21st Century Education & Learning Environments 01 Sep 2007 06:08 am
Interactive Whiteboard Debate
Just spent the last few days at this year’s Interactive Whiteboard Conference. I commend those who organised the event and my views here are at all no reflection on those who put many hours into organising such a large event. I was fortunate enough to be able to attend the event FOC. I have never been convinced on the effectiveness of these tools for student learning – therefore, wanted to take this chance to have folk demonstrate to me how this tool could be used in such a way to benefit student learning. Well I must say no one could convince me – I kept an open mind for the two days and asked plenty of questions. Why couldn’t anyone give me a good answer to this one question -”How does this improve student learning?” I was frustrated as person after person gave me the same answer over and over again – Everyone was convinced it improves test scores!!! AHHHHH!!! Since when do test scores tell us if a student is learning. I get so frustrated at this narrow minded, uneducated and archaic concept of learning.
So I continued walking through the trade hall, spending time with vendors and educators who just raved about their different versions of IWB’s. I kept asking questions and requesting demos of what the different applications could be used for – time after time I kept having horrible flashbacks to my junior science teacher who had all of his science notes and lessons on Overhead transparencies. I failed to see the difference in the learning that was occurring – sure the presentations skills and method was very impressive, but no one could show me how a presentation, “Sage on the Stage” style could suddenly be an effective learning concept simply by using these devices. I continued to look over the literature that the vendors were displaying – Big posters boldly declaring that with an IWB I (as a teacher) would never hear “I’M BORED” ever again. hmmmm….. I couldn’t help but feel the irony of such a claim as the vendor continued to bore me with a PowerPoint presentation that had the most tacky transitions and horrible colour scheme possible.
My mission continued to find someone that could convince me that there was something exciting in this entire concept. So I headed off to the MAC lab where some folk were doing demos with iLife – surely I could find something interesting here?? Well the presentation was interesting but the IWB integration was once again just a flash presenting tool. In fact we just ended up doing activities with iLife on the computers – ironic moment again came when I heard from at least 3 teachers in the room “My students would love doing this on their computers.” Oh so now we sit at a conference dedicated to a presenting tool and all realise that there is more benefit in having our students creating with the humble computer?!?!?! Oh and the irony of the opening keynote….. Testimonials from Seymour Pappert and the one laptop per child initiative…. Just do a google search on these guys and see if their philosophies fit a IWB style classroom??
Some conclusions….
1) These devices are better than traditional whiteboards or blackboards….
2) They are a step forward in presentation skills as they do provide a great medium to present multimedia….
3) They are certainly a step BACK in terms of student learning… They reinforce the horrible idea that the teacher is the fountain of all knowledge and ALL learning requires a teacher.
4) They disconnect our connected students…. we need to have tools that help us engage a generation of students that are connected to so many different sources of knowledge. Like it or not we have to embrace this fact and provide learning opportunities that connect these students.
5) Where is the evidence that this really does make a difference to student learning??? Oh and please don’t feed me test score data!!
I would like to finish with some thoughts from David Loader’s latest book “Jousting for the new generation.”
“An undesirable consequence of schooling is that if you wish to learn, you need to have a teacher. My understanding is that the learning goal is for students to take responsibility for their learning. We need tools that support students such as books, computers, curriculum, peers and adults. A classroom is not a circus tent where we sit around the performing actor and admire their performance. Rather, it is a setting that puts the student at the centre of the action in the real world.”
Well I welcome thoughts and feedback….
on 02 Sep 2007 at 5:08 am 1.Warrick said …
Thanks for those thoughts, and for saving me that same trip through the iwb vendor machine. You sum up a lot of what I feel about these devices, over-talked up and underwhelming. Worse, the teacher-centric paradigm preserved in the guise of new tech!
on 02 Sep 2007 at 9:17 pm 2.Chris Betcher said …
Hi Brett… I didn’t know you were there, wish I had so we could have said G’day in person. I read you blog post and certainly agree with much of what you say. I was the world’s biggest sceptic when I first saw IWBs and for a long time saw most of the value they offered as being in the data projector far more than the board, and in many ways I still do think that. However, after having taught with them for a while, I do agree that they change the classroom dynamic in a positive way. Sure, they are not a panacea for every problem even though they are sometimes marketed as such. One of the problems with them, as I noted in one of my sessions on the weekend, is that if your only tool is a hammer then everything looks like a nail. It bothers me sometimes that the IWB is often touted as the solution to everything. It’s not. It makes some things better, some things it doesn’t really change, and others it probably makes worse. Ultimately it comes down to the skill and insight of the teacher to use this (or any) technology in a meaningful way. Give an IWB to a good teacher and she will do wonderful things with it, give it to a lousy teacher and he will completely balls it up. Like any technology, it’s use is generally quite neutral until someone applies it.
