| Summary: | 碩士 === 南台科技大學 === 應用英語系 === 101 === The purposes of this study were (a) to explore the current developments and the usage of interactive whiteboard (IWB) for English teachers in Ping-Tung County, (b) to understand these teachers’ perceptions and teaching difficulties of using the IWB, (c) to explore the using experience between different seniority of teacher groups, (d) to compare the differences between different teacher groups in urban areas and rural areas.
This study was a quantitative research. The survey of the questionnaire was employed in order to conduct the quantitative research. For this study, 60 English teachers who have used the IWB were selected from seven supervised districts in Ping-Tung County. The findings and results were summarized as follow.
1. The perceptions of English teachers using the IWB in English teaching were positive. Teachers’ main application of the IWB was to display teaching materials, to encourage students to operate the board and to present the teaching materials by using the basic functions. Besides, teachers often used the teaching material from the publishers and sometimes used the material that designed on their own.
2. The teaching difficulties teachers encountered and bothered them a lot were the unfamiliarity with the IWB operation and the negative influence on the classroom management. Moreover, the deficiency of the related workshops or training seminars was the problem that troubled English teachers the most.
3. The responses of the three teacher groups with different seniority on perceptions of the IWB varied. Also, the significant differences were shown on the frequency of walking around in class to check students’ learning and students’ learning effectiveness. Furthermore, teachers with different seniority had different level of difficulties of the stability of the IWB software and hardware, the technical support from schools and the issues of class management.
4. The survey indicated there were significant different viewpoints of using the IWB between teacher groups in urban areas and rural areas. The differences were the fluency of the IWB teaching process, the students’ concentration in class and the interaction between teachers and students.
5. Different teacher groups in urban areas and rural areas also experienced different teaching difficulties which were the preparation work, technical support, the shortage of related workshops and the classroom management.
|
|---|
