Information Technology Reference
In-Depth Information
in that hitherto, this aspect of interactive whiteboards had rarely been investigated.
Pupils were 'very enthusiastic' about the multimedia element of whiteboards (move-
ment, colour, touch, sound) and enjoyed the variety of resources, like games (Hall
and Higgins 2005: 102). However, the pupils disliked technical problems and the
lack of skills displayed by teachers and supply staff. What pupils did want was the
opportunity to touch and use the screen more. 'When asked for their opinions about
the interactive whiteboard, pupils are unanimous . . . [they like] correcting errors,
moving things about, selecting, changing, and undoing are all regarded as great fea-
tures' (Longman and Hughes 2006: 14).
From pupils' perspectives . . . it is important to gather more data about how
pupils see this type of technology affecting their classroom life . . . how easily
they list . . . examples of how the interactive whiteboard helps them to learn
[and] the value that pupils place on the repeatability of demonstrations and
illustrations used by the teacher.
(Longman and Hughes 2006: 17)
Although research has found that pupils value and enjoy the pedagogic use of
interactive whiteboards in lessons, and the increased concentration and motivation,
no evidence was found which showed this impacted in a significantly measurable
way on attainment. Consequently, the impact of increased visual and kinaesthetic
learning through interactive whiteboards on pupil achievement is less clear than the
impact on general motivation and increased attention spans. The patterns on attain-
ment are complex, and where a study may show increase one year, this is not neces-
sarily sustained in the second year (Somekh et al. 2007).
The key issue emerging from this analysis is that although the interactive
whiteboard may alter the way that learning takes place, and that the motiva-
tion of teachers and pupils may be increased, yet this may have no signifi-
cant or measurable impact on achievement.
(Higgins et al. 2007: 221)
The issue is the gap or space between the introduction of digital technologies in
schools and the measurement of pupil attainment, which has always been problematic,
because of the difficulty of claiming categorically a causal connection, and also the lack
of evidence of significant increases in attainment. This is identified as a major 'problem
space' (Becta 2010a: 6) and specific 'unease related to the difficulty of finding causal
relationships' between technology and learning. The difficulties of finding sustainable
answers to this challenge should not be underestimated (Becta 2010a: 6). As argued
previously, it may be more helpful to think of this 'problem space' as an 'ecology: one in
which a complex network of interacting influences is shaping' the relationship between
technology, learning and attainment in much more subtle ways (Becta 2010a: 6).
However, Cox et al. (2004) did find that the 'use of ICT has a more consist-
ent effect on attainment when pupils are challenged to think and question their
own understanding' (cited in Somekh et al. 2007: 162). This highlights the need to
Search WWH ::




Custom Search