1 / 20

Integrating Interactive White Boards (IWBs) into the Mathematics Classroom

Integrating Interactive White Boards (IWBs) into the Mathematics Classroom . Presented by: Krishelle Hardson-Hurley University of San Diego. The Research. Interactive White Boards (IWBs) serve as a tool to enhance teaching by offering the following: Flexibility and Versatility

hollis
Download Presentation

Integrating Interactive White Boards (IWBs) into the Mathematics Classroom

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Integrating Interactive White Boards (IWBs) into the Mathematics Classroom Presented by: Krishelle Hardson-Hurley University of San Diego

  2. The Research • Interactive White Boards (IWBs) serve as a tool to enhance teaching by offering the following: • Flexibility and Versatility • Multimedia/multimodal presentation • Efficiency • Supporting planning and the development of resources • Modeling ICT skills to students • Interactivity and participation in lessons • IWBs serve as a tool to support learning by offering the following: • Motivation and affect • Multimedia and multisensory presentation 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.

  3. Problems and Issues • Practicalities of the setting (lighting, placement, etc). • Training • Without proper practical and methodological training, IWBs will not become the transformation pedagogical tool that they are meant to become. • Without proper training on pedagogical tools within specific content areas, IWBs will simply become a presentational aid. 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. 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 language: an empirical analysis from the secondary sector. Learning, Media, and Technology, 32 (1), 5-20.

  4. “Technology might enhance the pedagogy only if the teachers and pupils engaged with it and understood its potential in such a way that the technology is not seen as an end in itself but as another pedagogical means to achieve teaching and learning goals.” Higgins, S., Beauchamp, G., & Miller, D. (2007). Reviewing the literature on interactive whiteboards. Learning, Media and Technology, 32(3), 213-225.

  5. Three-Stage Process of Pedagogical Development • STAGE 1: Supported teacher-center approach where IWB is used to enhance tradition whiteboards: focused didactic teaching • STAGE 2: Interaction where the teacher recognizes some of the additional benefits of the technology and endeavors to stimulate interactivity by questioning and involvement of pupils • STAGE 3: Enhanced Interaction where the teacher moves from the instructional to the involvement role and uses the technology to stimulate, integrate and develop interactive learning Miller, D., Glover, D. & Averis, D. (2004) Matching technology and pedagogy in teaching mathematics: understanding fractions using a virtual manipulative’ Fraction wall, paper presented at the British Educational Research Association Conference, UMIST, Manchester, September.

  6. Pedagogical Change: Where to Start • Recognize what “interactivity” means: • Student to Student Interactivity • Teacher to Student Interactivity • Value the technology and learn how to use it • Understand the nature of interactivity and its pedagogical implications 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 language: an empirical analysis from the secondary sector. Learning, Media, and Technology, 32 (1), 5-20.

  7. Three-Stage Process of Pedagogical Development • STAGE 1: Supported teacher-center approach where IWB is used to enhance tradition whiteboards: focused didactic teaching • STAGE 2: Interaction where the teacher recognizes some of the additional benefits of the technology and endeavors to stimulate interactivity by questioning and involvement of pupils • STAGE 3: Enhanced Interaction where the teacher moves from the instructional to the involvement role and uses the technology to stimulate, integrate and develop interactive learning Miller, D., Glover, D. & Averis, D. (2004) Matching technology and pedagogy in teaching mathematics: understanding fractions using a virtual manipulative’ Fraction wall, paper presented at the British Educational Research Association Conference, UMIST, Manchester, September.

  8. Stage 1: Supported Teacher-Centered Approach • What does it look like? • Teacher is the focus following traditional approaches • Minimal pupil activity with the exception of response to teacher questioning • IWB used as visual support • Effect • Students see the use of the IWB as a new tool • Impact on Pedagogy • Illustrates, does not develop concepts Miller, D., Glover, D. & Averis, D. (2004) Matching technology and pedagogy in teaching mathematics: understanding fractions using a virtual manipulative’ Fraction wall, paper presented at the British Educational Research Association Conference, UMIST, Manchester, September.

  9. Three-Stage Process of Pedagogical Development • STAGE 1: Supported teacher-center approach where IWB is used to enhance tradition whiteboards: focused didactic teaching • STAGE 2: Interaction where the teacher recognizes some of the additional benefits of the technology and endeavors to stimulate interactivity by questioning and involvement of pupils • STAGE 3: Enhanced Interaction where the teacher moves from the instructional to the involvement role and uses the technology to stimulate, integrate and develop interactive learning Miller, D., Glover, D. & Averis, D. (2004) Matching technology and pedagogy in teaching mathematics: understanding fractions using a virtual manipulative’ Fraction wall, paper presented at the British Educational Research Association Conference, UMIST, Manchester, September.

  10. Stage 2: Interactive • What does it look like? • Teacher begins to challenge students to think by using visual, verbal and kinesthetic stimuli. • Teacher is getting comfortable and begins to explore other tools (PowerPoint, Excel, etc). • IWB is center of student attention– it is used to: • Illustrate, • Develop, and • Test discrete concepts • Effect • IWB is not a novelty but integrated into teaching and learning • Impact on Pedagogy • Full potential is not fully developed Miller, D., Glover, D. & Averis, D. (2004) Matching technology and pedagogy in teaching mathematics: understanding fractions using a virtual manipulative’ Fraction wall, paper presented at the British Educational Research Association Conference, UMIST, Manchester, September.

