Description
The purpose of this paper is to describe a simple approach available to corporate finance
instructors to enhance the lecture delivery through the use of “digital ink” and tablet technology, to
increase engagement during the lecture and enhance the classroom experience
Accounting Research Journal
Enhancing lecture presentation through tablet technology
Mirela Malin
Article information:
To cite this document:
Mirela Malin , (2014),"Enhancing lecture presentation through tablet technology", Accounting Research
J ournal, Vol. 27 Iss 3 pp. 212 - 225
Permanent link to this document:http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/ARJ -09-2013-0069
Downloaded on: 24 January 2016, At: 21:20 (PT)
References: this document contains references to 26 other documents.
To copy this document: [email protected]
The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 1367 times since 2014*
Users who downloaded this article also downloaded:
Nicholas Apergis, Christina Christou, Christis Hassapis, (2014),"Accounting standards convergence
dynamics: International evidence from club convergence and clustering", Accounting Research J ournal, Vol.
27 Iss 3 pp. 226-248http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/ARJ -06-2013-0031
Kim Watty, Satoshi Sugahara, Nadana Abayadeera, Luckmika Perera, J ade McKay, (2014),"Towards a
Global Model of Accounting Education", Accounting Research J ournal, Vol. 27 Iss 3 pp. 286-300 http://
dx.doi.org/10.1108/ARJ -08-2013-0054
Theodore T.Y. Chen, (2014),"Is Hong Kong ready for accounting education reform: an analysis of tri-partite
views", Accounting Research J ournal, Vol. 27 Iss 3 pp. 249-265http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/ARJ -11-2013-0078
Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by emerald-srm:115632 []
For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for
Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines
are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com
Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company
manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as
providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee
on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive
preservation.
*Related content and download information correct at time of download.
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
1
:
2
0
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
Enhancing lecture presentation
through tablet technology
Mirela Malin
Department of Accounting, Finance and Economics,
Griffth Business School, Griffth University,
Gold Coast, Australia
Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to describe a simple approach available to corporate fnance
instructors to enhance the lecture delivery through the use of “digital ink” and tablet technology, to
increase engagement during the lecture and enhance the classroom experience.
Design/methodology/approach – The purpose of this paper is to describe a simple approach
available to corporate fnance instructors to enhance the lecture delivery through the use of “digital ink”
and tablet technology, to increase engagement during the lecture and enhance the classroomexperience.
Findings – Positive student satisfaction was documented with the majority of students fnding that
the newmethod of teaching has helped with their learning. While there was no substantial difference in
the overall mean examscores compared to previous teaching periods, there was an improvement in the
ability of students to identify and summarise the different theories.
Originality/value – Technology has created both a progress and a decline in helping students learn.
The original blackboard method of instruction was considered outdated when PowerPoint
presentations became the main method of lecture delivery. However, the ability of instructors to work
through problems progressively can be diminished in slide presentations. This paper shows how
technology has facilitated a shift back towards the original “chalk and talk” method of lecture delivery,
where the “chalk” has been replaced with “digital ink” in an attempt to reinvigorate slide presentations
and actively engage students more during the lecture.
Keywords iPad, App, Digital ink, Lecture, Student engagement
Paper type Case study
1. Introduction
In the past decade universities have been challenged by the digital revolution, forcing a
shift in policy and academic practice towards greater integration (or “blending”) of
traditional face-to-face and e-learning methods. Nowadays, e-learning is not only the
responsibility of distance education institutions, but has been included in the student
learning experience of campus-based institutions as well (Ellis et al., 2009).
Schneckenberg (2009) states that the success of blended learning strategies in higher
education depends on senior management’s commitment to the development of
academics’ skills. As human resources within the tertiary institution, academics
represent the “face of the university” through their varied interactions with students and
development of curriculum. Consequently, academics are the critical factor for
structural e-learning innovation, and ultimately, the success of e-learning within the
tertiary sector. Not only must academics now embrace technology in every aspect of
their teaching, but they must also fnd ways to keep students engaged and interested
through the use of blended learning techniques.
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/1030-9616.htm
ARJ
27,3
212
Accounting Research Journal
Vol. 27 No. 3, 2014
pp. 212-225
©Emerald Group Publishing Limited
1030-9616
DOI 10.1108/ARJ-09-2013-0069
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
1
:
2
0
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
The concept of student engagement refers to the way students interact with their
institution in the process of learning, and it depends upon howeach student participates
in educationally purposeful activities (Radloff and Coates, 2009). Student engagement
refers not only to the time spent on an activity, but to the enhancement of the overall
student learning and development experience. Radloff and Coates (2009, p. 9) state that
that the overall student learning experience depends also on the ability of institutions
and staff to “generate conditions that stimulate and encourage involvement”. Thus, the
instructors are an integral part of this process, requiring continuous development of new
skill sets and new ways of thinking on how to make the learning process more
stimulating (Moller et al., 2008).
While “student engagement” is not a new idea and is generally a widely accepted
construct for academics, knowing how to facilitate meaningful, stimulating and
satisfying learning interactions within a virtual learning space is potentially a major
obstacle academics face when designing e-learning curricula (Kuh, 2009). Kuh (2009)
identifes the concept “student engagement” to be a complex entity and not necessarily
a solid one, rather it evolves as interpretations of the “what and how” of teaching
changes over time.
The pedagogical problemaddressed in this paper relates to howstudent engagement
can be increased by improving the content and the way the lecture is communicated (i.e.
the “what and how” of teaching) through the use of technology. More specifcally, this
paper presents an innovative way to deliver lectures in the higher education setting,
particularly in fnance courses, through the use of an iPad and a unique presentation
application, called Explain Everything, which can be purchased through the App Store
on the iPad. Preliminary observations alluding to the effectiveness of this presentation
method will be discussed.
2. Theoretical framework
An appropriate pedagogical framework for learning and teaching with technology
within business courses is the community of inquiry (CoI) framework presented by
Garrison et al. (2010). According to this model, presented in Figure 1, the educational
experience of students is infuenced by how technology affects: how we teach (the
teaching presence) how students process the knowledge (the cognitive presence) and
how students connect with their peers and teachers (the social presence). The
application of technology in enhancing the delivery of lectures addresses two elements
of Garrison’s CoI framework: teaching presence and cognitive presence. Teaching
presence includes design (creating innovative and challenging learning activities and
environments), facilitation (providing new means for communication and interaction
between students and teachers) and direct instruction (various ways of sharing and
introducing information from diverse sources and forms with the help of emerging
technologies) (Garrison and Akyol, 2009). Within the teaching element, technology is
able to change the way academics teach, thus causing an incremental change to
pedagogy.
Garrison and Akyol (2009) describe cognitive presence in terms of four practical
inquiry (PI) model phases proposed by Garrison et al. (2001): the triggering event
(presentation of the problem), exploration (problems are explored by gathering
information and discussion), integration (relevant information and ideas are brought
together to solve the problem) and resolution (testing the proposed solutions). Within the
213
Enhancinglecture
presentation
throughtablet
technology
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
1
:
2
0
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
cognitive element of the framework, technology, with the aid of teaching presence, helps
the student develop a better understanding of the content, promotes higher order
thinking and refective learning and facilitates a better engagement with the course
content. As Garrison and Akyol (2009) state: “the key to cognitive presence is teaching
presence as manifestedthroughtaskspecifcationandactive facilitationor moderation”.
Garrison and Vaughan (2008) state that the key in engaging students to construct
meaningful knowledge is found in the way students are stimulated and motivated to
refect on the material presented to them. The educational experience of students can be
enhanced by integrating the three elements of teaching presence: design, facilitation and
direction. The educational leader is thus responsible for providing the appropriate
design, facilitation and direction that will structure, support and shape the students’
learning experience Garrison and Vaughan (2008, p. 32). Furthermore, Garrison et al.
(2010) state that the three dimensions of teaching presence appear to help students
through the four PI phases of the cognitive presence. Similarly, the teaching presence
element is an important determinant in student satisfaction, perceived learning and
sense of community (Garrison and Arbaugh, 2007). Having established the importance
of the teaching presence in the overall student learning experience and engagement, the
attention is directed towards the factors that hinder or delay this process.
