Interactive teaching technologies in general education: a literature review
Article Sidebar
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Main Article Content
Abstract
The importance of using interactive learning technologies in the modern general education system is increasing. Interactive methods ensure the active participation of students in the learning process and contribute to improving the quality of education. This work reviews the scientific literature of recent years and analyzes the impact, advantages and limitations of interactive learning technologies on learning outcomes. During the study, 50 documents (articles, meta-analyses, reviews) in the Scopus and Google Scholar databases were systematically analyzed, and the main conclusions about the effectiveness of interactive learning were drawn. It was found that interactive technologies increase students' academic achievement on average, increase their motivation and level of participation in learning. However, the need for competent integration of technologies into traditional lessons, not just as an additional tool, but as an integral part of learning, was highlighted. It was proven that digital competence and pedagogical training of teachers are decisive factors in the successful implementation of interactive learning. Practical significance: the conclusions of the article provide recommendations for the effective use of digital interactive resources in general education and can serve as a basis for the development of future educational technologies and the improvement of the skills of teaching professionals.
Article Details
References
Haleem A., Javaid M., Qadri M. A., Suman R. Understanding the role of digital technologies in education: A review // Sustainable Operations and Computers. – 2022. – Vol.3, No.4. – P.275–285. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.susoc.2022.05.004
Tamim R. M., Bernard R. M., Borokhovski E., Abrami P. C., Schmid R. F. What forty years of research says about the impact of technology on learning: A second-order meta-analysis and validation study // Review of Educational Research. – 2011. – Vol.81, No.1. – P.4–28. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654310393361
Cheung A. C., Slavin R. E. The effectiveness of educational technology applications for enhancing mathematics achievement in
K-12 classrooms: A meta-analysis // Educational Research Review. – 2013. – Vol.9. – P.88–113. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2013.01.001
Ross S. M. Technology infusion in K-12 classrooms: A retrospective look at three decades of challenges and advancements in research and practice // Educational Technology Research and Development. – 2020. – Vol.68, No.5. – P.2003–2020. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-020-09756-7
Freeman S., Eddy S. L., McDonough M., Smith M. K., Okoroafor N., Jordt H., Wenderoth M. P. Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics // Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. – 2014. – Vol.111, No.23. – P.8410–8415. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1319030111
Prince M. Does active learning work? A review of the research // Journal of Engineering Education. – 2004. – Vol.93, No.3. – P.223–231. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2168-9830.2004.tb00809.x
Hake R. R. Interactive-engagement versus traditional methods: A six-thousand-student survey of mechanics test data for introductory physics courses // American Journal of Physics. – 1998. – Vol.66, No.1. – P.64–74. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1119/1.18809
Chi M. T., Wylie R. The ICAP framework: Linking cognitive engagement to active learning outcomes // Educational Psychologist. – 2014. – Vol.49, No.4. – P.219–243. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2014.965823
Mishra P., Koehler M. J. Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for integrating technology in teacher knowledge // Teachers College Record. – 2006. – Vol.108, No.6. – P.1017–1054. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/016146810610800610
Tondeur J., van Braak J., Sang G., Voogt J., Fisser P., Ottenbreit-Leftwich A. Preparing pre-service teachers to integrate technology in education: A synthesis of qualitative evidence // Computers & Education. – 2012. – Vol.59, No.1. – P.134–144.
