How are primary teachers’ pedagogy and practice affected by using an IWB?

5,766 views
5,583 views

Published on

How are primary teachers’ pedagogy and practice affected by using an IWB?

Published in: Education
0 Comments
5 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total views
5,766
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
74
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
112
Comments
0
Likes
5
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

How are primary teachers’ pedagogy and practice affected by using an IWB?

  1. 1. How are primary teachers’ pedagogy and practice affected by using an IWB? RITWIT Conference University of Cambridge June 2009 Julie Cogill juliecogill@hotmail.com
  2. 2. Outline of the presentation • Background to research • Pedagogical models and the IWB • Change in pedagogy and practice, post IWB use • Interactivity and the IWB • Implications for teaching and further research
  3. 3. Research Questions 1. Do teachers change the way they teach during one year of IWB use? 2. What are the factors that may influence IWB pedagogy?
  4. 4. Methodology • All teachers new to IWB use at the start of the research • 11 teachers in 2 UK primary schools, all experienced and confident. (Primary: children age 4-11, teachers teach all subjects) • Interviews each term across one year with all teachers and heads of both school at the start and end of the year • Observations of all teachers each term • In total 37 interviews and 33 observations across 1 year
  5. 5. What affects teachers’ pedagogy? • Pedagogical knowledge (PK) • Content Knowledge (CK), • Pedagogical Content Knowledge (PCK) • Teachers’ beliefs in how children learn and teachers’ previous experience • The context in which they are teaching • A teacher’s learning disposition (Refs: Schulman, Banks et al, Alexander …)
  6. 6. Model for pedagogical change based on previous models and frameworks (Cogill, see fig 2 )
  7. 7. Base of model for pedagogical change (Cogill, see fig 1) Pedagogical knowledge Intersection of teachers’ beliefs Knowledge of and educational observable practice context PCK Curriculum Knowledge Content Knowledge
  8. 8. Teachers’ pedagogical change Struts representing the flow of learning between elements on base of pyramid and change in whiteboard pedagogy T E A C H Pedagogical Knowledge E E D R U S’ C Pedagogical A Knowledge of B learning Content Knowledge T E processes in I the curriculum Fused L knowledge O I contributing to N E observable A practice F L S Curriculum Knowledge Content Knowledge Content C knowledge & for the O curriculum N E T X E P X S T Area of intersection of teachers’ beliefs, experiences and educational context
  9. 9. Influences of the IWB on teachers’ knowledge subsequent to analysis PK: Planning preparation and classroom management CK: Selection of resources for whiteboard use and the way teachers’ reflect on the use of theseresources PCK: Change in delivery of content, effects on motivation and interactive teaching NOTE: PK, CK and PCK were used as a framework for analysing teachers’ knowledge as there is considerable overlap and differentiating between knowledge features is not straightforward
  10. 10. Pedagogical Knowledge and the IWB Positives Negatives • Better lesson planning • Lack of flexibility • Sharing plans and • Sharing lesson plans may pedagogy only be a time saver • Recap on understanding • Loss of practical work • More time to teach • Whole class teaching • Children reflecting and may result in passive thinking about own work learners • Whole class collaboration • Children spending a third of their time listening • Frees teacher time for • Loss of group work class discussion • Behaviour management easier
  11. 11. Content and Curriculum Knowledge (CCK) (In UK primary schools all subjects taught) Positives Negatives • Facility to access huge • The IWB cannot replace range of new resources books • Teachers learning • Funding for ICT themselves through resources may replace range of software other materials • Visual and dynamic • The IWB is not the only resources may provide learning tool what matters greater understanding is relevance to children’s • Internet provides learning opportunity to respond spontaneously to questions
  12. 12. Pedagogical Content Knowledge (PCK) Positive Negative • Adapting own resources • Teacher exposition too • Innovative use of IWB long tools • Neglect differentiation • More ways of teaching • Presentation may be dull the same thing • Creating discussion • Class may be inactive while others are at the • Engaging visual learners board • Capturing attention with • Children only motivated motivating resources by ‘whizz’ factor • Involving children: sense • Board resources used for of theatre the teacher, not children’s • Interactive teaching learning