3. Key challenges relating to student engagement
While sustained attention in class is dependent upon a range of factors like time of day,
motivation, emotion and enjoyment, earlier studies on attention span suggested that
“after 15 or 20 minutes the lecture loses its effectiveness even in transmitting
information” (Frederick, 1986, p. 44). However, a more recent reviewby WilsonandKorn
(2007) found no evidence to support this idea. Although the average length of attention
Figure 1.
Community of inquiry
framework
ARJ
27,3
214
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
1
:
2
0
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
span has not been accurately established, there is a growing concern that student
attention during lectures is declining. Because university classes typically run for 1 to 2
hours, and are often scheduled back-to-back, instructors are faced with the challenge of
capturing and maintaining students’ attention for long periods of time. This is especially
diffcult for subjects involving mathematical formulas or other dense/abstract concepts.
Strategies like incorporating live demonstrations or visual aids in the lecture, requiring
student participation on certain tasks, or integration of other student-centred
approaches have the ability to increase attention, leading to longer-lasting retention of
the presented information (Bunce et al., 2010).
Another issue faced by many instructors, especially in the areas of science, maths
and business, is that the slide presentation method has a reduced capacity to keep
students intrigued through the gradual and spontaneous revelation of elements of an
idea or problem as the thinking process progresses. Business courses such as
accounting, fnance and economics, for example, involve instruction by showing how
models, equations and graphs are structured (Scott, 2011). An important learning
outcome in business courses is the ability of the students to apply into practice the
theory and models learned by solving complex problems, which require multiple step
processes. The free-hand method of lecture delivery allows instructors to begin with a
simple conception of the problem and then add in more complex elements as students
master the basic ideas. This method also sends a subtle signal to students that the
lecture is a “work in progress” rather than a pre-scripted monologue, allowing them
greater scope for active involvement.
Thus, the problem that presents itself is: how to increase the attention of students
through careful design of the three elements of the teaching presence in such a way that
helps students engage more in the cognitive processes. The approach to solve this
problem is to change the way the content is delivered in class. By designing a new
method of delivery or learning activity, the teacher plans howto engage the learner in a
sustained and effortful cognitive activity that allows the knowledge or idea to be
retained until it is needed next time (Laurillard, 2009). Thus, the teachers’ design of the
lecture is crucial, as it motivates the learners’ effort to stay engaged and retain complex
information. According to Shulman (1986), the ways of representing and formulating
the subject or the pedagogical and content knowledge is important in determining how
students access and comprehend the material presented to them. One way of making the
content more accessible and comprehensible to the learner is by using technology
(Mishra and Koehler, 2006).
4. Targeted pedagogical improvement
The traditional face-to-face instructional mode of education still remains the major delivery
method of tertiary education. To create dynamic presentations with traditional lecture
delivery tools, teachers can use the whiteboard, but this involves frequently turning their
back to the class and losing eye contact with the students, which can result in students
disengaging from the lecture (Race, 2007). Similarly, Exley and Dennick (2009) state that
presenting concepts on the whiteboard or blackboard is unproductive as often writing is
illegible and diffcult to see from the back of a lecture theatre, making the lecture an
ineffective learning mechanism (Venema and Lodge, 2013). The introduction of lecture
capture practices, where the lectures are recorded and made available to students at their
leisure, has permitted students greater opportunity for reviewing content according to their
215
Enhancinglecture
presentation
throughtablet
technology
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
1
:
2
0
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
individual needs. However, this creates another drawbackwithusingthe whiteboardinthat
any free-hand drawing on this tool is not recorded by the standard lecture capture setup.
Many lecture theatres are equipped with electronic data visualisers (or document cameras)
that are connected to the lecture recording system. However, the use of this tool stops the
fowof the explanationbecause of the needtoswitchbetweendevices, whichcanbe followed
byadelayasonedeviceshutsoff andtheother turnson, whichinturninterruptsthelearning
process of students.
Teachers need to explore these conventional methods in the new context of digital
learning and if necessary adapt the environment, task practice or the way concepts are
articulated, to the students’ needs. Good teaching commands an understanding of how
technology relates to pedagogy and content. Mishra and Koehler (2006) state that there
is a complex and fne relationship between what is learned and taught (content), the
methods of teaching and learning (pedagogy), and technology. Not only do instructors
have to know the subject they teach, but also how the content can be changed by the
application of technology. Similarly, knowing howteaching might change as a result of
implementing a particular technology is connected with the ability of the instructor to
choose the appropriate tool that fts the subject.
Given the stated constraints faced by educators in business courses, the challenge is
to incorporate the static slide presentation method, which is superior in the way it clearly
structures and effciently signposts the key points of the lecture, with the spontaneous
use of a free-hand drawing tool into a dynamic lecture presentation where all visual and
auditory components can be effciently recorded as well. This can be achieved through
the use of tablet technology and “digital ink”, which combines elements of traditional
whiteboard-based teaching and PowerPoint presentation to deliver a more dynamic and
interactive classroom experience (Phillips and Loch, 2012). This way, the face-to-face
traditional presentation can be transformed into a combined teacher/student
collaborative experience where the lecture is constructed slide by slide. This activity
was found to be valued not only by the students, but can be more rewarding for the
instructor as well (Phillips and Loch, 2011). The use of iPad and “digital ink” to solve
problems on the presentation slides has the potential to improve student engagement
and enhance retention of content. Anderson et al. (2007, p. 60) state that “digital ink is a
natural medium for solving problems, not just reporting solutions”.
The “Explain Everything” application combined with the iPad fulfls the criteria for
the free-hand drawing tool. Like a whiteboard, the application provides a blank white
canvas, but now in electronic form on the screen of the iPad. This canvas can be drawn
upon using a specially designed, rubber-tipped pen called a “stylus”. PowerPoint
presentations can be imported into the application and added to the canvas, where it
then becomes possible to draw upon individual slides and on the areas of the canvas
surrounding them. Once imported into the application, individual slides can also be
increased or decreased in size and moved around the canvas using regular touchscreen
fnger gestures. Thus, the application permits answers and solutions to be worked on (or
around) the actual PowerPoint slides. Using the stylus, important concepts can be
highlighted and students’ attention can be directed to the current subject matter being
discussed. The ability to annotate slides in real time to clarify a point, introduce diverse
ideas and show novel solutions provides dynamicity to the traditional slide-based
presentation (Anderson et al., 2007). The PowerPoint slides act as a framework for the
lecture, where the instructor can add live annotations and pose challenging questions
ARJ
27,3
216
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
1
:
2
0
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
(Tront, 2007). Iribe et al. (2010), specifcally, have shown that learning can be improved
by including hand-drawn diagrams on presentation slides. Most importantly, the iPad
can be plugged into the data projector (in a similar way to how you would plug in a
laptop) so worked solutions are recorded in the same manner as the typical lecture
presentation. Students can therefore revise not only the lecture slides but also the
worked examples, diagrams or models that otherwise would not have been recorded if a
traditional whiteboard had been used instead.
This is an important tool, especially in applied maths-based courses such as
corporate fnance, as it has the ability to increase students’ understanding and facilitate
deep learning. In the second teaching semester of 2012, this tool was used to present all
lectures for two undergraduate second- and third-year fnance courses. Figure 2(A)
presents an example of a PowerPoint slide without “digital ink” annotations, where the
concept of “frm valuation” based on the Modigliani – Miller capital structure theory is
Figure 2.
Example of lecture slides
217
Enhancinglecture
presentation
throughtablet
technology
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
1
:
2
0
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
presented step by step. Figure 2(B) shows the same slide, which has been reduced in size
to allow further notes and explanations on the model. Similarly, Figure 2(C) shows a
slide, which presents the stages in the valuation of a target frm in a merger, while
Figure 2(D) shows the same instructions using formulas inserted on the blank slide
during the delivery of the lecture.
The implementation of this teaching application is straightforward and does not
involve extensive effort. As the PowerPoint slides are already prepared, they can be
uploaded from Dropbox or any other site into the “Explain Everything” application as
shown in Figure 3. The fles uploaded can have a ppt. extension, however, to make sure
formulas or certain symbols are retained, it is recommended that the slides can be
uploaded in a pdf. format.
The application not only allows the instructor to write on the slides, but also displays
a number of features like laser pointer, insert text/picture/browser or change the colour
of the pen, as seen in Figure 4. Furthermore, the app contains a recording feature that lets
Figure 3.
Uploading the lecture
notes into the application
Figure 4.