Kopcha T. J., Neumann K. L., Ottenbreit-Leftwich A., Pitman E. Process over product: The next evolution of our quest for technology integration // Educational Technology Research and Development. – 2020. – Vol.68, No.1. – P.1–21. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-020-09735-y
Kühl T., Wohninsland P. Learning with the interactive whiteboard in the classroom: Its impact on vocabulary acquisition, motivation and the role of foreign language anxiety // Education and Information Technologies. – 2022. – Vol.27. – P.10387–10404. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-11004-9
Shi Y., Zhang J., Yang H., MacLeod J. Effects of interactive whiteboard-based instruction on students’ cognitive learning outcomes: A meta-analysis // Interactive Learning Environments. – 2021. – Vol.29, No.2. – P.283–300. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2020.1769683
Kyriakou A., Higgins S. Systematic review of the studies examining the impact of the interactive whiteboard on teaching and learning: What we do learn and what we do not // Preschool and Primary Education. – 2016. – Vol.4, No.2. – P.254–275. DOI: https://doi.org/10.12681/ppej.9873
Moreno R., Mayer R. E. Interactive multimodal learning environments // Educational Psychology Review. – 2007. – Vol.19, No.3. – P.309–326. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-007-9047-2
Torff B., Tirotta R. Interactive whiteboards produce small gains in elementary students’ self-reported motivation in mathematics // Computers & Education. – 2010. – Vol.54, No.2. – P.379–383. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2009.08.019
Wall K., Higgins S., Smith H. “The visual helps me understand the complicated things”: Pupil views of teaching and learning with interactive whiteboards // British Journal of Educational Technology. – 2005. – Vol.36, No.5. – P.851–867. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2005.00508.x
Dehghanzadeh H., Fardanesh H., Hatami J., Talaee E., Noroozi O. Using gamification to support learning in K-12 education: A systematic literature review // British Journal of Educational Technology. – 2024. – Vol.55, No.1. – P.34–70. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13335
Ashouri A., Taheri M. Effectiveness of gamification in enhancing learning and attitudes: A study of statistics education for health school students // Journal of Advances in Medical Education & Professionalism. – 2023. – Vol.11, No.1. – P.1–9.
Lampropoulos G., Sidiropoulos A. Impact of gamification on students’ learning outcomes and academic performance: A longitudinal study comparing online, traditional, and gamified learning // Education Sciences. – 2024. – Vol.14, No.4. – P.367. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci14040367
Garzón J., Pavón J., Baldiris S. Systematic review and meta-analysis of augmented reality in educational settings // Virtual Reality. – 2019. – Vol.23, No.4. – P.447–459. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10055-019-00379-9
Zhang J., Wang Y., Sung Y. T., Chang K. E., Hwang G. J. Augmented reality in K–12 education: A systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature from 2000 to 2020 // Sustainability. – 2022. – Vol.14, No.15. – P.9725. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su14159725
Kapur M., Hattie J., Grossman I., Sinha T. Fail, flip, fix, and feed – Rethinking flipped learning: A review of meta-analyses and a subsequent meta-analysis // Frontiers in Education. – 2022. – Vol.7. – Article 956416. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2022.956416
Hunsu N. J., Adesope O., Bayly D. J. A meta-analysis of the effects of audience response systems (clicker-based technologies) on cognition and affect // Computers & Education. – 2016. – Vol.94. – P.102–119. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2015.11.013
Hannafin M. J., Hannafin K. M., Land S. M., Oliver K. Grounded practice and the design of constructivist learning environments // Educational Technology Research and Development. – 1997. – Vol.45, No.3. – P.101–117. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02299733
Ertmer P. A., Ottenbreit-Leftwich A. T. Teacher technology change: How knowledge, confidence, beliefs, and culture intersect // Journal of Research on Technology in Education. – 2010. – Vol.42, No.3. – P.255–284. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2010.10782551
Bingimlas K. A. Barriers to the successful integration of ICT in teaching and learning environments: A review of the literature // EURASIA Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education. – 2009. – Vol.5, No.3. – P.235–245. DOI: https://doi.org/10.12973/ejmste/75275
Mama M., Hennessy S. Developing a typology of teacher beliefs and practices concerning classroom use of ICT // Computers & Education. – 2013. – Vol.68. – P.380–387. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2013.05.022
Chen C. H. Why do teachers not practice what they believe regarding technology integration? // The Journal of Educational Research. – 2008. – Vol.102, No.1. – P.65–75. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3200/JOER.102.1.65-75
Polly D., Hannafin M. Examining teachers’ instructional adjustments during technology-supported science curriculum design // Journal of Science Education and Technology. – 2011. – Vol.20, No.5. – P.447–462.
