After participating in my first #edchat, I have spent some serious time reflecting on the difference between how others feel about Interactive Whiteboards (IWBs) vs. my own personal opinion. My opinion on IWBs is that they are useless when considering interactivity simply because the only individual interacting with the device is the one using it. Rather than dwell exclusively on “why” my opinion is different, I feel as though the discrepancy should be analyzed to understand the deeper root of the problem.
I tend to wonder if advocates of IWBs consider them to be “good enough” rather than “good” as a classroom tool. Consider what people are saying when they make the following statement: IWBs offer another opportunity for teachers to vary their instruction. Are they really saying that IWBs are a high-quality, productive tool in the classroom that engage every student and provide for an enriching activity? I tend to think not.
What I think people are really saying is: IWBs are not a great tool, but they offer another opportunity to put technology in the classroom when I can’t have something better. Maybe I am wrong, maybe I am right, but the bottom line is that in 5 years not one of the people who advocate for an IWB would even want one in their classroom. Why? Here we go:
The world of educational technology is sitting in a period of a gathering storm. Up to this point, companies have dictated to educators what they want out of electronic devices and then provided some type of instrument that is “good enough”. But I promise you, the time is coming when educators will be asked to sit at the table and design products that are exactly what they want.
Consider the patterns of interactive devices that are made available for consumer use; many of which your students already own. SMARTboards were once innovative with their touch screen ability. The fact that they were large, clumsy, annoying to set up, required an LCD projector, and calibration didn’t bother us so much because they were new. In a couple months, the educational world will be talking about touch screen TVs that do the same thing but do not require calibration or an LCD projector and are more accurate.
Simultaneously, the public consumer has been witness to touch screens themselves by way of the iPhone or iTouch and, now, the Android and Nexus One. As these technologies continue to develop, the price will drop and, eventually, one of these two companies will realize that education is the untapped market that can offer huge profit shares. Think of the difference: one is large, clunky and for an individual while the other is small, lightweight, and individualized.
These educational versions will provide students with browsers to research and a Bluetooth connection that will allow for a teacher to select individual student devices to be displayed on an LCD screen at the front (similar to asking for individual student responses) via computer connectivity. Students in computer classes will be receiving “orders” from teachers requesting class-specific applications that will then be built by those same students thereby authenticating their experience. Textbooks will go by the wayside unless textbook companies adopt mobile versions that students can design around their own learning style. How will they know their learning style? The handheld device will continually be learning more and more about the user and providing automatic feedback as to how he/she can best perform in class. Consider the possibilities of these types of handheld devices.
How can I make these bold predictions and feel confident at the same time? Everyone told me what they wanted last night. What I did was what all of the companies that make handheld devices and educational technology should be doing. I took all of your ideas and combined them to make one device that is engaging to all kids, is student-centric, and offers interactivity for an entire class that is facilitated (not dictated) by the teacher.
The time is coming when companies will begin calling educators to the table and saying, “what do you want out of educational technology?” I only hope that I can sit at the table and offer them my two cents. I hope you do as well.
Post Footer automatically generated by Add Post Footer Plugin for wordpress.
Hi Aaron,
I really enjoy reading your blog, and this post is no exception. I also enjoyed the opportunity to engage in a discussion surrounding IWBs on #edchat last night. I do, however, have a bit of a varying opinion regarding the use of IWBs, and want to comment on a few points you make in your post.
As a former teacher who had a SMART Board in my classroom, and now as an Education Consultant who works with school divisions and teachers to refine the use of technology in their classrooms, I am still a believer in IWBs. The key to success using them is to think of all the ways that they can be used — to enhance teacher delivery, increase student interactivity and aid with individual, small group or large group review/assessment. As is common with all facets of education, the main determining factor of success is the teacher and how they choose to utilize various tools that are at their fingertips.
Having said that, I do agree with your vision for some of the ‘not-yet-there’ technology for the classroom. Some of it, in fact, already exists — schools can purchase overlays for LCD TVs to give them a touch interface, many textbook companies offer apps and downloadable versions of their texts for iPhone, and software does exist that enables teachers to ‘push’ content from their computer to students and vice versa. [in the case of the latter one, I can only speak for the one that I know of and have used -- SMART Sync, and it has increased both teacher control and student collaboration] There is another exciting product that I’m aware of that also works in conjunction with an IWB to give students a second tool to collaborate around (this is called the “Magic Planet” and I’ve just been introduced to it in the past few months).
I don’t believe that the technology that you speak of will actually replace IWBs and hence, lead to the demise of the SMART Board, but rather add additional value and options for teaching flexibility. I think we are just at the very beginning of a long, exciting journey of teaching in the classroom, and I’m happy to be a part of it in any capacity. I get the impression that you are too!
Take care,
Vanessa
Looking for ways I can structure my tech purchases as we move ahead… K-6 elementary building, currently we have 6 mobile SMARTboards and two Promethean board systems mounted in a Gr. 3 and Gr. 6 classroom. Two teachers piloted those systems and use them daily. I would feel comfortable adding more Promethean boards into rooms where teachers are willing to embrace using them constructively with students. The SMART boards are not used nearly as often as I would like them to be. I believe this is because a) teachers had insufficient training on their use (one of the first things I did last year was provide additional training for them) and b) they are mobile and it is a pain to reserve one, get a projector, drag it to your room, set it up, etc. If we add more IWB to our school, my tech person is telling me we are moving as a district towards Polyvision. The thought of having three platforms in my building drives me crazy, because I currently have teachers who KNOW how to use the other boards and could serve as expert trainers for the rest of my staff, given the time to do so. I am not 100% convinced we are using the boards in ways that enhance student learning in every instance, but, again, I can’t fault my teachers when they haven’t been given proper PD in that area. Part of me agrees with you in that IWB are going to be an old fad in a rapidly changing ed. tech world. I’d rather see more personalized experiences in students’ hands (for instance, we love the Promethean Activotes/Activexpressions student response tools) and maybe investing in a bunch of tablets would be a better way to go. Thanks for listening to my ramblings!
