Abstract
Digital educational technologies and ICT have been widely reported as central to innovations in science education. The Australian Government’s School Science Education action plan has recommended as a priority that pedagogy should enable students to learn science by ‘seeking understanding from multiple sources of information, ranging from hands-on investigation to internet searching’ (Goodrum and Rennie, Australian school science education: National Action Plan 2008–2012: Vol. 1. The National Action Plan. Department of Education, Training and Youth Affairs, Canberra, p 14, 2007). Interactive whiteboard (IWB) technology has been embraced in Australia and internationally as an educational tool that enables the convergence of a diverse range of ICT sources and multimodal representations into daily classroom practice. The technology enables students and teachers to interact with all the functions of a desktop computer through the IWB’s large touch-sensitive surface, fixed at the front of the classroom (Murcia, Teach Sci 54(4):17–21, 2008; Betcher and Lee, The interactive whiteboard revolution. ACER Press, Camberwell, 2009). However, to enhance the effectiveness of classroom science, educators must move beyond understanding the technology itself, important as this is, to understanding the impact of the technology on teachers’ pedagogy and students learning (Higgins et al., Learning, Media and Technology, 32(3), 213–225, 2007). A series of case studies conducted in Australian science classrooms, which explored the impact of IWB technology on learning and teaching, are discussed in this chapter. Classroom-based examples of effective interactive digital pedagogy are reported here with the aim of supporting educators moving to or working in contemporary IWB learning environments.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Ainsworth, S. (1999). The functions of multiple representations. Computers in Education, 33, 131–152.
Australian Academy of Science. (2007). Primary connections. http://www.science.org.au/primaryconnections/spinninginspace.htm. Accessed 5 Oct 2009.
Beauchamp, G., & Kennewell, S. (2008). The influence of ICT on the interactivity of teaching. Education and Information Technologies, 13, 305–315.
Betcher, C., & Lee, M. (2009). The interactive whiteboard revolution. Camberwell: ACER Press.
Deaney, R., Chapman, A., & Hennessy, S. (2009). A case-study of one teacher’s use of an interactive whiteboard system to support knowledge co-construction in the history classroom. Curriculum Journal, 20(4), 365–387.
Goodrum, D., & Rennie, L. (2007). Australian school science education: National Action Plan 2008–2012: Vol. 1. The National Action Plan. Canberra: Department of Education, Training and Youth Affairs.
Hackling, M., & Prain, V. (2005). Primary connections: Stage 2 trial – Research report. Canberra: Australian Academy of Science. http://www.science.org.au/primaryconnections/pcreport1.htm
Hackling, M., Smith, P., & Murcia, K. (2010). Talking science: Developing a discourse of inquiry. Teaching Science, 56(1), 17–22.
Hand, B., Gunel, M., & Ulu, C. (2009). Sequencing embedded multimodal representations in a writing to learn approach to the teaching of electricity. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46(3), 225–247.
Higgins, S., Beachamp, G., & Miller, D. (2007). Reviewing the literature on interactive whiteboards. Learning, Media and Technology, 32(3), 213–225.
Jewitt, C. (2006). Technology, literacy, learning. Oxon: Routledge.
Lee, M. (2010). Interactive whiteboards and schooling: The context. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 19(2), 133–141.
Lemke, J. (1998). Teaching all the languages of science: Words, symbols, images, and actions. http://academic.brooklyn.cuny.edu/education/jlemke/papers/barcelon.htm. Accessed 20 Aug 2009.
Littleton, K. (2010). Research into teaching with whole-class interactive technologies: Emergent themes. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 19(2), 285–292.
Mercer, N., Hennessy, S., & Warwick, P. (2010). Using interactive whiteboards to orchestrate classroom dialogue. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 19(2), 195–209.
Murcia, K. (2005). Using action research principles for professional development: The Waikiki school experience. ALAR Journal, 10(1), 3–17.
Murcia, K. (2008). Teaching for scientific literacy with an interactive whiteboard. Teaching Science, 54(4), 17–21.
Murcia, K. (2010). Multi-modal representations in primary science: What’s offered by interactive whiteboard technology? Teaching Science, 56(1), 23–29.
Murcia, K., & McKenzie, S. (2008). Whiteboard Technology: Engaging children with literacy and numeracy rich contexts. Report to DEEWR Australia. http://www.education.murdoch.edu.au/clcd/docs/Whiteboard%20Technology%20Report.pdf
Murcia, K., & Sheffield, R. (2010). Talking about science in interactive whiteboard classrooms. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 26(4), 417–431.
Prain, V., & Waldrip, B. (2006). An exploratory study of teachers’ and students’ use of multi-modal representations of concepts in primary science. International Journal of Science Education, 28(15), 1843–1866.
Rudd, T. (2007). Interactive whiteboards in the classroom. Futurelab. www.futurelab.org.uk/events/listing/whiteboards/report. Accessed 20 Mar 2009.
Tanner, H., Jones, S., Kennewell, S., & Beauchamp, G. (2005, July). Interactive whiteboards and pedagogies of whole class teaching. In P. Clarkson, A. Downton, D. Gronn, M. Horne, A. McDonough & R. Pierce, et al. (Eds.), Building connections: Theory, research and practice. Proceedings of the 28th annual conference of the Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia, Melbourne. Sydney: MERGA. http://www.merga.net.au/documents/RP832005.pdf. Accessed 11 Jan 2011.
Twiner, A., Coffin, C., Littleton, K., & Whitelock, D. (2010). Multimodality, orchestration and participation in the context of classroom use of the interactive whiteboard: A discussion. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 19(2), 211–223.
Tytler, R. (2007). Australian Education Review. Re-imagining science education: Engaging students in science for Australia’s future. Australian Council for Educational Research.
Tytler, R., Peterson, S., & Prain, V. (2006). Picturing evaporation: Learning science literacy through a particle representation. Teaching Science, 52(1), 12–17.
Warwick, P., & Kershner, R. (2006). Is there a picture of beyond? Mind mapping, ICT and collaborative learning in primary science. In P. Warwick, E. Wilson, & M. Winterbottom (Eds.), Teaching and learning primary science with ICT. Cambridge: Open University Press/McGraw-Hill House.
Warwick, P., Wilson, E., & Winterbottom, M. (2006). Considering the place of ICT in developing good practice in primary science. In P. Warwick, E. Wilson, & M. Winterbottom (Eds.), Teaching and learning primary science with ICT. Cambridge: Open University Press/McGraw-Hill House.
Weinstein, K. (1995). Action learning. London: Harper Collins.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2012 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Murcia, K. (2012). Integrating Digital Technologies into the Contemporary Science Classroom. In: Tan, K., Kim, M. (eds) Issues and Challenges in Science Education Research. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-3980-2_15
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-3980-2_15
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-007-3979-6
Online ISBN: 978-94-007-3980-2
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawEducation (R0)