. Educational Technology Research and Development, 47(4), 47–61. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02299597.
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. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.02.001.
Hall, I., & Higgins, S. (2005). Primary school students' perceptions of interactive whiteboards. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 21, 102–117. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2729.2005.00118.x.
Hew, K. F., & Brush, T. (2007). Integrating technology into K-12 teaching and learning: Current knowledge gaps and recommendations for future research. Educational Technology Research and Development, 55(3), 223–252. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-006-9022-5.
Hsu, H. H. (2012). The acceptance of moodle: An empirical study based on UTAUT. Creative Education, 3, 44–46. https://doi.org/10.4236/ce.2012.38b010.
Hur, J. W., Shannon, D., & Wolf, S. (2016). An investigation of relationships between internal and external factors affecting technology integration in classrooms. Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education, 32(3), 105–114. https://doi.org/10.1080/21532974.2016.1169959.
Ifenthaler, D., & Schweinbenz, V. (2013). The acceptance of tablet-PCs in classroom instruction: The teachers’ perspectives. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(3), 525–534. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2012.11.004.
Inan, F. A., & Lowther, D. L. (2010). Factors affecting technology integration in K-12 classrooms: A path model. Educational Technology Research and Development, 58(2), 137–154. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-009-9132-y.
Interstate New Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium. (2013). Model Core teaching standards and learning progressions for teachers 1.0: A resource for ongoing teacher development. Council of Chief State Schools Officers, 4(18), Washington, DC. http://www.ccsso.org/Resources/Programs/Interstate_Teacher_Assessment_Consortium_(InTASC).html.
Jimoyiannis, A. (2010). Designing and implementing an integrated technological pedagogical science knowledge framework for science teachers professional development. Computers & Education, 55, 1259–1269. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2010.05.022.
Jonassen, D. H., Peck, K. L., & Wilson, B. G. (1999). Learning with technology: A constructivist perspective. Columbus, OH: Prentice Hall.
Jones, A., & Vincent, J. (2010). Collegial mentoring for effective whole school professional development in the use of IWB technologies. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 26(4), 477–493. https://doi.org/10.14742/AJET.1066.
Jöreskog, K., & Sörbom, D. (2001). LISREL 8.51. Mooresville: Scientific Software.
Kim, C., Kim, M. K., Lee, C., Spector, J. M., & DeMeester, K. (2013). Teacher beliefs and technology integration. Teaching and Teacher Education, 29, 76–85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2012.08.005.
Kline, R. B. (2005). Principle and practice of structural equation modeling. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
Koehler, M. J., & Mishra, P. (2005). Teachers learning technology by design. Journal of Computing in Teacher Education, 21(3), 94–102. https://doi.org/10.1080/10402454.2005.10784518.
Kopcha, T. J., & Sullivan, H. (2007). Self-presentation bias in surveys of teachers’ educational technology practices. Educational Technology Research and Development, 55(6), 627–646. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-006-9011-8.
Lawless, K. A., & Pellegrino, J. W. (2007). Professional development in integrating technology into teaching and learning: Knowns, unknowns, and ways to pursue better questions and answers. Review of Educational Research, 77(4), 575–614. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654307309921.
Lim, C. P. (2007). Effective integration of ICT in Singapore schools: Pedagogical and policy implications. Educational Technology Research and Development, 55(1), 83–116. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-006-9025-2.
Lim, C. P., & Chai, C. S. (2008). Teachers’ pedagogical beliefs and their planning and conduct of computer mediated classroom lesson. British Journal of Educational Technology, 39(5), 807–828. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2007.00774.x.
Liu, S. H. (2011). Factors related to pedagogical beliefs of teachers and technology integration. Computers & Education, 56(4), 1012–1022. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2010.12.001.
Marzano, R. J. (2009). Teaching with interactive whiteboards. Educational Leadership, 67(3), 80–82 https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED577573.pdf.
Ministry of National Education. (2008). Teacher competencies. Ankara: Devlet Kitapları Müdürlüğü.
Ministry of National Education. (2017). Ministry of National Education FATİH Project. http://fatihprojesi.meb.gov.tr
Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A new framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017–1054. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9620.2006.00684.x.
