Interactive Whiteboards in a classroom environment

http://teacher.scholastic.com/resources/whiteboards/

In doing a quick google search on interactive white boards, it becomes apparent that there is already a significant amount of research done that support the use of an interactive whiteboard within a classroom environment. Whether these studies are funded by the manufacturers or retailers can put into question the legitimacy of the research, yet common sense based on research in other fields of teaching and learning would suggest that this increased learning experience is quite possible.

The potential of using an interactive whiteboard in our classes have the advantage over a normal whiteboard that you can use computer generated images, which enhances the learning support materials within the classroom. By engaging more senses with a more realistic look and feel, we therefore link various interactions of the brain with the single exercise which studies have proven to be more effective within a teaching and learning environment.

Because the content is displayed through a computer, the resolution can be enhanced, enlarged or minimized in order to focus the display on a certain section or the whole.

In my opinion, one of the biggest advantages is that you can use different colors very effectively without the need to ensure that you have chalk in the classroom. A lot of times within the classroom, there might be a lack of chalk in the classroom which can hamper effective teaching. Certain colors on normal chalkboards also does not display very well, while there are certain interactive whiteboards that can only display a set number of different colors.

Another drawback on the interactive boards is that as with most projectors, it requires the surrounding area to not be too bright, which under certain circumstances might be problematic, especially if the area needs to be so dark that learners cannot see and therefore write to take notes AND if they do, it might be detrimental to their eyesight.

In a South African context, our biggest possible problem would be a combination of access and Eskom. Not all schools will have the required funding to enable the use of interactive white boards and unlike a normal chalkboard, they do require electricity to operate. It would therefore not be viable to use an interactive whiteboard in the event of a power outage.

Although the argument can be made that a normal projector can provide the same functionality, anyone who grew up watching SABC educational programs should remember Mr William Smith. The reason I mention him specifically is because if you are aware of whom I'm talking about, you should also be aware of the fact that his hands were always filthy due to the constant erasing of the magic markers with his hands. Although a cloth can be used to do this, in practise, it rarely happens that it is always the case and in my school education I remember numerous occasions when teachers had "colorful hands" because they had to re-explain something on the projector.

Normal projectors, although less expensive, also require power and a significant amount of preparation since special transparent sleeves are required to showcase the lesson.

In order to keep certain information on the transparent documents, our teachers had to "photocopy" these images onto the documents. It was then permanent, but if they had made a mistake or wanted to make a change, it was not possible as it was a fixed permanent document to which could only be added.

The biggest advantage that interactive whiteboards however have, in my opinion, is that it allows the use of a display using a computer. In the digital age of today and with our previous exploration of digital pedagogy, most teachers most likely will be making use of computer assisted teaching methods. These interactive boards therefore directly integrates with our preferred method of preparation and should therefore lessen the burden of preparation for class.

Considering that almost no presentations within the business world is made without a projector making use of a computer, it is only logical to take the technology into the classroom. Being a technophile myself, I tend to agree with the findings that interactive whiteboards will assist teaching and learning, especially since my own rationale comes to the same conclusion.

Yes, it has its drawbacks but as Allan F. Mogensen said: 

"Work Smarter...Not Harder"

Purveying Pedagogy

The video refers to the SSDD we learn in all the PGCE classes, which is represented by the didactic triangle and are the components that deals with how to become a good teacher. It therefore only lists the factors to keep in mind for a classroom environment when we teach. However, I found the reading extremely insightful. What I specifically enjoyed about it is that although we have been taught the principle by means of inference, it highlighted the real world experience where thinking outside the box was required to be able to do the mundane.

In my opinion it says a lot about human nature in that the only thing the teacher had to do differently was to get the learners attention and then wean them from the necessity to continue with the innovative means of starting a class, yet to keep capturing their attention without the physical props. This is a typical example of what we have learned about with regards to looking at yourself as the teacher being the problem when you are not making inroads with the learners. What she had done was to rethink her method and give up total control of her class in order to obtain the participation she required of her classroom. She did not however let go of her authority within the classroom, which I think is critical to remain the teacher in the eyes of the learners.

