InfoTech
Volume 32, Number 2, December 2004
Laurel A. Clyde
Electronic Whiteboards
“Electronic whiteboard” or “digital whiteboard” or “smart whiteboard” or “interactive whiteboard” are terms that are generally used interchangeably but which may mean slightly different things to different people. Confusingly, some commentators define the terms differently, so that one person’s electronic whiteboard becomes another person’s interactive whiteboard. However, in general these terms are used to describe a group of technologies that are brought together to support classroom activities in a particular way. The most basic “ingredients” in the mix are either the humble whiteboard or a specially-designed whiteboard, the computer and a digital projector linked to the computer. Images are projected onto the whiteboard and teachers or students can add to the images using whiteboard pens or, if the screen is touch sensitive, simply by touching the screen. To this mix of technologies can be added specialist teaching software, electronic resources on CD-ROM or from the Internet (including digital learning objects – see my April 2004 InfoTech column), an electronic pen that takes the place of chalk or the whiteboard pen for writing over the projected images, and a “flipchart” capability to save and print the images, use them with other applications such as a word processor or post them to a web site so that the class has a record of the lesson.
Electronic whiteboard technologies have a number of advantages in the classroom setting. The teacher and all of the students in the class can see, not only what is projected onto the whiteboard, but also any additions made with whiteboard markers or an electronic pen. Used in this way, the whiteboard functions in much the same way as a traditional blackboard but with the possibility to use color, sophisticated images and even moving images. The electronic whiteboard software, supported by teaching resources on CD-ROM and/or resources available on the Internet, provides the teacher with access to a wide range of materials and resources to support instruction. The electronic whiteboard is controlled by the teacher, usually from the front of the classroom, though optional powerful handheld remote control devices enable the teacher to make changes from anywhere in a classroom. The electronic whiteboard can also be used as a tool to facilitate group work in a classroom. The fact that most systems are not completely dependent upon keyboard input means that they can be used with very young students and special needs students, in addition to their use with students who have mastered the keyboard.
Dr. Mary Ann Bell of Sam Houston State University in Texas has carried out a survey of the use of “interactive electronic whiteboards” in instruction in schools and colleges in the US (Bell, 2001). While only 17 institutions (15 of them schools in the K-12 range) replied, their responses nevertheless reveal a variety of instructional applications and a considerable degree of satisfaction with the technology. Respondents reported between 50 and 90 per cent of use of the electronic whiteboard in their institution was for demonstrations such as searching the school library catalog or commercial databases; however, many of the teachers encouraged or required student input into those demonstrations (“it allows students to interact with instruction – they can come up to the board” and add information to the screen). It was reported that students enjoyed this interactivity and found it interesting and even motivational. It was also reported that the electronic whiteboard was better in this regard than the more familiar computer with digital projector set-up, which, it was said, did not encourage students to provide input to the same extent. On the down side, it was difficult to move the electronic whiteboard equipment and re-calibrate it in a new setting, so that unless all classrooms could be equipped with the technology, then teachers would have to take their class to a room in which the electronic whiteboard was already set up.
Dr. Bell has reported elsewhere (Bell, 2002) that she “became interested in the boards for use in junior class and library instruction” and subsequently wrote a doctoral thesis about a project that “involved interactive use of the board in 8th grade writing class.” The study, she says, “showed statistically significant improvement in student attitudes towards both using computers in instruction and towards writing instruction.”
From Australia, Peter Kent, deputy principal at Richardson Primary School in the capital city of Canberra, reports on a project in which over a period of two years, the school has “transformed its entire educational program based around the widespread introduction of interactive whiteboards into the school” (Kent, 2004a). Richardson Primary is a small school of around 220 students in 11 classes. All the classrooms plus the school library and the computer lab are equipped with the electronic whiteboards. The school is using very large, touch-sensitive screens to encourage student involvement in group activities based on the electronic whiteboard technology. Groups might be any size up to and including a full class group. Students can capture the work they do on the whiteboard, manipulate it (for example using software available in the school) and share it with the group via handouts or other means. Kent says, “e-Teaching in the Richardson context involves teachers managing this convergence of digital information from a wide range of sources and devices when presenting, discussing and reflecting upon a concept with a class group.” The “Richardson Strategy,” he says, is “based on educational leadership rather than technical leadership, combined with ongoing structured professional reflection, discussion and support” (Kent, 2004a).
