Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Ed.S. Project Defense Presentation

58 views

Published on

  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Ed.S. Project Defense Presentation

  1. 1. Implementation of Interactive Whiteboard Technology in the Classroom: Users Tricia Swanson
  2. 2. Statement of Problem • Because interactive whiteboards (IWB) are a relatively new technology in classrooms, teachers require guidance and familiarity to implement them effectively.
  3. 3. Rationale for Study Since the potential usefulness of any technology will not be realized without education, guidance, and practice, more research is required to determine how the experience and professional development of classroom teachers, or lack thereof, impact the uses of IWBs.
  4. 4. Research Questions 1. How will expectations differ concerning the use of IWBs between a novice and a more experienced user? 2. How do novice and experienced users teach using IWBs? 3. Are there differences in how teachers implement and expect to implement IWBs?
  5. 5. Definition of Terms Interactive whiteboard- An IWB is an electronic, touch-sensitive whiteboard that is used in conjunction with a computer and projector. Computer images are displayed on the board where they can be used interactively (Weiser, 1996).
  6. 6. Definition of Terms (contd.) Interactive learning- The learner actually participates in the learning instead of just being a spectator (Bork, 1978).
  7. 7. Significance of Study If time is appropriated for practice and professional development in the use of IWBs, the technology could possibly be used to improve teaching and learning (Levy, 2002).
  8. 8. Literature Highlights  Latham (2002) found that in order for the use of IWBs to be effective teachers must have the following:  “confidence in using the resource and familiarity with its practical potential”(p.3),  knowledge of their curriculum,  knowledge of how to teach interactively, and  high expectations of student abilities.
  9. 9. Literature Highlights  Students are more motivated and engaged in learning (Smith, 2000), which could lead to improvements in behavior (Thompson & Flecknoe, 2003).  Notes can be saved and downloaded by students (Levy, 2002).
  10. 10. Literature Highlights  Cuthell (2005) performed a study in UK classrooms and concluded the following:  All learning styles benefited (Cuthell, 2005; Thompson & Flecknoe, 2003).  Teachers with one year experience said that there were greater benefits for teaching and learning after three months of using an IWB.
  11. 11. Literature Highlights Research results are ambiguous.  IWB technology can enhance teaching and learning, however teacher experience and perceptions are influential factors to successful implementation (Levy, 2002).  There is insufficient evidence to prove that IWBs improve teaching and learning (Smith, Higgins, Wall, & Miller, 2005)
  12. 12. Methodology- Participants  Participant selection was based on experience and subject area  Experienced user- at least two years experience  Novice user- less than twelve months experience  Subject area: Math  Availability to the researcher
  13. 13. Methodology- Participants  The four teachers who participated in the study work in Southeast Georgia public schools.  Teacher A = female with 3.5 years experience  Teacher B = female with 2 years experience  Teacher C = male with 5 months experience  Teacher D = female with 11 months experience
  14. 14. Methodology- Protocols  Semi-structured interviews  Expectations of IWB use  Video recorded lessons with tape recorded sound  Actual IWB use analyzed  See how experienced vs. novice teach with IWB  Cross-check expectations of use with actual use
  15. 15. Methodology- Interview 1. How much experience do you have using SMART boards? 2. How comfortable do you feel in using new technology? 3. Are you one of those people who can just play around with technology to figure it out or do you like someone to show you how to do it before you begin? 4. What kind of professional development have you received to help equip you with skills to successfully implement an IWB in your classroom?
  16. 16. Methodology- Interview (contd.) 5.How do you plan to use your IWB in lessons that you will record for me? Can you give examples? 6.Will you be using IWBs in assessments? Why, or why not? Please explain. 7.What kind of technology have you used in teaching in the past?
  17. 17. Methodology- Analysis  Table 1 - Interview data – data is reduced for manageability and placed into a table to analyze for common themes  Rubric – to determine what level the teachers are using the IWB (beginner or proficient level)  Table 2 – Expected IWB use vs. Actual IWB use
