Interactive Whiteboard

Posts Tagged ‘Interactive whiteboard’

Using a Visualiser with the Visually Impaired

Monday, January 16th, 2012

A visualiser is essentially a static webcam that can be used to project images of real objects or text onto a screen, an interactive whiteboard or a webpage. By projecting an image onto a whiteboard or a large screen, they can be used in whole-class or large group teaching. By linking them to a server the image can be sent to a network of computers, including remote computers, or to individual handheld devices. The image can be, and most often is, displayed in real time but the image, or a stream of images, can be recorded, stored and used at any time. The visualiser is a very versatile piece of kit that can be used in many ways to enhance teaching.

What I want to touch on in this post is the use of a visualiser for pupils with visual impairment. Now, instinctively, the first thing you think when working with a pupil with visual impairment is that the image should be both clear and large. The visualiser can easily provide this; it displays the image of the object under its lens and projects this onto a screen. The image can be of a two dimensional object, such as text or picture in a book, or a real three dimensional object, it can even be of a moving real-life object, such as a spider (or ladybird for the squeemish). Careful use of a light source can help minimise shadows and/or emphasise the 3 dimensional nature of the image. The image produced from the visualiser can be enlarged to present it clearer to the pupils; this can be especially useful if you are teaching a large group or if you have a pupil with visual impairment who just happens to be sitting near the back.

It is traditional wisdom that images should be larger than life when teaching a pupil with a visual impairment but really the efficacy of this depends upon the nature of the visual impairment. What I’d like to suggest is that we do the opposite; we take the image produced by the visualiser and we shrink it and then shrink it even more until it is actually smaller than in real life.

Why do I suggest shrinking it like this? Well let us take the case of a learner whose visual depth is no more than a couple of centimetres in front of his eye. A learner with such an impaired visual field can rarely take in the whole of an object but has to move their head and eye around an object in order to perceive it all. If we present a real-life sized image to such a learner, they will experience difficulty perceiving it. If we have enlarged it, then we have only compounded the difficulty the learner experiences. If, on the other hand, we have shrunk the image to less than life size, we have increased the opportunity of this learner to perceive the whole object and, thereby, improved the learning opportunity for that learner. This, of course, assumes that the learner is able to get close enough to the projected image!

I make that last remark because, while it may be the case that the image can be projected onto a wall, projector screen or IWB, the learner may be prevented from getting close to the projected image by furniture or objects placed in front of or attached to the a screen. The learner would also have to be able to locate the small image among a vast mass of white space. Perhaps, in this instance, feeding the visualiser image to a server and then to a handheld device might be a better solution.

There may be many other ways of using a visualiser with visually impaired learners and, indeed, other obstacles to overcome. I simply present this as an idea for their use and a demonstration of their versatility.

Interactive Projectors – IWB’s without the whiteboard (whiteboardblog.co.uk)

Using a Visualiser with the Visually Impaired

Possibly Related Posts:

Tags: Display technology, Document camera, Interactive whiteboard, visualiser, visually impaired
Posted in Classroom Technology | No Comments »

23% of Learners Learn Better Without an Interactive Whiteboard

Monday, November 14th, 2011

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: Display technology, Educational technology, Interactive whiteboard, Learning styles, Robert Marzano
Posted in Classroom Technology, Interactive Whiteboards | 1 Comment »

Retro Computing

Monday, August 29th, 2011

: 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.

Even the ultra-trendy Mac computer is not immune to a bit of retro computing, it would seem. Announced at Macworld last year and with a new version for education announced this year, Papershow seems to bring to your mac a pen tool similar to Livescribe. Even Livescribe themselves have not been sitting still and have made available their newer Echo version of the livescribe pen.

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.

1988: The Future Has Arrived! [Retro] (jalopnik.com)
IWB Guides from Becta – get them before they go (whiteboardblog.co.uk)
Retro-Futuristic Eco Design – ‘Power Styling’ Book Reveals Space-Age Concepts to Beautify the Grid (GALLERY) (trendhunter.com)
Outfitting 21st Century Classrooms with 21st Century Teachers (isteconnects.org)
Classic computers at retro festival (news.bbc.co.uk)
Retro/Oldschool Computer Tech Commercials (neatorama.com)
Technology Goes “Retro-Chic” with YUBZ (geardiary.com)
Vintage computers celebrated at Bletchley Park computer festival (news.bbc.co.uk)
Livescribe’s Echo is a creative new take on the smartpen (venturebeat.com)
Vintage computers inspire next generation of scientists (news.bbc.co.uk)
The Need for a Common IWB Format (whiteboardblog.co.uk)
Retro Computer Ressurections – The Commodore 64 ss Back and Sexier Than Ever (VIDEO) (trendhunter.com)

Possibly Related Posts:

Tags: 1960s, BBC Micro, Education, Instructional Technology, Interactive whiteboard, K through 12, Technology, Terry Freedman
Posted in Classroom Technology, Interactive Whiteboards | 1 Comment »

The Future of Teaching is Online

Sunday, February 6th, 2011

I came across this article on the Mashable website which looked at the future of teaching. It is not often that you find an article about education on this site, so I was intrigued. The article is titled The Future of teaching, so I was doubly intrigued.

