Jane Feener

In partial fulfillment of the requirements of Ed 6390

It is a large touch-sensitive board which is connected to a digital projector and a computer.

It can be operated via the computer keyboard and mouse, or by tapping on the screen image

Increased efficiencyMultimedia and

multisensory presentation of material

Increased motivation Promotes interactivityCan promote creativity

Teachers reported favourable reactions to this new technology

Teachers felt that the nature of their teaching had changed

Teachers made their lessons more enjoyable and interesting

Three pedagogic phases of IWB use:

“Teachers who reach this level of competence show considerably enhanced understanding of the learning process, talk about the ways that technology can support learning, and show ingenuity in developing materials to meet specific learning needs”

(Glover, Miller, Averis, & Door,2007, p.10)

“Teachers are offered opportunities to design, create and employ digital resources that demand creativity in teaching”

(Wood & Ashfield, 2008, p.94)

Promotes teacher centered instruction when not used correctly

Students can become spectators

Information overload due to fast paced lessons

Reduces teacher-student interaction

Discourages student participation

Overwhelms students

There has been little evidence in the literature to show links between IWB use and student achievement

However, recent research has pointed to positive gains in literacy, mathematics, and science in classrooms where the IWB has been utilized for a longer period of time.

“Good teaching remains good teaching with or

without the technology”

(Higgins, Beauchamp, & Miller,2007, p.217)

Establish a community of practice to support colleagues

Interactive Whiteboard

BECTA (2003b) What the research say about interactive whiteboards. The British Educational Communications and Technology Agency, Coventry, England

Bennett, S., & Lockyer, L. (2008). A study of teachers' integration of interactive whiteboards into four Australian primary school classrooms. Learning, Media and Technology, 33(4), 289-300.

Cutrim Schmid, E. (2008). Potential pedagogical benefits and drawbacks of multimedia use in the English language classroom equipped with interactive whiteboard technology. Computers & Education, 51(4), 1553-1568.

Geronazzo, M. (2011) SMARTBoard interactive whiteboard reaches 20 year milestone. Retrieved from http://investor.smarttech.com/releasedetail.cfm?ReleaseID=543246

Gillen, J., Staarman, J., Littleton, K., Mercer, N., & Twiner, A. A ‘learning revolution’? Investigating pedagogic practice around interactive whiteboards in British primary classrooms. Learning, Media and Technology, 32(3), 243-256.

Glover, D., Miller, D., Averis, D., & Door, V. (2007). The evolution of an effective pedagogy for teachers using the interactive whiteboard in mathematics and modern languages: An empirical analysis from the secondary sector. Learning, Media and Technology, 32(1), 5-20.

Hall, I., & Higgins, S. (2005). Primary school students' perceptions of interactive whiteboards. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 21(2), 102-117.

Harlow, A., Cowie, B., & Heazlewood, M. (2010). Keeping in touch with learning: The use of an interactive whiteboard in the junior school. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 19(2), 237-243.

Higgins, S., Beauchamp, G., & Miller, D. (2007). Reviewing the literature on interactive whiteboards. Learning, Media, and Technology, 32(3), 213-225.

Jewitt, C., Moss, G., & Cardini, A. (2007). Pace, interactivity and multimodality in teachers’ design of texts for interactive whiteboards in the secondary school classroom. Learning, Media, and Technology, 32(3), 303-317.

Kennewell, S., Tanner, H., Jones, S., & Beauchamp, G. (2008). Analysing the use of interactive technology to implement interactive teaching. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 24(1), 61-73.

Lewin, C., Somekh, B., & Steadman, S. (2008). Embedding interactive whiteboards in teaching and learning: The process of change in pedagogic practice. Educational and Information Technologies, 13(2), 291-303.

Lewin, C., Scrimshaw, P., Somekh, B., & Haldane, M. (2009). The impact of formal and informal professional development opportunities on primary teachers’ adoption of interactive whiteboards. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 18(2), 173-185.

Lopez, O. S. (2010). The digital learning classroom: Improving English language learners' academic success in mathematics and reading using interactive whiteboard technology. Computers & Education, 54(4), 901-915.

Magana, S., & Frenkel, P. (2009). Transforming teaching and learning for the 21st century. Retrievedttp://www.prometheanworld.com/upload/pdf/Transforming_Teaching_and_Learning_for_the_21st_Century_V6.

Mathews-Aydinli, J., & Elaziz, F. (2010). Turkish students' and teachers' attitudes toward the use of interactive whiteboards in EFL classrooms. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 23(3), 235-252.

McCormick, R., & Scrimshaw, P. (2001). Information and communications technology, knowledge and pedagogy. Education, Communication and Information, 1(1), 37-57.

Miller, D., & Glover, D. (2010). Presentation or mediation: Is there a need for "interactive whiteboard technology-proficient" teachers in secondary mathematics? Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 19(2), 253-259.

Miller, D., & Glover, D. (2002). The interactive whiteboard as a force for pedagogic change: The experience of five elementary schools in an English education authority. Information Technology in Childhood Education Annual, 2002(1), 5-19.

Mohon, E. H. (2008). SMART moves? A case study of one teacher's pedagogical change through use of the interactive whiteboard. Learning, Media and Technology, 33(4), 301-312.

Moss, G., Jewitt, C., Levaaic, R., Armstrong, V., Cardini, A., & Castle, F. (2007). The interactive whiteboards, pedagogy and pupil performance evaluation: An evaluation of the Schools Whiteboard Expansion (SWE) project: London challenge. London: Institute of Education.

Northcote, M., Mildenhall, P., Marshall, L., & Swan, P. (2010). Interactive whiteboards: Interactive or just whiteboards? Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 26(4), 494-510.

Reedy, G. B. (2008). PowerPoint, interactive whiteboards, and the visual culture of technology in schools. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 17(2), 143-162.

Slay, H., Sieborger, I., & Hodgkinson-Williams, C. (2008). Interactive whiteboards: Real beauty or just "lipstick"? Computers & Education, 51(3), 1321-1341.

Smith, F., Hardman, F., & Higgins, S. (2006). The impact of interactive whiteboards on teacher–pupil interaction in the national literacy and numeracy strategies. British Educational Research Journal, 32(3), 443-457.

Smith, H. J., Higgins, S., Wall, K., & Miller, J. (2005). Interactive whiteboards: Boon or bandwagon? A critical review of the literature. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 21(2), 91-101.

Watson, A. (2010). Interactive whiteboards to reach 900 000 unit sales. Retrieved from http://www.futuresource-consulting.com/pdfs/2010-02_IWB_release.pdf

Winzenried, A., Dalgarno, B., & Tinkler, J. (2010). The interactive whiteboard: A transitional technology supporting diverse teaching practices. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 26(4), 534-552. Wood, R., & Ashfield, J. (2008). The use of the interactive whiteboard for creative teaching and learning in literacy and mathematics: A case study. British Journal of Educational Technology, 39(1), 84-96.

Yelas, J., & Engles, P. (2010). Project ACTIVate: Innovations from New Zealand. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 26(4), 432-446