Interactive+Whiteboards

= Interactive Whiteboards = James Ralston

Description and Uses of Technology
There are four types of operation:
 * Interactive whiteboards such as smart boards are activated by touch for user input. I have one in my classroom and it is great when it works. Like most interactive whiteboards my smart board uses an overhead projector on my classroom ceiling that shows my computers' video output. It has four different color digital pens, along with a digital eraser, at the bottom of the board. These digital ink pens can be used to highlight what you are projecting on the screen. I use this feature for my IEP students to help them understand the main points of what I am showing and to help them take notes. The smart board is a patented interactive white board that uses this finger touch, or any hard object, in addition to the digital pens to manipulate the board using proprietary software. In addition to highlighting information, I can write my own notes. There are several types of interactive white boards. They are connected to a computer by a USB or serial port cable or a wireless connection (Brown, S. 2003).
 * 1) One type uses an infrared light at the bottom of the board. Using software, both a person touching the screen using their finger, a pen, or other device interrupts the light and the software translates this into an output (Brown, S. 2003).
 * 2) Another type is a resistive touch-based interactive white board. A thin film of material coats the whiteboard. The surface distorts under pressure and activates a conducting back plate. Software converts this to an output (Brown, S. 2003).
 * 3) Another type uses an electromagnetic pen that operates by interacting with coils built into the board. This pen operates similar to the mouse on your computer and like the other types uses proprietary software to convert this into an output (Brown, S. 2003).
 * 4) Another interactive white board uses an infrared (IR) pen which is different in that it is similar to an ordinary Wii remote control. Since many people including students are familiar with the Wii games, this makes it easier for students to use (Brown, S. 2003).

The following video shows a kindergarten teacher using a smartboard in her class: [] Students love to use the smart board and this feature gets them engaged in the lesson. You can connect your document projector, or even a microscope, using the device shown in the following video: []

Important Findings on Student Outcomes
"The study results indicated that, in general, using interactive whiteboards was associated with a 16 percentile point gain in student achievement. This means that we can expect a student at the 50th percentile in a classroom without the technology to increase to the 66th percentile in a classroom using whiteboards" (Marzano, R. 2009). This is obviously significant, however, he later says, "One of the more interesting findings from the study was that in 23 percent of the cases, teachers had better results without the interactive whiteboards." (Marzano, R.2009). This is due to the fact that teachers tended to include too much information and not get into teaching the students the "why" behind the information. The also tended to pace the class too fast and cover too much information. In summary, they tended to pay too much attention to the teachers and getting "applause" rather than clarifying content. However, compared to control groups without the smartboard, students generate more ideas and also focus more closely on concepts. This is due to the fact that they interact with the board and are more engaged in the lesson. More studies are needed to confirm these preliminary findings. However, I suspect it has more to do with the teacher than the tool they are using. Teachers who engage students would be successful with or without the smartboard in my opinion. It does provide an additional tool for providing differentiated instruction to students whom learn in different ways. However, interactive whiteboards this technology benefits deaf students by allowing them to concentrate on the board and not on watching sigh language so much. (Liles, 2005) However, if the content is not too much students can benefit from multiple modes of learning (Liles, 2005)

