Monday 17 November 2008

IWBs

In response to the article 'Whiteboards under the microscope', I would like to express my lack of surprise that "the boards are having no discernible impact on children's test scores".  To my mind, IWBs are merely another tool which can be used by teachers to deliver lessons.  While IWBs can provide the opportunity to make lessons more creative, or least make it easier for teachers to be creative, there surely could not have been any expectations that they would improve children's learning potential.  I was therefore very surprised to read that "around 85% of teachers believed the whiteboard would improve children's scores."

I agree with the article when it states that teachers would benefit from further professional training to maximise the potential of this medium, but I would argue that this is not the main flaw to IWBs.  I suggest that the IWB add to the plethora at the teacher's disposal and therefore creates a sense of bewilderment for the teacher.   From my observations, faced with such a realm of resources, teachers consider using the IWB to entertain first, and to educate second.

IWBs are very exciting and I am looking forward to using them, but I am under no illusion that by throwing thousands of pounds at a problem or by using the latest technology, educators can improve grades.  Children are so far advanced in terms of ICT in comparison to their teachers, that they are not impressed or in awe of the programmes used by teachers on IWB.  Is this what that 85% of teachers mentioned earlier expect?  Children learnt for centuries without IWBs, why would they suddenly improve their ability when faced with interactive technology?  As a new technology, it will take a while for the effects of them to be seen as teachers develop their effective inclusion in the classroom.

I don't intend to sound negative about IWBs as I can see the many benefits they have, some of which have been highlighted here, for example, "Children can be directly involved in whole class teaching to show what they know and can do," and that teachers can more easily manage their work load.  I am looking forward to using IWB during my initial school based training but am sceptical of the amount of hope that seems to be pinned on them.  One final example of this scepticism is exasperated from the article mentioned above which states "the strongest indicator of success (of IWBs)...is teachers' unwillingness to move from a classroom with the technology to one without".  While the article sees this an indicator for success I would argue it shows an over-reliance on the tool and prevents teachers from planning lessons and being creative in other ways.  As teachers become reliant on IWBs, lessons can become repetitive and children can become indifferent to the tool.

References:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2006/jun/20/elearning.technologyhttp://eduwight.iow.gov.uk/curriculum/whiteboard/images/IWBReportIoWColour.pdf

1 comment:

The Python said...

...I would like to express my lack of surprise that "the boards are having no discernible impact on children's test scores". To my mind, IWBs are merely another tool which can be used by teachers to deliver lessons. While IWBs can provide the opportunity to make lessons more creative, or least make it easier for teachers to be creative, there surely could not have been any expectations that they would improve children's learning potential...

Absolutely.

...I was therefore very surprised to read that "around 85% of teachers believed the whiteboard would improve children's scores...

Thing is, these people have been conditioned by government to believe that ict will increase children's scores. This is a political agenda which is used by government to 'demonstrate' that they are doing a good job.

Unfortunately, the cost of this agenda - teaching to the test, league tables, SAS - results in stressed children, schools and teachers, the latter threatened with closure or other dire consequences if their test scores are not up to scratch.

Do you understand the concept of catch 22?