Interactive Whiteboards Shannon Burns- Casimier Dr. Robert Hancock Walden University August 2012

1. Interactive WhiteboardsShannon Burns-CasimierDr. Robert HancockWalden UniversityAugust 2012

2. Interactive whiteboards (IWBs) are large displays that are used to connect to computers, projectors, overheads, and televisions What are Interactive Whiteboards?

3. An Interactive Whiteboard

4. Creating video files used to teach a lesson, software application, and/or load a post on the web or server • Digital storytelling • Taking and storing notes • Encouraging and motivating participants to actively engage in activities • Visual images of thoughts/ideas • Accommodates different learning styles • Used in distance learning communities • Developing higher order thinking skills and brainstorming skills • Used to search global information/resources • Used to share lesson plans, textbooks, graphic s, and charts • Teaching steps in math problems, diagramming activities, vocabulary terms • Use the record feature to narrate informational text Need for Interactive Whiteboards

5. In 1987, Nancy Knowlton and David Martin founded Smart Technologies in Calgary, AB, Canada • In 1991, Smart Technology developed its first Smart Board Interactive Whiteboard. The first Interactive Whiteboard provided touch control of computer applications and standard Microsoft applications directly on the whiteboard. • In 1992, Smart Technology collaborated and formed an alliance with Intel to form a join product development of the Interactive Whiteboard. • The company introduced the Interactive Whiteboard to classroom settings, in corporate meetings, and globally around the world. Research

6. Prior to 1991, no one was familiar with the Interactive Whiteboards. • Although early versions of the Interactive Whiteboard sought to enable lectures at a distance, there were the low-speed modems, early software and slow processors with little graphics capability. • In 1992, the joint alliance of Smart Technologies and Intel developed and designed Interactive Whiteboards . • Interactive Whiteboards were designed to both share information from a personal computer and to engage people in group environments. • David Martin’s vision to broadened the dissemination of the message without having a mouse and keyboard, instead he developed an emerging mode of natural touch with the fingers. Development

7. In 2004-2006, the Interactive Whiteboards hit its biggest peak by selling 100,000 units in the UK. • According to Futuresource, 2.6 million units have been sold in the UK by 2010. • Vendors are concerned that due to funding being cut in schools, the demand for Interactive Whiteboards are being sold to health care agencies, companies, and corporations. Commercialization of Interactive Whiteboards

8. Knowledge Stage The Interactive Whiteboards allow the shift in pedagogy for teachers to become more effective at reaching their students’ learning styles and meeting their students’ needs. • Persuasion Stage Effective training of faculty and staff members to use the Interactive Whiteboard device and software products as well as also providing them with technical support. • Decision Stage Research the effective use of the IWBs within the educational setting. • Implementation Stage Advertising, Production, Manufacturing, and Technical Support • Confirmation Stage Positive results which shows an increase in students’ performance and schools’ performance. Rogers’ Five Stages of Innovation Decision Process

9. In 1987, Nancy Knowlton and David Martin founded Smart Technology in Calgary, AB, Canada. • In 1991, Smart Technology developed its first Smart Board Interactive Whiteboard. The first Interactive Whiteboard provided touch control of computer applications and standard Microsoft applications directly on the whiteboard. Knowledge Stage

10. In 1992, Smart Technology collaborated and formed an alliance with Intel to formed a joint product development of the Interactive Whiteboard. That same year, the company introduced the Interactive Whiteboard to classroom settings, in corporate meetings, and globally around the world. Persuasive Stage

11. In 1992, Smart Technologies introduced the Interactive Whiteboard to classroom settings, in corporate meetings, and globally around the world. Decision Stage

12. 1994: Numonics established the 1st pen-centric interactive whiteboard. • 1997: Smart Technologies developed a collaborative software program called Smart Notebook. • 2001: Recording software was developed as well as the ability to play videos, audio files, and record lessons and/or presentations. • 2002: SMART Board became wireless. • 2003: SMART Technology established its first online community for educators. • 2004: Promethean designed ActiVotes as a learner response system. • 2006: ActivBoard was developed. • 2008: The 1st SMART Table was created. • 2009: Promethean created ActivInspire. • 2011: 1st solar-power IWB was developed. • 2012: SMART released the 1st four-touch IWB Implementation Stage

13. Within the last twenty years, Interactive Whiteboards have become the leading the technology in educational settings. Interactive Whiteboards transforms classrooms from traditional nature to dynamic and integrative learning environment. • Over 20 million students in more than 900,000 classrooms in more than 175 countries around the world are currently using SMART products. • In the United Kingdom, over 70% of their classrooms uses IWs. Netherlands and Denver uses IWs within 40-42% of its schools. Australia, United States, Canada, Ireland, and Mexico uses IWs in about 30% of their schools. Confirmation Stage