  18. 18. Evaluation of SMART Board Implementation in Lessons Beginner Level Proficient Level Student Use ofSmart Board Teacher is the primary user of the SMART Board. Teacher uses the SMART Board to present information and creates interactive lessons for students during whole class and small group instruction. Teacher Use ofSmart Board Teacher uses the SMART Board primarily for providing directions, United Streaming videos, PowerPoint presentations, scanned worksheets and bell work exercises. Teacher uses the SMART Board for providing background information and directions and also has students use interactive web sites, flash tools, interactive PowerPoint presentations and online manipulatives. Teacher Use ofSmart Board Teacher does not move effectively between Notebook software and other applications. Teacher effectively moves between Notebook software and all other applications. Smart Tools Teacher uses the basic SMART tools including pens, erasers, handwriting recognition, spell check, Notebook galleries, SMART Board keyboard and right click button, and can orient the board. Teacher uses basic tools along with the spotlight tool, magnifier, screen capture tool, highlighter pens, stamps, full screen view; can add lines, shapes, and text; can group and lock objects; adds links to websites, videos, documents and attachments. Recording Feature Teacher does not use the recording feature. Teacher records information and uses the files in the classroom or for substitute teachers. SmartBoard Lessons Teacher uses websites on the SMART Board. Teacher downloads and modifies SMART Notebook lessons from the Internet. Adapted from http://www.amphi.com/departments/technology/whiteboard/lessonplans.html
  19. 19. Results  What kind of professional development have you received to help equip you with skills to successfully implement an IWB in your classroom?  Teacher A = 3 days  Teacher B = 3 days  Teacher C = 2 hours  Teacher D = 1 day
  20. 20. Results  How comfortable do you feel in using new technology?  Teachers A, B, and C were comfortable  Teacher D experiences fear and anxiety. After hours of playing with it, she becomes more comfortable.
  21. 21. Results – Teacher A Expected In lesson 1, the IWB will be used as a projector. The picture gallery may be used. Lesson 2 will be more activity based. Actual  Colored pens  Scanned homework sheet  Graph from the gallery  Line feature
  22. 22. Results – Teacher B Expected  Graphic calculator software  May pull up a website  Use the camera feature  Colored pens Actual  Line feature  Keyboard  Highlighter  Graphic calculator software  Notes with colored pens
  23. 23. Results – Teacher C Expected  Notes  Students work examples  Wireless slate Actual  Notes  Flash tool spinner  Zoom feature  Rolling dice interactive tool (different colors)  Colored pens
  24. 24. Results – Teacher D Expected IWB will be used as an outline for teaching with titles, standards, announcements, notes, and warm-ups. Actual  Notes  Shapes  Line feature  Gallery tools  Interactive games  Colored pens
  25. 25. Results  Teacher A – 2 out of 4 parameters at the proficient level  Teacher B – 3 out of 5 proficient areas  Teacher C – 3 out of 4 proficient areas  Teacher D – 4 out of 4 proficient areas
  26. 26. Evaluation of SMART Board Implementation in Lessons Beginner Level Proficient Level Student Use ofSmart Board Teacher is the primary user of the SMART Board. Teacher uses the SMART Board to present information and creates interactive lessons for students during whole class and small group instruction. Teacher Use ofSmart Board Teacher uses the SMART Board primarily for providing directions, United Streaming videos, PowerPoint presentations, scanned worksheets and bell work exercises. Teacher uses the SMART Board for providing background information and directions and also has students use interactive web sites, flash tools, interactive PowerPoint presentations and online manipulatives. Teacher Use ofSmart Board Teacher does not move effectively between Notebook software and other applications. Teacher effectively moves between Notebook software and all other applications. Smart Tools Teacher uses the basic SMART tools including pens, erasers, handwriting recognition, spell check, Notebook galleries, SMART Board keyboard and right click button, and can orient the board. Teacher uses basic tools along with the spotlight tool, magnifier, screen capture tool, highlighter pens, stamps, full screen view; can add lines, shapes, and text; can group and lock objects; adds links to websites, videos, documents and attachments. Recording Feature Teacher does not use the recording feature. Teacher records information and uses the files in the classroom or for substitute teachers. SmartBoard Lessons Teacher uses websites on the SMART Board. Teacher downloads and modifies SMART Notebook lessons from the Internet. Adapted from http://www.amphi.com/departments/technology/whiteboard/lessonplans.html
  27. 27. Discussion Findings suggest that more experience using an IWB promotes higher expectations.
  28. 28. Discussion Novice teacher D used the IWB the most proficiently of all participants.  Received 1 day of professional development  Spent many hours becoming familiar with SMART board and available features  Could anxiety of new technology be a motivating factor?
  29. 29. Discussion  Teacher A had the most experience using an IWB, but had the least number of proficient areas compared to others.
  30. 30. Limitations of Study  Expectant mother?  Sample Size  Interrater reliability
  31. 31. Future Research Future research may examine what is more important, spending much time in professional development courses or time allotted for the practice and exploration of the IWB with software on one’s own.
  32. 32. Recommendations For IWB integration in lessons:  Interactive websites  Interactive games to teach and reinforce lesson  Online manipulatives
  33. 33. Recommendations (contd.)  Record lesson for absent students or substitute teachers  Take advantage of SMART notebook lessons that are available from the SMART gallery or Internet

×