Think prepping kids for the 21st century means buying a Smartboard & computers? Think again.

You have read this article 21st Century Education / interactive whiteboard / IWBs / SMARTBoards with the title interactive whiteboard. You can bookmark this page URL https://benncam.blogspot.com/2012/02/think-prepping-kids-for-21st-century.html. Thanks!

Gary Stager Finally Shares Why He Thinks Interactive Whiteboards / Smartboards Suck

Effective use of Smartboard? Image: Courtesy Tom Welsh

I first met Gary Stager at last year’s EduCon 2010 in a session he was doing that was a spoof on places like Google and Apple making you certified teachers.  Participants could become Stager certified, with real live certificates.  Great session, but what stood out was that like me, Stager had a distaste for interactive whiteboards (IWBs).  

Mine started about 6 years ago when we launched a 1:1 laptop program in NYC where every teacher was to receive an IWB. No! No! No! I screamed.  Please don’t waste money on that!!! Everyone looked at me like I was crazy. My colleague working on the project actually left to work for an IWB company (He later left the company confessing he now  gets what I’m talking about). In the meantime, my cries fell on deaf ears and hundreds of IWBs marched off to the schools. Ah! The horror!

At the session I asked Gary if he’d written anything about his dislike of the devices. I was surprised to learn the answer was no.  I told him I hoped he would and in the meantime, I wrote several of my own posts explaining why I hate interactive whiteboards which you can read here.

• Are Interactive Whiteboards a Smart Idea when they Make Even the Most Innovative of Educators Look Dumb? – 10 Reasons to Ditch the Board
• Do The IWBs or Clickers You (want to) Own REALLY Help Meet Learning Goals?
• Got Money for a Really Expensive Set of Training Wheels? I’ve Got An IWB to Sell Ya.
• IWBs are Not the Stars. They’re the Overpaid Extras with A Great Agent
• Getting Smart about the Real No’s No’s of Teaching with IWBs - A Photo Compilation
• Why I Hate Interactive Whiteboards Too
• The Cat's Out of the Bag. More People Are Getting Smart about Interactive Whiteboards
• Erase Unnecessary Costs by Getting Smart about Interactive Whiteboards
• Why Smartboards are a Dumb Initiative
• The Ten No Nos of Teaching with a Projector or Interactive Whiteboard

Last week on Twitter, I was thrilled to see Gary announce that he decided to articulate why he believes IWBs are a terrible investment that breathes new life into medieval educational practices.  He questioned if Tech & Learning would publish his thoughts in their “interactive whiteboard” issue.  Having written a few pieces of my own about why I hate interactive whiteboards, I was pretty sure “fair and balanced” would win out over “bias and sell out.” I was right and readers of Tech & Learning’s March issue will be treated to Gary’s piece.  His main argument is that,

“They reinforce the dominance of the front of the room and teacher supremacy. At a time of enormous educational upheaval, technological change, and an increasing gulf between adults and children, it is a bad idea to purchase technology that facilitates the delivery of information and increases the physical distance between teacher and learner.”

Hear! Hear! I medievally chant from the blogosphere and Twitosphere!

Gary comes out swinging dispelling these myths about the usefulness of interactive whiteboards.  

•    The kids are so engaged.

•    It’s just a tool.

•    It all depends on how teachers use it.

•    You should see it when the kids use the board!

•    We use it to share student work.

•    Our ninth graders went to Israel for a month and didn’t miss a math lesson.

To find out how he shoots holes in those arguments visit Whiteboards—A Modest Proposal by Gary Stager and/or read the March issue of Tech & Learning.

You have read this article interactive whiteboard / IWBs / SMARTBoards with the title interactive whiteboard. You can bookmark this page URL https://benncam.blogspot.com/2011/02/gary-stager-finally-shares-why-he.html. Thanks!

Why Using Interactive Whiteboards May Be Smart for Educators On Their Way to Becoming Innovative

Editor's note: Those who follow my blog know I believe that when it comes to educating innovatively, it's dumb to use a SMARTboard. Here's the best argument I've seen on the other side of the issue. I still believe that we can save tens of thousands if we ditch the board. I also believe we should try the less expensive Tablet/projector option. And, I still believe you can teach better without the IWB, but...for some teachers new to tech, the reasons stated in this post which was a response to my previous blog entry "may" make a case for purchasing an IWB.

TimeOutDad said...

@ Lisa - I love your posts on IWBs! It always makes for great debate and conversation! :) Funny thing is that some of the biggest protesters and critics of IWBs still USE them when they're around... ;)

I think I still kinda' like IWBs (despite all the bad press), namely because I use them and see MANY teachers using them who did not use ANY technology before they came along. And yes, computers and projectors were available before we got the IWBs. They weren't used because very few were willing to set them up. (Plus, we all know that anything that is constantly set up and put away has a much higher chance of breaking.) For a tech savvy person, setting up a projector, a set of speakers, and laptop is not a problem, but that convenience (one button) factor of the IWB has made all the difference in many of our classrooms, in terms of bringing technology into our classrooms.

