IWBs are Not the Stars. They’re the Overpaid Extras with A Great Agent

I recently explained Why I Hate Interactive Whiteboards Too which like my other posts on the topic received numerous responses. Kent3, who clearly cares about helping students succeed, wrote a thoughtful (three-part) comment which deserves at least a blog entry (or two) in response. I enjoy being challenged in thought-provoking ways on my views and respect those who can move or help grow my thinking.

In this case, though, it’s another opponent in the ring who tried to change my mind about IWBs being tools of needless, misguided spending that has not changed my beliefs. Like the IWB companies who masterfully market to educational institutions to gain huge profits from schools (and all those who they pay), ), Kent3 (surely unintentionally) is confusing the power of the internet, laptop/tablet, projector, speakers with the power of the extra very expensive IWB add-on.

This doesn’t surprise me as these companies spend countless dollars to lead people to believe that the device runs the show. Confusing the masses into believing this, which means big profits for them. The reality is the co-star of this show (aside from the teacher and students) is the internet, which is supported by that fabulous laptop or even better the supah stah...***The Tablet***. Putting them up in lights, is of course, none-other-than the beloved... projector!!! Providing sound is those powerful, but very affordable (under $40) speakers.

The IWB is merely a highly overpaid insignificant extra that can be replaced by any number of other free and more effective substitutes.

IWB just has a very good (marketing) agent that fools you into believing he’s the star. I did read Kent’s entire research report supporting IWBs. Not surprisingly what I found is there is not a single instance where IWBs aren’t given credit for the work of the real tech stars of the show: the laptop/tablet, internet, projector, and software (which can/and often is run independent of the board, whose functionality can be accomplished with alternate free software as well). Examples include:

• A photo was displayed on the IWB and revealed in portions using the ‘spotlight tool’.
  -Ahem, you don't need an IWB to display a photo or to use a spotlight tool.
• Speaking Activity – Students reported on current events using Internet News websites via an IWB.
  -Huh? What does the IWB have to do with bringing us current events or websites that have current events. The other hardware stars are responsible.
• Selected student’s work was displayed on the IWB at the end of the lesson using the visualiser.
  -Ummm...I don't need an IWB or visualiser to display student work and actually, I'm more interested in where this work was authentically published and the global community who was involved in the conversation.
• Using the IWB students had to write their name on a continuum identifying ‘How well do they swim’.
  -Okay, why do I even need any tech for this??? Let's have students line up and have cool conversations with classmates about where they belong to do so.
• There's lotsa arranging and prioritizing.
  -We can do this easily, more efficiently, and with more interactivity without an IWB. Why on earth are we using and IWB to prioritize? Not necessary.
  
• Downloading onto the IWB and playing the song ‘Come on the bay’ engaged the boys who were usually reluctant singers.
  - Ahhhh! You didn't download on the IWB. You downloaded on a computer. No IWB required.
• Students were being read to by a ‘talking book’ on the IWB.
  -Well, umm, no. The talking came through the speakers and the book was on the laptop. IWB is unnecessary.
  
• The teacher displayed a work sample on the IWB while the students were completing the task. This allowed students to complete the task without having to be continually reminded of what to do.
  -Really? Do I even need to explain why the $2.5K investment is an extra with an overpaid agent here????
  

There is more than one issue. The extra on the set (aka IWB), really just dumbs down and detracts from the show. When I’m placed in the role of movie editor, the IWB is left on the cutting room floor and in it’s stead, I hire a more reputable, non-biased casting director who could recast the show more powerfully. That cast would trade in the $2.5k-ish salary of the IWB and replace it with any number of more worthy characters able to accomplish all the extras for free and more effectively.

If I had the extra bucks to throw around in these cash-strapped times, I would instead cast a shiny class set of student response systems or Smart pens or maybe 10 iTouches or netbooks. These extras would no doubt soon rise to the role of supporting actor or maybe even steal the show. They certainly would be more worthy of idolization then those overpaid IWB extras who are typecast to a boring front and center role, never mingling among or even having the opportunity to go home with their audience. Instead, my stars would shine, connected to a student, rather than that of an immobile (but valuable) Midas star stuck helplessly in front of the room. The reason that’s important and all the other flaws of using an IWB vs more effective means of teaching and learning is the topic of yet another post indeed.

Stay tuned.

Why Using Interactive Whiteboards May Be Smart for Educators On Their Way to Becoming Innovative

Editor's note: Those who follow my blog know I believe that when it comes to educating innovatively, it's dumb to use a SMARTboard. Here's the best argument I've seen on the other side of the issue. I still believe that we can save tens of thousands if we ditch the board. I also believe we should try the less expensive Tablet/projector option. And, I still believe you can teach better without the IWB, but...for some teachers new to tech, the reasons stated in this post which was a response to my previous blog entry "may" make a case for purchasing an IWB.

TimeOutDad said...

@ Lisa - I love your posts on IWBs! It always makes for great debate and conversation! :) Funny thing is that some of the biggest protesters and critics of IWBs still USE them when they're around... ;)

I think I still kinda' like IWBs (despite all the bad press), namely because I use them and see MANY teachers using them who did not use ANY technology before they came along. And yes, computers and projectors were available before we got the IWBs. They weren't used because very few were willing to set them up. (Plus, we all know that anything that is constantly set up and put away has a much higher chance of breaking.) For a tech savvy person, setting up a projector, a set of speakers, and laptop is not a problem, but that convenience (one button) factor of the IWB has made all the difference in many of our classrooms, in terms of bringing technology into our classrooms.