Richardson is not the only school in the Australian Capital Territory that uses electronic whiteboards, though the well-known work at Richardson has been described in a number of articles and reports (see, for example, Kent, 2004b). Out of the interest that has been generated has come the 2004 Richardson Conference, with the theme “Interactive Whiteboards and Schooling.” This professional conference is based on the premise that “interactive whiteboards, used wisely, have the capacity to dramatically enhance the use of information and communications technology (ICT) in all facets of school life, and in turn markedly improve the quality of teaching and learning.” Further, “used as large screen, digital convergence facilities [facilities that bring together a range of technologies for a particular application] they can, in the hands of skilled teachers, become digital hubs that add a new and exciting dimension to the teaching/learning process” (from the conference publicity material). Note, however, the emphasis on “skilled teachers.” This technology will not replace teachers; rather it will enable good teachers to do their work better. The conference was just opening for registrations at the time this article was being written; however, some interesting material was already available on the conference web site at www.iwb.net.au/ .
Meanwhile, on the other side of the globe, at the Education Show in Birmingham, England, a range of new interative whiteboard software was on display in early 2004. Spectrum Science from Cambridge-Hitachi provides an illustrated CD-ROM with materials to support elementary school science courses. From the same group, the Penpals CD-ROM is designed for teaching handwriting skills using an electronic whiteboard. Mult-e-Maths from Beam and Anita Straker is designed specifically for instruction based on an electronic whiteboard, while Edutech’s Primary Explorer series of CD-ROMs can be used in history, geography and science classes. Educational games for the electronic whiteboard are available from Easiteach, which also has a set of software development tools that teachers can use to tailor software to their own teaching objectives (Drage, 2004).
While information technology of all kinds has become more readily available in schools in recent years, there are still problems, including problems with this particular technology or group of technologies. For example, “interactive whiteboards are under-used, because teachers lack the time to find or develop resources to use with them,” says Terry Freedman (2004). The same problem was mentioned by respondents in the survey carried out by Dr. Bell (see above). There are other problems, too. In some schools, teachers have to take their class to an IT room or computer lab in order to use the technology, which means that the lesson may have to be fitted into the schedule for the room rather than taking place at a time that best fits the class schedule. Booking time in the IT room may be another problem; unless it can be done online within the school and the booking confirmed immediately, “traipsing around the school or cross-checking between rooms is time-consuming and can deter teachers” (Freedman, 2004).
The ideal situation, of course, would be a whiteboard setup in every classroom, with software like Boardworks, plus video and DVD or CD-ROM (Freedman, 2004), as was the case at Richardson Primary School. At Kent Rise combined school in Burnham, UK, “every classroom has an ICT package of an interactive whiteboard and computer, video, DVD player, webcam, scanner and printer, in addition to an ordinary whiteboard” (Tarleton, 2004). Supporting this whole-school approach, information is also presented electronically at Kent Rise staff meetings so that teachers see and experience the technology in contexts other than class instruction. We see evidence of this also at Richardson.
Is the electronic whiteboard yet another new technology that might change the world? Not really. However, it appears that electronic whiteboards are very useful tools that, if used appropriately and with imagination, can help teachers to reach their instructional goals.
References
Bell, M.A. (2001). Update to survey of use of interactive electronic whiteboard in instruction. Retrieved July 11, 2004, from http://www.shsu.edu/~lis_mah/documents/updateboardindex.htm
Bell, M.A. (2002, January). Why use an interactive whiteboard? A baker’s dozen reasons! teachers.net. Retrieved July 11, 2004, from http://teachers.net/gazette/JAN02/mabell.html
Drage, C. (2004, March 9). Out come the tools of the trade. The Guardian, 7.
Freedman, T. (2004, March 9). Still failing the technology test? The Guardian, 19.
Kent, P. (2004a). Interactive whiteboards and the journey to ‘e-teaching.’ Retrieved July 12, 2004, from http://edcompass.smarttech.com/en/learning/research/pdf/kent1.pdf
Kent, P. (2004b). E-teaching with interactive whiteboards. Administrator, 26 (1). Retrieved July 3, 2004, from http://www.iwb.net.au/public/content/ViewCategory.aspx?id=34
Tarleton, A. (2004, March 9). Big screen action. The Guardian, 7.
 Laurel A. Clyde is Professor in the Faculty of Social
Science at the University of Iceland in Reykjavik. She
can be reached at anne@rhi.hi.is.
|
