EuroCALL presentation: Koenraad, Cutrim Schmid & Whyte; Evora, Portugal, 12/09/13

1. iTILT and SMARTVET: two EU projects to
promote effective interactive whiteboard use
in language and vocational education
Ton Koenraad, Euline Cutrim Schmid & Shona Whyte

2. introduction
iTILT
SmartVET
www.itilt.eu

3. iTILT
The project
Research results
www.itilt.eu

4. www.itilt.eu

5. Website
The final website contains:
 Video clips of IWB classroom episodes
 Comprehensive training manual
 Training materials in 6 different languages
 List of publications on IWB in language education
 Links to helpful websites
 List of criteria for materials design
www.itilt.eu

6. www.itilt.eu

7. www.itilt.eu

8. DurationDuration
www.itilt.eu

9. www.itilt.eu

10. IWB Training
www.itilt.eu

11. The iTILT Training Manual
 introduction to IWBs
 general tips on how to make the best use of interactive
whiteboards
 criteria for the design and evaluation of IWB-based
language teaching materials
 tips for the implementation and copyright issues of IWB based
material
 examples of activities for teaching speaking, listening, writing
and reading with an IWB, plus grammar and vocabulary
www.itilt.eu

12. Electronic Flipcharts
www.itilt.eu

13. Data Collection
www.itilt.eu

14. Website – Practice Reports
www.itilt.eu

15. WebsiteWebsite
www.itilt.eu

16. www.itilt.eu

17. www.itilt.eu

18. Practice Reports
www.itilt.eu

19. iTILT
Research findings

20. interactive technologies,
interactive whiteboard
• transformative
potential of
technologies
• integration into existing
teaching practice
Avvisati et al., 2013; Lee, 2013

21. Pre-project studies
• IWB in state
school settings
(France, Germany)
• IWB use
dependent on level
of teacher
development
• Cutrim Schmid &
Whyte, 2012
• IWB for VC in primary
EFL
• little unplanned,
independent interaction
• Whyte, 2011

22. critics of the IWB have pointed out that
one of its drawbacks is the fact that it
can be easily assimilated into teachers’
traditional pedagogical practice, thus
leading to patterns of technology use
that simply replicate previous practice
changes in pedagogical
practice cannot be
imposed hegemonically
from above, via isolated
training sessions and in
the absence of ongoing
support in the classroom
[In a collaborative action
research] framework,
teachers are supported by
researchers in a process of
structured reflection
involving data collection and
analysis with the goals of
better understanding teaching
and learning in their
classrooms and applying this
knowledge to improve
teaching efficacy and student
learning
Cutrim Schmid & Whyte, 2012
Whyte, Cutrim Schmid, van
Hazebrouck, & Oberhofer,
in 2013

23. Whyte, Cutrim Schmid, van Hazebrouck Thompson & Oberhofer (2013)

25. project data
7 countries
6 languages
website with video examples of
IWB-supported classroom
practice with additional
materials
Dutch
English
French
Spanish
Turkish
Welsh
Belgium
France
Germany
Netherlands
Spain
Turkey
UK
primary
secondary
university
vocational
4 sectors
44 teachers, 81 films, 267 clips

26. Teacher development as IWB userTeacher development as IWB user
(Beauchamp, 2004)(Beauchamp, 2004)
beginner
IWB as black/whiteboard
substitute, only teacher
uses IWB
only native software
apprentice
planned learner
manipulation of objects
(drag and drop)
some other software
initiate
planned learner use of
more IWB tools
use of more programmes
(internet)
advanced
spontaneous learner use
of IWB features and
peripherals (slates)
use of audio and video
files

27. ICT/IWB self-efficacy: questionnaire data
 how much can you do to exploit ICT for
teaching?
 how much can you do to exploit the IWB for
language teaching?
 how confident do you feel with various IWB
tools and features?
 how much do you believe the IWB can help in
language teaching?

28.  teachers showed high self-efficacy perceptions for ICT,
lower confidence with IWB tools, but encouraged
learners to use the IWB
Hillier, Beauchamp,Whyte (2013)
 primary teachers used narrow range of basic tools for
circumscribed goals, irrespective of IWB experience
Whyte, Beauchamp, Hillier (2012)
 wide variety of IWB use Whyte et al (2013)
 French EFL teachers showed differential development
readiness based on IWB self-efficacy and engagement
Whyte & Alexander (2013)

29. further research: learner interaction
 overview of European language teachers’ use of IWB
 interactivity and L2 interaction at IWB
 video communication for English as a Lingua Franca
(young learners France & Germany)

