Interactive Whiteboard Use

I’ve read and written a good amount about interactive whiteboards (IWBs).  Basically, the main debate regarding them centers on whether they should primarily be used as for teacher-centered instruction or learner-centered instruction.  Most research has concluded, perhaps unfortunately, that the interactive whiteboards are primarily a teacher-centered instructional tool.  Below is a summary of some of the teacher centered uses of interactive whiteboards:

• Easily compare texts at once by splitting the IWB into three side-by-side screens (Miller and Glover, 2002).
• Quickly annotate, highlight, and flip back and forth between pages of a digital text (Thomas, 2003).
• Reload class- and teacher-created material for review.
• Enhance lessons with sound, video, and images (Levy, 2002).
• Transform, break apart, and rotate fractions, angles, and polygons (Edwards et al., 2002).
• Spend less time managing physical resources (Latham, 2002).
• Save time preparing lessons by more frequently saving, sharing, and reusing lesson material (Lee and Boyle, 2003).
• Regularly model ICT skills on a large screen (Goodison, 2002).

Clearly, interactive whiteboards are capable of truly transforming whole-class (teacher-centered) instruction.  In contrast, IWBs ability to transform learner-centered instruction is debatable.  Essentially, every argument defending the learner-centered benefits of IWBs is confounded by the basic fact that IWBs do not allow more than a few (usually only one) person at a time to control the display of content.  No matter how engaging or interactive, one must question the categorization of IWB lessons as “learner-centered,” which would place them in the same category as lessons built on the principals of group collaboration, student self-direction, and project-based activities.

However, in another paper I have made the case that IWBs are capable of indirectly facilitating and improving learner-centered instruction.  Firstly, time saved using the IWB to explain concepts can provide additional time for collaborative, self-directed, and project-base activities.  Secondly, greater understanding of teacher explanations can lead to more effectual leaner-centered work by students.  And thirdly, student knowledge that group or independent work might be shared with the rest of the class via the whiteboard can cause students to work with increased earnestness.

Since IWBs are nothing more than large, touch-sensitive computer screens, their ability to improve the accessibility of classroom learning anymore than laptops is limited.  However, I can imagine that IWBs could be of benefit to a learner such as Sarah (from the example student profiles).  Sarah has ataxic cerebral palsy and although she very much enjoys working with other students, her disability probably makes it difficult to express herself as much as she would like.  Therefore, the IWB’s ability to allow Sarah to easily present her work to the whole class could be of great benefit.

Also, someone like Emma who struggles with number sense could benefit from a teacher’s improved ability to explain complex mathematical concepts using an IWB.