ASSESSING THE EFFECT OF LIGHTBOARD TECHNOLOGY ON STUDENTS’ COGNITIVE PERFORMANCE IN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL

Eftychia Aslanidou, Georgios P. Heliades

Abstract


Recent advancements in technology have increasingly facilitated the adoption of different instructional methodologies in education. The Lightboard (LB), an innovative pedagogical tool, comprises a specially illuminated glass surface upon which instructors articulate written content during lessons. This allows for sustained visual engagement with both the instructor and the instructional material. While empirical investigations into face-to-face classroom application of the LB have predominantly emerged from the United States, these studies, focusing on specific dimensions of the learning process, suggest that the LB fosters cognitive development and sustains engagement among typically developing learners. This study presents the inaugural findings from the Greek educational context, assessing the efficacy of the LB in face-to-face instruction relative to the traditional Whiteboard. The research, conducted with 30 elementary school students enrolled in a non-profit educational program, examines learning experiences within the domain of mathematics. Employing a mixed-methods research design, the study utilized two data collection instruments: (a) cognitive assessments (pre-test, main test, and post-test) tailored to the developmental stage of the participants, and (b) systematic teacher observations to document extra-linguistic phenomena. The results underscore the significant potential of the LB as a modern instructional tool, particularly given its ability to achieve cognitive outcomes comparable to those of the traditional Whiteboard, which has been a cornerstone of classroom teaching for centuries. This alignment with such a well-established method highlights the LB's promise, while also encouraging further exploration through larger-scale studies to fully understand and expand its educational impact. Moreover, the research explores students’ perceptions of the teacher and the LB, as juxtaposed with other educational technologies employed during instruction.

 

Article visualizations:

Hit counter


Keywords


lightboard, cognitive performance, technology-enhanced pedagogy, students’ learning outcomes, elementary education, educational technology

Full Text:

PDF

References


Aslanidou, E., & Heliades, G. P. (2024). The students' attitude towards the teacher who uses the Lightboard technology while teaching. Research presented in 2024 First International & Pedagogical Conference of DIPE, Pieria, Greece.

Aslanidou, E. (2019). Home Learning Activities and Children’s Learning Outcomes: A Review of Recent Evidence. European Journal of Education Studies, 6 (1), 100-159. http://dx.doi.org/10.46827/ejes.v0i0.2375.

Beatty, B. J. (2019). Hybrid-Flexible Course Design: Implementing student-directed hybrid classes. https://doi.org/10.59668/33

Bell, B. S., & Kozlowski, S. W. J. (2008). Active Learning: Effects of Core Training Design Elements on Self-Regulatory Processes, Learning, and Adaptability. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93, 296-316.

https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.93.2.296

Birdwell, J. A., & Peshkin, M. (2015). Capturing technical lectures on Lightboard. In 2015 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition (pp. 26-325). https://doi.org/10.18260/p.23664

Clark, R. C., & Mayer, R. E. (2016). E-learning and the Science of Instruction: Proven Guidelines for Consumers and Designers of Multimedia Learning. Wiley. Doi:10.1002/9781119239086

Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2000). Research methods in education (S. Kyranakis, M. Mavraki, Ch. Mitsopoulou, P. Bithara, & M. Filopoulou, Trans.) (5th ed.). Metaixmio. (Original work published 2000). Retrieved from https://www.akademika.no/studieteknikk/metode/research-methods-education/9781138209886

Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative and Mixed Methods Approaches (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Retrieved from https://www.ucg.ac.me/skladiste/blog_609332/objava_105202/fajlovi/Creswell.pdf

DeVellis, R. F. (2016). Scale Development: Theory and Applications (4th ed.). SAGE Publications. Retrieved from https://books.google.com.pe/books?id=48ACCwAAQBAJ&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q&f=false

Firouzian, S., Rasmussen, C., & Anderson, M. (2016). Adaptations of learning glass solutions in undergraduate STEM education. The XIX Annual Conference on Research on Undergraduate Mathematics Education, 25-27. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/299395180_Adaptations_of_learning_glass_solutions_in_undergraduate_STEM_education

Fokidis, E., & Pachidis, G. (2017). Digital educational games, mathematics, and primary school students. Results of a pilot project. Open Education: The Journal for Open and Distance Education and Educational Technology, 13 (2), 77-96. https://doi.org/10.12681/jode.14061

