Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
0
Introducing interactive whiteboards in the schools
Introducing interactive whiteboards in the schools
Introducing interactive whiteboards in the schools
Introducing interactive whiteboards in the schools
Introducing interactive whiteboards in the schools
Introducing interactive whiteboards in the schools
Introducing interactive whiteboards in the schools
Introducing interactive whiteboards in the schools
Introducing interactive whiteboards in the schools
Introducing interactive whiteboards in the schools
Introducing interactive whiteboards in the schools
Introducing interactive whiteboards in the schools
Introducing interactive whiteboards in the schools
Introducing interactive whiteboards in the schools
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

Introducing interactive whiteboards in the schools

2,684

Published on

Introducing interactive whiteboards in the schools: an experience report

Introducing interactive whiteboards in the schools: an experience report

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

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
2,684
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
2
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
68
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. Introducing interactive whiteboards in the schools: an experience report Marco Ronchetti, Benjamin Dandoy Università degli Studi di Trento, Informatica Trentina SpA
  • 2. Interactive Whiteboards (IAW): what are they? Intro
  • 3. The overall project <ul><li>Trentino (Trento province, Italy) </li></ul><ul><ul><li>400&apos;000 people </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>70&apos;000 students (School only) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>7&apos;000 teachers </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>3&apos;000 classes </li></ul></ul>Intro
  • 4. The overall project <ul><li>Target: a whiteboard per class (6 M €) </li></ul><ul><li>2006/7: 225 whiteboards (7.5%) </li></ul><ul><li>2007/8: 225 whiteboards </li></ul>Intro
  • 5. Any problem? Intro
  • 6. Any problem? Intro
  • 7. The SLIM4DIDA project <ul><li>Try to </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Introduce </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Guide </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Help </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Sustain </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Create (a) community(ies) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Reuse </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Scale </li></ul></ul>The project
  • 8. Structure of our project <ul><li>5 high schools and 2 so-called “comprehensive institutes” composed by primary schools (grades 1 to 5) and middle schools (grades 6 to 8) </li></ul><ul><li>4 in town, 3 in the valleys </li></ul><ul><li>57 teachers over a three months period </li></ul>The project
  • 9. Structure of our project <ul><li>4 meetings: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>General introduction </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Technical introduction </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Pedagogical issues </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Focus group + questionnaire </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Support actions </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Production of learning material </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Set up a wiki </li></ul></ul>The project
  • 10. Teacher perception: positive aspects <ul><li>Support for handicapped students </li></ul><ul><li>Time saving in certain activities </li></ul><ul><li>Fascination of the tool </li></ul><ul><li>Complementary aspects with respect to a multimedia classroom </li></ul>OUTCOME
  • 11. Teacher perception: negative aspects <ul><li>Induced laziness </li></ul><ul><li>Time lost for problems or setup </li></ul><ul><li>Time needed to prepare material </li></ul><ul><li>Doubts about the suitability of the tool to certain disciplines and age ranges </li></ul><ul><li>Precision and naturalness of the virtual writing not fully satisfactory </li></ul>OUTCOME
  • 12. Problems and issues <ul><li>installation of the devices </li></ul><ul><li>Placement of the devices </li></ul><ul><li>Perception of the tool </li></ul><ul><li>How to facilitate the transition to more partecipatory teaching/learning? </li></ul><ul><li>Notion of learning object </li></ul><ul><li>NIH syndrome </li></ul><ul><li>White paper syndrome </li></ul><ul><li>Expectations/results mismatch </li></ul>OUTCOME
  • 13. Hurdles <ul><li>Teachers are busy people! </li></ul><ul><li>Community startup </li></ul><ul><li>Fear of lack of timely and efficient support </li></ul><ul><li>Archival/retrieval </li></ul><ul><li>Finding the ways to recognize and remunerate any extra work </li></ul>OUTCOME
  • 14. Conclusions <ul><li>Is the IWB the magic tool described by the vendors and by some literature? </li></ul><ul><li>The strong point is bringing Internet and the PC in the middle of the class </li></ul><ul><li>It does not happen magically… </li></ul><ul><li>The process needs to be driven </li></ul>

×