Do IWBs always create great teaching and learning moments? NO WAY. But, are there times when we need our students to focus and pay attention to what we're teaching? YES! Does an IWB sometimes make for more effective teaching/presenting? YES! Aren't some of the highest paying people "Sages on the Stages." who talk, present, or perform for a living? YES! YES! YES!

WHY are we blaming the poor IWBs for ineffective teaching, presenting, or learning? Why are we demonizing a tool? Guess what? They cost a LOT less than an ineffective teacher or presenter. Poor IWB pales in comparison... Also, when you blamed the IWB setup in those classrooms at EdCampNYC, guess what? That was HUMAN error the way those poor IWBs were set up, not the IWB's fault. ;)

I think IWBs are the "Fall Guy" for ineffective teaching or presenting. It's like blaming a rice cooker for bad rice, blaming a hammer for poor construction, blaming a car for bad driving. We are blaming IWBs for being expensive, blaming them for poor teaching, blaming them for being misnamed. I don't think they named themselves, did they? Where does/should the responsibility lie?

It's similar to going into a kitchen, and blaming the microwave for the cooking that's going on in a household. Microwaves aren't evil, are they? We shouldn't use them for all of our cooking (although some might beg to differ), but even the BEST chefs use them sometimes, no? In the end though, let's not blame the microwaves for ineffective cooking...

If an IWB enables someone who is not so effective to be more effective in a classroom, a conference room, or a corporate board room, then that IWB certainly deserves to be paid a few grand, no? Personally, I'd take an IWB over an ineffective educator or presenter any day of the week. ;)

Erase Unnecessary Costs by Getting Smart about Interactive Whiteboards

I was at a presentation yesterday where school leaders and teachers were led to believe that the key to addressing the Achievement Gap was in part through purchasing Interactive Whiteboards (IWBs). Dr. Robert J. Marzano lead the presentation where he shared what has been called questionable research that showed how IWBs and response systems (srs) lead to student achievement. Egad! I wanted to shout out a warning.

THIS IS NOT TRUE! DON'T THROW AWAY YOUR MONEY!

You can save about $3500 hundred dollars per classroom if you buy a tablet and projector rather than an interactive whiteboard and get the same results, but you don't know that because this and other research (almost always commissioned by IWB companies) is purposely misleading you, comparing classrooms with IWBs to those without technology rather than comparing classrooms with IWBs to the much less expensive projectors/laptop or projector/tablet combo.

There's an incentive to mislead schools. It equals more profit for the IWB companies who have brainwashed educators into believing you need their $5000 device to increase student achievement. But once you know the truth about interactive whiteboards you'll realize, YOU DON'T!

DISPELLING 10 COMMON INTERACTIVE WHITEBOARD MYTHS
Myth 1: You need an interactive whiteboard to show videos.
Truth: You don't need an IWB to show videos. You just need a laptop/projector.

Myth 2: You need an interactive whiteboard to capture/record your lessons for playback later.
Truth: You don't need an IWB to capture/record lessons. You can do this for free with a number of screencasting programs that require no downloads such as Screentoaster or ScreenJelly.

Myth 3: An interactive whiteboard is necessary if you want students to be able to interact with the content.
Truth: An interactive whiteboard is not necessary if you want students to interact with the content. They can go to your Tablet and interact just as easily.

Myth 4: You need an interactive whiteboard to have access to interactive lessons and software.
Truth: Interactive whiteboard software works on any laptop. You do not need the IWB and you can present the lessons equally effectively with a tablet and projector.

Myth 5: The kids and teachers just love interactive whiteboards and they keep them so engaged.
Truth: IWB companies spend big bucks to trick you into thinking you need the fancy and expensive gadget to educate innovatively. They want you to spend the big bucks that make them big profits. When you teach the same content with a tablet and projector they also love the lesson, interact, are engaged, and the added bonus is you can use that extra money to put much more interactive tech into the hands of every student.

Myth 6: Interactive whiteboards are necessary for tactile learners and students with special needs.
Truth: A tablet serves the same function for tactile learners and students with special needs.
Myth 7: The large size of the interactive whiteboard is necessary for student engagement. Students can't manipulate a tablet-sized device nearly as well. Especially young children or those with special needs.
Truth: What? Really? Have ya seen What Happens When you Give a 3, 4, 8-Year-Old an iTouch? Kids are perfectly happy on a tablet-sized device and if you've watched a teenager you've seen them use their phones like they're masterfully conducting a symphony. Small is big for kids. Big is big for adults...not kids. For visually impaired students or those with special needs laptops have a whole suite of free accessibility options available.

