Effective practice in technologyenhanced learning: interactive whiteboards - Teaching with Technologies: The Essential Guide - page 45

embed the technology in a sound pedagogy that utilizes constructivist principles to
get pupils to evaluate and reflect on their own learning.
To this end, the multi-modal aspects of interactive whiteboards enable teachers
to cater pedagogically for a range of learning styles - for visual learners, the large screen
engenders greater pupil engagement, for audio learners there is the use of sound,
and kinaesthetic learners have the opportunity to walk up to the screen, touch and
move objects around. Smith et al. (2005: 94) argue that the interactive potential of
interactive whiteboards in particular offers opportunities to create educational added
value. The added value is the support interactive whiteboards can provide for teach-
ers in scaffolding different learning styles and addressing diversity issues (Cuthell
2003; Glover et al. 2007: 13). As Kennewell (2004:12) argues, 'The degree of engage-
ment and participation was felt to be increased; this was particularly important for
the less able children. One way in which this was achieved was by calling pupils up
to the board to interact with the material'.
Interactive whiteboards: afford interactivity (technically and dialogically)
One factor that accounts for the motivational effects of interactive whiteboards is the
increased interactivity between the pupils and the whiteboard - for example, touch-
ing the screen. Kennewell (2006) makes a distinction between interactivity in a tech-
nical or physical sense (board functionality such as the production of sound when
you touch a picture) and the promotion of cognitive interactivity (question-answer,
comprehension check). To this, Koenraad (2008) adds socio-cognitive interactivity,
which is the co-construction of knowledge, encouragement of reflection, brainstorm-
ing between teacher and pupil and among pupils. Glover and Miller (2002, cited in
Somekh et al. 2007) were among the first to argue that interactivity included a range
of interactions , which include technical interactions, between the pupil and white-
board; dialogic interactions, which are between teachers and pupils, pupil and pupil;
and cognitive interactions, which are between pupils and lesson content.
With respect to developing a pedagogy for the use of whiteboards which utilizes
and exploits this typology of interactions, teachers can be placed on a spectrum from
traditional and didactic with minimum interactions to progressive and constructiv-
ist, which is more interactive. These latter aspects have been explored in more depth
recently by the Cambridge research group (Hennessy et al. 2011; Mercer et al. 2010;
Warwick et al. 2010) who have investigated how interactive whiteboards can enhance
dialogic approaches to learning to support a more constructivist pedagogy. This will
be discussed further in the pedagogy section of this chapter.
The benefits of teaching with an interactive whiteboard
In addition to enhancing the types of interactivity outlined above, interactive white-
boards have the potential to benefit teaching by providing greater flexibility, multi-
media presentations, support for planning, increased efficiency, and opportunities
for modelling technology (Somekh et al. 2007). With respect to flexibility, interactive
whiteboards enable teachers to access technical features when required, such as access-
ing their own online resources, the Internet, and it is also possible to teach the whole