This example therefore highlights very distinct requirements that I believe all people who wish to impart knowledge need to get under the belt if they want to be successful in their endeavors of teaching others. Firstly, the requirement of getting the initial attention of the potential learners. Secondly to keep it interesting once you have their attention. Thirdly, lose control. This does not mean that you need to go nuclear but rather that you should refrain from attempting to remain in total control yet retaining authority. One of the most important requirements in my opinion is to be able to think outside of the box in order to achieve these objectives. The reason I believe these abilities to be critical is simply because they will ensure that you capture the attention of your audience. Without someones attention, it is impossible to communicate and communication is key to learning.

People differ. Even a single person is influenced by internal and external forces. Within the week, I received terrible news in that a family member has an unknown amount of time left with us. My first thought was why could it not wait till next year. Its not being insensitive, but even though we are not close, the person is a sibling of someone whom I are about. It impacts on them and therefore impacts on me. When comparing my feelings, attitude and general well-being before and after I had received the news, it is evident that the news had had a significant impact on me as a person as well. I only mention this because it is an exaggerated example of how humans change due to influences. The point is that the same thing does not always work for different people, even the same person, since our circumstances change over time. This in my opinion is the main reason why we need to think outside of the box. That being said, it is thus just as important to never give up. It is not always possible that your brilliant idea will work as intended the first time. It may need to be tweaked and adjusted in order to fit/work. It reminds me of Thomas Edison who said two things that is of particular importance in life : "I have not failed. I've just found 10,000 ways that won't work" and then to enforce this idea "Many of life's failures are people who did not realize how close they were to success when they gave up".

The last thing that stood out in my mind that is also one of life's lessons that people sometimes never learn is that the best ideas normally only happen when you are doing something else. Think of Archimedes who observed the water rising when he got into his tub (bath). I am certain he did not set out to solve a significant problem from his era, but his brain made the observation and connected the dots. It can probably be argued that he then took it too far by then running out of the house naked in the excitement of sharing his discovery, yet at the time it can be compared to someone now discovering other intelligent life in our solar system. But the article clearly states that the writer made a conscious effort to not work on the problem at hand as all her previous attempts at finding a solution failed. Instead she applied her mind on something else and then had that Eureka moment, which brings me to the solution itself.

In sociology it is said that if your work is not complicated, then it is not deemed to be of importance. However, in most cases, we Humans tend to over-complicate matters in order to find a solution. We want to appear sophisticated and intelligent, but more often than not we need exactly the opposite. Think of the 3 laws of Newton and the 4 laws of electro-magnetism. They are extremely simple in their explanation and have been commended for being thus. It does not mean that the impact, proof or theory behind it is uncomplicated, but rather that the elegance of its simplicity needs to be admired. Not to get into Einstein and General Relativity, consider that we can explain all movement of objects in space based on the 3 laws of Newton. As stated, it is truly elegant in its simplicity and is probably the reason we cannot think of them. Why does it take a genius to show us the simplistic? In relation to the article, the writer tried everything she had learned on how to cope with unruly learners and in the end it took a coloured bowl and some water to resolve her issue.

The qualities we as future purveyors of knowledge therefore require to practice the art is to be determined, creative and to not overthink solutions as it will present itself, but the most important quality to keep in mind is KISS.

Endangered Teachers ... The new Dodo?

What are we ever going to do with subject XYZ?

We all were there, probably, at one point or another during high school.

In my case it was due to the fact that the marks I obtained in the particular subject was not very good. I was lucky, but some school friends were not. We start to fear going to the class because we just do not "get" the subject. Eventually this fear turns into anger which then transmorph into hate. As Yoda warns, "hate leads to the dark side..." which here means that instead of only skipping or not paying attention in the one class, teenagers end up skipping/hating school as a rule. By rebelling against the system, they are rewarded by their peers for being the rebel and speaking up for everyone, which acts as an example for younger children. As you can see, and probably remember, this effect keeps on snowballing and we end up with children who barely makes it out of school. This is not a new problem, except we have lost the stick of corporal punishment.