  13. 13. Base of revised model of pedagogical change as a consequence of IWB use (Cogill, see fig 3) Pedagogical knowledge: Planning, preparation, management Intersection of Fused knowledge teachers’ beliefs contributing to and educational IWB practice context Content and Curriculum Pedagogical content Knowledge: Use of Knowledge: and reflection on Teaching and interactivity resources
  14. 14. Change in pedagogical practice as a consequence of whiteboard use Struts representing the flow of learning (teachers’ learning disposition) between elements on base of pyramid and change in whiteboard pedagogy T E A C H Pedagogical Knowledge: E E planning, preparation and D R classroom management U S’ C Knowledge of A B Knowledge of interactive effective ICT T E teaching and learning resources I L Fused O processes knowledge I contributing to N E whiteboard A practice F L S Pedagogical content Content and Knowledge of knowledge: Influences resources for Curriculum C & on teaching and Knowledge: Influences interactivity interactive on use of resources O teaching N E T X E P X S T Area of intersection of teachers’ beliefs, experience and educational context
  15. 15. Links with Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPCK) http://tpack.org/ (Mishra & Koehler )
  16. 16. Change in pedagogy and practice post IWB Integrating ICT: Hokanson and Hooper (2000) • Re-presentation: reproduction of information • Generative: foster creative thinking ICT changing pedagogical practice: McCormick and Scrimshaw (2001) • Practice becomes more efficient or effective • Practice is extended in some way • Practice is transforming (whole teacher) Using these ideas teachers’ practice was categorised into: efficient, extending or transforming
  17. 17. PK: Planning, preparation, classroom management Efficient Extending Transforming Sharing lesson Adapting others’ Sharing plans resources pedagogy with teachers Preparing lessons Spontaneously Sharing teaching in advance answering children’s and learning with questions children Saving writing Using saved time Encouraging time in lessons for effective child-child discussion discussion Accessing Accessing children’s Integrating board previous teaching learning effectively with own teaching
  18. 18. CCK: Use of and reflection on resources Efficient Extending Transforming Using images and Searching for Demonstrating more video appropriate ways of teaching the resources same thing Using shapes and Using IWB tools Using IWB tools to models from effectively improve learning IWB’s software Use of some Using software Teachers learning software resources for a themselves through resources specific purpose new resources Collaborative problem solving with software
  19. 19. PCK: Children’s learning and interactivity Efficient Extending Transforming Children use IWB to Children illustrating Extending from one to answer questions their learning whole class Use of facility to Children learning from recap on work their work Facilitating Problem solving with relevant discussion whole class Collaborative work to produce an end result Children: thinking and reflecting; presenting own research; being ‘a bit of a teacher’
  20. 20. Interactivity and the IWB: technological facilities It’s about a teacher and their set of students • Facilitates whole class collaboration by creating eg a poem or diagram • Show and amend children’s own work • Brainstorm a topic, categorise ideas and to show thinking processes • Predicting outcomes and testing these predictions • Collaborative problem solving • Group preparation of resources to show the whole class • Access to images to create a story or investigate the image • Use of diagrams that can be manipulated in response to ideas
  21. 21. Implications for teaching with an IWB and further research • Transparency of practice is essential • ICT skills: basic skills are required and teachers may need specific training • ICT skills: need to differentiate between good and mediocre software • Pedagogical skills are of greater importance than technological skills • Need for a pedagogical framework on which to base future IWB research • Provide greater clarity for teachers on what is meant by interactive teaching and learning • Snapshot research not enough
  22. 22. Conclusions If positive influences prevail the IWB changes teachers’ • PK through facilities for lesson planning, preparation and classroom management • CCK though use of and learning from software resources • PCK through the facility to teach for interactive learning In an age where teachers are increasingly competent in their use of ICT, professional development in IWB use should focus on pedagogy rather than technology if the IWB is to create dynamic classrooms through interactive teaching and learning. juliecogill@hotmail.com

×