Myth 8: An interactive whiteboard enables you to connect with the world.
Truth: The interactive whiteboard is not connecting you to the world. Your computer with internet is connecting you to the world.
Myth 9: Interactive whiteboards are easier to use for educators because they combine everything into a single device. You don't need to worry about bulbs, speakers, extra wires, laptop, etc.
Truth: Interactive whiteboards don't combine everything into a single device. With all devices, you still need to replace projector lightbulbs and you still need a laptop. Speakers are an optional add on for computers and IWBs however with a computer you can get a nice set for under $40. This feature on an IWB raises the price hundreds of dollars and they often have issues. Additionally, the sales pitch that they're easy to use, often is not realized in schools. For instant recently during a visit to I school I asked a teacher how she and her colleagues like their Smartboards. Her response, "Well, when they work, I guess they're okay." At that school I visited three classrooms an every teacher needed assistance with using their Smartboard during my visit. As far as requiring less wires. Not true. Wires done right are the same whether you use an IWB or laptop/projector. It takes proper consideration of how to accommodate your device, but either way you need a few wires that you can run through walls, ceilings, or tape down to the floor.

Myth 10: You should get an interactive whiteboard because it's easy to use.
Truth: An interactive whiteboard is not that easy to use. In fact when they are not used or not used well, you always hear, that it is because teachers didn't get the proper professional development. Of course the IWB companies will be happy to sell you thousands of dollars of training to learn to use the devices. The training runs at a cost of about $1800 per day and that doesn't include the cost for substitutes. You'll also find that IWBs have a lot of technical issues. In most of the classrooms I visit I find teachers need technical support to get the devices going.
If I've succeeded in helping you see the truth and you realize you don't need to spend this much money to create a 21st century classroom, take a look at the numbers and see what you can instead put in the hands of children once armed with this knowledge. First is a breakdown of costs with and without an IWB.

COST COMPARISON:
Note: These are approximate numbers for items that you can purchase for a slightly higher or lower cost depending on if you select the high-end or low-end model.

Projector/Tablet Combo:

• Projector - 748
• Tablet - $1,098

Total Cost: $1,846

Projector/Laptop/Slate Combo:

• Projector - 748
• Laptop - $817
• Slate/Airliner: $281.00 (gives the tablet function in a mobile format)

Total Cost: $1,846

Interactive Whiteboard/Laptop Combo:

• Interactive Whiteboard - $4300
• Laptop or Tablet - $1000

Total Cost: $5300

Total Savings - Tablet/Projector combination:$3454
Now,with the interactive whiteboard myths dispelled you can spend your money on putting technology into students hands without sacrificing functionality.

In essence, you could buy one IWB or any of the bulleted items below:

• 9 netbooks
• 9 iTouches
• 3 Tablets or Laptops
• 2 class sets of student response systems
• 28 Livescribe pens
• 4.5 projectors

Now imagine schools that are considering purchasing ten IWBs. Instead they could furnish their school with any of the below bulleted items:

• 90 netbooks
• 90 iTouches
• 30 Tablets or Laptops
• 20 class sets of student response systems
• 280 Livescribe pens
• 45 projectors
• 1 technology coach or technician

Those are the numbers and facts you should have in mind when making this purchasing decision. Whether you're an educator or a leader, it's important to make informed decisions, especially if those decisions can result in additional, or fewer, resources in the hands of children.

------------------------------------------
Related Posts:
Why Smartboards are a Dumb Initiative
The Ten No Nos of Teaching with a Projector or Interactive Whiteboard

Are IWBs Past Their Prime?

guest post by Jacob Gutnicki

In recent months (perhaps years) many have questioned the cost effectiveness of the IWB and its siblings. More specifically, educators have voiced concerns that the IWBs are redundant as its interactive features mimic the tablet, which can be purchased for far less money. Additionally, numerous critics have lamented that the professional development services offered by IWBs are all too often substandard. In fact, a perusal of recent articles would suggest that school administrators should trash the IWBs and replace it with either tablets or Smart Phones.

Sounds crazy??? Think again. About 10 years ago, laptops became king. As such, many administrators threw out desktop computers that were still in their prime years. About 20 years ago incoming administrators broke apart computer labs, as the computing trend was to push the computers out of the lab and into the classroom. In recent years, schools have also been ditching old equipment believing that only the latest computer hardware should be used with students. This often happens, as it is convenient to purchase new equipment and follow the adage out with the old, in with the new. However, these same schools then wonder why their network-based programs no longer work or in some cases wish to reassemble the lab when computer labs are in style again. They also cry poverty claiming that their computer to student ratio is atrocious.

At the same time, there are many schools that believe that the IWB can do no wrong. In fact, they are aggressively working to outfit each room with an IWB. I have also noticed that IWB training seminars are always well attended.

So… who is right? After all, in this economy we should not spend our limited funds in a callous manner. In truth, this is not an easy question to answer. Many schools purchase IWBs because it is a brand name they are familiar with and believe it will be easier to get “buy in” from their teachers. Additionally, schools are reluctant to use cheaper alternatives, as they believe it will not be compatible with the software they are using. On the other hand, IWB critics believe this technology is prohibitively expensive and is quickly becoming obsolete. IWB critics also assert that tablets and Smart Phone technology is not only cheaper; it also includes far more interactive features thereby putting the IWB to shame.

In the end, schools have to weigh the facts carefully and decide how to best use technology to best serve the needs of their children. This includes examining the school culture, features of competing technologies, physical space available in the school, the school’s comfort level with varying technology models, and the total cost of ownership.