  11. Three-Stage Process of Pedagogical Development • STAGE 1: Supported teacher-center approach where IWB is used to enhance tradition whiteboards: focused didactic teaching • STAGE 2: Interaction where the teacher recognizes some of the additional benefits of the technology and endeavors to stimulate interactivity by questioning and involvement of pupils • STAGE 3: Enhanced Interaction where the teacher moves from the instructional to the involvement role and uses the technology to stimulate, integrate and develop interactive learning Miller, D., Glover, D. & Averis, D. (2004) Matching technology and pedagogy in teaching mathematics: understanding fractions using a virtual manipulative’ Fraction wall, paper presented at the British Educational Research Association Conference, UMIST, Manchester, September.

  12. Stage 3: Enhanced Interactivity • What does it look like? • Technology is an integral part of most teaching in most lessons • Integration of concept and cognitive development in a way that exploits the interactive capacity of the technology • IWB used to prompt discussion, explain processes, develop hypothesis or structures and then test these by varied application • Effect • Teachers aware of available techniques– fluent in use of technology and flexibility of lesson • Impact on Pedagogy • Teachers show enhanced understanding of the learning process and talk about ways technology can support learning Miller, D., Glover, D. & Averis, D. (2004) Matching technology and pedagogy in teaching mathematics: understanding fractions using a virtual manipulative’ Fraction wall, paper presented at the British Educational Research Association Conference, UMIST, Manchester, September.

  13. How to Achieve Enhanced Interactivity Tip #1-Lesson Preparation • Lesson Preparation • Tighter planning • Implementation of lesson plans according to the need to cover prepared material • Planning with greater precision, consider all available resources • Result: • Depart from the prepared “script” and use fresh or recalled screens • Faster pace allows for less time for off-task behaviors 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 language: an empirical analysis from the secondary sector. Learning, Media, and Technology, 32 (1), 5-20.

  14. How to Achieve Enhanced Interactivity Tip #2-Lesson Structure • Lesson Structure • Construct lessons with a progression for conceptual development • Offer opportunities for cognitive growth through reflection • Starter  Developmental phase  Review of learning • Result: • Ability to match activities to objectives • Students use the IWB to help in their evaluation of whether they met such objectives 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 language: an empirical analysis from the secondary sector. Learning, Media, and Technology, 32 (1), 5-20.

  15. How to Achieve Enhanced Interactivity Tip #3-Learning Management • Learning Management • Ability to look at students during the lesson • Recall slides and materials to address misconceptions • Deviations in lesson can be captured and maintained for revision • Result: • Depart from the prepared “script” and use fresh or recalled screens • Faster pace allows for less time for off-task behaviors 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 language: an empirical analysis from the secondary sector. Learning, Media, and Technology, 32 (1), 5-20.

  16. How to Achieve Enhanced Interactivity Tip #4-Storing and Editing Lessons • Storing and Editing Lessons • Ability to save and re-use resources • Organize your files in 1 of 3 ways: • By topic and extracting as each lesson was prepared • By lesson and then copied if to be used in another lesson • By intended year group and then developed with further material if being used for different content • Result: • Ability to refine lessons for different classes rather than redesign • Ability to access materials quickly in the lesson 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 language: an empirical analysis from the secondary sector. Learning, Media, and Technology, 32 (1), 5-20.

  17. How to Achieve Enhanced Interactivity Tip #5-Pedagogical Change • Approach planning for enhanced interactivity in the following ways: • Plan for cognitive development • Create clear visual representation of concepts • Activities should encourage an active, thinking approach • Progression in learning and attainment through progressive lesson structure • Illustrate concepts in different ways • Sequencing is important • Gain immediate feedback • Recall to strengthen learning 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 language: an empirical analysis from the secondary sector. Learning, Media, and Technology, 32 (1), 5-20.

  18. Conclusions • “It is still the quality of the teaching that ensures progress; the IWB alone does not guarantee it.” • “Teachers need time to develop their technological fluency, apply pedagogic principles to the available materials or to the development of materials, and then to incorporate the IWB seamlessly into their teaching” • Students should have access to the board • “Effective teaching requires that the technology and the pedagogy are directed towards enhanced and structure understanding” 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 language: an empirical analysis from the secondary sector. Learning, Media, and Technology, 32 (1), 5-20. Photo: http://21stfollowup.wikispaces.com/file/view/sb680Kids.jpg/57534752/sb680Kids.jpg

  19. Conclusions • Enhanced Interactivity requires: • Potential IWB users to become confident operators of the equipment and software • Opportunities for reflection on the way in which the IWB can present concepts • Willingness to link subject-specific work to think about the process of learning 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 (Vol. 32). Learning, Media and Technology. Photo: http://mytechperformance.com/images/teacheratSMARTboard.jpg

  20. References • 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 (Vol. 32). Learning, Media and Technology. • Higgins, S., Beauchamp, G., & Miller, D. (2007). Reviewing the literature on interactive whiteboards. Learning, Media and Technology, 32 (3), 213-225. • Levy, P. (2002). Interactive whiteboards in learning and teaching in two Sheffield schools: a developmental study. Retrieved December 10, 2010, from http://www.shef.ac.uk/eirg/projects/wboards • McCrummen, S. (2010). Some educators question if whiteboards, other high-tech tools raise achievement. The Washington Post. Washington, DC. Retrieved from http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/06/10/AR2010061005522.html. • SMART Technologies Inc. (2006). Interactive Whiteboards and Learning: Improving student learning outcomes and streamlining lesson planning. SMART Technologies Inc. • 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, 91-101.

More Related