180 likes | 323 Views
Interactive White Boards Do They Positively Impact Education?. By: Sheri Cooper & Lauren Townsend. Advantages of IWBs. Advantages for Students. Increased Participation Increased Motivation Opportunity to delve into complex and abstract subjects. Advantages for Teachers. Flexibility
E N D
Interactive White BoardsDo They Positively Impact Education? By: Sheri Cooper& Lauren Townsend
Advantages for Students • Increased Participation • Increased Motivation • Opportunity to delve into complex and abstract subjects
Advantages for Teachers • Flexibility • Multiple Resources • Reaches multiple and diverse students
Disadvantages for Students • Quickly lose appeal • Less time on content • One note lessons
Disadvantages for Teachers • Technical Issues • Teacher Training • Shifts attention from student to technology
Effectiveness of Smart Board Technology • As a tool for non-linear learning • By accessing text and media • Ability to move back and forth among pages • Ability to present the same information in different ways
Effectiveness of Smart Board Technology • Combines the benefits of interactive computer use with group learning • Internet access • Videos • Large screen
Effectiveness of Smart Board Technology • As a tool for multi-modal teaching • Descriptive • Experimental • Mathematical • Figurative • Kinesthetic
Effectiveness of Smart Board Technology • As a tool for teaching children with disabilities • Manipulatives • Auditory and Visual Cues • Interactive video • Various assessment strategies
Effective Use of Smart Board Technology • Must have adequate training and time to find appropriate software • Provide incentives to increase IWB skills • Vendor training • In-service training • Tutorials • Cooperative learning among teachers
Effective Use of Smart Board Technology • must be an integral part of the lesson, not something tacked on to be fun • Create lessons on the IWB • Use features in the software
Akbas, O., & Pektas, H. M. (2011). The effects of using an interactive whiteboard on the academic achievement of university students. Asia-Pacific Forum on Science Learning and Teaching, 12(2) • 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. doi:10.1080/00131910500279551 • Betteney, M. (2009). Interactive white boards. English 4--11, (35), 3-5. • Blau, I. (2011). Teachers for "Smart Classrooms": The Extent of Implementation of an Interactive Whiteboard-based Professional Development Program on Elementary Teachers' Instructional Practices. Interdisciplinary Journal Of E-Learning & Learning Objects, 7275-289. • Campbell, M. L., & Mechling, L. C. (2009). Small Group Computer-Assisted Instruction With SMART Board Technology : An Investigation of Observational and Incidental Learning of Nontarget Information. Remedial & Special Education, 30(1), 47-57. • Giles, R. M., & Shaw, E. L. (2011). SMART boards ROCK! Science and Children, 49(4), 36-37. • Harden-Thew, K. (2012). Transition to school, success and an interactive whiteboard. Practically Primary, 17(1), 34-36. • How to afford interactive whiteboards. (2011). Technology & Learning, 31(8), 44-46. • Jang, S., & Tsai, M. (2012). Exploring the TPACK of Taiwanese elementary mathematics and science teachers with respect to use of interactive whiteboards. Computers & Education, 59(2), 327- 338. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2012.02.003 • Manny-Ikan, E., Tikochinski, T. B., Zorman, R., & Dagan, O. (2011). Using the interactive white board in teaching and learning - an evaluation of the SMART CLASSROOM pilot project. Interdisciplinary Journal of E-Learning & Learning Objects, 7, 249-273.
McNamara-Cabral, M. (2012). Idea bank: How a smart board changed my teaching. Music Educators Journal, 98(3), 26-27. doi: 10.1177/0027432112439669 • Murcia, K. (2010). Multi-modal representations in primary science: What's offered by interactive whiteboard technology. Teaching Science: The Journal Of The Australian Science Teachers Association, 56(1), 23-29. • Şad, S. N., nihat.sad@inonu.edu.tr. (2012). An attitude scale for smart board use in education: Validity and reliability studies. Computers & Education, 58(3), 900-907. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2011.10.017 • Şad, S., & Özhan, U. (2012). Honeymoon with IWBs: A qualitative insight in primary students' views on instruction with interactive whiteboard. Computers & Education, 59(4), 1184-1191. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2012.05.010 • Türel, Y., & Johnson, T. E. (2012). Teachers' Belief and Use of Interactive Whiteboards for Teaching and Learning. Journal Of Educational Technology & Society, 15(1), 381-394. • Whitby, P. S., Leininger, M. L., & Grillo, K. (2012). Tips for Using Interactive Whiteboards to Increase Participation of Students With Disabilities. Teaching Exceptional Children, 44(6), 50-57. • Xin, J. F., & Sutman, F. X. (2011). Using the smart board in teaching social stories to students with autism. Teaching Exceptional Children, 43(4), 18-24.