4Hall, I., & Higgins, S. Primary school students' perceptions of interactive whiteboard]]]. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 2005,(21): 102-117.
5Mohon, E. H. 'SMART moves? A case study of one teacher's pedagogical change through use of the interactive whiteboard'[J]. Learning, Media and Technology, 2008, 33( 4): 301-312.
6Armstrong, V., Barnes, S., Sutherland, R., Curran, S., Mills, S. & Thompson, I. Collaborative research methodology for investigating teaching and learning: the.use of interactive whiteboard technology [[].Educational Review, 2005, 57(4): 457 - 469.
7Schuck, S. & Kearney, M. Exploring pedagogy with interactive whiteboards: a case study of six schools (Sydney, University of Technology Sydney) [DB/OL].http://www.ed-dev.uts.edu.au/teachered/research/iwbproject/pdfs/iwbreportweb.pdf (accessed 16 Sep 2010).
8Lee M. & Boyle M. The Educational Effects and Implications of the Interactive Whiteboard Strategy of Richardson Primary School. Richardson Primary School: ACT, Australia[DB/OL].http://www.richardsonps, act.edu.au/RichardsonReview Grey.pdf. (Accessed 12th Sep 2010).
9Hoover, T. An experimental study of a computer assisted teacher training system using Flanders' Interaction Analysis category system providing immediate feedback of teacher behavior to Naive subjects [D]. Lincoln: thesis of the University of Nebraska, 1975.
10Smith, F. C. A latitudinal study of pre-service instruction in Flanders' Interaction Analysis Categories [D]. Tempe: Arizona State University, 1975.