Therefore, if you are in the field of teaching and learning, you have to agree that the concept showcased by the "Independent Project" was one of the most fascinating and progressive ideas to date. Here you have children who acknowledge that they hated going to school and found a new way of learning through which they now enjoy schooling, even if they cover subjects that they never before enjoyed or excelled at. By investigating the teenager's brain development, this makes complete sense. In Teaching and Learning, the subject material emphasises the way in which an adolescent's brain works by explaining that a situation offering a reward for an action in front of peers, with an element of risk will be made with an emotional response every time (paraphrasing). The cognitive brain does not stand a chance.

Breaking it down into its individual parts, it is clear to see why this is the case. Firstly, having been through adolescence, we all know it is a time of extreme emotional turmoil and making emotional decisions are inevitable. Secondly, the learners are relying on one another to each do their part and as a result there is a reward of respect and status from your peers if you are able to teach them something new and positive rather than gaining recognition for negative behaviour. The particular teenagers are therefore "forced" to find an alternative means of gaining recognition from their peers and can only do it in a positive way. This effect is probably amplified by the fact that failing to deliver would not only be a failure to receive status, but would also lower your status within the group. This in my opinion is possible largely due to the fact that there are no adults to rebel against and thus gain recognition in that way.

When we couple the apparent outcome of the first experiment of the "Independent Project" with the empirical evidence provided by Sugata Mitra's "Hole in the Wall" experiment, the only logical conclusion is why had this not been attempted earlier? Not only does the evidence point to learners learning faster, but it seems to also suggest that the learners will also learn any topic that their peers decide is important. Having now found that it works, it can probably be seen as the holy grail in teaching and learning in that we can now get the kids of tomorrow to learn anything under the sun, learn it faster and do so with a thorough understanding of the subject matter. Pink Floyd hinted at this in 1979, yet no-one paid attention until now.

We already know that children are knowledge sponges. They only lose interest in learning because we hinder their learning process. With the internet being a source of instant knowledge distribution, maybe it is time that teachers realise their role in late childhood development (teaching) has reached its end in its current form. Our inherent human drive for independence seem to transcend all aspects of life including learning. It also seems to develop at an early age. Just try and help any child in their "self" stage and you will know it is impossible to help someone who does not want your help, even if they are 2 years old. You can only help them if/when they finally decide to ask for help, whichever method they use to let you know they're asking for help. This does not therefore necessarily mean that teachers will no longer be required, but rather that the role a teacher plays will need to shift from being the presenter of knowledge to being the fountain of knowledge.

Being a fountain of knowledge would therefore symbolise being on standby to provide someone with the knowledge they ask for when they ask for it, rather than providing the knowledge which you think is important to the person at the time. The "Independent Project" is a perfect example of this in that although the parent planted the seed, the idea was only acted on by the children and they only accessed the information from the adults to the extent that they needed their help to do so to realise the concept. Once they had it figured out they were better off on their own.

Therefore the trick to future proof yourself as a teacher will be to find the means of getting teenagers interested in the knowledge that you have AND getting them to return for more. The question therefore arises if this might be the beginning of the end of traditional teachers? In my mind, there is no difference between a fountain of knowledge teacher and a modern classroom teacher, except that the time of a modern classroom teacher might also be limited. Both are required to ensure that the child becomes interested enough to want to learn from you, rather than trying to force the child to learn with one possible exception.

With the internet being such a prolific distributor of knowledge, the possibility quite literally exist that if we do not adapt we might end up with a few fountains of knowledge in the world and everyone just accessing their knowledge. While this does bode well for fountains of knowledge, the nature of the internet is such that there will be far fewer fountains of knowledge than current teachers and these fountains will generally be the scientists / researchers themselves.
This pushes Arthur C. Clarke's quote of "Any teacher that can be replaced by a computer, should be" squarely into the realm of possibility whereby all teachers becomes an endangered species and "traditional old school" teachers will definitely be going the way of the Dodo.

Teachers therefore have 2 choices ...  Become a fountain of knowledge or go extinct.