Would the interactive whiteboard, coupled with YouTube, enhance learning as compared to a more traditional tech-supported setting where the educator uses PowerPoint?

Learning is a process that involves the students, the educators, and the content. Not only is the process dependent on the instructional material, but it is dependent on the material relevance, and on the environment. The role that the students play—passive or active—is key to how much of the content is mastered. To assist in the content mastery, the education set-ups of today have integrated tech-tools to assist the educators in the endeavor of teaching.

The reality is that many classrooms have been bombarded with interactive whiteboards.

Creating a setting with technology that promotes active learning enables the students to construct their own understanding; thus, the setting becomes far more powerful than the set-ups we usually tend to see where the students remain passive, even with technology present. The technology in this instance, specifically PowerPoint, was used to deliver the content, and the students accepted the information and reproduced it when cued to. However, technology when coupled with activities, tasks, and discussion creates active and critical learners that are able to process information in a more enhanced manner.

Thus, my intention in teaching ESP was threefold:

1. to integrate diverse learning theories with the use of technology;
2. to have learning evolve cyclically using different learning theories and conditions—specifically behavior and informational processing, and cognitive, social learning and motivation strategies; and
3. to use technology, specifically the interactive whiteboard, as a tool along with PowerPoint and YouTube to enrich ESP students’ interactivity and connectivity with the subject matter.

I expected students to take in the ESP information, specifically the business communication content, and I expected to see it modeled, self-processed, self-reflected, and self-analyzed, for the students to create an understanding of the material. I expected them to be able to judge what content material to use to enable them to peer or group role play and discuss the material to help them self-regulate their learning growth. With self-efficacy in hand, they would be able to comprehend and actively use the information delivered through the technology to plan, strategize, and implement; thus, showing content ESP mastery. The mastery was to be measured through an achievement test at end of the ESP content unit.

The purpose of the study was to see if the interactive whiteboard, coupled with the use of YouTube and PowerPoint, did indeed enhance the students’ ESP learning as compared to a more traditional tech-supported learning set up where the educator used the interactive whiteboard and the PowerPoint only. It was hypothesized that the learning under the two conditions would yield a significant difference as would be witnessed by post-test results.

I taught 52 students in a business communication course at a private university in Lebanon where the language of instruction was English. Using an experimental-control group post-test only design, the 52 participants were randomly divided up into two groups: 27 and 25 respectively. Both groups were taught the same ESP content —the business meeting—using the course textbook, my planned lecture-discussions, and the interactive whiteboard to deliver the ESP material through Microsoft PowerPoint and Word. However, the experimental group also was exposed to ESP content material through YouTube.

Throughout the ESP unit, both groups were given the same tasks to carry out. The experimental group, during their ESP class teaching sessions, were also exposed to YouTube video clips, specifically showing modeled communication issues, enacted business terminology, explanations and observations of various Robert's rule of order practices, and role-played business meeting interactivity. At the end of the ESP unit, both groups sat for the same post-test to assess their acquired ESP content and application.

Using a t-test to analyze results, as hypothesized, the experimental group scores were significantly different than the control group’s scores (t=2.2875; p<0.05). The students were all exposed to the same factors—syllabus, content, task—yet the instructional settings differed.

The control group learned the ESP content passively; they were conditioned to take in the new information and respond to it when cued to use it. However, on their own or in groups, the students took on active roles, selecting, producing, collaborating, reflecting, and assessing. The fact was that the control group had passively listened, but they actively responded to the tasks, becoming responsible for their own learning.

On the other hand, the experimental group was not as passive in their learning. From the start, they had taken on more responsible roles in their learning of the ESP content. They had observed diversity in the material exposure, they had observed live models on the clips, they had learned vicariously, and they had observed interactivity. In short, they had learned by combining behavioral, constructivist, information processing, and social learning theories. From the start, they had initiated their own learning process, guided by the educator, the textbook, and the technology. They were able to collaborate with their peers, yet they still monitored, reflected, and regulated their own content mastery. In short, the experimental group results had successfully showed mastery at a 95% confidence level of significance.

I concluded that using the interactive whiteboard coupled with YouTube added increased interactivity in their ESP learning set-up, enabling the students to effectively increase their own learning endeavors. The limitation was that the study was only one small research study that resulted in one significant success. I recommend that the use of the tool remain the choice of the educator, whether it is used individually, coupled, or partnered; as a support or a stand-alone tool. ESP content material on YouTube is plenteous, and educators need to select carefully, be it simulated or authentic material. Moreover, educators should not use the technology because it is the bandwagon practice of today; they should use the technology with purpose and clear intent. Furthermore, educators need to create challenging activities, and not only ESP activities, that reflect real life.

Dr. Christine Sabieh is professor at Notre Dame University. An advocate of CALL and a certified online instructor/trainer, she does education consultancy, workshops, publishes, and participates in conferences on a national, regional, and international level. She serves as a member of TESOL’s CALL-IS Steering Committee (2013–2015). Christine loves to travel, mixing in her professional presence with culture exploring and shopping sprees.