I breathed a sigh of relief when I came across your post. I’m excited about the possibilities we have right now because they aren’t hanging on a wall behind a locked door for most of the day.
And I’ve heard support for what you say about interactive whiteboards–that they are “good enough” for educators as they make the transition to more active and project-based learning enviroments. Okay, but my worry is that it just cements the old instructional models firmly in place.
Maybe I’ve just not seen IWBs used consistently well, but I have several concerns that you echoed here (plus a couple of additional ones).
1) Cost. I could spend $5K for one classroom set-up (either Promethean or SMART), but for our 100 classrooms, it would cost us $500,000! If I took that $5K and got 15 netbooks for that classroom instead of an IWB, I’d have a lot more student-based, interactive possibilities.
2) Pedagogy. Like Kimberly mentioned above, an IWB is still primarily a teacher-driven tool, and it may reinforce a teaching approach that really needs to shift. It still ties the teacher to the front of the room, and it still lends itself to presentation-type instruction.
3) Training. As Lyn mentioned, training is pretty important. The training required to really utilize an IWB for all it can do is pretty extensive. I wonder if we might be better off using that same amount of time to work on really good instructional strategies that can be used with a variety of student-based tools rather than a single teacher-based one.
Bottom line: I couldn’t agree with you more. I hope this gathering storm you mentioned results in good stuff for learning, and not just stuff that’s “good enough.”
I disagree with your statement!
I use my SMART Board Daily and I am able to save everything we do as a PDF File and post it on the Blackboard site for parents. I think it is a very valuable tool, and I find that the more people see me use it, the more they want to learn about it.
My students use the board more than I do and when I have a guest teacher they complain that it is too hard to follow along using just a marker board. If you use a document camera in conjunction with your SMART board you will find that you can put anything on your SMART Board for the parents to see. My students use it for every subject area and love using it. I think it is worth every penny and I think our money should go for more items like this instead of textbooks! We just spent $50,000 on textbooks that are not even accurate.
Vanessa,
I understand your points, but my concern is more along the lines of efficiency. Is it worth it to spend an exorbitant amount of money on IWBs that get used for ten minutes (with one focal point) when we are trying to move our society away from a “teacher-centered” to a “student-centric” setting? My theory for school technology purchases is not to buy the product if it is not a “student-centric” technology. In other words, stop purchasing the LCD projectors, VCRs, DVD players, and whitescreens. If you have one for every ten teachers then that is plenty. Just my personal philosophy, but I tend to think more of “where are we going” than “where are we”. IWBs will be obsolete in five years, which says to me that there is no point in purchasing them when we can invest in infrastructure and netbooks or other student-centric technology.
Your other point is the one that I am the most excited about. I understand that many of these technologies exist, but the problem is that there is not one central medium that can host all of them and make them available to students on a minute-by-minute basis. Much of this is because there is no incentive for businesses to produce mobile versions (schools don’t have them). My hope is that a company that creates the hardware will team up with a company the makes the software to make an fluid device that is both engaging and affordable for all school districts.
Thanks so much for following and for your comments! Love the discussion!
Aaron,
I agree with your belief that educational products should be developed in consultation with teachers. I take that a step further and suggest that they should be developed by teachers. I left my teaching position five years ago to found StarrMatica Learning Systems because I didn’t like what the education publishers had to offer for interactive content. StarrMatica is an education publisher that specializes in digital content for use with technology. Our company is owned and operated by teachers, and our content was designed and developed entirely by current classroom teachers.
Being and entrepreneur is a difficult road, but I would love to see more teachers travel this path because teachers know what is needed in the classroom.
We’re currently working on StarrMatica’s second generation of our content product which will contain many upgrades suggested by classroom teachers. We’ll also be forming an advisory group in the next few weeks of elementary classroom teachers from across the US. Thank you for posting about the necessity of teacher consultation in the development of products!
IWBs are the bomb, yo! I teach in a district with very limited funding for technology, very little of which ends up dripping down to the teachers. An IWB is a method to provide classwide access to one computer in a fun and engaging way. Yes, it takes some learning to fully exploit this tool, but it’s totally worth it. Think of it this way:
1. The computer is like a keyhole into another world (the Internet).
2. The projector is the view once the door is opened.
3. The IWB is the tool that allows you to interact with that world without first squeezing yourself back through the keyhole.
I teach ESL and my beginners and I spend a lot of time with pictures and words. If I want to work on a series of pictures with them, then I need to be able to manipulate the virtual world with ease. I can accomplish this either by running back and forth to my computer or with an IWB system (I use the Wiimote system–LOVE IT TO DEATH). For me, the choice is clear. Also, students learn things when the teacher gestures (this applies primarily to early word learning) and the IWB allows the teacher to do that: to use their entire body in the interaction with the virtual world, not just a wrist and some fingers.
I also have desktop computers for my students (old clunkers that I’ve touched up with Linux). My students use these almost daily. They are, like IWBs, great tools for learning. Netbooks are also great tools. The best tool for any job, however, is the one that helps finish it and in the context of education that is going to vary greatly from location to location.
Of course, I am against tech vendors pushing themselves on educators. I believe in edupunk, which is a demand-driven philosophy. Tech vendors are not primarily interested in education and will not ever be able to supply the best product at any given time. An edupunk teacher, however, will always be able to put something together that suits their needs (to the best of their ability, anyway).