Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
Interactive whiteboard
An interactive whiteboard (IWB), is a large interactive display that connects to a computer and projector. A projector projects the computer's desktop onto the board's surface where users control the computer using a pen, finger, stylus, or other device. The board is typically mounted to a wall or floor stand. They are used in a variety of settings, including classrooms at all levels of education, in corporate board rooms and work groups, in training rooms for professional sports coaching, in broadcasting studios and others. The interactive whiteboard industry was expected to reach sales of US$1 billion worldwide by 2008; one of every seven classrooms in the world will feature an interactive whiteboard by 2011 according to market research by Futuresource Consulting.[1] In 2004, 26% of British primary classrooms had interactive whiteboards.[2] The Becta Harnessing Technology Schools Survey 2007 indicated that 98% of secondary and 100% of primary schools had IWBs.[3] By 2008 the average numbers of interactive whiteboards rose in both primary schools (18 compared with just over six in 2005, and eight in the 2007 survey) and secondary schools (38, compared with 18 in 2005 and 22 in 2007).[4]
A pupil uses the interactive whiteboard
Uses for interactive whiteboards may include: Running software that is loaded onto the connected PC, such as a web browsers or proprietary software used in the classroom. Capturing and saving notes written on a whiteboard to the connected PC Capturing notes written on a graphics tablet connected to the whiteboard Online whiteboard[5] Controlling the PC from the white board using click and drag, markup which annotates a program or presentation Using OCR software to translate cursive writing on a graphics tablet into text Using an Audience Response System so that presenters can poll a classroom audience or conduct quizzes, capturing feedback onto the whiteboard
General operation
An interactive whiteboard (IWB) device is connected to a computer via USB or a serial port cable, or else wirelessly via Bluetooth or a 2.4GHz wireless. In the latter case WEP and WPA/PSK security is available. A device driver is usually installed on the attached computer so that the interactive whiteboard can act as a Human Input Device (HID), like a mouse. The computer's video output is connected to a digital projector so that images may be projected on the interactive whiteboard surface. The user then calibrates the whiteboard image using a pointer as necessary. After this, the pointer or other device may be used to activate programs, buttons and menus from the whiteboard itself, just as one would ordinarily do with a mouse. If text input is required, user can invoke an on-screen keyboard or, if the whiteboard provides for this, utilize handwriting recognition. This makes it unnecessary to go to the computer keyboard to enter text.
Interactive whiteboard Thus, an IWB emulates both mouse and keyboard. The user can conduct a presentation or a class almost exclusively from the whiteboard. In addition,most IWBs are supplied with software that provides tools and features specifically designed to maximize interaction opportunities. These generally include the ability to create virtual versions of paper flipcharts, pen and highlighter options, and possibly even virtual rulers, protractors, and compassesinstruments that would be used in traditional classroom teaching.
Interactive whiteboard
Classroom uses
In some classrooms, interactive whiteboards have replaced traditional whiteboards or flipcharts, or video/media systems such as a DVD player and TV combination. Even where traditional boards are used, the IWB often supplements them by connecting to a school network digital video distribution system. In other cases, IWBs interact with online shared annotation and drawing environments such as interactive vector based graphical websites. The software supplied with the interactive whiteboard will usually allow the teacher to keep notes and annotations as an electronic file for later distribution either on paper or through a number of electronic formats. In addition, some interactive whiteboards allow teachers to record their instruction as digital video files and post the material for review by students at a later time. This can be a very effective instructional strategy for students who benefit from repetition, who need to see the material presented again, for students who are absent from school, for struggling learners, and for review for examinations. Brief instructional blocks can be recorded for review by students they will see the exact presentation that occurred in the classroom with the teacher's audio input. This can help transform learning and instruction. Many companies and projects now focus on creating supplemental instructional materials specifically designed for interactive whiteboards. Electrokite out of Boston, MA, for example, will have the first complete curriculum for
Interactive whiteboard schools and districts. One recent use of the IWB is in shared reading lessons. Mimic books, for instance, allow teachers to project children's books onto the interactive whiteboard with book-like interactivity. Dixons City Academy in the North of England was the first non college or university learning environment to make use of interactive whiteboards after the school's then principal Sir John Lewis showed a keen interest in the developing technology. An interactive whiteboard can now be found in every classroom of the school.