That being said, we must also be careful not to throw the baby out with the bath water. While its important to analyze differing technologies and purchase wisely, it is also essential that we carefully analyze how we are going to use our existing technology and re-purpose it when applicable. Additionally, administrators should inventory their existing hardware, assign all functioning hardware a purpose, and pursue a quality training program that helps build instructional capacity as needed and maximizes how legacy and current technology is used.

Got Money for a Really Expensive Set of Training Wheels? I’ve Got An IWB to Sell Ya.

Editor’s note: Here’s another in the series for those who have been following the great debate going on here at The Innovative Educator over the effectiveness of Interactive Whiteboards (IWBs).

I’ve never understood how the IWB companies could fool so many into needlessly wasting their money by misinforming them of the capabilities of the device which I believe provide no value over the Tablet / projector combo, yet cost as much as $1000 - $3000 more. Yet the debate about the device has helped answer this question thanks to many who’ve contributed comments, including, most recently Peter Kent who sums up some of the debate to date here at The IWB debate - where do you stand?

In our latest round, Mr. Kent acknowledges in his comments that he agrees with my belief that “everything that could be done with an IWB could be done with other / cheaper technology,” however, he shares that this is besides the point. As I read through his insights into my misguided flaws in thinking, I realize, he’s right indeed. He breaks it down in two parts. Here is an excerpt from Part 1 where he helps me understand why schools are wasting thousands of dollars on these devices when money could better be spent on resources for students.

The problem is with the message you are weaving, the narrative. It is misguided, though well intentioned, and if there has to be a right or wrong in the issue – you would be wrong.

• 1st Wrong Thing - Humans are emotional and are not rational, and you are insisting that teachers act as if they are absolutely rational.
  
  In your posts you never mention the broader context in schools that we need to consider. Non-techie teachers (the vast bulk of teachers) are not comfortable with technology, with the concept of computers within classrooms, and while it is not rational we need to accept that. Prior to IWBs (last century) the concept of 2 or 3 computers in a classroom used to freak out the vast majority of teachers. They were however comfortable with the concept of a ‘Board’ in the room. This was the revolutionary nature of IWBs, and still is. For emotional and non-rational reasons it was technology that the vast bulk of teachers were prepared to buy into. This is what I think IWB manufactures talk about when they use the term ‘bridging technology’. An IWB is like the training wheels that teachers need as they come to terms with and hopefully eventually move to a richer and more diverse range of technologies within the classroomSo the while the detail of what your posts say are true on the surface, they are wrong within the context of ‘the real world’.

Mr. Kent is correct. I lack some of that social emotional empathy that others have and in it’s place have a more black and white view of things. A decade into the 21st century and I’m tired of the training wheels already. Especially when the funds to purchase those extraordinarily expensive wheels means fewer resources for students. I’d prefer to save those dollars by spending some time with teachers showing them how they can teach more effectively when they ditch the board, and have a seat to get down and dirty with their students (who may or may not be in the same room as them) and get to the work of learning. I understand that many teachers cling to what they believe is their rightful place, front and center of the room, but there is a better way, and it involves tying learning to people not places. And, if you’re wondering, that doesn’t mean I’m suggesting abandoning direct instruction, but rather that we make a shift in the thinking about the place from where it is delivered. When we break down the wall between the teacher up front and everyone else behind him or her we can all move ahead into the 21st century together regardless of physical location of the teachers or learners.

Note: For my response to his 2nd wrong thing about my thinking, read the comment section here.

Are Interactive Whiteboards a Smart Idea when they Make Even the Most Innovative of Educators Look Dumb? – 10 Reasons to Ditch the Board

I had the good fortune to attend EdCampNYC this past weekend which was attended by passionate and innovative educators. All presenters were placed in rooms equipped with Smartboards. As I’ve witnessed at every other conference I’ve attended with interactive whiteboards (IWBs), they either weren’t utilized (such as at Alan November's yearly Building Learning Communities conference) or they made the sessions more difficult and glitchy.

Because the conference was held at a school, it had the usual IWB configuration. The Smartboard was front and center and not near the CPU/keyboard essential to effectively operate all necessary controls. What some presenters resorted to was a rather awkward set up with one person at the front of the room and another controlling the keyboard/mouse from elsewhere. Of course, teachers don’t have luxury of a second person or assistant, but this was what seemed to be most effective. In each session the board made these tech-savvy presenters (present company included) rather flustered and uncomfortable as a result of the glitchiness of them and/or awkwardness of having either two people at the helm or needing to run back and forth between the front of the room and the keyboard. Additionally, let’s face it. Smartboards just aren’t that intuitive. Folks often get frustrated as they intend to point to something on the board but instead the point results in unexpectedly being taken elsewhere or something they didn’t want to have appear on the screen pops up so the facilitators found themselves running back over to the keyboard and mouse.

I know all those people who feel the need to believe in the magic of the board are going to jump up and down saying how great they are at using IWBs and they will explain how they have transformed teaching with them, but the reality is they are doing that either 1) Because they begged their principal to get an IWB so they better stand up for the benefits it is supposed to provide or their school wasted thousands of dollars that could have gone toward personal computing for students. Acknowledging Smartboards are dumb is as difficult for them as telling a child there’s really no Santa Claus and the real stars are their parents. For all of those in this category, like the myth of Santa, you are attributing the magic of the board to the wrong player. While the board has tales of legend and lore behind it in reality IWBs are Not the Stars. They’re the Overpaid Extras with A Great Agent.