There is still, IMHO, a place for teachers who teach. I’m greatly into a constructivist approach to learning, but I think there are still times when the quickest way from A to B is for a teacher to show/explain it. Obviously we still have too many teachers for whom this is the ONLY way to teach, and that’s a shame.
Good post though… thought provoking and well worth reading. Thanks for sharing.
on 02 Sep 2007 at 11:06 pm 3.Denise said …
I am in fact a proponent of the interactive white board. I don’t have one of these fantastic items in my classroom full time but have had a wonderful time utilising activities and research based activities on one located in our school library and occasionally have had the opportunity to have one in the classroom for days on end.
As a class we have been able to participate in an online investigation – Murder Under the Microscop, use interactive online lessons on geometry and fractions (with great enthusiasm), do problem solving and edit stories.
I found that with this device I could set up a lesson or activityand then sit back and allow the students to discuss, use and problems solve their way through a range of fantastic activities that just wouldn’t be possible on a blackboard or whiteboard.
I found it just fantastic explaining how to use a protractor. No cumbersome protractor that would slip around the board.
I also discovered that when working with a small group on activities where the interactive board was beside us we could look up information to clarify and/or check facts. This also allowed for students to learn the importance of being discerning information gatherers and users of technology.
This resource also allowed me to introduce activities that would allow for practice of skills in writing and mathematics that could be done online to supplement their learning.
In all of the activities the key to engaging the student was how much of the activity could be done by them. Of all of the activities I have done or used so far the ones that have been the most beneficial and encouraged the most sharing of knowledge have been the ones where the students are operating the board and I have been part of the group. I believe that the resource is only as good as or as limited as the imagination of the person utilising it. I would love to have one in the classroom on a fulltime basis as I believe it can enhance and support classroom programs because the students can be in control.
on 02 Sep 2007 at 11:23 pm 4.Brett said …
Thanks for your thoughts Chris and Denise,
I understand your interest in these devices and can see that you both use them in what seems to be interesting ways. I agree that we can get students using the boards and interacting with them… However, one central device means one student at a time… If budget was never a question I would certainly have one simply for some of the activities you mentioned. However, budget is always an issue and the value for money on learning is what we need to have some serious discussion about…. I will write more about this in a later post…. Personally for $8000 I would much prefer 4 – 6 laptops that I could disperse to groups of students. The laptop and “connected” devices are much better learning tools than an IWB. The IWB is a great tool for the thoughts you have shared but I don’t see why a school would spend $100,000 on IWB’s?!?! I am assuming that is the money you are spending on just the hardware – not including PD? If so I would be screaming for the money to be spent on a well thought through 1 to 1 program. The research is certainly out there that shows how a 1 to 1 program can improve learning (NOT test scores – well they might – real teachers just don’t convince themselves that good test scores = learning) and I fail to see any credible research that can match up for IWB’s. If I was in a position to launch a technology integration program that would make a difference to learning, I would spend it on a 1 to 1 program with a huge amount of PD for staff.
More in a further post I think as this is getting far to long….
on 02 Sep 2007 at 11:28 pm 5.Brett said …
Oh one more thing – if you want some good reading you must have a read of David Loaders new book “Jousting for the new Generation”
AWESOME READ!!!!
on 03 Sep 2007 at 4:00 am 6.scep tic said …
“Everyone is convinced tgis improves scores”
Until they are asked to show it.
on 03 Sep 2007 at 4:15 am 7.Chris Betcher said …
I guess one of the biggest advantages I like about the fulltime IWB-enabled classroom is doing what I call on-the-fly-lessons. With a permanent board and projector in the classroom, I find it so much more likely that I will take the “side trips” into unplanned territory as a lesson unfolds. Although there is a lot touted about the software that comes with an IWB and the “packages” and “learning objects” that you can get for them, for me personally the benefit of being able to divert and dart into areas thay I never planned for is the biggest advantage. Now, I’m pretty confident with the use of most of this technology so I find it unconfronting to work in a fairly ad-hoc manner like this, plus I know I can sidetrack quickly and easily and return to the main pathway. Just as not all teaching should be entirely teacher-focussed, I’d argue that not all learning should be entirely learner focussed. In a classroom, you have access to a teacher… hopefully a wise person willing to give their knowledge and expertise to students, to model what it means to learn and use knowledge, to assist students learn from their mistakes and to offer guidance and advice to students who need it. Let’s not be too quick to dismiss the role of the teacher as we advocate learner-centered classrooms… there is LOTS of research to suggest that the MOST valuable resource in a classroom is a knowledgeable, passionate teacher who knows their subject and has a passion for passing it on to their students, and builds strong relationships in the classroom. That is worth more than any piece of technology. But once you get those factors in place, technology can be the next incredibly enabling layer in the classroom.