Fullan, M. & Langworthy, M. (2014). A Rich Seam: How New Pedagogies Find Deep Learning. London: Pearson. Retrieved from https://www.michaelfullan.ca/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/3897.Rich_Seam_web.pdf

Fung, F. M. (2017). Adopting Lightboard for a Chemistry flipped classroom to improve technology-enhanced videos for better learner engagement. Journal of Chemical Education, 94(7), 956-959. Doi: 10.1021/acs.jchemed.7b00004. Retrieved from https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acs.jchemed.7b00004

General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). (2016). Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Directive 95/46/EC (General Data Protection Regulation). Official Journal of the European Union, L119, 1-88. Retrieved from http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2016/679/oj

Gliem, J. A., & Gliem, R. R. (2003). Calculating, interpreting, and reporting Cronbach’s alpha reliability coefficient for Likert-type scales. Midwest Research-to-Practice Conference in Adult, Continuing, and Community Education. Retrieved from https://scholarworks.iupui.edu/bitstream/handle/1805/344/Gliem%20%26%20Gliem.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y, last accessed 2024/11/12.

Goswami, U., & Bryant, P. (2007). Children’s cognitive development and learning. Cambridge Primary Review Research Survey 2/1a. University of Cambridge Faculty of Education. Retrieved from https://cprtrust.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/COMPLETE-REPORT-Goswami-Childrens-Cognitive-Development-and-Learning.pdf, last accessed 2024/12/10.

Hall, S., & Villareal, D. (2015). The hybrid advantage: Graduate student perspectives of hybrid education courses. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 27(1), 69-80. Retrieved from https://www.isetl.org/ijtlhe/pdf/IJTLHE1897.pdf

Hughes, A. (2003). Testing for language teachers. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511732980

Johnson, D. W, & Johnson, R. T. (2015). Cooperation and Competition. International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences (Second Edition). Elsevier. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-097086-8.24051-8.

Lubrick, M., Zhou, G., & Zhang, J. (2019). Is the future bright? The potential of lightboard videos for student achievement and engagement in learning. EURASIA Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 15(8). https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/108437

Matthews, M., & Zimmerman, W. (2020). The impact of visual displays on learning across the disciplines: A systematic review. Educational Psychology Review, 32(3), 697–736. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-020-09523-3

Mayer, R. E. (2004). Should There Be a Three-Strikes Rule Against Pure Discovery Learning? The Case for Guided Methods of Instruction. American Psychologist, 59, 14-19. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066x.59.1.14

McCorkle, S., & Whitener, P. (2020). The Lightboard: Expectations and experiences. International Journal of Designs for Learning, 11(1), 75–84. https://doi.org/10.14434/ijdl.v11i1.24642

Michael, D., Tsigilis, N., Michaelidou, V., Gregoriadis, A., Charalambous, V., & Vrasidas, C. (2024). Evaluating the classroom environment: Multilevel validation and measurement invariance of classroom behavioral climate. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 0(0). https://doi.org/10.1177/07342829241242350

Misirlis, N., & Munawar, H. B. (2022). An analysis of the technology acceptance model in understanding university students' behavioral intention to use metaverse technologies. In 12th International Conference: The Future of Education(pp. 159-163). https://doi.org/10.48550/arxiv.2302.02176

Negi, P. S., Negi, V., & Pandey, A. C. (2011). Impact of information technology on learning, teaching, and human resource management in the educational sector. International Journal of Computer Science and Telecommunications, 2(4), 66-72. https://doi.org/10.26483/ijarcs.v2i4.598

Neofotistos, V., & Karavakou, V. (2018). Factors Influencing the Use of ICT in Greek Primary Education. Open Journal for Educational Research (OJER), 2 (2), 73-88. http://dx.doi.org/10.32591/coas.ojer.0202.02073n

Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric Theory (3rd ed.). McGraw-Hill. Retrieved from https://books.google.no/books/about/Psychometric_Theory.html?id=r0fuAAAAMAAJ&redir_esc=y

Paivio, A. (1990). Dual Coding Theory. In Mental Representations: A Dual Coding Approach (pp. 583-605). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195066661.003.0004