The article claims that research has shown that online teaching appears to be more effective than face-to-face teaching. My own experience of learning online would tend to disagree with that but let’s hope that online tuition has improved, I’m sure it has, since my last experience of online learning.

The key message appears to be that online learning needs to be used in combination with other methods to be most effective. Well, I guess that is not a new or an earth shattering message.

However, I do feel that the article has a positive message for the future of education. It shows that online tuition can be effective and most certainly has a role to play in the future of education. For me., this is an important message as we move forward with Home Access. It not only tells us that online learning can be effective, it also emphasises that those learners without access are at a disadvantage.

Many of you will know that I have been involved in Becta’s Home access programme. Articles like this only help reinforce my view that a successful implementation of home access is important for improving the learning outcomes for all learners.

Education Technology; Teaching Tool or Learning Tool?

Sunday, January 2nd, 2011

: Image via Wikipedia

Yesterday, I read this great short blog post from @kylepace entitled Good Vs Great Teachers. In the article, Kyle criticises another author who appeared to believe that educational technology was a waste of time because it would never replace good teachers. All in all I would agree very much with Kyle’s response, which is basically that good teachers embrace the technology and what it offers, to become Great teachers.

I posted a tweet on Twitter, inviting my followers to take a look at the article but I also posed the question, does the article still look upon education technology as a teaching tool rather than a learning tool? The purpose of this post on my blog is to attempt to explain what I meant by that.

We’ve had computers in schools for around 30 years now. I’m still surprised when I encounter a colleague who still questions whether we should have computers in schools. I remind them just how long they have been around in education and, if I’m feeling particularly narked, I ask what my colleague has been doing all this time? (I wonder why I have no friends!)

As I say, we’ve had computers for around 30 years and, in that time, the nature of the technology and its uses have changed considerably. No longer is a computer a device which only one, or possibly two, people could use at a time when sat at a monitor screen. Nowadays, we can project computer images to large groups and classes via interactive whiteboards. The computer in the classroom is no longer the sole preserve of the teacher, who says who can use it and when. Now each pupil can have their own computer, on a desk, on their lap or in their pocket.

Originally, pupils could engage in the learning software that their teacher presented to them. Nowadays, pupils can locate their own resources and share them with peers. They can use computers to collaborate on projects and other learning work. They can create their own materials and display or broadcast them to an audience. Their audience, or their peer group, is no longer confined to the members of their own school, year or class group, that audience is now to be found beyond school or even national boundaries.

What is echoing in my mind, are the words I first heard from John Davitt, “we need to move learners from being passive consumers of technology into becoming creative users of that technology” . I feel that this shift has been happening over the years and needs to continue to progress. The technology is no longer just a tool for the teacher, it is no a tool for the learner.

I sometimes find myself saying to teachers, particularly those who have some reticence or lack confidence in using ICT, that it does not matter so much how you use technology, what matters most is how you allow and enable your learners to use technology.

So, for me, educational technology is a tool more for the learner than the teacher. That is not to deny the role that technology has in supporting the teacher in their work and in their approaches to learning but that it is the use of technology by the learner that is key to the future of education.

For me, a good teacher is one who uses technology in their work ( see my article elsewhere on good teachers and technology), a great teacher is one who extends that to encourage, support and develop their learners’ use of technology in their learning.

Technology Everywhere (slideshare.net)
Action plan for integration of technology (slideshare.net)
Students as Creators of Multimedia Instruction (boisebarbara.org)
SWGFL ICT Conferences – Torquay & Bristol (dougdickinson.co.uk)
Does ICT Improve Learning? (ictineducation.org)
New Technology and Outdoor Learning: Introduction (olliebray.typepad.com)
Outfitting 21st Century Classrooms with 21st Century Teachers (isteconnects.org)

Education Technology; Teaching Tool or Learning Tool?

Possibly Related Posts:

Tags: Author, Education, Information and communication technologies in education, Interactive whiteboard, K through 12, Learning, Technology, Twitter
Posted in Classroom Technology, Transforming Learning | 2 Comments »

Interactive Whiteboards in Education

Sunday, October 24th, 2010

It seems that Interactive Whiteboards (IWB) have recently been causing some controversy. Some people seem to be dead set against them. Surprisingly, it is not the anti-technologists or the technophobes who are against them, this time it seems to be some of the leading lights of technology who are decrying their use.

