Microsoft Word josefinfinalversion docx

knowledge. The lack of knowledge prevented the participants from using the IWB as regularly 
and interactively as they would have liked and lack of time prevented them from expanding 
their knowledge in order to use it more regularly and interactively. This can be compared with 
previous research, which shows that training and knowledge are two main factors that are 
crucial for the success of the IWB. The result of the study turned out, to some extent, as 
expected. The IWB was most frequently used to display information despite the participants’ 
awareness of its various possibilities and this was, as expected, due to the teachers’ lack of 
time and knowledge to find out more about the different functions and possibilities on the 
IWB. Nevertheless, because of the small sample of data one should be cautious about making 
generalisations from this study.
The method and material used for this study seemed appropriate for the aim. The interviews 
opened up for flexibility for the researcher and the participants, which resulted in detailed 
answers. However, a questionnaire with carefully elaborated questions would probably have 
been beneficial too, and had probably been beneficial for the collection of data and the result, 
since it perhaps would have resulted in a greater number of participants and the collection of a 
wider range of empirical materials.
The weaknesses in this study were the number and assortment of participants. The restricted 

---

38
time for this study and the teachers’ busy schedule limited the research. Furthermore, the 
random selection of English teachers resulted in a sample of only female participants, who 
were all in the same age. For further research it would be preferred to have more participants 
and a mixed selection of age and gender. It would also be interesting to do classroom 
observations in order to actually see how the IWB is integrated in ELT.

---

39
7. References
Armstrong, V. Barnes, S. Sutherland, R. Curran, S. Mills, S. & Thompson, I. (2005). 
Collaborative research methodology for investigating teaching and learning: The use
of interactive whiteboard technology. Educational Review, 57(4), 457-469.
Balanskat, Anja & Blamire, Roger & Kefala, Stella. 2006.
The ICT impact report: A review of ICT impact on schools in Europe. 
European schoolnet. 
http://www.aef-europe.be/documents/RAPP_doc254_en.pdf
Basmah Issa Ahmad Al-Saleem. 2012. The interactive whiteboard in English as a foreign
language (EFL) classroom. European Scientific Journal, Vol. 8, No.3: 131 
Bax, Stephen. 2003. CALL - past, present and future. Vol. 31, No. 1: 13-28.
Bax, Stephen. 2006. Interactive Whiteboards: Watch this Space. The Journal of the Learning
 
Technologies Special Interest Group.
http://ltsig.org.uk/archives/cr0602.pdf
Beatty, Ken. 2003. Teaching and Researching Computer Assisted Language Learning. New 
York: Longman. 
Betcher, Chris & Lee, Mal. 2010. The interactive whiteboard revolution: Teaching with 
 
IWBs. Camberwell: Acer Press. 
British Educational Communications and Technology Agency (Becta). 2003. What the 
 
research says about interactive whiteboards. London: Becta. 
http://dera.ioe.ac.uk/5318/1/wtrs_whiteboards.pdf
(Accessed: 2015-01-19) 
Bryman, Alan. 2008. Samhällsvetenskapliga metoder. Malmö: Liber AB. 
CILT. 2005, Digital video in the MFL classroom. CILT, the National Centre for Languages. 
http://www.cilt.org.uk/languagecolleges/digital_video.htm
Condie, Rae & Munro, Bob with Seagraves, Liz and Kenesson, Summer. 2007. The impact of