Features in the “Explain
everything” app
ARJ
27,3
218
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
1
:
2
0
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
the user record the entire lecture or just certain sections of the delivery even if the theatre
or seminar room is not equipped with recording capabilities. Complete explanation of
each feature, together with video tutorials can be found on www.explaineverything.com/.
The cost associated with the application of this tool is minimal. The app is available
for purchase for $2.99 USD and can be installed on a Mac or Android device. The price
of a “stylus” ranges from$10-$35 AUDwhile the extension cable that connects the tablet
to the lecture theatre console costs around $25-$35 AUD. The examples described in this
paper have been conducted on an iPad 2. The results of introducing this initiative are
described in the next section.
5. Evaluation
Assessing the effectiveness of this method of lecture delivery is vital in understanding
whether it improves student engagement and overall learning. At the end of each
semester, students are asked to formally evaluate the course and the teaching team by
completing a survey with questions on a fve-point Likert scale ranging from “strongly
agree” to “strongly disagree”. To evaluate this teaching method, a statement relating to
the use of digital ink during the lecture delivery was inserted in the general university
survey. Table I presents the students’ responses from the two undergraduate courses
where this method of lecturing was used.
Overall, in the second-year corporate fnance course, which is a core subject for the
accounting major, 60 students responded to the survey, representing 37 per cent of the
cohort, while in the third-year course, a capstone course in the fnance major, 38.7 per
cent of the students flled in the questionnaire. The implementation of this technology
proved successful, in terms of student satisfaction, with the vast majority of each group
(85.0 per cent and 96.8 per cent for second- and third-year, respectively) choosing
“strongly agree” or “agree” in response to the statement: “The use of writing on the
presentation slides to solve problems or emphasise points during the lecture in this
course assisted my learning”. Student comments in response to open-ended questions on
the surveys were also positive, revealing a perception in students that this method of
teaching increased their attention in class and enabled greater retention of knowledge.
Some examples of comments from the open-ended questions include the following:
Use of iPad to write examples during lecture is ground-breaking – very good solution to lecture
capture not recording the whiteboard.
Table I.
Results of survey
administered at the end of
semester
Question asked
Corporate fnance
second-year
Advance corporate
fnance third-year
n % n %
The use of writing on the presentation
slides to solve problems or to
emphasise points during the lecture in
this course assisted my learning
SA 23 38.3 12 50
A 28 46.7 11 45.8
N 5 8.3 1 4.2
D 2 3.3 0 0
SD 2 3.3 0 0
Total 60 of 162 37 24 of 62 38.7
Note: 5pt Likert scale: (SD) Strongly Disagree, (D) Disagree, (N) Neutral, (A) Agree, (SA) Strongly
Agree
219
Enhancinglecture
presentation
throughtablet
technology
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
1
:
2
0
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
The use of “Explain Everything” was very effective.
I found the additional notes added by the lecturer on the slides during the lectures to be
invaluable in gauging a good understanding of the formulas.
The use of writing on the slides during presentations was a FANTASTIC!!! Idea that I have
suggested to other lecturers; it is very helpful.
The new technology which allows me to see everything you write on lecture capture is
fantastic and a great learning tool, and really keeps me engaged.
While these subjective ratings by students are very encouraging, it is equally important
to look for objective improvements in the learning outcomes. The second-year corporate
fnance course, where more than half of the students enrolled are accounting majors, was
selected for further analysis. Corporate fnance, a core subject in the Bachelor of
Commerce, is one of the courses that had assigned specifc learning goals and objectives
that need to be assessed as part of the accreditation by the Association to Advance
Collegiate Schools of Business (AACSB). AACSBrequires tertiary institutions to have a
quality Assurance of Learning framework for its programs where knowledge specifc to
the discipline and generic skills are achieved (AACSB, 2013). The Program Learning
Objective (PLO) assigned to corporate fnance was to “demonstrate an understanding of
major theories, models and tools” and was applied to the mid-semester exam. The
curriculummapping of the programindicated that this course is the only fnance subject
that students in the accounting major must complete, thus enabling certain theories and
models like effcient market hypothesis and capital asset pricing model to be assessed.
When mean examscores were calculated for the study period when the newmethod was
implemented (i.e. semester 2, 2012) and the two consecutive study periods preceding it,
there did not appear to be any substantial improvement in the mid-semester or the fnal
exam results that could be attributed to the innovation (see Table II).
Table III provides further information on each group of students in the teaching
periods investigated. “Total fails” represents the overall failure rate due to a grade lower
than 50 per cent, while “other fails” measures course abandonment due to failure to sit all
exams or non-submission of all assessment items (Phillips and Loch, 2011). Semester 2,
2012, where the new teaching method was introduced displays a lower percentage of
“total fails” compared to the other two periods. Similarly, there is a reduction of 1 per
cent in the number of “other fails” in the semester where interactive lectures were
introduced. Because the course investigated in this paper is a “core” in the program, the
number of course abandonments is relatively low. The demographics show an even
gender distribution across the semesters, with international students making up
between 31-47 per cent of students enrolments.
Phillips and Loch (2011) investigates whether socio-economic status (SES) has an
infuence on student achievement, motivation and engagement with a course,
Table II.
Mean and standard
deviation scores for the
mid-semester and end-of-
semester exams for three
consecutive study periods
Study period
Mid-semester exam End-of-semester exam
Mean SD n Mean SD n
Semester 2 2011 20 4.8 192 29 11.1 179
Semester 1 2012 20 4.9 170 30 10.4 159
Semester 2 2012 21 4.9 157 30 11.2 148
ARJ
27,3
220
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
1
:
2
0
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
concluding that there is a relationship between students who drop out and low SES.
Using student postcodes at application time and Australian Bureau of Statistics 2011
census data provided by the university, Table III shows only a relatively small
percentage of lowSES students in each semester. Nevertheless, semester 1, 2012, where
the “other fails” are the highest at 4.7 per cent has also the highest percentage of lowSES
students at 7 per cent compared with the other two semesters. However, the grade point
average (GPA) breakdown for each period shows that semester 2, 2012, where digital ink
was used in the lecture has the highest number of students with low GPA and, at the
same time, the lowest failure rate (The GPAscore is the student’s overall score as at the
commencement of the course where 1 is the lowest and 7 is the highest).
Although Table II and III provide mixed results as to the effectiveness of the new
teaching tool, closer inspection of the mid-semester exam results reveals an interesting
pattern. The mid-semester exam questions could be divided based on two PLO criteria,
into those assessing the student’s ability to identify and summarise the correct theory
and those assessing the student’s ability to apply the theory to a scenario. For each
question set, students were categorised according to whether they scored between 0-49
per cent (unsatisfactory USA), 50-64 per cent (satisfactory S), 65-74 per cent (good G),
75-84 per cent (very good VG) or 85-100 per cent (excellent EX), according to the grading
scale of the university. As can be seen in Figure 3 there was a distinctive pattern of
improvement in the results for the purely theoretical questions, with a higher proportion
of students scoring 65 per cent or above and a lower proportion of students scoring
Table III.
Student fails,
demographics and
educational background
Demographics Semester 2, 2011 (%) Semester 1, 2012 (%) Semester 2, 2012 (%)
Students enrolled 192 170 159
Fails
Total 16.5 12.4 10.8
Other 3.6 4.7 3.7
Gender
Male 50 57 57
Female 50 43 43
Citizenship status
Australian or resident 53 69 61
International 47 31 39
Socio-economic status
Low 4 7 3
Medium 41 54 47
High 3 2 4
NA 52 37 46
Grade point average
1 to less than 3 4.7 2.3 6.3
3 to less than 5 50.5 47.7 46.5
5 to 7 28.6 29.4 28.3
NA 16.2 20.6 18.9
221
Enhancinglecture
presentation
throughtablet
technology
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
1
:
2
0
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
below 65 per cent compared to the previous two study periods for which data could be
collected (Figure 5).
This pattern of improvement was not replicated for the application questions.
Figure 4 shows mixed results. Although, from semester 1, 2012, to semester 2, 2012,
there was an increase in the percentage of students who performed excellent (EX) and
good (G) of 3.18 per cent and 5.5 per cent, respectively, the performance of students who
performed very good (VG) and satisfactory (S) decreased by 2.3 per cent and 8.5 per cent,
respectively. This makes the fndings diffcult to interpret given that the free-hand
drawing strategy is supposed to specifcally target application of theory through clearer
elucidation of problem-solving techniques (Figure 6).