After many years of working in a technology rich room, I recently tried teaching back in a non-digital classroom…. it was horrible! Sure IWBs may not be the complete answer, but then there’s not a lot of conclusive evidence that 1 to 1 programs are either. The truth is that none of that makes much difference without a committed teacher to drive learning in the classroom.
Chris
on 03 Sep 2007 at 4:51 am 8.Ron Iony said …
What a pity the examples of “interactive” all refer to teachers using these boards. And in most cases, the main benefit of the IWB is that they don’t need o use a mouse. If it’s just about presentation why not just use the data projector?
on 03 Sep 2007 at 6:07 am 9.Teaching Generation Z » Blog Archive » Tools Rule said …
[...] I read today that Brett Moller attended the recent IWB conference on the Gold Coast and still remains unconvinced by the technology. While I should head over and make a more pointed response over in the comments [...]
on 04 Sep 2007 at 3:14 am 10.Brett said …
SO let me clear some things up here…. I do not think that an IWB is a BAD tool…. I simply believe it is a waste of money!! It is late and I need to get this off my chest – When will educators wake up and realise that we are being taken for a ride by many corporations who are in it for a quick buck?!?! I actually used a IWB today in class – besides the fact that it locked up and died a tragic death in the middle of my class, I couldn’t see how I could possibly engage my large class of 28 “struggling” maths students all at once. I am sure there are ways to do it, but why do we try and make a new piece of technology fit the learner? Take some time ladies and gents and read some research from credible educators. One to One programs that have been implemented properly and at a reasonable pace do work…. the research is there to back it up. Take some time and Google Seymore Pappert and Gary Stager. Take time to read the research. Oh I could go on….. and I probably will!!
on 03 Sep 2007 at 1:49 pm 11.Mary said …
Thanks for the insight. I do know and respect Chris’ opinions and found your perspective thought provoking Brett. I am still not convinced of the value of IWB. With tools such as LAN school and laptops, labs, data projectors, I cannot see how an IWB would be of value. Denise spoke about Murder under the microscope as an application. We participate in MUM and use laptops and small student groups combined with “tribal council”. Lan School is in my opinion a more personal and learner centred way of achiveing what an IWB can.
Brett I have just been to a conference where IWB companies were trying to persuade us to purchase and I could not see the point either….
on 03 Sep 2007 at 4:56 pm 12.Anne Baird said …
My sentiments exactly Chris and Brett. I think that we can surround ourselves with all the wonderful technology that is available to us and still present a class that is teacherheavy, studentlight, unengaging and irrelevant. What makes the difference is the thought, passion and preparedness of the teacher, the acceptance of the interests and needs of the students and the recognition that the technology is there to enhance, support and extend the thinking of the students rather than replace old pedagogy with the same old pedagogy that uses new technology.
Thanks for the recommendation of David Loader’s book. I will check it out.
on 03 Sep 2007 at 5:00 pm 13.Phil said …
No debate as far as I am concerned. These technologies are great headline grabbers and visually pronounce that technology is in the school. But in terms of engaing the whole class in learning – give me a break – the two or three students at the front of the room manipulating the board – maybe. The rest of the class siting and waiting their turn – no way. Don’t get me wrong if someone wants to place one at the front of my classroom – great – but do not tell me it will revolutionise the learning for my students – it is just an alternative way for our class to present their work. In the meantime, we will continue to project on to our classroom wall.
on 03 Sep 2007 at 5:50 pm 14.Denise said …
You made great points here Chris. I whole heartedly agree. I have found that there is some real co-operative learning going on with an IWB in the room too as it allows students to develop their thoughts and they are more willing to share their thinking processes with the ability to keep this on file easily. I agree with Chris that the resource is only as good as the teacher using it and there are many who would not feel comfortable using this tool. I also wonder if there is a difference in how effective this tool is between primary and secondary sectors.
I like Chris love the ability to use those ‘teachable moments’ without losing the thread of the original lesson and being able to turn back to it quickly and easily.