Interactive whiteboard Metropolitan University, led by Professor Bridget Somekh. To date it is the largest and longest study conducted into the impact of interactive whiteboards. Key Findings The principal finding of this large-scale study was that, [w]hen teachers have used an interactive whiteboard for a considerable period of time (by the autumn of 2006 for at least two years) its use becomes embedded in their pedagogy as a mediating artefact for their interactions with their pupils, and pupils interactions with one another." The authors of the study argued that "mediating interactivity" is a sound concept, offering "a ... theoretical explanation for the way in which the multi-level modelling (MLM) analyses link the length of time pupils have been taught with interactive whiteboards to greater progress in national test scores year on year." The research showed that interactive whiteboard technology led to consistent gains across all key stages and subjects with increasingly significant impact on the second cohorts, indicating that embedding of the technology into the classroom and teacher experience with the technology are key factors. Gains were measured in months progress against standard measures of attainment over the two year study period. In infant classes, ages 57: In Key Stage 1 Maths, high attaining girls made gains of 4.75 months over the two years, enabling them to catch up with high attaining boys. In Key Stage 1 Science, there was improved progress for girls of all attainment levels and for average and high attaining boys. In Key Stage 1 English, average and high attending pupils all benefited from increased exposure to interactive whiteboards There was also clear evidence of similar impacts in Key stage two ages 7 11 In Key Stage 2 Maths, average and high attaining boys and girls who had been taught extensively with the Interactive Whiteboard made the equivalent of an extra 2.5 to 5 months progress over the course of the two years. In Key Stage 2 Science, all pupils, except high attaining girls made greater progress with more exposure to the IWB, with low attaining boys making as much as 7.5 months additional progress In Key Stage 2 writing, boys with low attainment made 2.5 months of additional progress. There was no adverse impact observed at any level.
Additional research
Glover & Miller conducted a study on the pedagogic impact of interactive whiteboards in a secondary school. They found that although interactive whiteboards are theoretically more than a computer if it is only being used as an adjunct to teaching its potential remains unrealized. The authors research was primarily to ascertain the extent and type of use in the classroom. In order to determine if any change in pedagogy or teaching strategies was taking place the researchers conducted a detailed questionnaire. The authors found that the teachers used the IWBs in one of three ways; as an aid to efficiency, as an extension device, and as a transformative device. They noted that teachers use of the technology was not primarily affected by training, access, or software availability. When used as a transformative device (approximately 10% of teachers taking part in the study) the impact on pedagogy was transformative.[13] In recent times, manufacturers of IWB technology have been setting up various online support communities for teachers and educational institutions deploying the use of the interactive whiteboards in learning environments. Such websites regularly contribute research findings and administer free whiteboard lessons to promote widespread use of interactive whiteboards in classrooms.
Interactive whiteboard
Criticisms
According to Larry Cuban, education professor emeritus at Stanford University, "There is hardly any research that will show clearly that any interactive whiteboards will improve academic achievement. According to a June 11, 2010 Washington Post article,[14] "Many academics question industry-backed studies linking improved test scores to their products. And some go further. They argue that the most ubiquitous device-of-the-future, the interactive whiteboard -- essentially a giant interactive computer screen that is usurping blackboards in classrooms across America -- locks teachers into a 19th-century lecture style of instruction counter to the more collaborative small-group models that many reformers favor." However, there are now collaborative interactive whiteboards that may address this shortfall. An article [15] posted on the National Association of Secondary School Principals web site details pro's & con's of interactive whiteboards. A report on interactive whiteboards from London's Institute of Education said: Although the newness of the technology was initially welcomed by pupils any boost in motivation seems short-lived. Statistical analysis showed no impact on pupil performance in the first year in which departments were fully equipped.[16] The report highlighted the following issues: Sometimes teachers focused more on the new technology than on what pupils should be learning. The focus on interactivity as a technical process can lead to some relatively mundane activities being over-valued. Such an emphasis on interactivity was particularly prevalent in classes with lower-ability students. In lower-ability groups it could actually slow the pace of whole class learning as individual pupils took turns at the board.