Nevertheless, the implementation of this teaching method has been greatly
appreciated by the students, who have requested this tool to be adopted in other courses,
as well as by other academics teaching in the feld of accounting and fnance who have
embraced this method of lecture delivery to keep students engaged and improve
learning outcomes.
6. Conclusion
The purpose of this paper was to describe how tablet technology can be used to
communicate lectures that keep students engaged and to present preliminary
observations relating to the introduction of a newlecture delivery method. The two key
success measures that were explored were:
(1) student satisfaction, as reported in the formal course evaluations; and
(2) exam performance, as compared with that of previous teaching periods.
The student satisfaction ratings were very positive with the vast majority of
students reporting that they found the new method to have helped with their
Ex VG G S US
Sem 2, 2011 10.91% 20.00% 12.12% 28.48% 28.48%
Sem 1, 2012 15.19% 21.52% 11.39% 28.48% 23.42%
Sem 2, 2012 20.27% 25.68% 17.57% 20.27% 16.22%
0.00%
5.00%
10.00%
15.00%
20.00%
25.00%
30.00%
35.00%
40.00%
45.00%
Theory
Sem 2, 2011 Sem 1, 2012 Sem 2, 2012
Figure 5.
Percentage of students
scoring in the different
grade categories for the
theoretical questions
ARJ
27,3
222
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
1
:
2
0
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
learning. It would be interesting in future to ascertain a measure of comparative
value in student perceptions. For example, how valuable do students fnd this
method compared to a standard PowerPoint lecture or interactive practice questions
or simply reading the textbook. When it came to exam performance, again, the
results seemed generally positive. While there did not seem to be any substantial
difference in the overall mean exam scores compared to previous teaching periods,
there did appear to be a general improvement in the ability of students to identify
and summarise the different theories. Though this improvement did not follow
through on all performance categories in the application of theory, it is a solid frst
step, which can be built upon in future teaching periods. In conclusion, it is
imperative for lecturers to continually update their skill sets to incorporate the new
technologies available for enhancing student engagement. While it would be unwise
to introduce the latest technologies without a pre-conceived pedagogical purpose,
early observations do suggest that when the right tool is selected to match the
characteristics of the content area then substantial student learning improvements
can be achieved.
References
Aacsb (2013), “AACSB learning and teaching standard A5”, available at: www.aacsb.edu/
accreditation/accounting/standards/2013/learning-and-teaching/standard-a5.asp (accessed
26 September 2013).
Anderson, R., Anderson, R., Davis, P., Linnell, N., Prince, C., Razmov, V. and Videon, F. (2007),
“Classroompresenter: enhancing interactive education with digital ink”, Computer, Vol. 40
No. 9, pp. 56-61.
Ex VG G S US
Sem 2, 2011 14.55% 26.67% 15.76% 32.73% 10.30%
Sem 1, 2012 17.09% 15.82% 11.39% 43.04% 12.66%
Sem 2, 2012 20.27% 13.51% 16.89% 34.46% 14.86%
0.00%
5.00%
10.00%
15.00%
20.00%
25.00%
30.00%
35.00%
40.00%
45.00%
Applica?on
Sem 2, 2011 Sem 1, 2012 Sem 2, 2012
Figure 6.
Percentage of students
scoring in the different
grade categories for the
application questions
223
Enhancinglecture
presentation
throughtablet
technology
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
1
:
2
0
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
Bunce, D.M., Flens, E.A. and Neiles, K.Y. (2010), “Howlong can students pay attention in class? A
study of student attention decline using clickers”, Journal of Chemical Education, Vol. 87
No. 12, pp. 1438-1443.
Ellis, R.A., Ginns, P. and Piggott, L. (2009), “E-learning in higher education: some key aspects and
their relationship to approaches to study”, Higher Education Research & Development,
Vol. 28 No. 3, pp. 309-319.
Exley, K. and Dennick, R. (2009), Giving a Lecture: From Presenting to Teaching, Routledge,
New York, NY.
Frederick, P.J. (1986), “The lively lecture: 8 variations”, College Teaching, Vol. 34 No. 2, pp. 43-50.
Garrison, D.R. and Akyol, Z. (2009), “Role of instructional technology in the transformation of
higher education”, Journal of Computing in Higher Education, Vol. 21 No. 1, pp. 19-30.
Garrison, D.R., Anderson, T. and Archer, W. (2001), “Critical thinking, cognitive presence and
computer conferencing in distance education”, American Journal of Distance Education,
Vol. 15 No. 1, pp. 7-23.
Garrison, D.R., Anderson, T. and Archer, W. (2010), “The frst decade of the community of inquiry
framework: a retrospective”, Internet and Higher Education, Vol. 13 Nos 1/2, pp. 5-9.
Garrison, D.R. and Arbaugh, J.B. (2007), “Researching the community of inquiry framework:
review, issues and future directions”, Internet and Higher Education, Vol. 10 No. 3,
pp. 157-172.
Garrison, D.R. and Vaughan, H. (2008), “Designing blended learning to create a community of
inquiry, Chapter 3”, Blended Learning in Higher Education: Framework, Principles and
Guidelines, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, pp. 31-48.
Iribe, Y., Nagaoka, H., Kouichi, K. and Nitta, T. (2010), “Web-based lecture systems using slide
sharing for classroom questions and answers”, International Journal of Knowledge and
Web Intellingence, Vol. 1 Nos 3/4, pp. 243-255.
Kuh, G.D. (2009), “What student affairs professionals need to know about student engagement”,
Journal of College of Student Development, Vol. 50 No. 6, pp. 683-706.
Laurillard, D. (2009), “The pedagogical challenges to collaborative technologies”,
Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, Vol. 4 No. 1, pp. 5-20.
Mishra, P. and Koehler, M.J. (2006), “Technological pedagogical content knowledge: a framework
for teacher knowledge”, Teachers College Record, Vol. 108 No. 6, pp. 1017-1054.
Moller, L., Forshay, W.R. and Huett, J. (2008), “Implication for instructional design on the potential
of the web”, Tech Trends, Vol. 52 No. 4, pp. 66-70.
Phillips, P.J. and Loch, B.I. (2011), “Building lectures and building bridges with
socio-economically disadvantaged students”, Educational Technology and Society,
Vol. 14 No. 3, pp. 240-251.
Phillips, P.J. and Loch, B.I. (2012), “Dynamic and interactive teaching with technology”, Journal of
Financial Education, Vol. 38 Nos 3/4, pp. 46-68.
Race, P. (2007), The Lecturer’s Toolkit Routledge, London.
Radloff, A. and Coates, H. (2009), “Doing more for learning: enhancing engagement and outcomes.
Australasian survey of student engagement report”, ACER, Camberwell.
Schneckenberg, D. (2009), “Understanding the real barriers to technology-enhanced innovation in
higher education”, Educational Research, Vol. 51 No. 4, pp. 411-424.
Scott, R.H. (2011), “Tableau ?conomique: teaching economics with a tablet computer”, The
Journal of Economic Education, Vol. 42 No. 2, pp. 175-180.
ARJ
27,3
224
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
1
:
2
0
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
Shulman, L.S. (1986), “Those who understand: knowledge growth in teaching”, Educational
Researcher, Vol. 15 No. 2, pp. 4-14.
Tront, J.G. (2007), “Facilitating pedagogical practices through large-scale tablet PC deployment”,
Computer, Vol. 40 No. 9, pp. 62-68.
Venema, S. and Lodge, J.M. (2013), “Capturing dynamic presentation: using technology to enhance
the chalk and talk”, Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, Vol. 29 No. 1,
pp. 20-31.
Wilson, K. and Korn, J.H. (2007), “Attention during lectures: beyond ten minutes”, Teaching of
Psychology, Vol. 34 No. 2, pp. 85-89.
About the author
Mirela Malin is a Lecturer in the department of accounting, fnance and economics within Griffth
Business School. She has a research interest in howtechnology has infuenced teaching in higher
education and how blended learning techniques have been used to enhance student learning
outcomes. She has presented at blended learning symposiums, international teaching conferences
and has been a reviewer for journals and conferences in education and fnance. Her publications
include articles in the Journal of International Financial Markets Institutions and Money,
Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance and Accounting Research Journal among others.