Do IWBs always create great teaching and learning moments? NO WAY. But, are there times when we need our students to focus and pay attention to what we're teaching? YES! Does an IWB sometimes make for more effective teaching/presenting? YES! Aren't some of the highest paying people "Sages on the Stages." who talk, present, or perform for a living? YES! YES! YES!

WHY are we blaming the poor IWBs for ineffective teaching, presenting, or learning? Why are we demonizing a tool? Guess what? They cost a LOT less than an ineffective teacher or presenter. Poor IWB pales in comparison... Also, when you blamed the IWB setup in those classrooms at EdCampNYC, guess what? That was HUMAN error the way those poor IWBs were set up, not the IWB's fault. ;)

I think IWBs are the "Fall Guy" for ineffective teaching or presenting. It's like blaming a rice cooker for bad rice, blaming a hammer for poor construction, blaming a car for bad driving. We are blaming IWBs for being expensive, blaming them for poor teaching, blaming them for being misnamed. I don't think they named themselves, did they? Where does/should the responsibility lie?

It's similar to going into a kitchen, and blaming the microwave for the cooking that's going on in a household. Microwaves aren't evil, are they? We shouldn't use them for all of our cooking (although some might beg to differ), but even the BEST chefs use them sometimes, no? In the end though, let's not blame the microwaves for ineffective cooking...

If an IWB enables someone who is not so effective to be more effective in a classroom, a conference room, or a corporate board room, then that IWB certainly deserves to be paid a few grand, no? Personally, I'd take an IWB over an ineffective educator or presenter any day of the week. ;)

You have read this article interactive whiteboard / IWBs / SMARTBoards with the title interactive whiteboard. You can bookmark this page URL https://benncam.blogspot.com/2010/12/why-using-interactive-whiteboards-may.html. Thanks!

Are Interactive Whiteboards a Smart Idea when they Make Even the Most Innovative of Educators Look Dumb? – 10 Reasons to Ditch the Board

I had the good fortune to attend EdCampNYC this past weekend which was attended by passionate and innovative educators. All presenters were placed in rooms equipped with Smartboards. As I’ve witnessed at every other conference I’ve attended with interactive whiteboards (IWBs), they either weren’t utilized (such as at Alan November's yearly Building Learning Communities conference) or they made the sessions more difficult and glitchy.

Because the conference was held at a school, it had the usual IWB configuration. The Smartboard was front and center and not near the CPU/keyboard essential to effectively operate all necessary controls. What some presenters resorted to was a rather awkward set up with one person at the front of the room and another controlling the keyboard/mouse from elsewhere. Of course, teachers don’t have luxury of a second person or assistant, but this was what seemed to be most effective. In each session the board made these tech-savvy presenters (present company included) rather flustered and uncomfortable as a result of the glitchiness of them and/or awkwardness of having either two people at the helm or needing to run back and forth between the front of the room and the keyboard. Additionally, let’s face it. Smartboards just aren’t that intuitive. Folks often get frustrated as they intend to point to something on the board but instead the point results in unexpectedly being taken elsewhere or something they didn’t want to have appear on the screen pops up so the facilitators found themselves running back over to the keyboard and mouse.

I know all those people who feel the need to believe in the magic of the board are going to jump up and down saying how great they are at using IWBs and they will explain how they have transformed teaching with them, but the reality is they are doing that either 1) Because they begged their principal to get an IWB so they better stand up for the benefits it is supposed to provide or their school wasted thousands of dollars that could have gone toward personal computing for students. Acknowledging Smartboards are dumb is as difficult for them as telling a child there’s really no Santa Claus and the real stars are their parents. For all of those in this category, like the myth of Santa, you are attributing the magic of the board to the wrong player. While the board has tales of legend and lore behind it in reality IWBs are Not the Stars. They’re the Overpaid Extras with A Great Agent.

Five problems with interactive whiteboards

1. The keyboard doesn’t get the respect it deserves
An IWB devalues the keyboard which for many is an important component in driving a computer. Innovative educators such as myself rely on the keyboard in our presentations and interactions and using the pop up one on the IWB screen is not a viable option.

2. The pen gets more respect than it deserves
More and more innovative educators their often digitally savvy students are ditching the pen in favor of producing text with a keyboard. Drafting more often done by typing instead of hand printing or writing. For many of the digitally savvy the keyboard is mighterier than the pen.

3. Our eyes don't get the respect they deserve
As opposed to a set up with a laptop and projector that would enable the person facilitating to face the people in the room, the Smartboard, like the traditional blackboard results in teachers and students who are at the board often having their backs to the audience, or perhaps their side, to the audience. Additionally, because of this the person at the front of the room is often blocking what is on either on the board and/or the presenter often gets in the way of the projector.

