SlideShare verwendet Cookies, um die Funktionalität und Leistungsfähigkeit der Webseite zu verbessern und Ihnen relevante Werbung bereitzustellen. Wenn Sie diese Webseite weiter besuchen, erklären Sie sich mit der Verwendung von Cookies auf dieser Seite einverstanden. Lesen Sie bitte unsere Nutzervereinbarung und die Datenschutzrichtlinie.
SlideShare verwendet Cookies, um die Funktionalität und Leistungsfähigkeit der Webseite zu verbessern und Ihnen relevante Werbung bereitzustellen. Wenn Sie diese Webseite weiter besuchen, erklären Sie sich mit der Verwendung von Cookies auf dieser Seite einverstanden. Lesen Sie bitte unsere unsere Datenschutzrichtlinie und die Nutzervereinbarung.
Why IWBs, as in...“Why IWBs are the best option for yourclassroom”“Why IWBs in preference to other possibleclassroom technologies?”“Dear God, of all the things I could put inmy classroom, why IWBs!?”
“Interactive u ctant to use Whiteboards“ Ive become rel them or hat love the w hiteboard in my e them they are o slowly infilt ause it tends t rating ourclassroom bec classrooms s very teacher- . Reviews ofmake my classe effectivenes their centric” s is mixed. I opinion the boards/weblog/ 221.html n my http://www.com mun-it.org/com munity/white jury is still out.” http://edho use.wikispac es.com/Int eractive+Wh “(IWBs are)...the teacher- iteboards c entric paradigm preserved in the guise of new tech!” d-debate/ 07/09/01/interactive-whiteboar http://blog.brettmoller.com/20 “One of the big criticisms “(IWBs are )ju st enforcing ol d about interactive whiteboards teaching habits that we all is that it looks too much lik agree need to b e e expelled from a traditional classroom tool” teaching” http://blog.bret http://gwegner.edublogs.org/ tmoller.com/20 2007/05/29/interactive-pedag 07/09/01/intera ogies/ ctive-whiteboar d-debate/
“They reinforce thedominance of thefront of the room andteacher supremacy” Gary Stager http://www.techlearning.com/Default.aspx?tabid=67&EntryId=681
Is technology inherently good, or inherently bad? It depends...
Argument 4IWBs are too expensive and a waste of money
Cost of complete IWB installation: $5500Less cost of projector, cabling, etc: -$4000 Cost of just the IWB: $1500 IWB life expectancy: 5 years IWB cost per year: $300 Teaching days per year: 180 Average students per class: 25Cost per day, per student, per year: 6 cents
Argument 5 IWBs are completelyunnecessary when every student has a laptop
Used by a group Used by an individualShared learning Individual learningIdeal for stimulating group Ideal for self-paced,discussion self-directed workGood for introducing key Good for personalconcepts productivity and creativityFocus is on teaching Focus is on learning
Argument 6IWBs continue to promoteteacher-centric instruction
Students who are taught by expert teachers exhibitan understanding that is more integrated, morecoherent, and at a higher level of abstraction.**Dr John HattieUniversity of AucklandTeachers Make a Difference: What is the Research Evidence?
The effects of quality teachin When all other so urces of variation g on educational outcomes are are taken int o account, including greater than th ose that arise gender, socia l backgrounds of from students ’ backgrounds students and dif ferences between The quality of teac schools, the mos t important source her education and teach of variation in stud ent achievement is ing appears to be more strongly teacher quality. related to student achievement than class sizes, overall spendin g levels or E xcellence in teaching is the teacher salaries. singl e most powerful influence on achievement The best strategy to enhance student achievement is to It could be argued that ensure that all students receive effective sc hools are only the best possible qu ality of tive to the ext ent that they effec teaching. have effe ctive teachers. Kenneth Rowe Dr John Hattie
Maybe a little bit of‘teacher-centricity’ isnot that bad after all?
Teaching is not rocket science. It is, in fact, far more complex and demanding work than rocket science. Richard Elmore professor of educational leadership at Harvard Graduate School of Education
Argument 7Theres no proof that IWBs improve student learning
“IWBs clearly demonstrated a positive effect onteaching and learning.” ERNIST ICT School Portraits, 2004“In a UK study, teachers were extremely positiveabout the technology and were convinced thatIWBS were responsible for improvements inteaching and learning.” Higgins, et al, 2005 “When used wisely, IWBs can produce a signiﬁcant improvement to student learning.” Balanskat, Blamire & Kefala, 2006
85 classrooms Lesson without IWB Lesson with IWB Same teacher, same lesson Technology enabled lessons tested an averageDr Robert Marzano 17% better than non technology enabled lessons
The "Sweet Spot" is when interactivetechnology is used by an experiencedteacher, who has had training, at least2 years of IWB use, and uses it 75% ofthe time in class.That teacher shows a 29% gain in scores.
Two different studies* into the effects of IWBs found an overwhelming majority of teachers (98%) felt more conﬁdent in using ICT in general as a direct result of using an IWB. *Higgins (2005) and Underwood (2006)
And how did we envision ways touse this amazing new technology? We drove it to work.
Old Things Old Things New Thingsin Old Ways in New Ways in New Ways
Old Things in Old Ways• Notes are still handwritten on the board as the lesson is taught.• Lesson content consists primarily of Word or PDF documents.• Limited use is made of the IWB’s toolset.• Lessons are not usually prepared in advance.• Lessons do not take advantage of interactive features.• Lessons are not saved at the end of class.• The teacher works in isolation, not sharing resources with others.
Old Thingsin New Ways• Modiﬁcation of existing paper-based worksheets and activities to work on the IWB.• Greater use of lessons prepared in advance.• Greater use of dragable layered objects that can be moved around the screen, revealing existing words and objects.• Greater reliance on resources found in the gallery or web.• Effective use of software that works well on an IWB.• All lessons saved for future use and reused.• Lessons shared with other teachers to reduce workloads.• Noticeably increased levels of student engagement and interest.
New Things in New Ways• The use of short snippets of video or animation.• The inclusion of high-resolution photo images.• Tapping into libraries of interactive learning objects and embedding these in lessons so students are able to easily explore the ‘what if’ possibilities.• Greater use of software that enables students to manipulate ideas seeing what happens to the ﬁnal outcome if a variable is changed here or there.• The ability to perform impractical or dangerous experiments via simulation.• The ability to engage with virtual worlds and simulated environments.
New Things in New Ways• The use of real-time video communication software to facilitate class-to-class collaboration• Skyping in guests and experts so that students can ask questions and interact with others outside their classroom.• The use of classroom interactive learner response systems to gauge student understanding in real time.• Increased levels of interactivity and student involvement often raising questions that were unexpected but with answers that offer greater insight into and deeper understanding of a topic.
"Evidence suggests that the presentationaladvantages of IWB use are considerable and thatthe consequent motivational gain is to bewelcomed.However, it is also clear that neither of these addto teaching effectiveness unless they aresupported by teachers who understand thenature of interactivity as a teaching and learningprocess and who integrate the technology toensure lessons that are both cohesive andconceptually stimulating". Miller, Glover and Averis, 2005