Mirela Malin can be contacted at: [email protected]
To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: [email protected]
Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints
225
Enhancinglecture
presentation
throughtablet
technology
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
1
:
2
0
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
doc_729552134.pdf
The purpose of this paper is to describe a simple approach available to corporate finance
instructors to enhance the lecture delivery through the use of “digital ink” and tablet technology, to
increase engagement during the lecture and enhance the classroom experience
Accounting Research Journal
Enhancing lecture presentation through tablet technology
Mirela Malin
Article information:
To cite this document:
Mirela Malin , (2014),"Enhancing lecture presentation through tablet technology", Accounting Research
J ournal, Vol. 27 Iss 3 pp. 212 - 225
Permanent link to this document:http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/ARJ -09-2013-0069
Downloaded on: 24 January 2016, At: 21:20 (PT)
References: this document contains references to 26 other documents.
To copy this document: [email protected]
The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 1367 times since 2014*
Users who downloaded this article also downloaded:
Nicholas Apergis, Christina Christou, Christis Hassapis, (2014),"Accounting standards convergence
dynamics: International evidence from club convergence and clustering", Accounting Research J ournal, Vol.
27 Iss 3 pp. 226-248http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/ARJ -06-2013-0031
Kim Watty, Satoshi Sugahara, Nadana Abayadeera, Luckmika Perera, J ade McKay, (2014),"Towards a
Global Model of Accounting Education", Accounting Research J ournal, Vol. 27 Iss 3 pp. 286-300 http://
dx.doi.org/10.1108/ARJ -08-2013-0054
Theodore T.Y. Chen, (2014),"Is Hong Kong ready for accounting education reform: an analysis of tri-partite
views", Accounting Research J ournal, Vol. 27 Iss 3 pp. 249-265http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/ARJ -11-2013-0078
Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by emerald-srm:115632 []
For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for
Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines
are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com
Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company
manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as
providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee
on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive
preservation.
*Related content and download information correct at time of download.
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
1
:
2
0
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
Enhancing lecture presentation
through tablet technology
Mirela Malin
Department of Accounting, Finance and Economics,
Griffth Business School, Griffth University,
Gold Coast, Australia
Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to describe a simple approach available to corporate fnance
instructors to enhance the lecture delivery through the use of “digital ink” and tablet technology, to
increase engagement during the lecture and enhance the classroom experience.
Design/methodology/approach – The purpose of this paper is to describe a simple approach
available to corporate fnance instructors to enhance the lecture delivery through the use of “digital ink”
and tablet technology, to increase engagement during the lecture and enhance the classroomexperience.
Findings – Positive student satisfaction was documented with the majority of students fnding that
the newmethod of teaching has helped with their learning. While there was no substantial difference in
the overall mean examscores compared to previous teaching periods, there was an improvement in the
ability of students to identify and summarise the different theories.
Originality/value – Technology has created both a progress and a decline in helping students learn.
The original blackboard method of instruction was considered outdated when PowerPoint
presentations became the main method of lecture delivery. However, the ability of instructors to work
through problems progressively can be diminished in slide presentations. This paper shows how
technology has facilitated a shift back towards the original “chalk and talk” method of lecture delivery,
where the “chalk” has been replaced with “digital ink” in an attempt to reinvigorate slide presentations
and actively engage students more during the lecture.
Keywords iPad, App, Digital ink, Lecture, Student engagement
Paper type Case study
1. Introduction
In the past decade universities have been challenged by the digital revolution, forcing a
shift in policy and academic practice towards greater integration (or “blending”) of
traditional face-to-face and e-learning methods. Nowadays, e-learning is not only the
responsibility of distance education institutions, but has been included in the student
learning experience of campus-based institutions as well (Ellis et al., 2009).
Schneckenberg (2009) states that the success of blended learning strategies in higher
education depends on senior management’s commitment to the development of
academics’ skills. As human resources within the tertiary institution, academics
represent the “face of the university” through their varied interactions with students and
development of curriculum. Consequently, academics are the critical factor for
structural e-learning innovation, and ultimately, the success of e-learning within the
tertiary sector. Not only must academics now embrace technology in every aspect of
their teaching, but they must also fnd ways to keep students engaged and interested
through the use of blended learning techniques.
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/1030-9616.htm
ARJ
27,3
212
Accounting Research Journal
Vol. 27 No. 3, 2014
pp. 212-225
©Emerald Group Publishing Limited
1030-9616
DOI 10.1108/ARJ-09-2013-0069
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
1
:
2
0
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
The concept of student engagement refers to the way students interact with their
institution in the process of learning, and it depends upon howeach student participates
in educationally purposeful activities (Radloff and Coates, 2009). Student engagement
refers not only to the time spent on an activity, but to the enhancement of the overall
student learning and development experience. Radloff and Coates (2009, p. 9) state that
that the overall student learning experience depends also on the ability of institutions
and staff to “generate conditions that stimulate and encourage involvement”. Thus, the
instructors are an integral part of this process, requiring continuous development of new
skill sets and new ways of thinking on how to make the learning process more
stimulating (Moller et al., 2008).
While “student engagement” is not a new idea and is generally a widely accepted
construct for academics, knowing how to facilitate meaningful, stimulating and
satisfying learning interactions within a virtual learning space is potentially a major
obstacle academics face when designing e-learning curricula (Kuh, 2009). Kuh (2009)
identifes the concept “student engagement” to be a complex entity and not necessarily
a solid one, rather it evolves as interpretations of the “what and how” of teaching
changes over time.
The pedagogical problemaddressed in this paper relates to howstudent engagement
can be increased by improving the content and the way the lecture is communicated (i.e.
the “what and how” of teaching) through the use of technology. More specifcally, this
paper presents an innovative way to deliver lectures in the higher education setting,
particularly in fnance courses, through the use of an iPad and a unique presentation
application, called Explain Everything, which can be purchased through the App Store
on the iPad. Preliminary observations alluding to the effectiveness of this presentation
method will be discussed.
2. Theoretical framework
An appropriate pedagogical framework for learning and teaching with technology
within business courses is the community of inquiry (CoI) framework presented by
Garrison et al. (2010). According to this model, presented in Figure 1, the educational
experience of students is infuenced by how technology affects: how we teach (the
teaching presence) how students process the knowledge (the cognitive presence) and
how students connect with their peers and teachers (the social presence). The
application of technology in enhancing the delivery of lectures addresses two elements
of Garrison’s CoI framework: teaching presence and cognitive presence. Teaching
presence includes design (creating innovative and challenging learning activities and
environments), facilitation (providing new means for communication and interaction
between students and teachers) and direct instruction (various ways of sharing and
introducing information from diverse sources and forms with the help of emerging
technologies) (Garrison and Akyol, 2009). Within the teaching element, technology is
able to change the way academics teach, thus causing an incremental change to
pedagogy.
Garrison and Akyol (2009) describe cognitive presence in terms of four practical
inquiry (PI) model phases proposed by Garrison et al. (2001): the triggering event
(presentation of the problem), exploration (problems are explored by gathering
information and discussion), integration (relevant information and ideas are brought
together to solve the problem) and resolution (testing the proposed solutions). Within the
213
Enhancinglecture
presentation
throughtablet
technology
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
1
:
2
0
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
cognitive element of the framework, technology, with the aid of teaching presence, helps
the student develop a better understanding of the content, promotes higher order
thinking and refective learning and facilitates a better engagement with the course
content. As Garrison and Akyol (2009) state: “the key to cognitive presence is teaching
presence as manifestedthroughtaskspecifcationandactive facilitationor moderation”.
Garrison and Vaughan (2008) state that the key in engaging students to construct
meaningful knowledge is found in the way students are stimulated and motivated to
refect on the material presented to them. The educational experience of students can be
enhanced by integrating the three elements of teaching presence: design, facilitation and
direction. The educational leader is thus responsible for providing the appropriate
design, facilitation and direction that will structure, support and shape the students’
learning experience Garrison and Vaughan (2008, p. 32). Furthermore, Garrison et al.
(2010) state that the three dimensions of teaching presence appear to help students
through the four PI phases of the cognitive presence. Similarly, the teaching presence
element is an important determinant in student satisfaction, perceived learning and
sense of community (Garrison and Arbaugh, 2007). Having established the importance
of the teaching presence in the overall student learning experience and engagement, the
attention is directed towards the factors that hinder or delay this process.
