Hi Heather,

I am a SmartBoard user, and have been for the past 3 years. The technology has become so much a part of my classroom practice and that of my students that I can truly say that the board has become transparent. Teacher, student and visitor presentations, in many ways, come alive--provided that there is life in them to begin with!

Our district has plans to introduce many more of these boards into classrooms in then next few years. Currently, they are in the hands of some of our "early adopters", and I think that is a good thing. Networking among users has been started, and that is a good thing as well.

A few cautionary notes. First, I don't believe that interactive whiteboards are a strategy, in and of themselves. I think that we take a wrong turn when we make the mistake that any technology is anything but a tool.

Second, the interactive whiteboard will support any teaching style. It doesn't necessarily demand a new way of teaching. I have seen teachers use the technology as a glorified chalk board; I have seen others use it as an interactive multimedia centre. I think that the technology itself, while it will support transformational practice, doesn't necessarily demand it.

Finally, I think that we have to be very careful to define what we mean by success. If success means improved performance on standardized tests, that is one thing. If success means the development of deeper understanding, critical thinking ability or something that is beyond the measuring capability of the voting components of interactive whiteboards, then we have to encourage teachers to move differently with this technology.

While I respect the work of Robert Marzano, I don't think that any one individual's endorsement proves the legitimacy of any strategy, practice or way of thinking. Legitimacy comes from within the classroom, the place where theory and practice come together on a daily basis.

Thanks for starting this conversation...I think that it is an important one!

Thanks for your astute comments, Mark. You're right, of course. They are a tool, but a darn engaging one and also one that models some skills that students should know how to do. Just by watching the teacher and each other use the wand, click onto fields, open and close files, minimize, etc...on a daily basis, integrates these mini-lessons organically. And these are lessons that not every students gets otherwise. Additionally, using the voter technology in a formative, reflective manner is key. Using the board can't cease at the end of the lesson. The information gathered must be then used as data to develop lessons, reteaching strategies, and differentiated methods to reach students. But the board makes the gathering of that data easier and quicker which, thus, makes it easier to do our job - that of teaching all students.

I agree too that Robert Marzano is just one voice, but he's an influential one and one that represents a family of educational leaders who are just coming around on ed tech. Nevertheless, the important point here is to know that we can all adapt to use effective tools, just so long as we are open to that change.

If I had written a post that said, "Hey David Warlick just said ed tech is great!" or "Ted Lai loves podacasting," we'd all say "Duh!" Marzano adds some credibility to the argument. I'm not saying he's totally objective, but I'm glad he's on our side!

Thanks again for your comments. I love the dialogue.
-Heather

One of the things that I have found in researching Edutainment and Convergence is that it does not work well when the front line instructors have not been trained properly and just as critically there has to be a level of confidence in this approach by everyone involved. I have been using free mainstream social media tools to teach my communications classes how to do everything from conduct qualitative research, scholarly papers, critical thinking, analysis, and of course creating digital content for broadcasting and narrowcasting. Please keep up the good work because combination of great teaching and technology combined with a pragmatic and flexible philosophical approach at the highest levels will bury the highly questionable academic testing results. I will not get into high stakes testing in this post; however, I think that while standardization is a great Utopian goal it leaves out the very human quality that many who oppose technology blended learning argue that is needed.

You bring up a lot that could be their own posts, Chris. The only point I want to focus on here, however, is the issue of "there has to be a level of confidence in this approach by everyone involved." I think I beg to differ. Here's why.

I am always challenged by technology. I have confidence in the purpose and outcome of well-used technology used formatively, but I struggle with its use all the time. Because of that, I find that many tech tentative teachers will talk to me because I remember what it was like earlier in my career when I let some fears shut me off to using these strategies. It takes time to learn any tool, and tools seem to change daily. So it isn't confidence with the technology that's important, but confidence in the importance of its use that it.

Besides, I don't mind if the kids know more than me. It's a rich lesson onto itself to model one's own learning.

Thanks for the comments. Much to chew on.
-Heather

Hi Heather,

I suppose that I should read Marzano's research before making any further comments. Do you have a reference?

There is one thing that I thought peculiar. Perhaps you could clarify. There was a reported "immediate" gain of 17 percent, but given two to two and a half years of time and training, there was a 20 percent gain. Is this an additional 20 percent gain (i.e. 37 percent gain), or was it a 3 percent gain over the original 17.

Are you able to clarify?

Mark

Mark,
You bring up a good point and one that I hesitate to answer without my own further research. But you might want to check out Marzano here at CUE Live http://tinyurl.com/d7q99a where he was interviewed after his keynote. He speaks further on the subject, and he might be able to answer your questions and more.
Thanks again for your questions and comments.
-Heather

At the risk of being redundant, I agree that successful use of the interactive whiteboard depends upon the successful training of the teachers. Over the course of two decades of experience, we have learned that the most effective training in using technology is to incorporate immediate hands-on use of the tool in the classroom. Teaching all of the tools and experimenting with all of the bells and whistles in one or two long training sessions rarely accomplishes the goal of teachers being able to implement the use of the peripheral. Short bursts of training followed by in-class application encourages its being used successfully.

One of my most interesting experiences was attending a mandatory summer computer "boot camp" for all district teacher about ten years ago. The teachers had to learn the basic MS Office productivity tools and produce a workbook as proof of learning to qualify for the next pay step. In a class of 25 teachers, all of them produced the workbook at the end of the summer, and NONE of them implemented the use of the applicatons to create new teaching tools. When I conducted a follow-up training with some of those teachers, I taught each tool separately and sent them back to the classroom to implement it. They could not qualify for the next training until they demonstrated their new teaching tool to their peers. Not only did the retrained group master the application, the members shared their lessons so that everyone benefitted.

The moral of the story: insist that the teachers who attend the training for the interactive whiteboards (or any other peripheral) demonstrate their transfer of the training into the classroom. Follow-up by department heads and/or administrators is essential!

Cyndee Perkins
Director, Curriculum and Program Development
COMPUTER EXPLORERS
http://www.computerexplorers.com

Hi Heather

I'm interested in writing a grant to get an interactive whiteboard for in my classroom. I'm familiar with SmartBoards and recently saw many others at the ASCD Conference in Orlando, Florida. If I were to purchse one, what would you suggest?

Thanks!

Staff comment:

Katie:

Take a look at these two Edutopia articles: A Clean Slate: Interactive Whiteboard Makes Lessons Snazzy, and Board of Education: A Wall-Mounted Computer Monitor for Your Classroom: A top teacher shares her enthusiasm for -- and tips about using -- interactive whiteboards.

Mark,

I agree with your statement that "we take a wrong turn when we make the mistake that any technology is anything but a tool. " But I believe that what you're expressing is exactly what Marzano points out with the following excerpt from the original post


He emphasizes that, statistically, this successful strategy only works if

* there is clear focus on content, not just using bells and whistles -- the technology proves merely distracting otherwise.


I myself am a big fan of white boards and have been using them for years and feel that they are just a tool, but a powerful tool in the hands of an adept teacher.

Victor