Interactive whiteboard
Interactive whiteboard DST [Dispersive Signal Technology] A touch causes vibrations which create a bending wave through the substrate, which is detected by corner-mounted sensors. Using advanced digital signal processing and proprietary algorithms, an accurate touch location is identified. A touch is activated by a finger or stylus touching the glass substrate and creating a vibration. The vibration radiates a bending wave through the substrate, from the point of contact and spreading out to the edges. Sensors in the corners convert the vibrational energy into electrical signals. Through advanced Digital Signal Processing, we are able to apply dispersion correction algorithms which analyze the signals and report an accurate touch. Ultrasonic: 1. Ultrasonic only These devices have two ultrasonic transmitters in two corners and two receivers in the other two corners. The ultrasonic waves are transmitted by the whiteboard surface. Some little marks in the whiteboard borders create reflecting waves for each ultrasonic transmitter at different and recognizable distances. Touching with a pen or even the finger in the whiteboard causes these point waves to be suppressed, and the receivers communicate the fact to the controller. 2. Hybrid Ultrasound and Infrared When pressed to the whiteboard surface, the marker or stylus sends out both an ultrasonic sound and an infrared light. Two ultrasonic microphones receive the sound and measure the difference in the sound's arrival time, and triangulate the location of the marker or stylus. This technology allows whiteboards to be made of any material, but requires a suitably adapted active dry-erase marker or stylus.
Potential issues
Permanent markers and use of regular dry erase markers can create problems on some interactive whiteboard surfaces, because interactive whiteboard surfaces are most often melamine, which is a porous, painted surface that can absorb marker ink. Punctures, dents and other damage to surfaces are also a risk. Some educators have found that use of interactive whiteboards reinforces an age-old teaching methodteacher speaks, students listen. This teaching model is contrary to many modern instructional models, such as the Madeline Hunter-derived instructional delivery model.
Interactive whiteboard
Calibration
In most cases, the touch surface must be initially calibrated with the display image. This process involves displaying a sequence of dots or crosses on the touch surface and having the user select these dots either with a stylus or their finger. This process is called alignment, calibration, or orientation. Fixed installations with projectors and boards bolted to roof and wall greatly reduce or eliminate the need to calibrate. A few interactive whiteboards can automatically detect projected images during a different type of calibration. The technology was developed by Mitsubishi Electric Research Laboratories Inc and is disclosed in patent 7,001,023.[24] The computer projects a Gray Code sequence of white and black bars on the touch surface and light sensitive sensors behind the touch surface detect the light passing through the touch surface. This sequence allows the computer to align the touch surface with the display; however, it has the disadvantage of having tiny fiber-sized "dead spots" in the resistive touch surface where the light sensors are present. The "dead spots" are so small that touches in that area are still presented to the computer properly. Another system involves having a light sensor built into the projector and facing the screen. As the projector generates its calibration image (a process called "training"), it detects the change in light reflected from the black border and the white surface. In this manner it can uniquely compute all the linear matrix transform coefficients.
Associated equipment
A variety of accessories is available for interactive whiteboards: Mobile stand Allows the interactive whiteboard to be moved between rooms. Many are height adjustable as well. Personal Response System Allows students to answer test questions posted on the whiteboard or take part in polls and surveys. Printer Allows copies of the whiteboard notes to be made. Remote control Allows the presenter to control the board from different parts of the room and eliminates on-screen toolbars. Slate or tablet Allows students control of the whiteboard away from the front of the room. Track Allows the whiteboard to be placed over a traditional whiteboard or tackboard to provide additional wall space at the front of the room. Some tracks provide power and data to the whiteboard as well. Video projector Allows a computer display to be projected onto the whiteboard. 'Short Throw' projectors are available from some manufacturers that mount directly above the board minimizing shadow effects. 'Ultra Short Throw' projectors are even more effective. Wireless unit Allows the interactive whiteboard to operate without wires to the computer, e.g. Bluetooth.