The root of the issue seems to be that some advocates of technology appear to believe that IWBs have somehow set back the development of technology in education. To them, it seems, the way that IWBs are used is a cry back to the old days of ‘chalk and talk’. They see the boards being used like old blackboards with the teacher standing in front of the class teaching direct to the pupils. These teachers seem to feel that they are using technology but, in fact, the technolgy sems to have made very little change or impact upon their teaching. As such, the critics say, people and schools claim that they are making more use of technology in the classroom but, in essence, the change has been very little. The use of IWBs in this way has not brought about any change or transformation in teaching.

I’m really not sure about these critics. Did they really believe that IWBs would bring about a ‘transformation’ in teaching? If they did, then I think they must have been very short-sighted.

I tend to perceive things a little differently. The use of IWBs in classrooms has , it appears to me, extended the use of technology in education. It has enabled ICT to be used in new ways to support a wider range of teaching and learning styles. IWBs have made technology accessible to more teachers because they can now see the possibilities and potential for its use in their teaching.

Above all, IWBs have enabled ICT to be used to whole class and group teaching; this has possibly been the biggest development in educational ICT in the last 5 years. Previously, ICT had been a very individual teaching system. That is to say, each computer could be used to aide the learning of 1 or 2 pupils at a time. To reach a whole class, would entail the use of an ICT suite or require each pupil to have their own laptop PC. Now, there is always a place for ICT suites, but it would not be feasible to have one in every class or teaching area (it would also be very expensive). Each pupil having their own laptop is also very worthwhile but it would be very difficult for a teacher to monitor what each pupil accesses on their screen during a lesson or, indeed, to present the same material to each pupil at the same time. I know that all this is technologically possible but is perhaps beyond the technological capability of your average classroom teacher.

Beyond doubt there is a place and role for class or group learning in our modern educational system. Even in the age of personalised learning, there is an important role for class and group teaching. IWBs have enabled technology to be used for teaching classes and groups. We would be better to take advantage of this and promote its effective use in this role rather than decry its use.

There is, though, one area of IWB use in which I would agree with the critics. The I part of IWB is often ignored or overlooked. That is to say, there is often little Interactivity and the whiteboard is used simply as a projection screen or, worse, as a whiteboard with staff writing on it with marker pens.
It would agree, we need to encourage more Interactivity with IWBs, we also need to demonstrate that the Interactivity is not just between teacher and board but also between pupil(s) and board. Above all, there needs to develop interactivity between whiteboard and other software or peripherals under the control of the teacher or pupil.

There is also one aspect of IWBs with which I feel a certain amount of unease. I’m thinking now about the projector. It really amazes me how this lump of 1960s technology has seen a ressurgence because of the spread of IWBs. Also, the projector seems to fit in with the commercial ‘ethos’ so prevalent in our current society as also evidenced by printers and razors whereby the main piece of equipment (projector, printer, razor) has a reasonable cost that seems to fall in time but the necessary important parts(bulb, ink cartridge, razor blade) seems to cost a fortune and rise inexplicably in price.
I am pleased to see that the technology to manufacture large plasma screens with inbuilt touch sensitive screens is now being exploited, it’s just that the size and cost of such devices still seem initially limiting.

Possibly Related Posts:

Tags: Classroom Technology, Interactive whiteboard
Posted in Classroom Technology | 2 Comments »

Using Interactive Whiteboards to Improve Achievement

Saturday, July 3rd, 2010

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/

Learning Platforms, Insets and lessons (digital-teacher.co.uk)
Secondary Science on the IWB (warringtonict.wordpress.com)

Using Interactive Whiteboards to Improve Achievement

Possibly Related Posts:

Tags: Display technology, Educational technology, ICT CPD, Interactive whiteboard
Posted in Classroom Technology, Interactive Whiteboards, Training INSET and CPD | 7 Comments »

Posts Tagged ‘Interactive whiteboard’

Using a Visualiser with the Visually Impaired

23% of Learners Learn Better Without an Interactive Whiteboard

Retro Computing

The Future of Teaching is Online

Education Technology; Teaching Tool or Learning Tool?

Interactive Whiteboards in Education

Using Interactive Whiteboards to Improve Achievement

Contact me

Follow us on Twitter

Doug Woods

Posts Tagged ‘Interactive whiteboard’

Using a Visualiser with the Visually Impaired

Related articles by Zemanta

23% of Learners Learn Better Without an Interactive Whiteboard

Retro Computing

Related articles by Zemanta

The Future of Teaching is Online

Related articles by Zemanta

Education Technology; Teaching Tool or Learning Tool?

Related articles by Zemanta

Interactive Whiteboards in Education

Using Interactive Whiteboards to Improve Achievement

Related articles by Zemanta

Contact me

Follow us on Twitter

Doug Woods