3. Key challenges relating to student engagement
While sustained attention in class is dependent upon a range of factors like time of day,
motivation, emotion and enjoyment, earlier studies on attention span suggested that
“after 15 or 20 minutes the lecture loses its effectiveness even in transmitting
information” (Frederick, 1986, p. 44). However, a more recent reviewby WilsonandKorn
(2007) found no evidence to support this idea. Although the average length of attention
Figure 1.
Community of inquiry
framework
ARJ
27,3
214
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
1
:
2
0
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
span has not been accurately established, there is a growing concern that student
attention during lectures is declining. Because university classes typically run for 1 to 2
hours, and are often scheduled back-to-back, instructors are faced with the challenge of
capturing and maintaining students’ attention for long periods of time. This is especially
diffcult for subjects involving mathematical formulas or other dense/abstract concepts.
Strategies like incorporating live demonstrations or visual aids in the lecture, requiring
student participation on certain tasks, or integration of other student-centred
approaches have the ability to increase attention, leading to longer-lasting retention of
the presented information (Bunce et al., 2010).
Another issue faced by many instructors, especially in the areas of science, maths
and business, is that the slide presentation method has a reduced capacity to keep
students intrigued through the gradual and spontaneous revelation of elements of an
idea or problem as the thinking process progresses. Business courses such as
accounting, fnance and economics, for example, involve instruction by showing how
models, equations and graphs are structured (Scott, 2011). An important learning
outcome in business courses is the ability of the students to apply into practice the
theory and models learned by solving complex problems, which require multiple step
processes. The free-hand method of lecture delivery allows instructors to begin with a
simple conception of the problem and then add in more complex elements as students
master the basic ideas. This method also sends a subtle signal to students that the
lecture is a “work in progress” rather than a pre-scripted monologue, allowing them
greater scope for active involvement.
Thus, the problem that presents itself is: how to increase the attention of students
through careful design of the three elements of the teaching presence in such a way that
helps students engage more in the cognitive processes. The approach to solve this
problem is to change the way the content is delivered in class. By designing a new
method of delivery or learning activity, the teacher plans howto engage the learner in a
sustained and effortful cognitive activity that allows the knowledge or idea to be
retained until it is needed next time (Laurillard, 2009). Thus, the teachers’ design of the
lecture is crucial, as it motivates the learners’ effort to stay engaged and retain complex
information. According to Shulman (1986), the ways of representing and formulating
the subject or the pedagogical and content knowledge is important in determining how
students access and comprehend the material presented to them. One way of making the
content more accessible and comprehensible to the learner is by using technology
(Mishra and Koehler, 2006).
4. Targeted pedagogical improvement
The traditional face-to-face instructional mode of education still remains the major delivery
method of tertiary education. To create dynamic presentations with traditional lecture
delivery tools, teachers can use the whiteboard, but this involves frequently turning their
back to the class and losing eye contact with the students, which can result in students
disengaging from the lecture (Race, 2007). Similarly, Exley and Dennick (2009) state that
presenting concepts on the whiteboard or blackboard is unproductive as often writing is
illegible and diffcult to see from the back of a lecture theatre, making the lecture an
ineffective learning mechanism (Venema and Lodge, 2013). The introduction of lecture
capture practices, where the lectures are recorded and made available to students at their
leisure, has permitted students greater opportunity for reviewing content according to their
215
Enhancinglecture
presentation
throughtablet
technology
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
1
:
2
0
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
individual needs. However, this creates another drawbackwithusingthe whiteboardinthat
any free-hand drawing on this tool is not recorded by the standard lecture capture setup.
Many lecture theatres are equipped with electronic data visualisers (or document cameras)
that are connected to the lecture recording system. However, the use of this tool stops the
fowof the explanationbecause of the needtoswitchbetweendevices, whichcanbe followed
byadelayasonedeviceshutsoff andtheother turnson, whichinturninterruptsthelearning
process of students.
Teachers need to explore these conventional methods in the new context of digital
learning and if necessary adapt the environment, task practice or the way concepts are
articulated, to the students’ needs. Good teaching commands an understanding of how
technology relates to pedagogy and content. Mishra and Koehler (2006) state that there
is a complex and fne relationship between what is learned and taught (content), the
methods of teaching and learning (pedagogy), and technology. Not only do instructors
have to know the subject they teach, but also how the content can be changed by the
application of technology. Similarly, knowing howteaching might change as a result of
implementing a particular technology is connected with the ability of the instructor to
choose the appropriate tool that fts the subject.
Given the stated constraints faced by educators in business courses, the challenge is
to incorporate the static slide presentation method, which is superior in the way it clearly
structures and effciently signposts the key points of the lecture, with the spontaneous
use of a free-hand drawing tool into a dynamic lecture presentation where all visual and
auditory components can be effciently recorded as well. This can be achieved through
the use of tablet technology and “digital ink”, which combines elements of traditional
whiteboard-based teaching and PowerPoint presentation to deliver a more dynamic and
interactive classroom experience (Phillips and Loch, 2012). This way, the face-to-face
traditional presentation can be transformed into a combined teacher/student
collaborative experience where the lecture is constructed slide by slide. This activity
was found to be valued not only by the students, but can be more rewarding for the
instructor as well (Phillips and Loch, 2011). The use of iPad and “digital ink” to solve
problems on the presentation slides has the potential to improve student engagement
and enhance retention of content. Anderson et al. (2007, p. 60) state that “digital ink is a
natural medium for solving problems, not just reporting solutions”.
The “Explain Everything” application combined with the iPad fulfls the criteria for
the free-hand drawing tool. Like a whiteboard, the application provides a blank white
canvas, but now in electronic form on the screen of the iPad. This canvas can be drawn
upon using a specially designed, rubber-tipped pen called a “stylus”. PowerPoint
presentations can be imported into the application and added to the canvas, where it
then becomes possible to draw upon individual slides and on the areas of the canvas
surrounding them. Once imported into the application, individual slides can also be
increased or decreased in size and moved around the canvas using regular touchscreen
fnger gestures. Thus, the application permits answers and solutions to be worked on (or
around) the actual PowerPoint slides. Using the stylus, important concepts can be
highlighted and students’ attention can be directed to the current subject matter being
discussed. The ability to annotate slides in real time to clarify a point, introduce diverse
ideas and show novel solutions provides dynamicity to the traditional slide-based
presentation (Anderson et al., 2007). The PowerPoint slides act as a framework for the
lecture, where the instructor can add live annotations and pose challenging questions
ARJ
27,3
216
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
1
:
2
0
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
(Tront, 2007). Iribe et al. (2010), specifcally, have shown that learning can be improved
by including hand-drawn diagrams on presentation slides. Most importantly, the iPad
can be plugged into the data projector (in a similar way to how you would plug in a
laptop) so worked solutions are recorded in the same manner as the typical lecture
presentation. Students can therefore revise not only the lecture slides but also the
worked examples, diagrams or models that otherwise would not have been recorded if a
traditional whiteboard had been used instead.
This is an important tool, especially in applied maths-based courses such as
corporate fnance, as it has the ability to increase students’ understanding and facilitate
deep learning. In the second teaching semester of 2012, this tool was used to present all
lectures for two undergraduate second- and third-year fnance courses. Figure 2(A)
presents an example of a PowerPoint slide without “digital ink” annotations, where the
concept of “frm valuation” based on the Modigliani – Miller capital structure theory is
Figure 2.
Example of lecture slides
217
Enhancinglecture
presentation
throughtablet
technology
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
1
:
2
0
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
presented step by step. Figure 2(B) shows the same slide, which has been reduced in size
to allow further notes and explanations on the model. Similarly, Figure 2(C) shows a
slide, which presents the stages in the valuation of a target frm in a merger, while
Figure 2(D) shows the same instructions using formulas inserted on the blank slide
during the delivery of the lecture.
The implementation of this teaching application is straightforward and does not
involve extensive effort. As the PowerPoint slides are already prepared, they can be
uploaded from Dropbox or any other site into the “Explain Everything” application as
shown in Figure 3. The fles uploaded can have a ppt. extension, however, to make sure
formulas or certain symbols are retained, it is recommended that the slides can be
uploaded in a pdf. format.
The application not only allows the instructor to write on the slides, but also displays
a number of features like laser pointer, insert text/picture/browser or change the colour
of the pen, as seen in Figure 4. Furthermore, the app contains a recording feature that lets
Figure 3.
Uploading the lecture
notes into the application
Figure 4.