Neuman, L, W. (2014). Social research methods: Qualitative and quantitative approaches. Essex: Pearson.
Pamuk, S., Çakır, R., Ergun, M., Yılmaz, H. B., & Ayas, C. (2013). The use of tablet PC and interactive board from the perspectives of teachers and students: Evaluation of the FATIH project. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 13(3), 1799–1822. https://doi.org/10.12738/estp.2013.3.1734.
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2012). Sources of method bias in social science research and recommendations on how to control it. Annual Review of Psychology, 63, 539–569. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-120710-100452.
Polly, D., Mims, C., Shepherd, C. E., & Inan, F. (2010). Evidence of impact: Transforming teacher education with preparing tomorrow’s teachers to teach with technology (PT3) grants. Teaching and Teacher Education, 26(4), 863–870. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2009.10.024.
Sidik, D., & Syafar, F. (2020). Exploring the factors influencing student’s intention to use mobile learning in Indonesia higher education. Education and Information Technologies, 25(6), 4781–4796. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-019-10018-0.
Smith, H. J., Higgins, S., Wall, K., & Miller, J. (2005). Interactive whiteboards: Boon or bandwagon? A critical review of the literature. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 21, 91–101. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2729.2005.00117.x.
Sweeney, T. (2008). Transforming learning with interactiue whiteboards: Towards a developmental framework. Australian Educational Computing, 23(2), 24–31 https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ898053.
Teo, T., Lee, C. B., & Chai, C. S. (2008). Understanding pre-service teachers' computer attitudes: Applying and extending the technology acceptance model. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 24(2), 128–143. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2729.2007.00247.x.
Tosuntaş, Ş. B., Karadağ, E., & Orhan, S. (2015). The factors affecting acceptance and use of interactive whiteboard within the scope of FATIH project: A structural equation model based on the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology. Computers & Education, 81, 169–178. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.10.009.
Van Laer, S., Beauchamp, G., & Colpaert, J. (2014). Teacher use of the interactive whiteboards in Flemish secondary education—Mapping against a transition framework. Education and Information Technologies, 19(2), 409–423. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-012-9228-6.
Van Raaij, E. M., & Schepers, J. J. (2008). The acceptance and use of a virtual learning environment in China. Computers & Education, 50(3), 838–852. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2006.09.001.
Vanderlinde, R., & Van Braak, J. (2010). The e-capacity of primary schools: Development of a conceptual model and scale construction from a school improvement perspective. Computers & Education, 55(2), 541–553. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2010.02.016.
Venkatesh, V., Morris, M, G., Davis, G, B., & Davis, F, D. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS quarterly, 425-478. https://doi.org/10.2307/30036540.
Voogt, J., & McKenney, S. (2017). TPACK in teacher education: Are we preparing teachers to use technology for early literacy? Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 26(1), 69–83. https://doi.org/10.1080/1475939X.2016.1174730.
Whyte, S., & Alexander, J. (2014). Implementing tasks with interactive technologies in classroom computer assisted language learning (CALL): Towards a developmental framework. Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology, 40(1), 1–26. https://doi.org/10.21432/T2TG6J.
Yeh, Y., Hsu, Y., Wu, H., Hwang, F., & Lin, T. (2013). Developing and validating technological pedagogical content knowledge-practical (TPACK-practical) through the Delphi survey technique. British Journal of Educational Technology, 44(6), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12078.
Funding
This work was supported by The Scientific and Technical Research Council of Turkey, International Research Fellowship Programme (2214/A) and Eskisehir Osmangazi University Scientific Research Projects Commission (Project number: 201621A209).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
This paper is a part of corresponding author’s phd thesis. All authors contributed to the study conception and design. The first draft of the manuscript was written by Şule Betül Tosuntaş and all authors commented on previous versions of the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Ethics
The study conducted with the approval of UniversityEskişehir Osmangazi University Institute of Educational Sciences, Education and Humanities Ethics Committee, Turkey.
Additional information
Publisher’s note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Tosuntaş, Ş.B., Çubukçu, Z. & Beauchamp, G. A new model for the factors that affect interactive whiteboard usage of teachers and its effect on performance. Educ Inf Technol 26, 3575–3592 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10428-z
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10428-z