The Effectiveness of Using Smart Board Technology in Teaching English as a Foreign Language to Preparatory Year Students at Tabuk University
Volume 4, Issue 6, November 2015, Pages: 332-337
Received: Sep. 10, 2015;
Accepted: Oct. 7, 2015;
Published: Dec. 7, 2015
Views 8105 Downloads 193
Abdulrahman Mohammad Alfahadi, English Language and Translation Department, Faculty of Arts, University of Tabuk / English Language Centre, Tabuk, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia
Follow on us
The goal of this research is to investigate the contribution of using smart board technology in teaching English as a foreign language to preparatory year students at a university in Saudi Arabia. In order to achieve the objectives of the study, the researcher used a multiple choice test comprising of 20 items, as well as a questionnaire covering different areas. The sample of the study included 36 preparatory year students, selected randomly, from a Saudi university. The participants of the study were distributed over the control and experimental groups randomly. The experimental group was taught English using the smart board, whilst the control group was taught using conventional methods. Pre-and post questionnaires were distributed to the experimental and control groups after teaching the tenses. The findings of the study showed that there is a statistical significance level of (0,05) for the mean scores on the achievement tests, in favour of the experimental group who were taught using the smart board. Also, the findings of the study showed that the use of the smart board resulted in a statistical significance level of (0,05) in the improvement of preparatory year students’ attitudes toward English. Hence, this research recommends that smart boards be used in teaching all subjects because of the positive effect it has on both student achievement scores and the improvement of student attitudes toward English.
Smart Board, Achievement, Attitudes, English as a Foreign Language
To cite this article
Abdulrahman Mohammad Alfahadi,
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.
Education Communications and Technology Agency. Retrieved March 22’2012’ from www.becta,org.ukDevelopmental Disorders, 37 (10), 1869-1882. doi: 10.1007/ s10803-007-0361-9. Interactive whiteboards and learning (2010)
Houcine. S. (2011). The effects of ICT on learning/teaching in a foreign language. ICT for Language Learning, 4th Edition. International Conference. Retrieved from conference.pixel-online.net/ICT4LL2011/.
Shenton, A. & - Pagett, L. (2007, November). From 'bored' to screen: the use of the interactive whiteboard for literacy in six primary classrooms in England. Literacy, 41 (3), 129-136. doi: 10.1111/j.1467- 9345.2007.00475.x.
Sani, Rozana, (2007). Creative means to bridge old and new teaching .Malaysia: Retrieved June 20, 2008.
Sykes. M. (2013). “Just” Playing Games? A Look at the Use of Digital Games for Language Learning. Special Focus on Technology. Retrieved from www.actfl.org/sites/default/files/pdfs/TLE_pdf/TLE_Oct13_Article.pdf.
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/smartboard+with+kindergartener.pff.
Education Communications and Technology Agency. Retrieved March 22‘2012’from www.becta,org.uk Developmental Disorders, 37 (10), 1869-1882. doi: 10.1007/s10803-007-0361-9. Interactive whiteboards andlearning. (2010)
Mechling, LC, Krupa, K., &Gast, DL (2007, March). Impact of smart board technology: an investigation of sight word reading and observational learning. The Journal of Autism & Developmental Disorders, 37 (10), 1869-1882. doi: 10.1007/s10803-007-0361-9. Interactive whiteboards and learning.
Arkoudis, S. (2003). Teaching English as a second language in science classes: Incommensurate epistemologies? Language and Education, 17, 161-173.