4. The Promethean Shuffle and Smartboard Slide don't deserve respect on the classroom floor
While the shuffle and slide may look good on the dance floor, they usually have no place in the classroom, but educators are often led to follow this dance when interactive whiteboards are used to lead instruction. If you’ve seen someone use an interactive whiteboard, you know what I’m talking about as they slide from side to side to access the information they want on the board and shuffle out of the way of the projector. While interactive whiteboards are great at making a teacher feel like they’re taking stage, the front of the class is just not a place they should be doing that type of song and dance.

5. The time teacher's have for professional development does not get the respect it deserves
Time and time again when I point out that I see money wasted on IWBS I hear, oh…teachers aren’t using Smartboards well because they don’t have the proper training. You know what? I don’t know of any technology that people get more training for then Smartboards and they’re still not being used effectively. This is a result of two reasons.

1. Useful technology doesn’t need all this training. Adults and students just figure out how to use cell phones, cameras, iPads, Wii’s, computers, televisions, projectors, etc. Sure, they may need help to get started, but then they’re off and running, at least with the basics…
2. They are a catalyst for ineffective teaching. When you drop the board and let educators use just the laptop and projector the following happens:

i. Instruction can become people, rather than place-based,

ii. Instructors can have eye-to-eye contact with the students

iii. The focus is off the front of the room and on the learning.

iv. The class becomes more interactive when learning is happening around the room rather than with the one (or sometimes 2 – 4) people at the board.

When cash-strapped schools stop wasting money on training people on a mistaken expenditure they can put those funds to something more meaningful

5 Reasons Ditching Interactive Whiteboards is a Smart Idea
While being able to tap a board that will react has an upfront “WOW” factor, innovative educators instinctively know that it’s NOT smart to teach in the manner dictated by an IWB. Instead, they know that dropping the IWB enables them to do all the following which become difficult with Smartboards.

1. Focus on the students, not the sage on the stage.
2. Learning should come from anywhere, not just at the board in front of the room.
3. When addressing a classroom it is better to look at students faces then have them look at your behind or side.
4. Have access to the keyboard and mouse and be able to see where you are typing and clicking.
5. Have access to any peripherals you are using such as when podcasting, Skyping, etc.

If you love your interactive whiteboard, enjoy, but if you are an innovative educator who hasn’t bought into the hype, don’t feel compelled to spend a lot of time learning to use something that many innovative educators believe just isn’t worth it in general and in particular because most people using IWBs look like those in this slide show I created.

Getting Smart About Interactive Whiteboards (Smartboards, Promethean Boards)

View more presentations from InnovativeEdu.

You have read this article interactive whiteboard / promethean / SMARTBoards with the title interactive whiteboard. You can bookmark this page URL https://benncam.blogspot.com/2010/12/are-interactive-whiteboards-smart-idea.html. Thanks!

Got Money for a Really Expensive Set of Training Wheels? I’ve Got An IWB to Sell Ya.

Editor’s note: Here’s another in the series for those who have been following the great debate going on here at The Innovative Educator over the effectiveness of Interactive Whiteboards (IWBs).

I’ve never understood how the IWB companies could fool so many into needlessly wasting their money by misinforming them of the capabilities of the device which I believe provide no value over the Tablet / projector combo, yet cost as much as $1000 - $3000 more. Yet the debate about the device has helped answer this question thanks to many who’ve contributed comments, including, most recently Peter Kent who sums up some of the debate to date here at The IWB debate - where do you stand?

In our latest round, Mr. Kent acknowledges in his comments that he agrees with my belief that “everything that could be done with an IWB could be done with other / cheaper technology,” however, he shares that this is besides the point. As I read through his insights into my misguided flaws in thinking, I realize, he’s right indeed. He breaks it down in two parts. Here is an excerpt from Part 1 where he helps me understand why schools are wasting thousands of dollars on these devices when money could better be spent on resources for students.

The problem is with the message you are weaving, the narrative. It is misguided, though well intentioned, and if there has to be a right or wrong in the issue – you would be wrong.

• 1st Wrong Thing - Humans are emotional and are not rational, and you are insisting that teachers act as if they are absolutely rational.
  
  In your posts you never mention the broader context in schools that we need to consider. Non-techie teachers (the vast bulk of teachers) are not comfortable with technology, with the concept of computers within classrooms, and while it is not rational we need to accept that. Prior to IWBs (last century) the concept of 2 or 3 computers in a classroom used to freak out the vast majority of teachers. They were however comfortable with the concept of a ‘Board’ in the room. This was the revolutionary nature of IWBs, and still is. For emotional and non-rational reasons it was technology that the vast bulk of teachers were prepared to buy into. This is what I think IWB manufactures talk about when they use the term ‘bridging technology’. An IWB is like the training wheels that teachers need as they come to terms with and hopefully eventually move to a richer and more diverse range of technologies within the classroomSo the while the detail of what your posts say are true on the surface, they are wrong within the context of ‘the real world’.