Features in the “Explain
everything” app
ARJ
27,3
218
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
1
:
2
0
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
the user record the entire lecture or just certain sections of the delivery even if the theatre
or seminar room is not equipped with recording capabilities. Complete explanation of
each feature, together with video tutorials can be found on www.explaineverything.com/.
The cost associated with the application of this tool is minimal. The app is available
for purchase for $2.99 USD and can be installed on a Mac or Android device. The price
of a “stylus” ranges from$10-$35 AUDwhile the extension cable that connects the tablet
to the lecture theatre console costs around $25-$35 AUD. The examples described in this
paper have been conducted on an iPad 2. The results of introducing this initiative are
described in the next section.
5. Evaluation
Assessing the effectiveness of this method of lecture delivery is vital in understanding
whether it improves student engagement and overall learning. At the end of each
semester, students are asked to formally evaluate the course and the teaching team by
completing a survey with questions on a fve-point Likert scale ranging from “strongly
agree” to “strongly disagree”. To evaluate this teaching method, a statement relating to
the use of digital ink during the lecture delivery was inserted in the general university
survey. Table I presents the students’ responses from the two undergraduate courses
where this method of lecturing was used.
Overall, in the second-year corporate fnance course, which is a core subject for the
accounting major, 60 students responded to the survey, representing 37 per cent of the
cohort, while in the third-year course, a capstone course in the fnance major, 38.7 per
cent of the students flled in the questionnaire. The implementation of this technology
proved successful, in terms of student satisfaction, with the vast majority of each group
(85.0 per cent and 96.8 per cent for second- and third-year, respectively) choosing
“strongly agree” or “agree” in response to the statement: “The use of writing on the
presentation slides to solve problems or emphasise points during the lecture in this
course assisted my learning”. Student comments in response to open-ended questions on
the surveys were also positive, revealing a perception in students that this method of
teaching increased their attention in class and enabled greater retention of knowledge.
Some examples of comments from the open-ended questions include the following:
Use of iPad to write examples during lecture is ground-breaking – very good solution to lecture
capture not recording the whiteboard.
Table I.
Results of survey
administered at the end of
semester
Question asked
Corporate fnance
second-year
Advance corporate
fnance third-year
n % n %
The use of writing on the presentation
slides to solve problems or to
emphasise points during the lecture in
this course assisted my learning
SA 23 38.3 12 50
A 28 46.7 11 45.8
N 5 8.3 1 4.2
D 2 3.3 0 0
SD 2 3.3 0 0
Total 60 of 162 37 24 of 62 38.7
Note: 5pt Likert scale: (SD) Strongly Disagree, (D) Disagree, (N) Neutral, (A) Agree, (SA) Strongly
Agree
219
Enhancinglecture
presentation
throughtablet
technology
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
1
:
2
0
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
The use of “Explain Everything” was very effective.
I found the additional notes added by the lecturer on the slides during the lectures to be
invaluable in gauging a good understanding of the formulas.
The use of writing on the slides during presentations was a FANTASTIC!!! Idea that I have
suggested to other lecturers; it is very helpful.
The new technology which allows me to see everything you write on lecture capture is
fantastic and a great learning tool, and really keeps me engaged.
While these subjective ratings by students are very encouraging, it is equally important
to look for objective improvements in the learning outcomes. The second-year corporate
fnance course, where more than half of the students enrolled are accounting majors, was
selected for further analysis. Corporate fnance, a core subject in the Bachelor of
Commerce, is one of the courses that had assigned specifc learning goals and objectives
that need to be assessed as part of the accreditation by the Association to Advance
Collegiate Schools of Business (AACSB). AACSBrequires tertiary institutions to have a
quality Assurance of Learning framework for its programs where knowledge specifc to
the discipline and generic skills are achieved (AACSB, 2013). The Program Learning
Objective (PLO) assigned to corporate fnance was to “demonstrate an understanding of
major theories, models and tools” and was applied to the mid-semester exam. The
curriculummapping of the programindicated that this course is the only fnance subject
that students in the accounting major must complete, thus enabling certain theories and
models like effcient market hypothesis and capital asset pricing model to be assessed.
When mean examscores were calculated for the study period when the newmethod was
implemented (i.e. semester 2, 2012) and the two consecutive study periods preceding it,
there did not appear to be any substantial improvement in the mid-semester or the fnal
exam results that could be attributed to the innovation (see Table II).
Table III provides further information on each group of students in the teaching
periods investigated. “Total fails” represents the overall failure rate due to a grade lower
than 50 per cent, while “other fails” measures course abandonment due to failure to sit all
exams or non-submission of all assessment items (Phillips and Loch, 2011). Semester 2,
2012, where the new teaching method was introduced displays a lower percentage of
“total fails” compared to the other two periods. Similarly, there is a reduction of 1 per
cent in the number of “other fails” in the semester where interactive lectures were
introduced. Because the course investigated in this paper is a “core” in the program, the
number of course abandonments is relatively low. The demographics show an even
gender distribution across the semesters, with international students making up
between 31-47 per cent of students enrolments.
Phillips and Loch (2011) investigates whether socio-economic status (SES) has an
infuence on student achievement, motivation and engagement with a course,
Table II.
Mean and standard
deviation scores for the
mid-semester and end-of-
semester exams for three
consecutive study periods
Study period
Mid-semester exam End-of-semester exam
Mean SD n Mean SD n
Semester 2 2011 20 4.8 192 29 11.1 179
Semester 1 2012 20 4.9 170 30 10.4 159
Semester 2 2012 21 4.9 157 30 11.2 148
ARJ
27,3
220
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
1
:
2
0
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
concluding that there is a relationship between students who drop out and low SES.
Using student postcodes at application time and Australian Bureau of Statistics 2011
census data provided by the university, Table III shows only a relatively small
percentage of lowSES students in each semester. Nevertheless, semester 1, 2012, where
the “other fails” are the highest at 4.7 per cent has also the highest percentage of lowSES
students at 7 per cent compared with the other two semesters. However, the grade point
average (GPA) breakdown for each period shows that semester 2, 2012, where digital ink
was used in the lecture has the highest number of students with low GPA and, at the
same time, the lowest failure rate (The GPAscore is the student’s overall score as at the
commencement of the course where 1 is the lowest and 7 is the highest).
Although Table II and III provide mixed results as to the effectiveness of the new
teaching tool, closer inspection of the mid-semester exam results reveals an interesting
pattern. The mid-semester exam questions could be divided based on two PLO criteria,
into those assessing the student’s ability to identify and summarise the correct theory
and those assessing the student’s ability to apply the theory to a scenario. For each
question set, students were categorised according to whether they scored between 0-49
per cent (unsatisfactory USA), 50-64 per cent (satisfactory S), 65-74 per cent (good G),
75-84 per cent (very good VG) or 85-100 per cent (excellent EX), according to the grading
scale of the university. As can be seen in Figure 3 there was a distinctive pattern of
improvement in the results for the purely theoretical questions, with a higher proportion
of students scoring 65 per cent or above and a lower proportion of students scoring
Table III.
Student fails,
demographics and
educational background
Demographics Semester 2, 2011 (%) Semester 1, 2012 (%) Semester 2, 2012 (%)
Students enrolled 192 170 159
Fails
Total 16.5 12.4 10.8
Other 3.6 4.7 3.7
Gender
Male 50 57 57
Female 50 43 43
Citizenship status
Australian or resident 53 69 61
International 47 31 39
Socio-economic status
Low 4 7 3
Medium 41 54 47
High 3 2 4
NA 52 37 46
Grade point average
1 to less than 3 4.7 2.3 6.3
3 to less than 5 50.5 47.7 46.5
5 to 7 28.6 29.4 28.3
NA 16.2 20.6 18.9
221
Enhancinglecture
presentation
throughtablet
technology
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
1
:
2
0
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
below 65 per cent compared to the previous two study periods for which data could be
collected (Figure 5).
This pattern of improvement was not replicated for the application questions.
Figure 4 shows mixed results. Although, from semester 1, 2012, to semester 2, 2012,
there was an increase in the percentage of students who performed excellent (EX) and
good (G) of 3.18 per cent and 5.5 per cent, respectively, the performance of students who
performed very good (VG) and satisfactory (S) decreased by 2.3 per cent and 8.5 per cent,
respectively. This makes the fndings diffcult to interpret given that the free-hand
drawing strategy is supposed to specifcally target application of theory through clearer
elucidation of problem-solving techniques (Figure 6).
