Interactive%20White%20Boards%20%20Do%20They%20Positively%20Impact%20Education?

1
Interactive White BoardsDo They Positively
Impact Education?

• By Sheri Cooper
• Lauren Townsend

2
Advantages of IWBs
3
Advantages for Students

• Increased Participation
• Increased Motivation
• Opportunity to delve into complex and abstract
  subjects

4
Advantages for Teachers

• Flexibility
• Multiple Resources
• Reaches multiple and diverse students

5
Disadvantages of IWBs
6
Disadvantages for Students

• Quickly lose appeal
• Less time on content
• One note lessons

7
Disadvantages for Teachers

• Technical Issues
• Teacher Training
• Shifts attention from student to technology

8
Effectiveness of Smart Board Technology
9
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

10
Effectiveness of Smart Board Technology

• Combines the benefits of interactive computer use
  with group learning
• Internet access
• Videos
• Large screen

11
Effectiveness of Smart Board Technology

• As a tool for multi-modal teaching
• Descriptive
• Experimental
• Mathematical
• Figurative
• Kinesthetic

12
Effectiveness of Smart Board Technology

• As a tool for teaching children with disabilities
• Manipulatives
• Auditory and Visual Cues
• Interactive video
• Various assessment strategies

13
Effective Use of Smart Board Technology
14
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

15
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

16
References
17

• 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. doi10.1080/00131910500279
  551
• 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. doi10.1016/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. Interdisciplina
  ry Journal of E-Learning Learning Objects, 7,
  249-273.

18

• McNamara-Cabral, M. (2012). Idea bank How a
  smart board changed my teaching. Music Educators
  Journal, 98(3), 26-27. doi 10.1177/00274321124396
  69
• 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.
• Sad, S. N., nihat.sad_at_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
• Sad, 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.
  doi10.1016/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.