The Interactive Whiteboards, Pedagogy and Pupil Performance ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

long run. Few teachers however currently use a centrally stored bank of resources or have had training in how to develop one. The teacher survey found that only around a quarter of teachers (26 per cent) report that they regularly download materials directly from the school network although around three-quarters of teachers (76 per cent) reported their IWB is connected to it. Although some teachers may well be storing their materials directly on their laptop or a memory stick, case study data showed that procedures in some schools made it difficult to use the school network to store and retrieve data in ways which would facilitate developing a resource bank. The case study data also suggested that there may be further difficulties in developing centrally shareable resources because of the way in which the materials teachers devise for their own classrooms are so clearly tied to the particular sequence of activity they have in mind. This may make them idiosyncratic in design, and less susceptible to sharing with those who are not so fully conversant with the teaching purposes for which the texts were intended. Possibilities of using the IWB interface to share texts made in class with students via the school intranet were not yet fully in place or being exploited during the period of data collection. Summary Observations for this project suggest that developing more efficient use of materials created for the IWB is not just a matter of solving a technical problem but also means addressing more fundamentally which kinds of texts could most usefully be shared in this way. Different features of the IWB seem to have more or less relevance to different core subjects and curricular topics. At this stage of policy implementation it is too early to fully assess the potential of the technology to contribute to efficient work management. 52
6. TEACHER AND PUPIL PERCEPTIONS OF IWBs This section explores teacher and pupil perceptions of IWBs drawing on both case study and survey data. Both teachers and pupils were broadly positive in their response to IWBs. The terms in which they expressed their enthusiasm were also broadly similar, and in general repeated key themes identified in the literature as the salient benefits of the technology. In both interview and survey responses teachers and pupils highlighted aspects of the technology that enhance the teacher’s role at the front of the class, including the ability to repeat and explain key points taught. Pupils generally considered that teachers’ lessons with IWBs were better prepared and organised. ‘I think they fit more parts of subjects into the lessons because they can do more than one thing, where they have got it written up already, and they can just click to the next screen and it is all there for you.’ (Pupil) Pupils were particularly likely to express enthusiasm for the visual aspects of teaching with IWBs: ‘When the teachers are saying it, it is one thing, but when you actually see it, it goes into your head. Because some people learn from pictures more than others. (Pupil) Both groups generally considered that IWBs make learning more interesting and that they help bring teaching up-to-date. Yeah, it has improved the system because technology is moving forward and we want to be moving with it…Some people still use chalkboards in other schools. This is modern. (Pupil) I think students want to learn when they feel they have been given new technology. A lot of students come to school and they go ‘This school’s rubbish, the computers are budget!’ That kind of attitude to their school, I think, is detrimental to their learning, so I think if they can see that their learning environment is appreciated and that money is invested, that they are a lot more willing to engage with their learning… (HOD) Pupils were far more cautious about the impact of IWBs on behaviour. When asked, ‘Do you think students behave better with IWBs’, for example one pupil answered: They did at the start but now nobody cares. It is just like an ordinary thing now. Less than a third of those surveyed agreed with the statements: I would work harder if my teacher used the IWB more often; or I think students behave better in lessons with IWBs. 53
Page 1 and 2:
RESEARCH The Interactive Whiteboard