Mr. Kent is correct. I lack some of that social emotional empathy that others have and in it’s place have a more black and white view of things. A decade into the 21st century and I’m tired of the training wheels already. Especially when the funds to purchase those extraordinarily expensive wheels means fewer resources for students. I’d prefer to save those dollars by spending some time with teachers showing them how they can teach more effectively when they ditch the board, and have a seat to get down and dirty with their students (who may or may not be in the same room as them) and get to the work of learning. I understand that many teachers cling to what they believe is their rightful place, front and center of the room, but there is a better way, and it involves tying learning to people not places. And, if you’re wondering, that doesn’t mean I’m suggesting abandoning direct instruction, but rather that we make a shift in the thinking about the place from where it is delivered. When we break down the wall between the teacher up front and everyone else behind him or her we can all move ahead into the 21st century together regardless of physical location of the teachers or learners.

Note: For my response to his 2nd wrong thing about my thinking, read the comment section here.

You have read this article interactive whiteboard / IWBs / SMARTBoards with the title interactive whiteboard. You can bookmark this page URL https://benncam.blogspot.com/2010/07/got-money-for-really-expensive-set-of.html. Thanks!

Getting Smart about the Real No’s No’s of Teaching with IWBs - A Photo Compilation

I was speaking with Marc Prensky last month lamenting about how interactive whiteboards were dumbing down instruction and sharing how teachers could be much more effective by ditching the boards and just using a laptop (or doc camera) and projector. Marc said, sometimes you need to show not tell.

That conversation came to mind as I ran across this slideshow from a presentation sponsored by Smartboard about using Smartboards in a 1:1 classroom. The presentation was filled with lots of examples of the dumb ways in which people use interactive whiteboards.

Even though Smartboard used these photos in a presentation to sell the device, they're their own worst enemy sometimes. I invite you to view this photo compilation which can serve as a model for what not to do when using IWBs.

Getting Smart About Interactive Whiteboards (Smartboards, Promethean Boards)

View more presentations from InnovativeEdu.

You have read this article interactive whiteboard / IWBs / promethean / SMARTBoards with the title interactive whiteboard. You can bookmark this page URL https://benncam.blogspot.com/2010/07/getting-smart-about-real-nos-nos-of.html. Thanks!

IWBs are Not the Stars. They’re the Overpaid Extras with A Great Agent

I recently explained Why I Hate Interactive Whiteboards Too which like my other posts on the topic received numerous responses. Kent3, who clearly cares about helping students succeed, wrote a thoughtful (three-part) comment which deserves at least a blog entry (or two) in response. I enjoy being challenged in thought-provoking ways on my views and respect those who can move or help grow my thinking.

In this case, though, it’s another opponent in the ring who tried to change my mind about IWBs being tools of needless, misguided spending that has not changed my beliefs. Like the IWB companies who masterfully market to educational institutions to gain huge profits from schools (and all those who they pay), ), Kent3 (surely unintentionally) is confusing the power of the internet, laptop/tablet, projector, speakers with the power of the extra very expensive IWB add-on.

This doesn’t surprise me as these companies spend countless dollars to lead people to believe that the device runs the show. Confusing the masses into believing this, which means big profits for them. The reality is the co-star of this show (aside from the teacher and students) is the internet, which is supported by that fabulous laptop or even better the supah stah...***The Tablet***. Putting them up in lights, is of course, none-other-than the beloved... projector!!! Providing sound is those powerful, but very affordable (under $40) speakers.

The IWB is merely a highly overpaid insignificant extra that can be replaced by any number of other free and more effective substitutes.

IWB just has a very good (marketing) agent that fools you into believing he’s the star. I did read Kent’s entire research report supporting IWBs. Not surprisingly what I found is there is not a single instance where IWBs aren’t given credit for the work of the real tech stars of the show: the laptop/tablet, internet, projector, and software (which can/and often is run independent of the board, whose functionality can be accomplished with alternate free software as well). Examples include:

• A photo was displayed on the IWB and revealed in portions using the ‘spotlight tool’.
  -Ahem, you don't need an IWB to display a photo or to use a spotlight tool.
• Speaking Activity – Students reported on current events using Internet News websites via an IWB.
  -Huh? What does the IWB have to do with bringing us current events or websites that have current events. The other hardware stars are responsible.
• Selected student’s work was displayed on the IWB at the end of the lesson using the visualiser.
  -Ummm...I don't need an IWB or visualiser to display student work and actually, I'm more interested in where this work was authentically published and the global community who was involved in the conversation.
• Using the IWB students had to write their name on a continuum identifying ‘How well do they swim’.
  -Okay, why do I even need any tech for this??? Let's have students line up and have cool conversations with classmates about where they belong to do so.
• There's lotsa arranging and prioritizing.
  -We can do this easily, more efficiently, and with more interactivity without an IWB. Why on earth are we using and IWB to prioritize? Not necessary.
  
