COMPARATIVE STUDY ON CHALKBOARD AND POWERPOINT TEACHING METHODS FOR EFFECTIVE LEARNING
150 / 137
Authors
-
SADDIKUTI PRASHANTHI
Department of Agricultural Extension Education, S.V. Agricultural College, Tirupati
-
T. LAKSHMI
Department of Agricultural Extension Education, S.V. Agricultural College, Tirupati
Keywords:
Chalkboard Teaching, Power Point Presentations, Student Perceptions;, Teaching MethodsAbstract
This comparative study investigates the effectiveness of traditional chalkboard and modern Power Point teaching methods in contemporary education. The study was conducted among third-year B.Sc. (Hons.) Agriculture students at Sri Venkateswara Agricultural College, Tirupati. A descriptive survey method was employed, utilizing questionnaires distributed via Google Forms, with 120 randomly selected responses analyzed using statistical tools. Results indicated that
while PowerPoint presentations are perceived to offer better organization, clarity and visual aids, chalkboards are valued for their ability to stimulate interest, facilitate note-taking, and enhance student-teacher interaction. Specifically, 63.33 per cent of students found Power Point presentations well-organized and 86.67 per cent appreciated the visibility of lecture content. Conversely, 81.67 per cent of students reported better understanding through chalkboard teaching and 85.00 per cent valued the interaction it fosters. The study highlights that each method has distinct advantages: PowerPoint’s multimedia capabilities and ease of updating content versus the chalkboard’s simplicity and reliability. The findings suggest that an optimal teaching approach might integrate both methods to leverage their respective strengths, thereby enhancing educational quality and learning outcomes.
References
Argyle, M. 2017. Bodily communication (2nd
ed.). Routledge. Bartsch, R. A. and
Cobern, K. M. 2003. Effectiveness of
PowerPoint presentations in lectures.
Computers & Education. 41(1): 77-86.
Brophy, J. 1986. Teacher Influences on Student
Achievement. American Psychological
Association.
Clark, R. C. and Mayer, R. E. 2016. e-Learning
and the science of instruction: Proven
guidelines for consumers and designers
of multimedia learning (4th ed.). Wiley.
Cline, H. F. and Ishi, M. A. 2006. The role of
traditional teaching methods in modern
education. Journal of Educational
Psychology. 98(2): 195-208.
Evertson, C. M. and Weinstein, C. S. 2006.
Handbook of classroom management:
Research, practice, and contemporary
issues. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Ghimire, S.K. and Joshi, P. 2023. Students’
Perception on Power Point Use in
Classroom. Journal of Balkumari
College. 12(1): 83-87.
Grossman, P., Compton, C., Igra, D., Ronfeldt,
M., Shahan, E. and Williamson, P. 2017.
Teaching practice: A cross-professional
perspective. Teachers College Record.
119(5): 1-41.
Gurung, R. A. R. 2005. How do students really
study (and does it matter)? Teaching in
higher education. 10(3): 363-377.
116
Hohenstein, J., Pieschl, S. and Goguadze, G.
2018. In search of the “why” of learning:
The role of goal-setting, feedback, and
self-regulation in educational settings.
Educational Psychology Review. 30(3):
1-28.
Igwe, G. M.2022. Undergraduate Students’
perception and Attitude toward the use
of PowerPoint for Lecture Delivery in
Tertiary Institution. Social Sciences and
Education Research Review, 9(2), 21-28.
Lee, J., Bostic, J. H. and Lee, J. 2011. The
impact of lecture note-taking skills on
academic performance. Accounting
Education. 20(6): 547-560.
Li, L. and Kirkup, G. 2007. Context,
communication and collaboration:
Knowledge construction in a multimedia
supported learning environment.
Interactive Learning Environments.
15(1): 79-92.
Mayer, R. E. 2009. Multimedia learning (2nd
ed.). Cambridge University Press.
Merrill, M. D. 2002. First principles of
instruction. Educational Technology
Research and Development. 50(3): 43
59.
Mueller, P. A. and Oppenheimer, D. M. 2014.
The pen is mightier than the keyboard:
Advantages of longhand over laptop
note taking. Psychological Science.
25(6): 1159-1168.
Nouri, J. and Shah, S. 2020. Impact of
whiteboard and PowerPoint
presentations on students’ performance:
An empirical study. International Journal
of Education and Development using
Information and Communication
Technology. 16(2): 23-37.
Penuel, W. R., Boscardin, C. K., Masyn, K. and
Crawford, V. M. 2007. Teaching for
understanding: The complex nature of
classroom interactions in literacy and
mathematics. Educational Assessment,
Evaluation and Accountability. 19(2): 99
113.
Peverly, S. T. 2006. The importance of
handwriting speed in adult writing.
Developmental Neuropsychology. 29(1):
197-216.
Szabo, A. and Hastings, N. 2000. Using IT in
the undergraduate classroom: Should we
replace the blackboard with PowerPoint?
Computers & Education. 35(3): 175-187.
Tindall-Ford, S., Chandler, P. and Sweller, J.
2016. When two sensory modes are
better than one: A review of the effects
of audio-visual presentation on learning.
Educational Psychology Review 28(3):
459-474
Downloads
Submitted
Published
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
The author owns the article's copyright until the article is accepted for publication. After acceptance, the author(s) assigns the article's copyright jointly to both the authors and the Publishers of the Journal of Research ANGRAU (ANGRAU) and licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-Share Alike 4.0 International License.