Page 4 and 5: CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ……
Page 6 and 7: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AIMS AND METHODS
Page 8 and 9: substantially enhance the use of IW
Page 10 and 11: Observations for this project sugge
Page 12 and 13: 1. THE STRUCTURE OF THIS REPORT Thi
Page 14 and 15: 2003). Whilst many of the factors t
Page 16 and 17: A range of data was collected in ea
Page 18 and 19: 3.2.4 Pupil Focus Groups Focus grou
Page 20 and 21: 3.5 Statistical Analysis of Pupil A
Page 22 and 23: • Reasons given for the choice of
Page 24 and 25: 5. FINDINGS: THE IMPACT OF THE INTR
Page 26 and 27: colleagues or using commercial soft
Page 28 and 29: textbooks or worksheets. This is tr
Page 30 and 31: 5.3 How the Available Resources Sha
Page 32 and 33: Illustrative Case Study. Example: T
Page 34 and 35: Illustrative Case Study. Example: U
Page 36 and 37: Illustrative Case Study. Example A
Page 38 and 39: Illustrative Case study. Example B
Page 40 and 41: Illustrative Case Study. Example C
Page 42 and 43: • Familiarise themselves with the
Page 44 and 45: were aware of this dimension and ha
Page 46 and 47: is not good, if the students aren
Page 48 and 49: 5.9.2 Teachers’ use of Multi-Medi
Page 50 and 51: Figure 8: Frequency of using IWB by
Page 52 and 53: Science classroom that map onto exi
Page 56 and 57: On the negative side, a sizable min
Page 58 and 59: These kinds of difficulties can be
Page 60 and 61: change in their own setting. Others
Page 62 and 63: a number of schools is for us a sec
Page 64 and 65: Table 1: Key School-Level Statistic
Page 66 and 67: 8.1.2. Difference-in-Differences (S
Page 68 and 69: Table 5 sets out the same type of r
Page 70 and 71: unlikely that right-hand censoring
Page 72 and 73: 8.1.4 Difference-in-Differences (Be
Page 74 and 75: 8.1.5 Discussion Overall, this stat
Page 76 and 77: figure; the mean percentages of pup
Page 78 and 79: Conclusion The larger scale survey
Page 80 and 81: Smith, H.J., Higgins, S., Wall, K.,
Page 82 and 83: schools. These were combined with p
Page 84 and 85: elevant hard and software and the r
Page 86 and 87: Within government generally, where
Page 88 and 89: Yet if there is little doubt in pol
Page 90 and 91: overhead projector (OHPs) (Though,
Page 92 and 93: intention to equip all children wit
Page 94 and 95: technology in much the same terms (
Page 96 and 97: In some lessons with IWBs these tec
Page 98 and 99: use shows considerable variation in
Page 100 and 101: Glover, D. & Miller, D. (2001) "Run
Page 102 and 103: Annex C Analysis of the IWB Baselin
Page 104 and 105:
Table 7: Number of IWBs by Departme
Page 106 and 107:
Figure 3: Funding source by subject
Page 108 and 109:
Figure 7: Sources of funding after
Page 110 and 111:
Are perceptions of ICT consistent w
Page 112 and 113:
Table 8: Allocation of LC funding t
Page 114 and 115:
Can perceptions of ICT resources in
Page 116 and 117:
Figure 16: Number of IWBs in Maths
Page 118 and 119:
schools have done this) and 100 mea
Page 120 and 121:
Use of IWBs in Science Departments
Page 122 and 123:
department feels all six areas are
Page 124 and 125:
Use of IWBs in English Departments
Page 126 and 127:
The training needs of English depar
Page 128 and 129:
Annex D Analysis of the IWB Teacher
Page 130 and 131:
Figure 3: Type of interactive white
Page 132 and 133:
Reported Frequency of IWB Use by Te
Page 134 and 135:
Figure 8: Frequency of using IWB by
Page 136 and 137:
How are Teachers using their IWB? A
Page 138 and 139:
Figure 14: Ease of finding suitable
Page 140 and 141:
What type of IWB training have teac
Page 142 and 143:
investment of time to integrate int
Page 144 and 145:
Many of the newer teachers do not a
Page 146 and 147:
Figure 25: Statements which the hig
Page 148 and 149:
eport IWBs are used hardly ever or
Page 150 and 151:
Table 2: Positive Statements: Perce
Page 152 and 153:
2. 3.3 Response to technology. Tabl
Page 154 and 155:
Annex F: Survey Instruments 1. The
Page 156 and 157:
PERFORMANCE: AN EVALUATION Baseline
Page 158 and 159:
Room Subject Source of funding Date
Page 160 and 161:
INTERACTIVE WHITEBOARDS, PEDAGOGY A
Page 162 and 163:
2. The pupil survey INTERACTIVE WHI
Page 164:
Copies of this publication can be o
show all

The Interactive Whiteboards, Pedagogy and Pupil Performance ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?