• Downloading onto the IWB and playing the song ‘Come on the bay’ engaged the boys who were usually reluctant singers.
  - Ahhhh! You didn't download on the IWB. You downloaded on a computer. No IWB required.
• Students were being read to by a ‘talking book’ on the IWB.
  -Well, umm, no. The talking came through the speakers and the book was on the laptop. IWB is unnecessary.
  
• The teacher displayed a work sample on the IWB while the students were completing the task. This allowed students to complete the task without having to be continually reminded of what to do.
  -Really? Do I even need to explain why the $2.5K investment is an extra with an overpaid agent here????
  

There is more than one issue. The extra on the set (aka IWB), really just dumbs down and detracts from the show. When I’m placed in the role of movie editor, the IWB is left on the cutting room floor and in it’s stead, I hire a more reputable, non-biased casting director who could recast the show more powerfully. That cast would trade in the $2.5k-ish salary of the IWB and replace it with any number of more worthy characters able to accomplish all the extras for free and more effectively.

If I had the extra bucks to throw around in these cash-strapped times, I would instead cast a shiny class set of student response systems or Smart pens or maybe 10 iTouches or netbooks. These extras would no doubt soon rise to the role of supporting actor or maybe even steal the show. They certainly would be more worthy of idolization then those overpaid IWB extras who are typecast to a boring front and center role, never mingling among or even having the opportunity to go home with their audience. Instead, my stars would shine, connected to a student, rather than that of an immobile (but valuable) Midas star stuck helplessly in front of the room. The reason that’s important and all the other flaws of using an IWB vs more effective means of teaching and learning is the topic of yet another post indeed.

Stay tuned.

You have read this article interactive whiteboard / SMARTBoards with the title interactive whiteboard. You can bookmark this page URL https://benncam.blogspot.com/2010/07/iwbs-are-not-stars-theyre-overpaid.html. Thanks!

Why I Hate Interactive Whiteboards Too

Last week I had a lengthy conversation with a big wig at an IWB company who was trying to convince me that my idea that educators could Erase Unnecessary Costs by Getting Smart about Interactive Whiteboards was way off. He couldn't understand how I could think that it was unnecessary to spend money on a tool that will allow students to collaborate, promote interactivity, and connect the classroom to the world. Ugh! This is what these IWB companies spend millions trying to get you to believe. Purchase their board and you get all this. So, I shared, that while I do agree those things are valuable, I don't need an IWB for any of it and that they just trick people into thinking they need the device for these things to happen. He asked if I've ever used one. Yes! And, I hate them. There is not a single thing I can do on an IWB that I can't do without one more effectively. Then he went into the whole training bit. No, I don't want training on something that's really expensive that has no value over teaching without one.

It just irks me that these companies lead people to believe they need to spend thousands when they can do the same thing and better using free tools.

Well, I have a blog post brewing that really dives into why these devices make learning worse and why schools and districts should instead spend their dollars on resources for students, but I haven't had the chance to write it (someday, I hope). However, serendipitously I came across a piece that shares many of my sentiments. Mine has a slightly different spin, but until that post makes it's way to the top of my pile, I'll share this one written by educator, author, blogger Bill Ferriter. Like many educators after a year of trying to make the best of a bad tool, Bill began Getting Smart about Interactive Whiteboards

In his article "Why I Hate Interactive Whiteboards," Bill, who gave his IWB away, shares in my belief that...

most of the time, interactive whiteboard programs are, in fact, nothing more than vain attempts to buy change. Sharing that even with time and training, interactive whiteboards are an under-informed and irresponsible purchase. They do little more than reinforce a teacher-centric model of learning. Heck, even whiteboard companies market them as a bridging technology, designed to replicate traditional instructional practices (make presentations, give notes, deliver lectures) in an attempt to move digital teacher-dinosaurs into the light. I ask you: Do we really want to spend thousands of dollars on a tool that makes stand-and-deliver instruction easier?

To read more pearls of wisdom from Bill visit his article here Why I Hate Interactive Whiteboards.

You have read this article interactive whiteboard / SMARTBoards with the title interactive whiteboard. You can bookmark this page URL https://benncam.blogspot.com/2010/07/why-i-hate-interactive-whiteboards-too.html. Thanks!

The Cat's Out of the Bag. More People Are Getting Smart about Interactive Whiteboards

Sebastian Mondrone, from my personal learning network shared today, that he saw an interesting post that reminded him of my debate about interactive whiteboards. In the post the "Two Writing Teachers" blog asks the question, Do we really need SMART Boards to teach writing well?

They began to ponder this after reading the Washington Post's article, Some educators question if whiteboards, other high-tech tools raise achievement. The article shares something I touched on in my post that urges educators to erase unnecessary costs in IWB purchases and goes on to dispel the myths of interactive whiteboards.

From the article:

Many academics question industry-backed studies linking improved test scores to their products. And some go further. They argue that the most ubiquitous device-of-the-future, the whiteboard -- essentially a giant interactive computer screen that is usurping blackboards in classrooms across America -- locks teachers into a 19th-century lecture style of instruction counter to the more collaborative small-group models that many reformers favor.

