Whether made by Promethean, SMART, or Mimio, research on interactive white boards
(IWB) shows that they can be effective instructional tools under the right
conditions. Before considering this evidence it is important to make a distinction between
an instructional
medium and an instructional method. Whiteboards are a way to present
information, an education medium, and as such they can be a very powerful tool.
However, they are not a method of instruction. This doesn't mean that they cannot have an effect on student outcomes, but as with any multimedia it is important to consider how the technology can facilitate a particular instructional strategy and not make the mistake of assuming that they are a magical way of making ineffective instruction better. One might speculate that technology could perhaps increase student interest and engagement by making activities more interactive, but we need to determine this with research and temper it with the understanding that technology, unless used with some degree of fluency and skill, may be more likely to inhibit student learning rather that increase it.
So what have researchers found
out? Among the many whiteboard-facilitated activities that improve student
learning are: annotating, matching, use of pictures, collaborative work, peer
instruction, feedback using reveals or student response systems. (O’Bannon,
2015) Additionally, IWB technology can improve classroom management, facilitate
multi-modal presentation of learning materials and promote active learning. In 2009, Marzano and Haystead conducted research showing that
three features of IWBs were statistically linked to achievement:
student response systems, graphics and videos, and reinforcer properties.
·
Response
to intervention
·
Teacher
credibility
·
Providing
formative assessments
·
Classroom
discussion
·
Teacher
clarity
·
Feedback
·
Reciprocal
teaching
·
Teacher-student
relationships fostered
·
Spaced
vs. mass practice
As you see there is significant overlap in what has been shown to be an effect use of IWBs and what is considered effective teaching overall. While not surprising this does lead to some questions for me and other teachers to consider.
- Am I incorporating effective teaching techniques with or without use of an IWB?
- Could I utilize IWB technology to improve or better facilitate effective teaching?
- Conversely, might use of an IWB be an unnecessary distraction or inhibit effective teaching techniques that I already utilize?
- Do I have the necessary technology and skills to utilize IWB in ways that have been demonstrated to be effective and if not how can I obtain these?
Finally, in considering use of IWB I asked my middle school age son how they are typically utilized in his classrooms. He unfortunately confirmed for me that they are mainly expensive projector screens. I specifically asked it he had ever had an activity where he had gotten out of this seat and used the touch screen and he replied "no". When pressed for more information he did remember using a student response system in elementary school and some interactivity with student computers and the board. He attends a suburban middle school in an affluent area which provides laptops for over 1,000 students and attracts highly qualified teachers. It would seem if there were any school that might utilize IWBs effectively that his would be one. While asking a lone rising 8th grader is not at all scientific, it does remind us that providing technology is not enough, training and specific expectations for the use of technology are important too.
Sources:
Blanche
OBannon. “Engaging Learners with Interactive Whiteboards.” ETEC Publications,
2015. iBooks. https://itun.es/us/AfSDX.n

No comments:
Post a Comment