I was challenged by the information by David Loader and look forward to reading more about his ideas from his book. This discussion has certainly sent my head reeling. Thanks to you all for these challenging thoughts.
on 03 Sep 2007 at 7:08 pm 15.Kel Hathaway said …
As the presenter of the iLife session you mentioned I was relieved that you found it interesting. You are quite right, that session was more about using iLife than about using an IWB so the focus was on using computers around the room. And I think the point is that often the arguments we make are all wrong. Educational opportunities are about using appropriate tools at appropriate times. Sometimes that is a Mac, sometimes that is a PC, sometimes that is a digital camera, sometimes that is an IWB, sometimes it is a computer, sometimes it is a pencil, etc, etc. Choosing one above the other as the be all and end off of educational tools is not the right approach.
IWB’s are part of the educational arsenal not necessarily the ultimate weapon.
Perhaps you were asking your question of the wrong people. “How does this (an IWB) improve student learning?”. I’ll answer that in 2 key words : “engagement” and “interaction” between the participants and the lesson content in ways that are not so easily achieved with other tools. Yes these can be achieved in other ways but an IWB is a great catalyst for achieving this.
I was classic non-believer in IWBs until I actually used one. It was then that I started to see ways in which I could enhance my lessons using this tool. In my first day of IWB operation with a class a bright 6 year old raised his hand and asked “When do we get to use the board?” and guess what . . . he was right. From then on my students control the board as much as I do and this makes our lessons more interective, engaging and realistic.
The board isn’t in use all day, only for those lessons that are suited to it. Sometimes it is a whole class, sometimes a small group or leave students with the board while off working with others.
Stay open minded and don’t just talk to people (especially board manufacturers), it’s much better to go into classrooms and get some first hand experience with them.
Cheers
on 03 Sep 2007 at 9:43 pm 16.Margo said …
Hi Brett
I don’t recall meeting you at the conference and cannot find you on the delegate list. Did you replace someone else?
Cheers
margo
on 03 Sep 2007 at 11:57 pm 17.Brett said …
Hi Margo,
I was a last min ring in – I met you briefly on the Thursday with Paul… Ring any bells?
I was the good looking one!!
on 04 Sep 2007 at 5:17 am 18.Graham Wegner said …
Brett, as one who has pontificated on this topic far more often than is necessary (40 posts at last count) and been responsible for the implementation IWB program at my school, I have some sympathy for your views. I think that one of the issues is that the IWB technology is quite pricey and for many schools, buying into this technology does mean having to give up on other options. The ideal world would be where an IWB is one of an array of technology options in the classroom accessed and used when appropriate. And in the primary school sector where I work there is legitimate need for the use of the IWB for explicit teaching – skillful use in this manner gets the students on track and interacting with the new concept or idea a lot quicker. Access to laptops is one of the needs we’ve identified in our middle school classes and I see that the two technologies complement each other. But it is all totally tied back to the teacher and how they implement technology in their classroom. I can see that a 1:1 program could be just as bad as the IWB teacher with instructivist tendencies if all the laptops were used for was typing up notes and essays or using drill and kill software. Skillful teachers will use any technology available to add value to their learning program – personally, the web connection and the data projector are the most valuable components. That still makes presentation technology a valuable asset for a classroom – would you be so anti-IWB if they were $500 a pop?
And just so you know where I’m coming from – any school that rolls out IWB’s in every classroom at once is either rolling in money or asking for trouble. So many tools (I’m talking laptops, ipods, anything) are implemented without the investment in teacher training (skills and pedagogy). That is quite often the reason you don’t see the improvement in student learning – you can’t always blame the technology!
on 04 Sep 2007 at 2:39 pm 19.Brett said …
Hi Graham,
Agree with you on this one… In fact if the IWB was as cheap as you suggest then I would say GO FOR IT!! I can see a use for them in some aspects of some lessons. Once again you are right as far as the teacher training and skills / pedagogy goes – I agree 100% that no tool is going to work if we don’t have the training and sound pedagogical thought as its foundation. After some research some years ago on the impact of 1 to 1, the trend for success seemed to be slow, gradual implmentation with massive amounts of time for planning, training and PD. The 1 to 1 programs that failed (and there were plenty) rushed it and went off and implemented it right through the school with little to no thought of possible implications…. this then left teachers with no choice but to run typing classes.