It goes on to share this from Larry Cuban, education professor emeritus at Stanford University.

"There is hardly any research that will show clearly that any of these machines will improve academic achievement, but the value of novelty, that's highly prized in American society, period. And one way schools can say they are 'innovative' is to pick up the latest device."

The article digs a bit deeper into the research explaining that according to many academics, industry claims about whiteboards are not based on rigorous academic studies. They then share the frequently cited study, conducted by Marzano Research Laboratory and funded by Promethean, which surveyed 85 teachers who volunteered to teach a lesson of their choice to two classes, one with the whiteboard, one without. The teachers then gave a test of their own design, with results showing an average 17-point gain in classrooms with whiteboards.

I have a few problems with the study as do others. First, They are comparing the wrong thing. They are comparing a classroom with technology to one without the thousands of dollars less expensive combo of a projector/Tablet or laptop. Again, this suggests you need to spend thousands for the same thing you can have with a much less expensive alternative. Second, an interactive whiteboard company is paying the researcher a lot of money to do the research, promote their device and tour around the country talking about how it promotes student achievement...huge conflict of interest.

Steve Ross, an education professor at Johns Hopkins University says, "It's a suggestive study -- you can't conclude anything, and that's being generous." One of the most outspoken critics of the research is Jonathan D. Becker, J.D., Ph.D. and professor at the Educational Leadership Department at Virginia Commonwealth University does a peer review of Marzano's work and concludes it to be questionable research.

Perhaps the most insightful is Chris Dede, an education professor at Harvard University, who shares that interactive whiteboards are popular precisely because companies designed them to suit the old instructional style with which teachers are most comfortable. "No one should be beating up on these companies," Dede said. "They're just doing what a capitalist society tells them to do."

You have read this article interactive whiteboard / SMARTBoards with the title interactive whiteboard. You can bookmark this page URL https://benncam.blogspot.com/2010/06/the-cat-out-of-bag-more-people-are.html. Thanks!

IWB, I Loathe You!

by Jacob Gutnicki

Michael Lotta was in a foul mood… again. Why did the school have to buy those stupid Clever Boards? Quite frankly it robbed him of blackboard space and a place to hang his coat. If that wasn’t enough, a school wide memo required all High School Math teachers to attend a Clever Board Nuts and Bolts workshop. Michael thought, “I bet this is Perkinson’s fault.” How he detested the new AP. “The nerve of him! He thinks because he went to the Harvard Leadership Program that he is ready to be an AP. How long did he teach in the classroom? 2 months? What a disgrace!”

The Clever Board instructor started by showing the participants how to use the interactive markers and having them sign their name on the Clever Board. The instructor then showed them how to align the board using the Clever Board Tools. For the next hour the instructor showed them how to integrate the Clever Board clip art into their documents. Bill Perkinson the AP was attending the session and thought it was going rather well.

Suddenly, Michael blurted, “What does this have to do with teaching math?” The Clever Board instructor said, “Let me show this really fun shape game we can play. On one side of the screen are the shapes and on the other side of the screen are the names of the objects. The objective of this activity is to drag the correct word on to the shape.”

Michael yelled, “What am I five years old? High School Math! We want High School Math!” The Clever Board instructor started to stammer. Clearly, he was not prepared for this turn of events. The Clever Board instructor attempted to find Math Activities only to be shot down again. Michael said, “Multiplication? You’re kidding me, right?” The Clever Board instructor then said that he would install the Clever Board Geometry Pack and asked the participants to take a 15-minute break.

About 15 minutes later, the installation was completed. The Clever Board instructor rebooted the machine and noticed the display on the Clever Board mutated into the shape of a diamond. Michael blurted, “Hey that looks like a parallelogram.” The instructor attempted to adjust the screen. “Now it looks like a rhombus. What’s next? A quadrilateral?” After another 15 minutes of tinkering, the instructor proceeded to launch the Clever Board Geometry pack. Unfortunately this caused the machine to show the following message;

WARNING- YOUR SYSTEM HAS A FATAL ERROR DUE TO THE INSTALLATION OF CORRUPT SOFTWARE. PLEASE CONTACT YOUR SYSTEMS ADMINISTRATOR IMMEDIATELY.

Michael Lotta could not be happier and said, “I give this instructor an Unsatisfactory.” The other High School teachers started grumbling as well and joined in the festivities.

Bill Perkinson was beside himself. He understood that this Clever Board workshop really stunk and would reinforce Michael’s biases. It would also probably sour the other Math teachers to this kind of technology.

You have read this article fiction / interactive whiteboard / Professional Development with the title interactive whiteboard. You can bookmark this page URL https://benncam.blogspot.com/2010/05/iwb-i-loathe-you.html. Thanks!