Five problems with interactive whiteboards

1. The keyboard doesn’t get the respect it deserves
An IWB devalues the keyboard which for many is an important component in driving a computer. Innovative educators such as myself rely on the keyboard in our presentations and interactions. Using the virtual one on the IWB screen is not a good option because you're left tapping a board with your back to the room and it's SLOW.

2. The pen gets more respect than it deserves
More and more innovative educators find their digitally savvy students are ditching the pen in favor of producing text with a keyboard. Drafting more often is done by typing instead of writing. For many of the digitally savvy the keyboard is mightier than the pen.

3. Our eyes don't get the respect they deserve
As opposed to a set up with a laptop and projector that would enable the person facilitating to face the people in the room, the Smartboard, like the traditional blackboard results in teachers and students who are at the board often having their backs to the audience, or perhaps their side, to the audience. Additionally, because of this the person at the front of the room is often blocking what is on either on the board and/or the presenter often gets in the way of the projector.

4. The Promethean Shuffle and Smartboard Slide don't deserve respect on the classroom floor
While the shuffle and slide may look good on the dance floor, they usually have no place in the classroom, but educators are often led to follow this dance when interactive whiteboards are used to lead instruction. If you’ve seen someone use an interactive whiteboard, you know what I’m talking about as they slide from side to side to access the information they want on the board and shuffle out of the way of the projector. While interactive whiteboards are great at making a teacher feel like they’re taking stage, the front of the class is just not a place they should be doing that type of song and dance.

5. The time teacher's have for professional development does not get the respect it deserves
Time and time again when I point out that I see money wasted on IWBS I hear, oh…teachers aren’t using Smartboards well because they don’t have the proper training. You know what? I don’t know of any technology that people get more training for then Smartboards and they’re still not being used effectively. This is a result of two reasons.

1. Useful technology doesn’t need all this training. Adults and students just figure out how to use cell phones, cameras, iPads, Wii’s, computers, televisions, projectors, etc. Sure, they may need help to get started, but then they’re off and running, at least with the basics…
2. They are a catalyst for ineffective teaching. When you drop the board and let educators use just the laptop and projector the following happens:

i. Instruction can become people, rather than place-based,

ii. Instructors can have eye-to-eye contact with the students

iii. The focus is off the front of the room and on the learning.

iv. The class becomes more interactive when learning is happening around the room rather than with the one (or sometimes 2 – 4) people at the board.

When cash-strapped schools stop wasting money on training people on a mistaken expenditure they can put those funds to something more meaningful

5 Reasons Ditching Interactive Whiteboards is a Smart Idea
While being able to tap a board that will react has an upfront “WOW” factor, innovative educators instinctively know that it’s NOT smart to teach in the manner dictated by an IWB. Instead, they know that dropping the IWB enables them to do all the following which become difficult with Smartboards.

1. Focus on the students, not the sage on the stage.
2. Learning should come from anywhere, not just at the board in front of the room.
3. When addressing a classroom it is better to look at students faces then have them look at your behind or side.
4. Have access to the keyboard and mouse and be able to see where you are typing and clicking.
5. Have access to any peripherals you are using such as when podcasting, Skyping, etc.

If you love your interactive whiteboard, enjoy, but if you are an innovative educator who hasn’t bought into the hype, don’t feel compelled to spend a lot of time learning to use something that many innovative educators believe just isn’t worth it in general and in particular because most people using IWBs look like those in this slideshow I created.

Getting Smart About Interactive Whiteboards (Smartboards, Promethean Boards) from Lisa Nielsen

Why I Hate Interactive Whiteboards Too

Last week I had a lengthy conversation with a big wig at an IWB company who was trying to convince me that my idea that educators could Erase Unnecessary Costs by Getting Smart about Interactive Whiteboards was way off. He couldn't understand how I could think that it was unnecessary to spend money on a tool that will allow students to collaborate, promote interactivity, and connect the classroom to the world. Ugh! This is what these IWB companies spend millions trying to get you to believe. Purchase their board and you get all this. So, I shared, that while I do agree those things are valuable, I don't need an IWB for any of it and that they just trick people into thinking they need the device for these things to happen. He asked if I've ever used one. Yes! And, I hate them. There is not a single thing I can do on an IWB that I can't do without one more effectively. Then he went into the whole training bit. No, I don't want training on something that's really expensive that has no value over teaching without one.

It just irks me that these companies lead people to believe they need to spend thousands when they can do the same thing and better using free tools.