Emerging Trends and Open Issues
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"> I learned more about emerging trends and open issues from a blog website, Educating the Digital Tribe, by Bob Leneway a professor at Western Michigan University, than from my journal articles. His blog address is: <span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;"> [] Because of the cost of interactive whiteboards and new technology, interactive whiteboards you see in the classroom today may remain because they have already been purchased, but schools may decide not to install these whiteboards in new classrooms because Ipads and other touch screen electronic devices are cheaper and more user friendly. We all love our Ipads, and by being connected to a big screen LCD TV, with economical software packages provide as much or more interaction than the large and expensive interactive whiteboards. They can also be connected to a projector and what I like is that they are wireless and you can walk around your classroom while you use this technology. Ipads can be purchased for as little as $299, depending on the model. I am sure schools could get a lower price by volume purchases. <span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">"Thus, by using a tablet like the iPad to communicate wirelessly with a classroom computer, teachers can project lessons using standard projection equipment to create an interactive whiteboard learning environment that allows students to participate in lessons without leaving their seats". (Leneway 2012) The Consumer Electronic Show in Las Vegas this year demonstrated this new capability. The GSA that had the $800,00 seminar might have seen this while their boss was sitting in his hot tub sipping an adult beverage! In summary, interactive whiteboards like you see in our classrooms today could become as obsolete as the old black chalk board of the past. They will end up being used as a screen for our projector while we walk around with our ipads. In addition our students may also have Ipads and we will all be connected wirelessly and watching the same lesson. **References**
 * 1) <span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 110%;">Al-Qirim, N. (2011). Determinants of interactive white board success in teaching in higher education institutions. Computers & Education, 56(3), 827-838. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2010.10.024
 * 2) Brown, S. (2003). Interactive Whiteboards in Education. Retrieved May 27, 2012, from www.jisc.ac.uk/uploaded_documents/**interactivewhiteboards**.pdf
 * 3) <span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 110%;">Mechling, L. C., Gast, D. L.,, & Krupa, K. (2007). Impact of SMART Board Technology: An Investigation of Sight Word Reading and Observational Learning. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 37(10), 1869 - 1882. doi:10.1007/s10803-007-0361-9
 * 4) <span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 110%;">Shenton, A.,, & Pagett, L. (2007). From ‘bored’ to screen: the use of the interactive whiteboard for literacy in six primary classrooms in England. Literacy, 41(3), 129-136. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9345.2007.00475.x
 * 5) <span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 110%;">Campbell, M. L.,, & Mechling, L. C. (2009). Small Group Computer-Assisted Instruction With SMART Board Technology. Remedial and Special Education, 30(1), 47-57. doi:10.1177/0741932508315048
 * 6) <span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 110%;">Higazi, T. B. (2011). Use of interactive live digital imaging to enhance histology learning in introductory level anatomy and physiology classes. Anatomical Sciences Education, 4(2), 78-83. doi:10.1002/ase.211
 * 7) <span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 110%;">Ş, ad, S.,, & leyman Nihat. (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
 * 8) <span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 110%;">Leung, I. K. C. (2008). Teaching and learning of inclusive and transitive properties among quadrilaterals by deductive reasoning with the aid of SmartBoard. ZDM, 40(6), 1007 - 1021. doi:10.1007/s11858-008-0159-z
 * 9) <span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 110%;">Somyü, rek, S., Atasoy, B., Ö, zdemir, S.,, & uk. (2009). Board’s IQ: What makes a board smart? Computers & Education, 53(2), 368-374. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2009.02.012
 * 10) <span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 110%;">Lambropoulos, N. (2010). “Learning Together with the Interactive White Board.” London South Bank University, UK and Margarida Romero (University of Toulouse, France)
 * 11) <span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 110%;">Anonymous (2010). “The pros and cons of interactive white boards.” American School and University. Overland Park U.S. : Penton Business Media, Inc.
 * 12) <span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 110%;">Bridge, H.D. (2009). “An Assessment of Interactive White Boards In Lancaster Community Schools.” University of Wisconsin-Stout.Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
 * 13) <span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 110%;">Al-Qirim, Nabeel (04/01/2011). "Determinants of interactive white board success in teaching in higher education institutions". Computers and education (0360-1315), 56(3), p.827. DOI:10.1016/j.compedu.2010.10.024
 * 14) <span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 110%;">Mead, Lloyd (01/01/2012). "Using interactive white boards as a tool to motivate and engage student learners with learning difficulties and disabilities". Journal of assistive technologies(1754-9450), 6(1), p.62.
 * 15) <span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 110%;">KAYA, Hüseyin (04/14/2011). "Student’s Views Towards Interactive White Board Applications in the Teaching of Geography Themes in Social Knowledge Lessons”. Zeitschrift für die Welt der Türken(1868-8934), 3(1), p.179.
 * 16) <span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 110%;">(04/02/2012). "Media Advisory/ACTAB Presents DELTAB: The new Interactive White Board-First in Class". Internet wire
 * 17) <span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 110%;">Olsen, Angie (04/30/2011). "The Impact of Self-Efficacy and Peer Support on Student Participation with Interactive White Boards in the Middle School Math Class". The journal of computers in mathematics and science teaching(0731-9258), 30(2), p.163.
 * 18) <span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 110%;">Heppell, Stephen (11/05/2004). "Project". The Times educational supplement(0040-7887), (4608), p.O8.
 * 19) <span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 110%;">Liles, B. (03/2004). “Electronic White Boards”. Sound & Video Contractor, ISSN 0741-1715, 03/2004
 * 20) Liles, M. (2005, May). Interactive whiteboard system drives increased achievement at TexasSchool for the Deaf. T H E Journal, 32(10), 49-50. Retrieved July 30, 2009, from Academic Search Premier database.
 * 21) <span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 110%;">Leneway, B. (01/2012). Educating the Digital Tribe, //Are Interactive White Boards Dead?// Retrieved May 14, 2012 from [/2012/01/are-interactive-white-boards-dead.html]
 * 22) <span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 110%;">Marzano, R.J. (11/2009). Teaching with Interactive Whiteboards, Multiple Measures Journal. Volume 72, issue 3, pgs 80-82

Reviewed By: (Peer Review Name 1, Peer Review Name 2) Robert J. Marzano November 2009 | Volume **67** | Number **3**** Teaching with Interactive Whiteboards Multiple Measures**Pages 80-82 Liles, M. (2005, May). Interactive whiteboard system drives increased achievement at Texas School for the Deaf. //T H E Journal//, 32(10), 49-50. Retrieved July 30, 2009, from Academic Search Premier database. Liles, M. (2005, May). Interactive whiteboard system drives increased achievement at TexasSchool for the Deaf. T H E Journal, 32(10), 49-50. Retrieved July 30, 2009, from Academic Search Premier database.