INTRODUCTION
A 2007 report by the North Carolina Joint Legislative Study Commission on Information Technology Studies indicates that standard equipment in 21st Century classrooms should include electronic whiteboards, along with data projectors, document cameras, and computers. This recommendation has encouraged the General Assembly to consider providing funding to place this array of equipment in all North Carolina classrooms. In light of this heightened interest on the part of educators and legislators, it seems likely that electronic whiteboards will become ubiquitous in our schools in the coming decade. Therefore, the Instructional Technology Division of NCDPI is providing this guide as a tool to assist in the process of evaluating this type of technology for use in the classroom.
OVERVIEW
An interactive whiteboard used as a basic presentation tool actually offers little advantage over a standard data projector and projection screen combination. Using one does free the instructor from the necessity of standing at the computer, but that feature alone is unlikely to justify the considerable extra expense involved. As with many forms of technology, a whiteboard enhances the learning environment in direct proportion to the experience level and enthusiasm of the instructor who is using it.
The interactive whiteboard’s full potential is realized when it is used for collaborative purposes. It turns a computer into a tool that may be conveniently manipulated by a team of students and viewed simultaneously by an entire class. Additionally, the software provided with the board often enhances the functionality of the computer as a teaching/learning device. An accomplished whiteboard user will find it easy to go back to view previous screens; and to add images, graphs, and other learning objects to the presentation to make it more meaningful and effective. The instructor is able to develop multimedia lessons in advance, or save classroom demonstrations (with modifications and annotations if desired) for students to view at a later time. This can be liberating for the teacher, who is freed from the endless cycle of write and erase, and for the student, who can pay more attention to the activity occurring without being tied to the note-taking process.
One of the most frequent comments made by teachers who currently use whiteboards effectively is that students are engaged in the lesson being conducted to a greater degree than when an ordinary chalkboard or non-interactive whiteboard is used. Furthermore, reluctant students are often encouraged to participate in board activities when whiteboards are being used. This raises the possibility that the use of electronic whiteboards may be able to increase student motivation and instructional efficiency at the same time.
CAPABILITIES
The operating software affects the specific capabilities of each whiteboard, but the following list covers the major features that distinguish interactive whiteboards from ordinary whiteboards:
Functional:
Manipulate computer applications from the board
Highlight, annotate, and revise documents in Word, PowerPoint, and other formats
Use onscreen manipulative tools (geometrical shapes, animations, protractors, etc.)
Interact with peripherals such as polling devices and handheld slates
Archive lessons for repeated use
Reduce clutter and messiness
Pedagogical:
Free students from taking hand-written notes
Encourage student collaboration
Provide a hands-on experience for students
Allow absent students to review lessons
Increase usability for impaired students
TYPES OF BOARDS
Generally speaking there are three types of technologies used in whiteboards, and significant differences in their operation as a result. Touch-sensitive boards have a membrane sandwiched between the screen’s layers, allowing the user to write on the board with the touch of a finger – no special input device is required. Electromagnetic boards rely on a grid embedded behind a surface of material such as Formica. They require special pens for input, and are considered by some to be more durable than touch-sensitive boards. Finally, the ultrasound or infrared boards require special input pens or devices, but may be constructed of virtually any material.
Examples of touch-sensitive boards include the SMART Board and the Polyvision board. The Interwrite SchoolBoard, the Promethean Activboard, and the Numonics Intelliboard use electromagnetic technology. Ultrasound/infrared technology is utilized by the Hitachi StarBoard and the Mimio Xi Portable System (the latter is in a category by itself, as it may be attached to almost any flat surface, turning it into a whiteboard). The intended use of the board should be factored in when considering the type of board to purchase. Some may find the touch-sensitive boards to be more intuitive. Those who frequently require mouse-emulation to manipulate computer applications may prefer electromagnetic or ultrasound/infrared boards. The team responsible for making purchasing decisions should have hands-on experience with at least one example from each category of whiteboard.
CAVEATS
The whiteboard is part of a system that includes a computer and a data projector; therefore, the instructor must be comfortable with computer technology in order to use a whiteboard at all. There is only a small learning curve involved in mastering the basics functions of an electronic whiteboard, but using the board interactively to support the curriculum is another issue altogether. Some companies offer more extensive support materials than others, including items such as online tutorials and downloadable documentation. Hands-on training, however, is not so easy to obtain. Most of this training is arranged through an informal agreement with the sales representative, who will most likely be the person providing the instruction. Consider the fact that many sales representatives cover an entire state, if not several states. This has implications for the sales person’s after-sale motivation, and also for his or her ability to provide effective instruction, particularly when going beyond the fundamentals. As a result, in most situations the school system itself should be prepared to offer ongoing professional development that covers not just the technical issues, but also the development of whiteboard resources and activities that meet teachers’ particular needs, and the integration of those activities into the curriculum. If this is not the case, then in all likelihood the majority of whiteboards will end up being used as nothing more than projection screens.
KEY FACTORS
There are a number of important considerations to weigh when deciding exactly which board to purchase. While school systems may prefer to standardize on one brand of whiteboard in order to get the best deal and to facilitate support, one type of board may not be optimal for all grade levels and subject areas.
Major Considerations:
Can board sessions (annotations, highlighting, etc.) be conveniently saved and accessed for later use? What format is used, and can the results be distributed electronically as well as in hard copy form?
Does the whiteboard software interact seamlessly with Microsoft Office applications and any other software of a critical nature?
How important is the inclusion of extra software, activities, and resources? (Some companies offer extensive collections, while others provide just the basics.)
Will the whiteboard be used extensively to operate the computer? (Is it important to be able to conveniently emulate mouse actions and right-click functionality, and is it simple to switch between graphic and mouse modes?)
Does the whiteboard software integrate with other tools that may be deployed in the future, such as electronic polling devices and handheld interactive tablets or slates?
Will the board be used in an environment where factors such as durability or pen theft might be of concern?
Will the board be wall-mounted or on wheels?
Can the desired functionality be achieved by less expensive means, such as a wireless keyboard and mouse, or a handheld tablet or slate?
SUMMARY
Although no large-scale studies have demonstrated that the appropriate use of electronic whiteboards has a direct effect on student performance, anecdotal evidence and common sense provide credible support for the idea. The difficulty in supporting this theory with objective data is that electronic whiteboards are being used for a variety of purposes in a diversity of environments. As indicated previously, the degree to which the teacher has taken full advantage of the interactive whiteboard’s capabilities and integrated its use into the curriculum ultimately determines how student performance will be influenced. As our curriculum transitions into a 21st Century framework the strengths of the whiteboard will become more important in encouraging student interaction, collaboration, and multimedia literacy -- key concepts advocated by the Partnership for 21st Century Skills (http://www.21stcenturyskills.org/).
The challenges that will be facing administrators and media/technology specialists as they deploy interactive whiteboards in their schools boil down to selecting the proper type of board for the intended use, establishing a suitable physical environment in classrooms, and developing an ongoing curriculum-based professional development program.
