Image 01

doug woods

ICT in Education Consultant and Trainer

Archive for the ‘Interactive Whiteboards’ Category

Retro Computing

Monday, July 19th, 2010

BBC Micro left
Image via Wikipedia

I have been using computers for most of my life yet I am still surprised at times by the concept of ‘retro’ computing. To me technology always still seems to be something new and I’m always on the look out for innovations and creative ideas. I guess this focusing on the new and the futuristic has blinded me to the history of computing and that may be why I’m surprised by the retro!

I am led to wonder though what the deal is with this ‘retro’ stuff. Is it simply a hankering for olden times when computing seemed simpler? Is it just a marketing ploy to try to make more money out of old ideas? Is it maybe a sign that we’re running out of new ideas and so turn to the old? Or is my inner cynic right to think that it costs so much to develop new ideas that developers repackage old ones as a cheaper alternative? Well, I guess any one of those reasons could be right, at least in part, but does ‘retro’ serve any useful purpose?

In educational technology, we are not immune from the ‘retro’ movement. In the past, I have seen companies repackage old BBC Micro programs for the PC and I even had one company want to repackage my old ‘Young Start” suite of programs. In the past, I’ve teased Terry Freedman about his use of the Livescribe pen which combines written notes with a laptop. I too have also been bitten by the retro bug and have been known to enthuse excitedly about the return of Bigtrak. The biggest and most pervasive example of retro computing is possibly the interactive whiteboard and projector.

The data projector really dates back to the slide projector or cine projector we used to have back in the early 1960s; it really is a dinosaur of technology and one that refuses to become extinct despite progress in display technology. It is, though, its partner, the Interactive Whiteboard (IWB) to which I wish to turn in order to illustrate the possible usefulness of retro computing.

Why, though, do I class IWBs as ‘retro’ computing, after all we didn’t have them back in the 1980s? Well, at a time when computing was moving schooling away from the teacher and the blackboard with its chalk and rubber (or the whiteboard and its marker pens), the interactive whiteboard took it right back there again. I don’t want to dwell on the well worn arguments as to the usefulness or otherwise of IWBs, whether they are a good thing or a bad thing, or whether they took educational technology forwards or backwards.

I see IWBs as linking technology to existing practice. In other words, they took a technique or skill teachers were used to  (writing and presenting on a board at the front of the class) and applied that to technology, or vice versa. Regardless of whether this is good practice or not, it brought technology to a wider range of teachers, many of whom will have since gone on to explore and use other technologies and other ways of using technology in education. This is an illustration of the power, or influence, of retro technology; it relates technology to existing practice and allows users to explore technology further and build upon their practice.

This is often far more effective than introducing something completely new to people and telling them they have to stop what they’re doing or how they’re doing it and do it a different way. By using technology that has a degree of familiarity, users are more accepting of it and perhaps more willing to explore new ways of using it; often leading themselves into changing the way in which they work.So while we may scoff or tease at things ‘retro’, let’s not forget that they may be a path to newer things.

Related articles by Zemanta
Retro Computing

Possibly Related Posts:


Tags: , , , , , , ,
Posted in Classroom Technology, Interactive Whiteboards | 1 Comment »

Using Interactive Whiteboards to Improve Achievement

Saturday, July 3rd, 2010

292168150 68c42d6b23 m Using Interactive Whiteboards to Improve Achievement image by Sean O’Sullivan

A recent study suggests that the use of interactive whiteboards (IWB) can improve learner achievement by 16%. This could be good news for those schools seeking to improve the number of learners achieving 5 A*-C grades grades, particularly the current crop of National Challenge Schools.

The study would suggest that by focussing upon the effective use of  a widely available piece of technology, schools and pupils can improve their performance.  This positive news, however, should be tempered a little because the study also shows that some inappropriate use of Interactive whiteboards may have a detrimental effect for some learners (see previous post). So, with appropriate staff training or CPD, schools could make better use of their IWBs and anticipate improved levels of achievement for their learners.

Training, CPD, of course, costs money but in this instance, it would seem to be money well spent. National Challenge Schools may already have budgets to help them improve the attainment levels of pupils. For all staff and schools, the upcoming ICT CPD for staff initiatives could help provide the necessary input.

So if you find yourself with an ICT CPD budget or an upcoming INSET day and you’re not sure what to do with it, spending part of it on improving the use of Interactive Whiteboards might be worthwhile.

 

For interactive whiteboard training in UK, you could do a lot worse than contact Danny http://www.whiteboardblog.co.uk/about/

Related articles by Zemanta
Using Interactive Whiteboards to Improve Achievement

Possibly Related Posts:


Tags: , , ,
Posted in Classroom Technology, Interactive Whiteboards, Training INSET and CPD | 6 Comments »

23% of Learners Learn Better Without an Interactive Whiteboard

Monday, January 11th, 2010

3509154129 f486daa9fe m 23% of Learners Learn Better Without an Interactive Whiteboard

In a recent study, researchers found that in 23% of cases, learners achieved better results when interactive whiteborads (IWB) were NOT used.

Okay, this was not the main finding of the study but it is an interesting one and one which I feel some people will latch upon. We need, however, to look at why the research found this finding. On examining the evidence, the researchers discovered that there were potential pitfalls in using interactive whiteboards, these included;

1. Not organising  the content appropriately and/or presenting the content poorly – often the content was rushed through without allowing learners the time to interact or analyze the content.

2. Using too many visuals. Pages may be awash with imagery that it became difficult for the learner to identify the key content.

3. Inappropriate use of voting or feedback devices. These were often used to note how many students got the right answer without probing why wrong answers were given or explaining why one answer was more approriate than another.

So at first it migh be argued that this research suggests that inappropriate or poor use of the technology could be more damaging to learning than no use of technology. Even if the points above were corrected, however, I’d suggest that there would still be some learners who would learn better without the use of IWBs. The Interactive Whiteboard is essentially a visual medium or multimedia tool. There are some learners for whom a visual method is not the best method of presentation. I’m thinking here of those learners who may have a predominantly auditory or kinaesthetic learning style.

For learners with a preferred style of learning that is not visual, the use of interative whiteboards (or any predominantly visual tool) could be a distraction, a source of confusion or, at worst, a detriment to their learning.

I’d also suggest that there may be many learners who, though unrecognised or undiagnosed, are at some point along the Autistic spectrum. We know that autistic learners have difficulty combining senses and appear to learn better via one sense. Often this IS the visual sense but not necessarily so. For such a learner, a multi-sensory or multimodal approach could be confusing or detrimental.

So, the research suggests that at least a fifth of learners learn better without an interactive whiteboard being used. Their suggestion is that it is inappropriate use of the technology which underlies this. Correcting the inappropriate usage may reduce this figure. However, there may still be those learners for whom the IWB may not be the best technology to utilise because of their preferred learning style.

The research was carried out by Robert Marzano and reported in the paper Multiple Measures; Teaching with Interactive Whiteboards published November 2009.  An extract of which can be found here on the ASCD website. The study appears to have involved Promethean boards but should also be relevant to other manufacturers’ products.

Possibly Related Posts:


Tags: , , , ,
Posted in Classroom Technology, Interactive Whiteboards | 1 Comment »

Copyright © 2010 by doug woods. All Rights Reserved. Subscribe to doug woods's feed.
Aggiornare Theme by GeekDesignGirl