Papaioannou, A., Milosis, D., Kosmidou, E., & Tsigilis, N. (2002). Multidimensional structure of goal orientations: The importance of adopting a personal development goal in physical education. Psychologia, 9, 494-513. https://doi.org/10.12681/psy_hps.24075

PISA (2010). PISA 2009 Results: What Students Know and Can Do: Student Performance in Reading, Mathematics and Science. Italy: OECD. Retrieved from https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/education/pisa-2009-results-what-students-know-and-can-do_9789264091450-en

Rogers, P. D., & Botnaru, D. T. (2019). Shedding light on student learning through the use of Lightboard videos. International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 13(3), 6. http://dx.doi.org/10.20429/ijsotl.2019.130306

Saavedra, A., & Opfer, V. (2012). Teaching and Learning 21st Century Skills: Lessons from the Learning Sciences. A Global Cities Education Network Report, New York: Asia Society. Retrieved from http://asiasociety.org/files/rand-0512report.pdf

Schweiker, S. S., & Levonis, S. M. (2020). A quick guide to producing a virtual chemistry course for online education. Future Medicinal Chemistry, 12(14), 1289-1291. https://doi.org/10.4155/fmc-2020-0103

Skibinski, E. S., DeBenedetti, J. I., Ortoll-Bloch, A. G., & Hines, M. A. (2015). A blackboard for the 21st century: An inexpensive Lightboard projection system for classroom use. Journal of Chemical Education, 92(10), 1754-1756. Retrieved from https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acs.jchemed.5b00155

Talanda-Fisher, M. (2020). Through the learning glass. STEM Instructional Graduate Teaching Assistant Posters, 18. Retrieved from https://scholarworks.wmich.edu/stem-gta-posters/18

Tankersley, M., Harjusola-Webb, S., & Landrum, T. J. (2008). Using single-subject research to establish the evidence base of special education. Intervention in School & Clinic, 44(2), 83-90. https://doi.org/10.1177/1053451208321600

Teddlie, C. and Tashakkori, A. (2009) Foundations of Mixed Methods Research: Integrating Quantitative and Qualitative Approaches in the Social and Behavioral Sciences. Sage, London. Retrieved from https://www.academia.edu/15527309/C_Teddlie_and_A_Tashakkori_Foundations_of_Mixed_Methods_Research_Integrating_Quantitative_and_Qualitative_Approaches_in_the_Social_and_Behavioural_Sciences_Sage_Publications_Los_Angeles_2008_RRP_AUD_81_00_ISBN_9780761930129, last accessed 2024/11/30.

Tosheva, N., & Abdullaeva, G. (2022). The concept of innovation and types of innovative technologies. Scientific Progress, 3(3), 586-589. Retrieved from https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/the-concept-of-innovation-and-types-of-innovative-technologies

UNESCO. (2014). Teaching and learning: Achieving quality for all. Education for All Global Monitoring Report 2013/4. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. Retrieved from https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000225660

Wang, J., & Antonenko, P. D. (2017). Instructor presence in instructional video: Effects on visual attention, recall, and perceived learning. Computers in Human Behavior, 71, 79–89. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.01.049

Wilson, K., & Korn, J. H. (2007). Attention During Lectures: Beyond Ten Minutes. Teaching of Psychology, 34, 84-89. Retrieved from https://www.scirp.org/reference/referencespapers?referenceid=2625419.

Yang, S., Carter, R. A., Zhang, L., & Hunt, T. (2021). Emanant themes of blended learning in K 12 educational environments: Lessons from the Every Student Succeeds Act. Computers & Education, 163. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2020.104116




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.46827/ejes.v11i12.5741

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Copyright (c) 2024 Eftychia Aslanidou, Georgios P. Heliades

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Copyright © 2015-2023. European Journal of Education Studies (ISSN 2501 - 1111) is a registered trademark of Open Access Publishing Group. All rights reserved.

This journal is a serial publication uniquely identified by an International Standard Serial Number (ISSN) serial number certificate issued by Romanian National Library (Biblioteca Nationala a Romaniei). All the research works are uniquely identified by a CrossRef DOI digital object identifier supplied by indexing and repository platforms. All authors who send their manuscripts to this journal and whose articles are published on this journal retain full copyright of their articles. All the research works published on this journal are meeting the Open Access Publishing requirements and can be freely accessed, shared, modified, distributed and used in educational, commercial and non-commercial purposes under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0).