The Interactive Whiteboards, Pedagogy and Pupil Performance ...

• Familiarise themselves with the technology and its possibilities through their
everyday use;
• Maintain existing styles of text-led whole class teaching.
Indeed, this capacity of the IWB to mimic other technologies explains why much of
what we observed in the case studies looked like teaching in classrooms without
IWBs.
The capacity of the IWB to be used to fit within existing pedagogic whole class
teaching styles sits alongside its potential to be used to remake the classroom
space. In general, how and when teachers used these potentials depended on their
pedagogic aim rather than the technology. When teachers used IWBs effectively, in
ways that seemed likely to improve teaching and learning, the potentials of IWBs
were clearly allied with teachers’ pedagogic aims. However, we also observed
lessons that seemed to prioritise the use of technological features of the IWB above
any clear pedagogic intent. This was particularly true of features associated with
high interactivity. (See following section) When use of the technological tools took
precedence over a clear understanding of pedagogic purpose, the technology was
not exploited in a way that would or could substantially enhance subject learning.
5.6 Can IWBs Act as a Catalyst for the Development of Interactive
Pedagogy?
Our analysis suggests that teachers in the case studies conceived of interactivity in
different ways and that this impacts on the type of pedagogy that we observed in the
classrooms. The interactive uses of the technology we observed can be categorised
as follows:
• Technical interactivity – where the focus is on interacting with technological
facilities of the board;
• Physical interactivity – where the focus is on ‘going up to the front’ and
manipulating elements on the board;
• Conceptual interactivity – where the focus is on interacting with, exploring and
constructing curriculum concepts and ideas.
How interactivity is understood and used in relation to the IWB in the classroom
appears to be shaped by the pedagogic theories of learning that underpin particular
teachers’ practice, and circulate more broadly in a subject department or school. It
also varies according to the:
• Demands of the subject and topic;
• Perceived ability of the students;
• Time available;
• Peripherals available.
Taken together all these elements help shape the teacher’s own pedagogic purpose
40