Well, I have a blog post brewing that really dives into why these devices make learning worse and why schools and districts should instead spend their dollars on resources for students, but I haven't had the chance to write it (someday, I hope). However, serendipitously I came across a piece that shares many of my sentiments. Mine has a slightly different spin, but until that post makes it's way to the top of my pile, I'll share this one written by educator, author, blogger Bill Ferriter. Like many educators after a year of trying to make the best of a bad tool, Bill began Getting Smart about Interactive Whiteboards

In his article "Why I Hate Interactive Whiteboards," Bill, who gave his IWB away, shares in my belief that...

most of the time, interactive whiteboard programs are, in fact, nothing more than vain attempts to buy change. Sharing that even with time and training, interactive whiteboards are an under-informed and irresponsible purchase. They do little more than reinforce a teacher-centric model of learning. Heck, even whiteboard companies market them as a bridging technology, designed to replicate traditional instructional practices (make presentations, give notes, deliver lectures) in an attempt to move digital teacher-dinosaurs into the light. I ask you: Do we really want to spend thousands of dollars on a tool that makes stand-and-deliver instruction easier?

To read more pearls of wisdom from Bill visit his article here Why I Hate Interactive Whiteboards.

Do The IWBs or Clickers You (want to) Own REALLY Help Meet Learning Goals?

The reason I don’t use interactive white boards or clickers is because I use technologies that will help me with productivity or help my students meet their learning goals in faster/better/or never previously possible ways. These items don’t help me do that so I don’t use them. If you are considering an IWB or clicker purchase, these questions should be considered and answered by school staff before you invest your money in such a purchase.

Just because a school has extra funds to spend on technology doesn’t mean it is always better to do so. Here are two stories of effective teachers who had tech imposed upon them that they didn’t want (story 1) or need (story 2) as a result of these questions not being addressed.

Story One - Literacy
An excellent literacy teacher in a one-to-one middle school loved her tablet and projector and exquisitely modeled writing during her mini lessons using her equipment. She demonstrated 21st century writing using a laptop with all the features that writers use. For instance in her modeling she’d show her students how she would type, cut, paste, right click, not slow down thinking with spelling errors the computer identifies, get synonym suggestions and dictionary definitions. She may get a bunch of text down first then chunk and place it where it belongs. She sat facing her students at eye level during instruction engaged in deep discussion. Her back was never to them.

None of this is done more effectively in a writing classroom with an IWB yet this teacher’s supervisor had a school full of em and she wanted them used. It didn’t matter that her students were writing with keyboards, not pens or that the teacher wanted to face or class or that the teacher felt modeling meant using the keyboard real writers use. The administration had lots of expensive boards and she wanted them used. The teacher left the school the next year.

Story Two - Unnecessary Purchase of Clickers
In story two a one-to-one school which extra funds succumbed to an IWBs companies sales advice that the next step for a school that had an IWB for every teacher and laptops for each student was to purchase clickers. The school was even covered by a news channel for the great work they were doing. Ugh. in the clip the teacher was up at her IWB and the students were at their desks with laptops and clickers. As I watched the news clip my heart sank. They were fooled by a salesman and had just wasted $2400 per class. They could have done exactly what they were doing with the clickers with the laptops every student had, or if the school didn’t ban cell phones, they could have used those.

What would I have recommended a school with extra cash to spend on tech do? Well, it’s what I’ve done with the educators and students with whom I work. Have a tech day and bring in a multitude of vendors from smart pens to iTouches, to flip video cameras etc. Have the teachers and students together explore this equipment and discuss ways these items can innovate instruction. Have teachers and students write proposals for the technology that can help them meet their learning goals. Provide the equipment for teachers with the agreement that they will publish what they are doing so others can learn. See http://innovatemyclass.org for an example of what this might look like.

But, how’s one to know?
Administrators need not turn to vendors for purchasing decisions. Instead turn to your staff and students and invite them to think, “What are my learning goals and what are the tools necessary to achieve them?” Do not turn to vendors for the answer. There are many innovative educators that can help guide purchasing decisions virtually or face-to-face. You can find them by reading blogs and developing a personal network for learning available in places like Facebook, Twitter, and Classroom 2.0. And, if you don’t have that yet, you can always start here, with me, The Innovative Educator.

The Ten No Nos of Teaching with a Projector or Interactive Whiteboard

I spend a lot of time visiting innovative classrooms in New York City. As I do, there is something that I've noticed in many classes I've visited - there are still some educators that don't seem to know the no nos for teaching with a projector or interactive whiteboard (IWB). Perhaps it's easier to notice when you're sitting as an audience member or an observer which is not often the case for teachers. If you're an innovative educator teaching with a projector or IWB, you too might be engaging in a no no or two. Here are ten no nos to avoid as you teach with technology.