Mathews-Aydinli J., Elaziz F. Turkish students’ and teachers’ attitudes toward the use of interactive whiteboards in EFL classrooms // Computer Assisted Language Learning. – 2010. – Vol.23, No.3. – P.235–252. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221003776781
Smith H. J., Higgins S., Wall K., Miller J. Interactive whiteboards: Boon or bandwagon? A critical review of the literature // Journal of Computer Assisted Learning. – 2005. – Vol.21, No.2. – P.91–101. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2729.2005.00117.x
Tondeur J., van Braak J., Sang G., Voogt J., Fisser P., Ottenbreit-Leftwich A. Preparing pre-service teachers to integrate technology in education: A synthesis of qualitative evidence // Computers & Education. – 2012. – Vol.59, No.1. – P.134–144. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2011.10.009
Johnson D. W., Johnson R. T., Stanne M. B. Cooperative learning methods: A meta-analysis. – Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, 2000. – 46 p.
Bishop J. L., Verleger M. A. The flipped classroom: A survey of the research // ASEE National Conference Proceedings. – Atlanta, GA, 2013. – Vol.30, No.9. – P.1–18.
Means B., Toyama Y., Murphy R., Bakia M., Jones K. Evaluation of evidence-based practices in online learning: A meta-analysis and review of online learning studies. – Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, 2010. – 66 p.
Sung Y. T., Chang K. E., Liu T. C. The effects of integrating mobile devices with teaching and learning on students' learning performance: A meta-analysis and research synthesis // Computers & Education. – 2016. – Vol.94. – P.252–275. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2015.11.008
Neumann M. M. Using tablets and apps to enhance emergent literacy skills in young children // Early Childhood Research Quarterly. – 2018. – Vol.42. – P.239–246. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2017.10.006
Connolly T. M., Boyle E. A., MacArthur E., Hainey T., Boyle J. M. A systematic literature review of empirical evidence on computer games and serious games // Computers & Education. – 2012. – Vol.59, No.2. – P.661–686. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.03.004
Shernoff D. J., Csikszentmihalyi M., Schneider B., Shernoff E. S. Student engagement in high school classrooms from the perspective of flow theory // School Psychology Quarterly. – 2003. – Vol.18, No.2. – P.158–176. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1521/scpq.18.2.158.21860
Ertmer P. A., Ottenbreit-Leftwich A., Sadik O., Sendurur E., Sendurur P. Teacher beliefs and technology integration practices: A critical relationship // Computers & Education. – 2012. – Vol.59, No.2. – P.423–435. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.02.001
Hsu P. S. Examining current beliefs, practices and barriers about technology integration: A case study // TechTrends. – 2016. – Vol.60, No.1. – P.30–40. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-015-0014-3
Deng F., Chai C. S., Tsai C. C., Lee M. H. The relationships among Chinese practicing teachers’ epistemic beliefs, pedagogical beliefs and their beliefs about the use of ICT // Educational Technology & Society. – 2014. – Vol.17, No.2. – P.245–256.
Bonwell C. C., Eison J. A. Active learning: Creating excitement in the classroom. – Washington, DC: The George Washington University, 1991. – 121 p.
Vygotsky L. S. Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. – Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1978. – 159 p.
Rutten N., van Joolingen W. R., van der Veen J. T. The learning effects of computer simulations in science education // Computers & Education. – 2012. – Vol.58, No.1. – P.136–153. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2011.07.017
Papert S. Mindstorms: Children, computers, and powerful ideas. – New York: Basic Books, 1980. – 230 p.
Zawacki-Richter O., Marín V. I., Bond M., Gouverneur F. Systematic review of research on artificial intelligence applications in higher education – where are the educators? // International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education. – 2019. – Vol.16, No.1. – P.39. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-019-0171-0
Carrera-Rivera A., Ochoa W., Larrinaga F., Lasa G. How-to conduct a systematic literature review: A quick guide for computer science research // MethodsX. – 2022. – Vol.9. – P.101895. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mex.2022.101895
Clark R. E. Reconsidering research on learning from media // Review of Educational Research. – 1983. – Vol.53, No.4. – P.445–459. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543053004445