The Big Three Questions: Interactive White Boards

The Big Three: Interactive White Boards1

The Big Three Questions: Interactive White Boards

Amber W. Bunce

University of West Georgia

Fall 2010

Abstract

Almost one-third of all classrooms in the United States now feature some sort of interactive white board (Corcoran 2009). These boards are many teachers’ and school systems’ answer to increasing technology in the classroom, increasing interactivity and engagement between students and material and providing increased technical skills needed in modern workforces (Manzo 2010). These are not cheap answers and costs between $700 and $5000 per board.

What does this technology really do?

An interactive whiteboard connects to a projector and a computer. It has access to the internet and to digital assessments via clickers for instant feedback. It is run through touch technology, some using a stylus pen of some sort and others using a finger or a pen. Material can be manipulated and connected during lessons and lecture. Students can run the board and the lesson. What does it do? Everything or so many would have people to believe. Yes, it is a chalkboard, a projector, a movie screen, a computer interface. It is a lot. These technologies meet many extraordinary needs in any classroom.

Proponents of interactive white boards in classrooms see the boards as everything from “a conduit to the curriculum” to the one thing that has created a “unique partnership” between students and their teachers (Starkman 2006). In truth, the possibilities are seemingly endless with the boards. In a primary class students address letter sounds and phonics, in art history classes the brush strokes of a Monet masterpiece are seen far clearer than ever before using textbook photographs. In sciences, 3-dimensional replicas can not only be viewed, but dissected, labeled and then repeated. Students often run the programs and the boards. In fact, most studies show that the students manipulating and using the boards are the most favorable way to increase the interactivity between the students and the material and thus increase the learning (Starkman 2006, Manzo 2010).

What specific and necessary problem will this piece of technology solve?

The biggest problem an interactive white board will combat would be student engagement. A chalkboard and a piece of chalk do not have the pizzazz to keep twenty-first century students engaged and engrossed in the vast majority of lessons. Students go to homes with fast-access internet, video games with unbelievable graphic capabilities, instantaneous communication via the internet and cell phones. They will one day work in environments where they will interact with computers, create presentations perhaps, train others, and demonstrate products. They will more than likely do these things using technologies that have yet to be envisioned. And then they are met in the classroom with lectures, overhead projectors, and perhaps and dry-erase board. That is a problem. Students need to be engaged and involved in their education. The simple joy of interacting with information using these technologies makes the material more real to the student.

Another problem that this technology addresses is the competition between American schools and those in other developed countries. In his study on interactive whiteboards, Starkman (2006) quoted the CEO of Polyvision, Inc., a company that produces an interactive board, “how we teach not what we teach must change in the US if we are to have our students compete in a global economy.” It is true that while almost 30% of American classrooms are equipped with some interactive board and with a projection of as many as 57% (Milshtein 2010) the United States is still behind economic competitors in using these technologies in the classroom. Studies have shown that as many as 75% of schools in the United Kingdom integrate interactive white boards into their classrooms (Corcoran 2009).

What cheaper/better/easier/simpler technology alreadyexists to solve your problem?

There are arguments that many teachers only use the interactive boards as “glorified chalkboards” and do not fully access the potential of the technology (Manzo 2010). There are also a multitude of options and packages to be found from just as many companies. The two leading manufacturers of interactive white boards are Smart Technologies and Promethean. As demand increases and the technologies themselves improve the boards are becoming cheaper and thus available to an increased audience. There is nothing that can truly compete with an interactive white board. It takes several different pieces of equipment to come near to what the one board can accomplish in a classroom. A projector attached to a computer can allow for projection of the computer screen, yes, but it cannot allow for manipulation of the material in the way that the hardware allows nor the software that has been created to be used with these resources.

In what way is the proposed innovation an improvement over other options or the existing protocol?

First, there is truly no existing protocol to do the many actions that can be done through the interactive white board technology. There have been arguments that saving the monies that are spent on the interactive boards and instead funding more computers or laptops to create a one-to-one scenario would be a viable, or better, use of funds (Manzo 2010). That is a moot point in many respects because this is comparing apples to oranges. An interactive white board does more than a laptop computer. It can provide instant assessments using clickers and survey questions. They allow for competition between classmates and increased interest through the entire classroom. Students are not engaged alone at one computer screen. With lessons using the interactive board the class in involved in a lesson together and learning from each other and not only a teacher.

Conclusion

I personally have seen students who would not look at the screen while reviewing and studying maps earlier in the year jumping, literally jumping, for the chance to slide labels across the Promethean Board to complete a map. Corcoran (2009) quoted an Iowa State University professor who said that with more technologies in the classrooms “kids get more actively involved with learning” and “they become doers.” The kids are waiting to be involved and engaged. The interactive white board technology gives educators the tool to involve those students.

References

Corcoran, E. (2009). Getting to the top of the class. Forbes Magazine. Retrieved from

Manzo, K. (2010). Whiteboards’ impact on teaching seen as uneven. Education Week Digital Directions.

Retrieved from

Milshtein, A. (2010). The white stuff. College Planning and Management. Retrieved from

Starkman, N. (2006). The wonders of interactive whiteboards. T.H.E. Journal, 33(10), 36-38.