1. No no: Don't have your back to your participants Description: This is one of my biggest pet peeves and something I see all the time. The teacher sets her laptop up so that to use it she is facing the screen or whiteboard. The teacher then instructs the class with her back to them. Awkward! Educators should not be talking to a board. They should speak to a class. Solution: By simply flipping the direction of the laptop the teacher can see the entire class. Additionally, the laptop becomes her teleprompter as she addresses her students. Advantage: The teacher can maintain eye contact with her participants providing for a more authentic discussion. She can also see their reactions and level of interest.
2. No no: Do not make a shadow on the whiteboard or screen with your hand or body. Description: In many classrooms the teacher is standing in front of the board pointing to things or speaking about things that are being projected. The problem is he's in the path of the objects projected and students can't see what it is he's speaking about. Solution: Be aware of the projection light. If you feel you must be at the board, perhaps you can use a pointing stick. You can also verbally tell students what part of the board you are discussing i.e. if you look in the top left quadrant. Finally, you don't need to go up to the board. You can engage the class directly from your laptop. Advantage: The students can see what it is you are sharing.
3. No no: Don't project a small and/or crooked image Description: I often go to classrooms and am perplexed as I see a tiny and/or crooked image displayed on the screen. It's as though the instructor has turned on the projector and doesn't realize it may need adjustment. Solution: Make sure the image fills the entire space onto which you are projecting and adjust your projector manually or using the keystone feature to make sure it is not crooked. You can make the image larger by placing the projector the proper distance from the screen and/or using the adjustments on the projector. You can make the image straight by manually moving the projector left or right or by using the keystone feature on the projector. Advantage: A small or distorted image is a distraction that most teachers want to avoid. By ensuring your image fills the screen and is straight you're participants will more easily be able to see and focus on your presentation.
4. No no: Don't leave your audience in the dark. Description: Teaching and learning should not occur in the dark. Don't turn off the lights during instruction. This does not encourage interactivity and engagement, but instead it makes some people rather sleepy. Additionally, it's difficult to have eye contact and see student reactions in the dark. Solution: Leave the lights on. In most rooms you can still generally see projected items with the light on. If your room has multiple light switches, just shut off the front lights. If you have windows, close the blinds in the part of the room where you are projecting. If it's really difficult to see with the lights on, get a few lamps for your classroom. Not only will this accomplish the goal, it will add a nice atmosphere to the room. Advantage: Your students will be more alert, engaged, and likely to participate in the lesson. Teachers can see their students and their students can see one another.
5. No no: Don't point with your finger. Description: This is a big mistake I see all the time. Teachers think they need to point directly on the screen so they end up doing a dance between their laptop and the screen. Solution: Every computer comes equipped with a free electronic pointer. It's called your cursor. You don't need to run to the board to point at the screen. Students know what a cursor is and can follow it if you instruct them to do so. Advantage: If you point with your cursor rather than your finger you can maintain eye contact with your audience allowing you to better gage their interest and understanding of the lesson. You can also avoid doing the unnecessary dance between your laptop and the screen or board onto which you are projecting.
6. No no: Don't waste instructional time fumbling with projector set up Description: Classroom time should not be wasted with equipment set up. Instructional time is valuable and it's important that technology using teachers are not robbing students of instruction with equipment set up. We never want students ready to learn with a teacher who isn't ready to teach them. Solution: It's important to become very familiar with equipment set up. Teachers often use tape on the floor so they know exactly where the projector, computer desk, and or screen should go. Many savvy teachers have a student responsible for setting up the projector at the start of the lesson while the teacher is beginning instruction. This is an elegant solution that involves your tech-savvy students. Advantage: Student learning is increased. Students with an interest in technology become more confident in their abilities and recognized for their talent.
7. No no: Don't assume your audience can see what you can see Description: The person presenting is usually close to the laptop or interactive whiteboard and can see everything clearly, but those in the back of the room may not be able to see things as well. It's important that you remember to zoom in and out so that your audience can best view what you are projecting. Solution: While specifics may vary from computer to computer, they all have zooming features. On some computers you can use "ctrl" or "command" and "+" or "-" on other computers you can use the scroll wheel on your mouse. If these options don't work visit the help menu. Advantage: Participants will be able to see and hear what you are sharing. You may want to assign a student responsible for reminding you if you need to zoom.
8. No no: Don't be a sage on the stage Description: While I often hear educators proudly discussing how engaged students are with interactive whiteboards, and I often hear sales folks boasting of the interactivity of whiteboards, I almost never see them used interactively with students. The same is true for a teacher with a projector. It's time for teachers to get off the pulpit and let their students shine. Solution: There are many ways to encourage interactivity of students with an IWB or projector. This should be worked into the teaching and sharing. Recently I saw a teacher projecting and presenting to students video clips of various classmates sharing. It was time for the teacher to step down and let the students share their own videos. They could have played their video and discussed it rather than the teacher doing that. Another class I visited had students working in groups. After wards they shared their learning from their desks while some irrelevant information was projected on the screen. This teacher also had access to five laptops that were in the corner of the room. The teacher could have given each group of students a laptop and let them put something together to project in a fun an interesting format rather than have each student go around and share in a bored tone what they had worked on. They could have placed their work on a shared space, a thumbdrive, or brought their laptop up to project. When students know their work will be shared and displayed, they are more excited and accountable. In another class a teacher was showing students how music and sound could affect the mood of a dialogue. He played the audio of various student's pre-recorded dialogue and then put different sounds and music as a background and discussed how it affected the mood of the piece. Again. Teacher, get off the stage. Let each student group present their work and select the sound they want to use. They love using these tools. Not watching you use them. Advantage: Students find an interactive classroom more engaging. When students know that their work is going to be shared and displayed, they are excited and more invested in the work. Share the limelight and let your students shine. Your students will love it.
9. No no: Don't use your projector as a blackboard or replacement Description: If a blackboard/whiteboard would do, don't waste your bulb. They are costly. I've often gone into rooms where there's just an aim projected on the screen. Not necessary. Teachers need to know the tool for the cause. If you just have a sentence to project, turn off the projector and put it on the whiteboard. I've also seen a projector left on with assignment directions that were also handed out to the class or, each student has a laptop where the assignment is displayed. Again, turn off the projector and save the bulb. Solution: When developing lessons determine if you really need to leave the projector on the whole time. If you are just projecting a sentence, use the blackboard. If your students already have the work in hand on their laptop or paper, you don't need the projector. Advantage: You'll save hundreds of dollars on projector bulbs.
10. No no: Don't waste money on an interactive whiteboard without some smart reasons Description: More often than not I go into a classroom and see a teacher not using their interactive whiteboard or I see them struggling to use it, but not quite knowing how and relying on another adult or student to assist. Many educators believe that you need a costly interactive whiteboard to teach engaging lessons with a projector, but you don't. None is required. Solution: Before wasting thousands upon thousands of dollars on costly interactive whiteboards take a moment and think. Will my teachers really utilize these boards to enrich instruction in a way that justifies the cost or might my students be better served by having access to technology in their own hands. A school can start with just a projector and save thousands of dollars. You can always purchase IWBs at a later time. In fact while IWB companies fund research that shows they are effective, more and more people are finding that student achievement is no higher in classrooms with IWBs than those with projectors only. To date in five years of searching and upon visiting many classrooms, I still have not seen instruction enhanced with an IWB. It may be happening somewhere, but I haven't seen it. Smart principals should ask those teachers who want interactive whiteboards to write a proposal to justify the expense and that proposal should clearly explain and state compelling reasons explaining how IWBs will result in more effective instruction than if they used a projector alone. If they can make a case, consider the purchase. If you find, as I have, that they can accomplish most of what they are talking about with a laptop (ideally a tablet) and a projector, you may want to reconsider. Advantage: You'll save thousands of dollars that you can allocate to technology that instead can go directly into your student's hands.

