2013
DOI: 10.2753/mer1052-8008230108
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Using Interactive Whiteboards in Teaching Retail Mathematics

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
5
0
1

Year Published

2016
2016
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 6 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 5 publications
0
5
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…On the positive side, poor quantitative, statistics and numeracy skills (and apparent interest) among marketing majors (Tarasi et al, 2012) have resulted in a myriad of cross-departmental creative teaching innovations for undergraduates and MBA students (Brennan and Vos, 2013;Gruca, 2000;Saber and Foster, 2011). Innovative pedagogical tools and methods to improve the "less quantitative minded" business student' have resulted in whiteboards in the classroom (Greene and Kirpalani, 2013), stand-alone self-study tutorials (Chen et al, 2012) and innovative class modules to improve numeracy (Ganesh et al, 2010). The financial literacy literature appears to have a gap in cutting edge pedagogical tools (see Lusardi et al, 2017 for an exception), and researchers have called for more creative methods in the classroom (Goetz et al, 2011;Huhmann and McQuitty, 2009).…”
Section: Financial Literacy and Studentsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…On the positive side, poor quantitative, statistics and numeracy skills (and apparent interest) among marketing majors (Tarasi et al, 2012) have resulted in a myriad of cross-departmental creative teaching innovations for undergraduates and MBA students (Brennan and Vos, 2013;Gruca, 2000;Saber and Foster, 2011). Innovative pedagogical tools and methods to improve the "less quantitative minded" business student' have resulted in whiteboards in the classroom (Greene and Kirpalani, 2013), stand-alone self-study tutorials (Chen et al, 2012) and innovative class modules to improve numeracy (Ganesh et al, 2010). The financial literacy literature appears to have a gap in cutting edge pedagogical tools (see Lusardi et al, 2017 for an exception), and researchers have called for more creative methods in the classroom (Goetz et al, 2011;Huhmann and McQuitty, 2009).…”
Section: Financial Literacy and Studentsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In response to the challenges facing the lecture class and contrasting to alternatives that eliminate the live lecture, there are proposals for new uses of new technologies to help make the lecture class session more engaging (e.g., classroom response systems, Garver & Roberts 2013; Malefyane et al, 2014; interactive whiteboards, Greene & Kirpalani, 2013; animations, Chan, 2013). The teaching innovation proposed in this article, VIDS, focuses on the “transmission” element of the lecture (didactic content from the lecturer to students)—how to make that more engaging and educationally effective for students.…”
Section: Vidsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The functions of the IWB extend beyond previous teaching tools such as the conventional dry-erase whiteboard, computer, or a projector and screen (Glover & Miller, 2001), and many studies have shown that the use of an IWB in class has a positive effect on student learning (Amiri & Sharifi, 2014; Digregorio & Sobel-Lojeski, 2010; Greene & Kirpalani, 2013; Hall & Higgins, 2005; Hora & Anderson, 2012; Katwibun, 2014; McQuillan, Northcote, & Beamish, 2012; Şad, 2012; Turan, 2014; Türel & Johnson, 2012; Wall, Higgins, & Smith, 2005; Warwick, Mercer, & Kershner, 2013). Accordingly, enhancing teaching interactivity by using the multiple functions of IWBs—and thus contributing to student learning—is what the public expects when schools incorporate the IWB into instruction.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%