Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply



Published on

Published in: Education, Technology

1 Like
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Total Views
On Slideshare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

No notes for slide
  • Good afternoon Board of Directors my name is Brandi Renfro and I will be discussing Smart Boards and their positive influence in the classroom.
  • Smart Boards are needed in the classroom because they provide students with an interactive, hands on experience. Students in today’s society need a more interactive experience in order to fully become involved in the learning process. Neal Starkman discussed in his article “The Wonders of Interactive WHITEBOARDS” the positive experience with the use of whiteboards at Lambton Kent School District. He found that the use of Smart Boards allowed for more student engagement and allowed the teacher to bring more creativity in the classroom. Benjamin Hazzard was quoted as saying that the credit for increased student engagement and creativity “ isn’t about the boards; it’s about the learning that is happening. The boards are a conduit to the curriculum”.
  • There has been increased interest in the effectiveness and usefulness of Smart Boards in the classroom. Due to this more research studies have been conducted. Linda Mechling, David Gast and Kristin Krupa conducted a research study in which they observed the effectiveness of Smart Boards on teaching sight word reading to students with moderate intellectual disabilities. Results from the study showed that the use of Smart Boards had a positive effect on those students that used the Smart Board to learn about sight words. The authors noted that the “results support the large screen for delivering target information and learning of other students’ information by making images more visible and increasing attention to the task”. Russel Kealey also noted in his article “Some initial thoughts on using a SMART BOARD in the media classroom” that there are many uses for the SMART BOARD in the classroom. One benefit is that all class notes are record, so it is easier to recap previous lessons. Another benefit is that the interactivity allows students to participate in class activities and build upon their knowledge base.
  • SMART BOARD was developed by SMART technologies in 1991, under the guidance of David Martin and Nancy Knowlton. They merged with Intel Corporation in 1992 which helped to grow the company financially. Growth was relatively slow until the early 2000’s because of early teacher resistance and school funding issues.
  • So how can this innovation be marketed? Increased marketability can be gained through professional development workshops and training courses. Also, testimonials from educators will show the positive effects of the SMART BOARD and increase marketability.
  • So this leads us to the innovation decision process timeline. There were a few monumental events that lead to the growth and success of this innovation. The first event occurred in 1991 when SMART Technologies designed its first interactive white board. In 1992, they formed an alliance with Intel Corporation. They also introduced the rear projection SMART BOARD in 1992. Starting in 1998 the company began to add various software that enhanced the SMART BOARD experience. Some of the software was the information management software, the SMART Notebook 2.0 and the SMART recorder.
  • SMART BOARDS have continued to gain popularity since their implementation in 1991. They have steadily increased in popularity since the early 2000’s. This is mainly attributed to the increased need for more technology in the classroom. The S curve above shows the increased popularity of the SMART BOARDS in years.
  • The innovators and early adopters for this innovation are business leaders, educators, and public speakers. These individuals would be included in this category because they would benefit most from this innovation. The laggards would be skeptical teachers and individuals who are resistant to new technology. These individuals are considered laggards because they would be the most resistant to this innovation. The top two attributes that would help sway the minds of the laggards would be trialability and observability. Each of these would allow the individuals to see the innovation being used by others and to use the innovation themselves.
  • To ensure that this innovation is diffused properly a decentralized approach would be best. This method is best for this innovation because it would allow for a specialized group of individuals to work together to ensure that this innovation is adopted appropriately. The key change agents for this innovation would be technology coordinators, board members and a select group of teachers and principals. Due to its increased popularity this innovation has reached critical mass.
  • As can be seen SMART BOARDS are essential to the success of students of all ages and levels because it allows for easier differentiated instruction. It also allows for more excitement and student interaction in the classroom. The use of SMART BOARDS can help prepare our students for overall success in the classroom and increase their knowledge and familiarity of technology.
  • Transcript

    • 1.  
    • 2.
      • Provides students with active, hands on learning opportunities in the classroom.
      • Creates environment that allows for differentiated instruction
    • 3.
      • Research suggest that hands on activities heighten student ability to make connections between the content and background knowledge.
      • Research findings indicate that incorporating visually appealing material in the classroom increases student attentiveness and comprehension.
    • 4.
      • The early stages of development were relatively slow due to financial troubles and limited backing.
    • 5.
      • Increased marketability through professional development workshops and training courses has made commercialization easier.
    • 6. Knowledge: SMART Technologies designs 1 st interactive white board 1991 1992 Decision: Intel Corporation forms an alliance with Intel Corporation Persuasion: Rear- Projection SMART BOARD introduced. 1998 Implementation : SMART released information management software and SMART Notebook 2.0 2001 SMART BOARD software with SMART recorder released 2005 Confirmation: Wireless slate released.
    • 7.  
    • 8.
      • Innovators and Early Adopters:
      • Business Leaders
      • Educators
      • Public Speakers
      • Laggards:
      • Skeptical Teachers
      • Those individuals resistant to new technology
      • Perceived Attributes:
      • Trialability
      • Observability
    • 9.
      • A decentralized approach would work best for the adoption of this innovation so that a specialized group of individuals can help with the diffusion of this innovation.
      • Key change agents:
      • technology coordinator
      • board members
      • select group of teachers
      • principals
      • This innovation has reached critical mass.
    • 10.
      • Smart Boards are essential to the success of students of all ages and levels because it allows for differentiated instruction.
      • Smart Boards also allows for more excitement and student interaction in the classroom.
    • 11.  
    • 12.  
    • 13.  
    • 14.  
    • 15.  
    • 16.
      • Keatley, R. (2010). Some initial thoughts on using a smart board in the media classroom. Screen Education,57 , 78-81.
      • 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 & Developmental Disorders,37 (10), 1869- 1882.
      • Starkman, N. (2006). The wonders of interactive WHITEBOARDS. T H E Journal,33 (10),1.
      • The history of SMART. .