Interactive whiteboard
10
See Also
Mixed reality Smart Board Open-Sankor
References
[1] Education Week's Digital Directions: Whiteboards Inc (http:/ / www. edweek. org/ dd/ articles/ 2007/ 09/ 12/ 02board. h01. html) [2] Primary Teacher's Toolbox Interactive Whiteboard Research (http:/ / www. btinternet. com/ ~tony. poulter/ IWBs/ research. htm) [3] http:/ / collection. europarchive. org/ tna/ 20040722012352/ http:/ / partners. becta. org. uk/ upload-dir/ downloads/ page_documents/ research/ harnessing_technology_schools_survey07. pdf [4] (http:/ / partners. becta. org. uk/ index. php?section=rh& catcode=_re_rp_02& rid=15952) [5] http:/ / dabbleboard. com/ tour Dabbleboard tour [6] YouTube Video: Low-Cost Multi-touch Whiteboard using the Wiimote (http:/ / www. youtube. com/ watch?v=5s5EvhHy7eQ) [7] https:/ / docs. google. com/ Doc?docid=0ARO0cbbLg1aVZGY3ajJwZnhfMTA3aG12azh4Z3M& hl=en [8] http:/ / www. youtube. com/ watch?v=w95hWeWP-60& feature=related [9] U.S PATENT No: US 7,703,926 B2. April 27, 2010,CMOS cameras embedded inside of a projector [10] http:/ / www. edfacilities. org/ rl/ interactive_whiteboards. cfm [11] Moss, G., Armstrong, V., Jewitt, C., Levacic, R., Cardini, A., & Castle, F.. "The Interactive Whiteboards, Pedagogy and Pupil Performance Evaluation: An Evaluation of the Schools Whiteboard Expansion (SWE) Project: London Challenge." Institute of Education (2007). Retrieved on May 20, 2010 from http:/ / www. pgce. soton. ac. uk/ ict/ NewPGCE/ pdfs%20IWBs/ The%20interactive%20whiteboard,%20pedagogy%20and%20pupil%20performance%20evaluation. pdf. [12] Evaluation of the DCSF Primary Schools Whiteboard Expansion Project, DCSF and Becta (2007) [13] Glover, D. & Miller, D. (2001). Running with technology: the pedagogic impact of the large-scale introduction of interactive whiteboards in one secondary school. Journal of Information Technology for Teacher Education, 10(3), 257278. doi:10.1080/14759390100200115 [14] http:/ / www. washingtonpost. com/ wp-dyn/ content/ article/ 2010/ 06/ 10/ AR2010061005522. html Some educators question if whiteboards, other high-tech tools raise achievement [15] http:/ / nasspblogs. org/ principaldifference/ 2010/ 06/ do_whiteboards_engage_students. html [16] Moss G, Jewitt C, Levai R, Armstrong V, Cardini A, Castle F (2007) The Interactive Whiteboards, Pedagogy and Pupil Performance Evaluation: An Evaluation of the Schools Whiteboard Expansion (SWE) Project: London Challenge http:/ / www. dfes. gov. uk/ research/ data/ uploadfiles/ RR816. pdf [17] Beauchamp, G and Parkinson, J. (2005). Beyond the wow factor: developing interactivity with the interactive whiteboard. School Science Review (86) 316: 97103. [18] Glover, D and Miller, D, Averis, D and Door, V. (2005) The interactive whiteboard: a literature survey. Technology, Pedagogy and Education (14) 2: 155170. [19] http:/ / publications. education. gov. uk/ eOrderingDownload/ RR816%20Report. pdf [20] Painter, D Whiting, E and Wolters, B (2005) The Use of an Interactive Whiteboard in promoting interactive teaching and learning [21] Smith, H.J. , Higgins, S., Wall, K., and Miller, J. (2005) Interactive whiteboards: boon or bandwagon? A critical review of the literature, Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 21(2), pp.91101.11 [22] http:/ / jtie. upol. cz/ clanky/ Reflections_on_the_Use_of_Interactive_Whiteboards_in_Instruction_in_International_Context. pdf [23] (http:/ / www. johnnylee. net/ projects/ wii/ ) [24] (http:/ / patft1. uspto. gov/ netacgi/ nph-Parser?patentnumber=7001023)
11
License
Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported //creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/