------------------------------------------ Related Posts: Why Smartboards are a Dumb Initiative Erase Unnecessary Costs by Getting Smart about Interactive Whiteboards

Gary Stager Finally Shares Why He Thinks Interactive Whiteboards / Smartboards Suck

Effective use of Smartboard? Image: Courtesy Tom Welsh

I first met Gary Stager at last year’s EduCon 2010 in a session he was doing that was a spoof on places like Google and Apple making you certified teachers.  Participants could become Stager certified, with real live certificates.  Great session, but what stood out was that like me, Stager had a distaste for interactive whiteboards (IWBs).  

Mine started about 6 years ago when we launched a 1:1 laptop program in NYC where every teacher was to receive an IWB. No! No! No! I screamed.  Please don’t waste money on that!!! Everyone looked at me like I was crazy. My colleague working on the project actually left to work for an IWB company (He later left the company confessing he now  gets what I’m talking about). In the meantime, my cries fell on deaf ears and hundreds of IWBs marched off to the schools. Ah! The horror!

At the session I asked Gary if he’d written anything about his dislike of the devices. I was surprised to learn the answer was no.  I told him I hoped he would and in the meantime, I wrote several of my own posts explaining why I hate interactive whiteboards which you can read here.

• Are Interactive Whiteboards a Smart Idea when they Make Even the Most Innovative of Educators Look Dumb? – 10 Reasons to Ditch the Board
• Do The IWBs or Clickers You (want to) Own REALLY Help Meet Learning Goals?
• Got Money for a Really Expensive Set of Training Wheels? I’ve Got An IWB to Sell Ya.
• IWBs are Not the Stars. They’re the Overpaid Extras with A Great Agent
• Getting Smart about the Real No’s No’s of Teaching with IWBs - A Photo Compilation
• Why I Hate Interactive Whiteboards Too
• The Cat's Out of the Bag. More People Are Getting Smart about Interactive Whiteboards
• Erase Unnecessary Costs by Getting Smart about Interactive Whiteboards
• Why Smartboards are a Dumb Initiative
• The Ten No Nos of Teaching with a Projector or Interactive Whiteboard

Last week on Twitter, I was thrilled to see Gary announce that he decided to articulate why he believes IWBs are a terrible investment that breathes new life into medieval educational practices.  He questioned if Tech & Learning would publish his thoughts in their “interactive whiteboard” issue.  Having written a few pieces of my own about why I hate interactive whiteboards, I was pretty sure “fair and balanced” would win out over “bias and sell out.” I was right and readers of Tech & Learning’s March issue will be treated to Gary’s piece.  His main argument is that,

“They reinforce the dominance of the front of the room and teacher supremacy. At a time of enormous educational upheaval, technological change, and an increasing gulf between adults and children, it is a bad idea to purchase technology that facilitates the delivery of information and increases the physical distance between teacher and learner.”

Hear! Hear! I medievally chant from the blogosphere and Twitosphere!

Gary comes out swinging dispelling these myths about the usefulness of interactive whiteboards.  

•    The kids are so engaged.

•    It’s just a tool.

•    It all depends on how teachers use it.

•    You should see it when the kids use the board!

•    We use it to share student work.

•    Our ninth graders went to Israel for a month and didn’t miss a math lesson.

To find out how he shoots holes in those arguments visit Whiteboards—A Modest Proposal by Gary Stager and/or read the March issue of Tech & Learning.