Erase Unnecessary Costs by Getting Smart about Interactive Whiteboards

I was at a presentation yesterday where school leaders and teachers were led to believe that the key to addressing the Achievement Gap was in part through purchasing Interactive Whiteboards (IWBs). Dr. Robert J. Marzano lead the presentation where he shared what has been called questionable research that showed how IWBs and response systems (srs) lead to student achievement. Egad! I wanted to shout out a warning.

THIS IS NOT TRUE! DON'T THROW AWAY YOUR MONEY!

You can save about $3500 hundred dollars per classroom if you buy a tablet and projector rather than an interactive whiteboard and get the same results, but you don't know that because this and other research (almost always commissioned by IWB companies) is purposely misleading you, comparing classrooms with IWBs to those without technology rather than comparing classrooms with IWBs to the much less expensive projectors/laptop or projector/tablet combo.

There's an incentive to mislead schools. It equals more profit for the IWB companies who have brainwashed educators into believing you need their $5000 device to increase student achievement. But once you know the truth about interactive whiteboards you'll realize, YOU DON'T!

DISPELLING 10 COMMON INTERACTIVE WHITEBOARD MYTHS

Myth 1: You need an interactive whiteboard to show videos.
Truth: You don't need an IWB to show videos. You just need a laptop/projector.

Myth 2: You need an interactive whiteboard to capture/record your lessons for playback later.
Truth: You don't need an IWB to capture/record lessons. You can do this for free with a number of screencasting programs that require no downloads such as Screentoaster or ScreenJelly.

Myth 3: An interactive whiteboard is necessary if you want students to be able to interact with the content.
Truth: An interactive whiteboard is not necessary if you want students to interact with the content. They can go to your Tablet and interact just as easily.

Myth 4: You need an interactive whiteboard to have access to interactive lessons and software.
Truth: Interactive whiteboard software works on any laptop. You do not need the IWB and you can present the lessons equally effectively with a tablet and projector.

Myth 5: The kids and teachers just love interactive whiteboards and they keep them so engaged.
Truth: IWB companies spend big bucks to trick you into thinking you need the fancy and expensive gadget to educate innovatively. They want you to spend the big bucks that make them big profits. When you teach the same content with a tablet and projector they also love the lesson, interact, are engaged, and the added bonus is you can use that extra money to put much more interactive tech into the hands of every student.

Myth 6: Interactive whiteboards are necessary for tactile learners and students with special needs.
Truth: A tablet serves the same function for tactile learners and students with special needs.

Myth 7: The large size of the interactive whiteboard is necessary for student engagement. Students can't manipulate a tablet-sized device nearly as well. Especially young children or those with special needs.
Truth: What? Really? Have ya seen What Happens When you Give a 3, 4, 8-Year-Old an iTouch? Kids are perfectly happy on a tablet-sized device and if you've watched a teenager you've seen them use their phones like they're masterfully conducting a symphony. Small is big for kids. Big is big for adults...not kids. For visually impaired students or those with special needs laptops have a whole suite of free accessibility options available.

Myth 8: An interactive whiteboard enables you to connect with the world.
Truth: The interactive whiteboard is not connecting you to the world. Your computer with internet is connecting you to the world.

Myth 9: Interactive whiteboards are easier to use for educators because they combine everything into a single device. You don't need to worry about bulbs, speakers, extra wires, laptop, etc.
Truth: Interactive whiteboards don't combine everything into a single device. With all devices, you still need to replace projector lightbulbs and you still need a laptop. Speakers are an optional add on for computers and IWBs however with a computer you can get a nice set for under $40. This feature on an IWB raises the price hundreds of dollars and they often have issues. Additionally, the sales pitch that they're easy to use, often is not realized in schools. For instant recently during a visit to I school I asked a teacher how she and her colleagues like their Smartboards. Her response, "Well, when they work, I guess they're okay." At that school I visited three classrooms an every teacher needed assistance with using their Smartboard during my visit. As far as requiring less wires. Not true. Wires done right are the same whether you use an IWB or laptop/projector. It takes proper consideration of how to accommodate your device, but either way you need a few wires that you can run through walls, ceilings, or tape down to the floor.

Myth 10: You should get an interactive whiteboard because it's easy to use.
Truth: An interactive whiteboard is not that easy to use. In fact when they are not used or not used well, you always hear, that it is because teachers didn't get the proper professional development. Of course the IWB companies will be happy to sell you thousands of dollars of training to learn to use the devices. The training runs at a cost of about $1800 per day and that doesn't include the cost for substitutes. You'll also find that IWBs have a lot of technical issues. In most of the classrooms I visit I find teachers need technical support to get the devices going.

If I've succeeded in helping you see the truth and you realize you don't need to spend this much money to create a 21st century classroom, take a look at the numbers and see what you can instead put in the hands of children once armed with this knowledge. First is a breakdown of costs with and without an IWB.

COST COMPARISON:
Note: These are approximate numbers for items that you can purchase for a slightly higher or lower cost depending on if you select the high-end or low-end model.