Nevertheless, the implementation of this teaching method has been greatly
appreciated by the students, who have requested this tool to be adopted in other courses,
as well as by other academics teaching in the feld of accounting and fnance who have
embraced this method of lecture delivery to keep students engaged and improve
learning outcomes.
6. Conclusion
The purpose of this paper was to describe how tablet technology can be used to
communicate lectures that keep students engaged and to present preliminary
observations relating to the introduction of a newlecture delivery method. The two key
success measures that were explored were:
(1) student satisfaction, as reported in the formal course evaluations; and
(2) exam performance, as compared with that of previous teaching periods.
The student satisfaction ratings were very positive with the vast majority of
students reporting that they found the new method to have helped with their
Ex VG G S US
Sem 2, 2011 10.91% 20.00% 12.12% 28.48% 28.48%
Sem 1, 2012 15.19% 21.52% 11.39% 28.48% 23.42%
Sem 2, 2012 20.27% 25.68% 17.57% 20.27% 16.22%
0.00%
5.00%
10.00%
15.00%
20.00%
25.00%
30.00%
35.00%
40.00%
45.00%
Theory
Sem 2, 2011 Sem 1, 2012 Sem 2, 2012
Figure 5.
Percentage of students
scoring in the different
grade categories for the
theoretical questions
ARJ
27,3
222
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
1
:
2
0
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
learning. It would be interesting in future to ascertain a measure of comparative
value in student perceptions. For example, how valuable do students fnd this
method compared to a standard PowerPoint lecture or interactive practice questions
or simply reading the textbook. When it came to exam performance, again, the
results seemed generally positive. While there did not seem to be any substantial
difference in the overall mean exam scores compared to previous teaching periods,
there did appear to be a general improvement in the ability of students to identify
and summarise the different theories. Though this improvement did not follow
through on all performance categories in the application of theory, it is a solid frst
step, which can be built upon in future teaching periods. In conclusion, it is
imperative for lecturers to continually update their skill sets to incorporate the new
technologies available for enhancing student engagement. While it would be unwise
to introduce the latest technologies without a pre-conceived pedagogical purpose,
early observations do suggest that when the right tool is selected to match the
characteristics of the content area then substantial student learning improvements
can be achieved.
References
Aacsb (2013), “AACSB learning and teaching standard A5”, available at: www.aacsb.edu/
accreditation/accounting/standards/2013/learning-and-teaching/standard-a5.asp (accessed
26 September 2013).
Anderson, R., Anderson, R., Davis, P., Linnell, N., Prince, C., Razmov, V. and Videon, F. (2007),
“Classroompresenter: enhancing interactive education with digital ink”, Computer, Vol. 40
No. 9, pp. 56-61.
Ex VG G S US
Sem 2, 2011 14.55% 26.67% 15.76% 32.73% 10.30%
Sem 1, 2012 17.09% 15.82% 11.39% 43.04% 12.66%
Sem 2, 2012 20.27% 13.51% 16.89% 34.46% 14.86%
0.00%
5.00%
10.00%
15.00%
20.00%
25.00%
30.00%
35.00%
40.00%
45.00%
Applica?on
Sem 2, 2011 Sem 1, 2012 Sem 2, 2012
Figure 6.
Percentage of students
scoring in the different
grade categories for the
application questions
223
Enhancinglecture
presentation
throughtablet
technology
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
1
:
2
0
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
Bunce, D.M., Flens, E.A. and Neiles, K.Y. (2010), “Howlong can students pay attention in class? A
study of student attention decline using clickers”, Journal of Chemical Education, Vol. 87
No. 12, pp. 1438-1443.
Ellis, R.A., Ginns, P. and Piggott, L. (2009), “E-learning in higher education: some key aspects and
their relationship to approaches to study”, Higher Education Research & Development,
Vol. 28 No. 3, pp. 309-319.
Exley, K. and Dennick, R. (2009), Giving a Lecture: From Presenting to Teaching, Routledge,
New York, NY.
Frederick, P.J. (1986), “The lively lecture: 8 variations”, College Teaching, Vol. 34 No. 2, pp. 43-50.
Garrison, D.R. and Akyol, Z. (2009), “Role of instructional technology in the transformation of
higher education”, Journal of Computing in Higher Education, Vol. 21 No. 1, pp. 19-30.
Garrison, D.R., Anderson, T. and Archer, W. (2001), “Critical thinking, cognitive presence and
computer conferencing in distance education”, American Journal of Distance Education,
Vol. 15 No. 1, pp. 7-23.
Garrison, D.R., Anderson, T. and Archer, W. (2010), “The frst decade of the community of inquiry
framework: a retrospective”, Internet and Higher Education, Vol. 13 Nos 1/2, pp. 5-9.
Garrison, D.R. and Arbaugh, J.B. (2007), “Researching the community of inquiry framework:
review, issues and future directions”, Internet and Higher Education, Vol. 10 No. 3,
pp. 157-172.
Garrison, D.R. and Vaughan, H. (2008), “Designing blended learning to create a community of
inquiry, Chapter 3”, Blended Learning in Higher Education: Framework, Principles and
Guidelines, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, pp. 31-48.
Iribe, Y., Nagaoka, H., Kouichi, K. and Nitta, T. (2010), “Web-based lecture systems using slide
sharing for classroom questions and answers”, International Journal of Knowledge and
Web Intellingence, Vol. 1 Nos 3/4, pp. 243-255.
Kuh, G.D. (2009), “What student affairs professionals need to know about student engagement”,
Journal of College of Student Development, Vol. 50 No. 6, pp. 683-706.
Laurillard, D. (2009), “The pedagogical challenges to collaborative technologies”,
Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, Vol. 4 No. 1, pp. 5-20.
Mishra, P. and Koehler, M.J. (2006), “Technological pedagogical content knowledge: a framework
for teacher knowledge”, Teachers College Record, Vol. 108 No. 6, pp. 1017-1054.
Moller, L., Forshay, W.R. and Huett, J. (2008), “Implication for instructional design on the potential
of the web”, Tech Trends, Vol. 52 No. 4, pp. 66-70.
Phillips, P.J. and Loch, B.I. (2011), “Building lectures and building bridges with
socio-economically disadvantaged students”, Educational Technology and Society,
Vol. 14 No. 3, pp. 240-251.
Phillips, P.J. and Loch, B.I. (2012), “Dynamic and interactive teaching with technology”, Journal of
Financial Education, Vol. 38 Nos 3/4, pp. 46-68.
Race, P. (2007), The Lecturer’s Toolkit Routledge, London.
Radloff, A. and Coates, H. (2009), “Doing more for learning: enhancing engagement and outcomes.
Australasian survey of student engagement report”, ACER, Camberwell.
Schneckenberg, D. (2009), “Understanding the real barriers to technology-enhanced innovation in
higher education”, Educational Research, Vol. 51 No. 4, pp. 411-424.
Scott, R.H. (2011), “Tableau ?conomique: teaching economics with a tablet computer”, The
Journal of Economic Education, Vol. 42 No. 2, pp. 175-180.
ARJ
27,3
224
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
1
:
2
0
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
Shulman, L.S. (1986), “Those who understand: knowledge growth in teaching”, Educational
Researcher, Vol. 15 No. 2, pp. 4-14.
Tront, J.G. (2007), “Facilitating pedagogical practices through large-scale tablet PC deployment”,
Computer, Vol. 40 No. 9, pp. 62-68.
Venema, S. and Lodge, J.M. (2013), “Capturing dynamic presentation: using technology to enhance
the chalk and talk”, Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, Vol. 29 No. 1,
pp. 20-31.
Wilson, K. and Korn, J.H. (2007), “Attention during lectures: beyond ten minutes”, Teaching of
Psychology, Vol. 34 No. 2, pp. 85-89.
About the author
Mirela Malin is a Lecturer in the department of accounting, fnance and economics within Griffth
Business School. She has a research interest in howtechnology has infuenced teaching in higher
education and how blended learning techniques have been used to enhance student learning
outcomes. She has presented at blended learning symposiums, international teaching conferences
and has been a reviewer for journals and conferences in education and fnance. Her publications
include articles in the Journal of International Financial Markets Institutions and Money,
Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance and Accounting Research Journal among others.
Mirela Malin can be contacted at: [email protected]
To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: [email protected]
Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints
225
Enhancinglecture
presentation
throughtablet
technology
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
1
:
2
0
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
doc_729552134.pdf