14. S-Curve of Interactive Whiteboards

15. According to Futuresource Consulting, Interactive Whiteboards sales at 100% with over 3.6 million IWs have been installed globally within classroom settings. • Although there have been challenges to budgets and reductions to funding in the United States, the U.S. is still a very important market with classroom penetration levels at 35%. Sales of Interactive Whiteboards

16. Innovators of the IWBs and founders of Smart Technologies are Nancy Knowlton and David Martin.

17. Principals and Educators are early adopters of Interactive Whiteboards. • Educators who are familiar with implementing technology devices within the classroom curriculums. • Educators who adapt their lesson plans and classroom activities to meet the needs and learning styles of all students. Early Adopters and Strategies

18. Veteran educators who are not familiar with using any technology devices within their classroom curriculums. • District Professional Workshops for faculty and staff members on how to effectively integrate technology devices into their classroom curriculums. • Bi-weekly demonstrations by teachers modeling their class lessons and activities using Interactive Whiteboards. Laggards and Adoption Strategies

19. Compatibility- The traditional whiteboards to Interactive Whiteboards with more enhanced features. • Trialability- Provide an Interactive Whiteboard pilot program/classroom within each school. • Observability- Teachers and other staff members want/need to observe their colleagues effectively implementing and using the Interactive Whiteboard within their classrooms. Attributes for Meeting Critical Mass

20. In order for Interactive Whiteboards to be adopted by the Board of Directors, IWBs will have to be diffused through a centralized system due to the lack of funding within school districts. If the government is involved in the diffusing aspect of Interactive Whiteboards, they will contribute the funding necessary for school districts to purchase the Interactive Whiteboards. Diffusion in a Centralized System

21. The Superintendents, Board Members, Principals, Assistant Principals, as well as Teachers are the key change agents within the educational field. • As key change agents these individuals play a vital role in influencing their staff members’ attitudes and behaviors towards diffusing innovations. • As key change agents, they can offer knowledgeable professional development workshops to their staff members on how to effectively implement Interactive Whiteboards into the classroom curriculums to accommodate all learning styles and to meet the needs of all students. Professional development workshops should display data/evidence showing how Interactive Whiteboards have made a positive impact on students’ academic performance. • Key change agents should also ensure all questions and/or technical issues will be addressed by onsite Technical Support Personnel. Key change agents and their roles in the educational field

22. Interactive Whiteboards have met critical mass in the educational field on a global level. IWBs have met Critical Mass

23. Accommodates students of all ages and their learning styles • Encourages student engagement in small group and collaborative tasks/activities • Promotes student centered learning experiences • Motivates classroom participation and group discussions • Allows teachers to easily create interactive lessons that meet the needs of all students • Provides opportunities for teachers to integrate technology and computer software into classroom curriculums • Allows teachers and students to save and print files IWBs are essential in education because the device:

24. IWBs promotes student centered learning

25. IWBs accommodate individual students’ needs

26. IWBs promote small group/collaborative tasks

27. IWBs encourage group discussions

28. Armstrong, V., Barnes, S., Sutherland, R., Curran, S., Mills, S., & Thompson, I. (2005). Collaborative research methodology for investigating teaching and learning: The use of interactive whiteboard technology. Educational Review, 57(4), 457-469. • Beeland, J.W. (2002). Student engagement, visual learning, and technology: Can interactive whiteboards help? Information retrieved on August 7, 2012, from http://chiron/valdosta.edu/are/Artsmanscript/Vol.1no1 /beeland_am.pdf. • Lamb, A. Engaging learners the smartboard way. Eduscape: A site for lifelong learners. Information retrieved from http://www.eduscapes.com/sessions/smartboard/. • Painter, D. D., Whiting, E., & Wolters, B. (2005). The use of interactive whiteboards in promoting interactive teaching and learning. Virginia Society for Technology in Education, 19(2), 31-40. • Smart Education. SMART Technologies, Inc. Smart Technologies. Information retrieved from http://education.smarttech.com/ste/en-us/. • Vincenti, J. (2010). Smart technologies. Information retrieved on August 7, 2012, from http://www.vincentimalta.com/smart. • Whalley, J. (2004). Ferl- Teaching interactively with electronic whiteboards. Ferl. Information retrieved on August 7, 2012, from http://ferl.becta.org.uk/display.cfm?resID=8224. References