Your post here makes perfect sense to me – I just don’t observe any IWB vendor or organisation reccomending such a path for schools. The fact is the price is still right up there and if we all have budgets to look after shouldn’t we be spending a great deal of time on research and recieving appropiate advice from many different sources…. This leads me to my final point here – Schools just don’t share enough, why can’t we have a conference on edtech where each school has to share their greatest success and their greatest stuff up!! That would be a truly educational conference – Get rid of the corporate sponsors and the fancy dinners and catering and simply hold a conference where we all bring a packed lunch and discuss these things in an open forum. A forum where the vendors nick off for a while and we invite folk who have done the research and schools that have done great things and not so great things. I think I may be dreaming……. But I shall continue to dream…. How about a barby at my place one weekend?!!?!
Bring your own Snags!!!
on 06 Sep 2007 at 12:17 pm 20.Tim Goree said …
Folks,
There IS an IWB out there for $500 (or less). It’s called a wireless tablet. Every IWB vendor sells one to “go with” their IWB. The thing is, it provides all of the functionality of an IWB except for the ability to physically write on the board itself, which can be considered a problem for teaching anyway for all the reasons above (stationary teachers = bad). With the wireless tablet, all you need is the computer connected to a display device – no IWB necessary.
I totally agree with the idea that test scores don’t matter, and that learning does. I also agree with the idea that the teacher as the primary source of information in the classroom has gone by the wayside. However, there are great uses for these devices in the sub $500 range.
on 10 Sep 2007 at 1:24 pm 21.An Expat Educator in Asia » The right tool for the job said …
[...] great but slightly controversial post was made by Brett Moller who questioned the whole concept of IWB [...]
on 05 Oct 2007 at 10:43 pm 22.Kevin said …
Brett – just searched Amazon for the book, and it didn’t turn up – maybe it is not published in the US yet?
Also, there was a study done in England about whiteboards, and I like the distinction they made in the name: “electronic whiteboards” or EWB, because they say, and I agree, the interactivity is in the use – there is no interactivity built into the board itself. That fits with your frustration, and some of the comments from teachers who do see a fit for it in the spectrum of tools available to both teacher and students. One of the uses that I find intriguing that doesn’t get mentioned that often is capturing notes developed during group sessions. I know you can do it with a computer as well, but there is something about seeing it on a bigger surface that seems appealing. And, often these sessions would otherwise be conducted using easel pads – that’s great, except after the session someone then has to transcribe everything, and often the notes just don’t capture the visual aspect. If I capture what was on the whiteboard, I can then send it as a PDF to those who were there, and those who could not attend, and they should be able to figure out the results of the discussion. Just some thoughts ….
on 08 Jan 2008 at 9:06 pm 23.Rob said …
This is brilliant – and so many responses! You have hit a nerve here with all the folk that have been pushing this stuff for far too long. Now I can go back to some of my staff and let them know that it is not just me the “old guy” believing this technology is not worth the investment that needs to be made.
on 12 Mar 2008 at 4:30 pm 24.Foden said …
Rob! Don’t use all this to force your own position – everyone needs to make up their on mind and all this is not the only ‘right’ answer – it is opinion!!! Let the staff know this is here and they can read it – remembering that it is opinion.
on 13 Mar 2008 at 10:05 pm 25.Brett said …
Foden – I don’t think Rob is planning on “forcing” any opinion on anyone. The idea here was simply to question the investment. You are right I have expressed my opinion and asked the questions of the “IWB” advocates. But at the end of the day NO ONE has been able to present any credible research or evidence that these tools are worth the investment they require. The very thought that these boards are interactive is crazy. I fail to see how these tools engage the learner and create an interactive experience for the learner. Interactive for the teacher – maybe. But it is just enforcing old teaching habits that we all agree need to be expelled from teaching – not encouraged with technology. These devices are attractive to older teachers who are keen to go back to their old familiar ways of lecturing while somehow being able to fool everyone and declare that they are using technology and connecting with their students. I am sorry but that is utter rubbish and too many administrators are being fooled by these devices – Oh goody we all now use technology.
on 21 Mar 2008 at 4:25 am 26.sandra said …
Here is a link to a study that may be of interest on this subject: http://www.math.unipa.it/~grim/21_project/21_brno03_Miller-Averis.pdf
The insertion of technology such as whiteboards will require new teaching methods to realize their greatest potential. As they are developed as a tool, however, I believe that there will be more information on how to get the most from them in the classroom. As the article states, “use of IAW’s is still in its infancy”.
I work for a vendor of IAW’s. We do not condone a “whole school” scheme and it is against our beliefs to sell boards without training in both the hardware usage and curriculum training. Our schools actively request teachers to tell them whether or not they would use the boards. Those that are comfortable with their existing methods of delivery are not required to change, but those that wish to use them are encouraged to do so and give feedback on their methods of incorporation.