30. IWB use for language interactionIWB use for language interaction
(Whyte & Cutrim Schmid, in preparation)(Whyte & Cutrim Schmid, in preparation)
planning/control context task
drill
pre-planned language
elements
limited attempt to
contextualise
language
production &
repetition with
teacher feedback on
form
display
some learner choice
in language to be
produced
limited attempt to
contextualise
language
activity largely
controlled by
teacher
simulation
greater space for
learner choice
role-play: pretend
context
space for learner
choice in shaping
activity
communication
spontaneous language
production
genuine exchange
of participants’
own reactions
learner-centred,
meaning-focused
activity

31. Smart VET
The project
Results
www.itilt.eu

32. Supporting Continuous Professional
Development of VET teachers in the use
of Interactive Whiteboards
 EU-Project Leonardo programme 2011-2013

33. Rationale
(Kennewell, 2006; Higgins et al., 2007; Koenraad, 2008;
Thomas & Cutrim Schmid, 2010)
Limited uptake in specific
subject areas and
educational sectors
Teacher skills key in
realising added value
IWB underused in Irish
VET sector

34. Aims
Needs Analysis
IWB train-the-trainers
programme + materials
CPD model for Irish VET
sector
CoP

35. Project Phases
Needs Analysis
Training
Champions
Workshops /
Teacher content
development
CoP

36. Needs Analysis: Recommendations
• Modules basic IWB functionalities + for ordering, structuring,
comparing etc.
• Design materials as modular as possible
• Demo IWB potential for a variety of disciplines
• Include IWB page navigation, assessing, adapting and
designing materials
• (revision of) general pedagogical topics like ‘active learning’
and general materials design principles.
• Foster added value discussion

37. Training
Training Activities
Training Materials
Training Activities
Training Materials

38. Results at www.smartvet.eu
Training Activities
Training Materials
Training Activities
Training Materials

39. Conclusion
IWB in language teaching and learning
www.itilt.eu

40. www.itilt.eu
Alexander, J. (2013). The IWB in EFL, the IWB for EFL: using the IWB to teach EFL in
French educational settings. (Unpublished master's thesis). Université Nice Sophia
Antipolis, Nice, France.
Avvisati, F., Hennessey, S., Kozma, R., & Vincent-Lancrin, S. (2013), “Review of the Italian
Strategy for Digital Schools”, OECD Education Working Papers, No. 90, OECD
Publishing. http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/5k487ntdbr44-en
Beauchamp, G. (2004). Teacher use of the interactive whiteboard in primary schools:
towards an effective transition framework. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 13(3), 327-
348.
Cutrim Schmid, E. (2010). Developing competencies for using the interactive whiteboard
to implement communicative language teaching in the English as a Foreign Language
classroom. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 19(2), 159–172.
Cutrim Schmid, E. & Whyte, S. (2012). Interactive Whiteboards in School Settings:
Teacher Responses to Socio-constructivist Hegemonies. Language Learning and Technology
16 (2), 65-86.
Hillier, E., Beauchamp, G., & Whyte, S. (2013). A study of self-efficacy in the use of
interactive whiteboards across educational settings: a European perspective from the
iTILT project. Educational Futures, 5 (2)
http://www.educationstudies.org.uk/materials/emily_hillier_besav3.pdf
Lee, M. (2013), "Where to After the Digital Education Revolution?", Education
Technology Solutions. Educational Technology Solutions,
http://educationtechnologysolutions.com.au/2013/05/13/where-to-after-the-digital-
education-revolution/

41. www.itilt.eu
Whyte, S. (2013). Interaction and interactivity in technology-rich second language
classrooms: the iTILT project in France. WorldCALL, 11-13 July, 2013.
Whyte, S. (2011). Learning to teach with videoconferencing in primary foreign language
classrooms. ReCALL 23(3): 271–293.
Whyte, S., & Alexander, J. (2013). Learning to Use Interactive Technologies for Language
Teaching: Video Diaries for Teacher Support in the iTILT Project. Atelier didactique
SAES, Dijon, France,18 May.
Whyte, S., Beauchamp, G., & Hillier, E. (2012). Perceptions of the IWB for second
language teaching and learning: the iTILT project. In L. Bradley & S. Thouësny (Eds.), CALL:
Using, Learning, Knowing, EUROCALL Conference, Gothenburg, Sweden, 22-25 August 2012,
Proceedings (pp. 320-6). © Research-publishing.net Dublin 2012.
Whyte, S., Cutrim Schmid, E., & van Hazebrouck, S. (2011). Designing IWB Resources for
Language Teaching: the iTILT Project. International Conference on ICT for Language Learning,
4th Edition. Simonelli Editore.
Whyte, S., Cutrim Schmid, E., van Hazebrouck Thompson, S., & Oberhofer, M. (2013).
Open educational resources for CALL teacher education: the iTILT interactive
whiteboard project. Computer Assisted Language Learning.