Projector/Tablet Combo:

• Projector - 748
• Tablet - $1,098

Total Cost: $1,846

Projector/Laptop/Slate Combo:

• Projector - 748
• Laptop - $817
  
• Slate/Airliner: $281.00 (gives the tablet function in a mobile format)
  

Total Cost: $1,846

Interactive Whiteboard/Laptop Combo:

• Interactive Whiteboard - $4300
• Laptop or Tablet - $1000

Total Cost: $5300

Total Savings - Tablet/Projector combination:
$3454

Now,with the interactive whiteboard myths dispelled you can spend your money on putting technology into students hands without sacrificing functionality.

In essence, you could buy one IWB or any of the bulleted items below:

• 9 netbooks
• 9 iTouches
• 3 Tablets or Laptops
  
• 2 class sets of student response systems
• 28 Livescribe pens
• 4.5 projectors

Now imagine schools that are considering purchasing ten IWBs. Instead they could furnish their school with any of the below bulleted items:

• 90 netbooks
• 90 iTouches
• 30 Tablets or Laptops
  
• 20 class sets of student response systems
• 280 Livescribe pens
• 45 projectors
• 1 technology coach or technician

Those are the numbers and facts you should have in mind when making this purchasing decision. Whether you're an educator or a leader, it's important to make informed decisions, especially if those decisions can result in additional, or fewer, resources in the hands of children.

------------------------------------------
Related Posts:
Why Smartboards are a Dumb Initiative
The Ten No Nos of Teaching with a Projector or Interactive Whiteboard

You have read this article interactive whiteboard / SMARTBoards with the title interactive whiteboard. You can bookmark this page URL https://benncam.blogspot.com/2010/05/erase-unnecessary-costs-by-getting.html. Thanks!

Why Smartboards are a Dumb Initiative

By Michael Staton
Cross posted at Edumorphology

I roll my eyes every time I hear people talk about putting Smartboards in the classroom. Ugh….

Don’t get me wrong, Smartboards are cool. They are just the least cost-effective way to improve learning I’ve ever seen. (Except for building new physical plant, that’s worse.)

We need to acknowledge that all a Smartboard does is:

1) Instead of using the mouse at the keyboard to interact with content, the presenter can stand at the board (without access to a keyboard) and there’s some wow factor there that might amuse students for an hour.

2) It enables you to efficiently save content on the whiteboard, though you can do this without a Smartboard in various other ways i.e. screenshot, screencast, use Microsoft OneNote and press “Save” with a projector. Or, you could use an Overhead Projector, a transparency, and a scanner. Or, you could take a picture of the whiteboard with a camera. The reality is the “save the brainstorm” possibilities are endless on a much smaller budget.

Anyways…

Here are my two arguments:

1. Smartboards don’t change the model that’s broken. They just make that model way more expensive.
• With a Smartboard, the teacher usually still controls the content, stands in front of a classroom, and has to manage a bunch of kids through a lesson plan they’d rather not be managed through. It doesn’t give kids an adaptive learning environment, doesn’t differentiate instruction (though it does make it a little more media savvy), doesn’t enable social feedback, doesn’t reduce teacher workload, doesn’t make lesson planning more efficient, yada yada. It just makes the whiteboard a little more attractive.
  
  
2. Smartboards are an administrative cop out. Administrators like Smartboards because when they spend money on technology they need to spend a lot of it and it needs to be on things they can point to and count.
• Instead of re-imagining what school/classrooms/learning looks like/the student-teacher relationship, they write proposals with line-items, they spend money and buy things. Administrators get evaluated on test outcomes, true, (not learning outcomes), but they also get evaluated on anything else that can fit into spreadsheets and reports. A senior administrator can ask: “Why do you need more money?” and a junior administrator can say “Because we want to buy Smartboards.” This is convenient, because if you want to ask for additional resources, you need to specify how you are going to spend the money. Saying “I would like an extra 200K to experiment with ways to improve learning outcomes” just doesn’t cut the cheese. It’s also doubly convenient because an administrator can look moderately successful just by spending that money on what they said they would spend it on. ”Test scores are up 1%! And, we bought as many as 30 Smartboards!!!!” It’s less risky to buy objects you can count than spend money on more ambitious initiatives – like, let’s say, reading and math remediation for students supposedly at grade level.

Having said those two things, if I was teaching I would be thankful for a Smartboard only because I’m a gadget geek. Personally, though, I’d rather everyone in our education system start working towards re-imagining what’s possible.

------------------------------------------
Related Posts:
Erase Unnecessary Costs by Getting Smart about Interactive Whiteboards
The Ten No Nos of Teaching with a Projector or Interactive Whiteboard

You have read this article interactive whiteboard / SMARTBoards with the title interactive whiteboard. You can bookmark this page URL https://benncam.blogspot.com/2010/05/why-smartboards-are-dumb-initiative.html. Thanks!