Taking objective approach to on-to-one computing

 

 

One-to-one computing means putting a computer- a PC, laptop, handheld, or tablet PC - into the hands of every student.

Many benefits have been put forward for one-to-one computing such as enhancing academic achievement, utility in project-based learning, Increase student engagement, it leads to greater student collaboration, Broadens learning beyond the classroom, Prepares for tomorrow’s workplace, and it provides More opportunities for self-directed learning. These potential benefits along with the fact that students are excited about computers, that it enriches our store of learning resources, and adds variety to teaching/learning  should demand teachers’ keen consideration.

 I specify consideration, and not yet use, since there are a number of disadvantages/challenges that the teachers need to consider such as too many schools emphasize technology over learning, that laptops and handhelds distract from learning rather than enhance it, the need for professional development of the teachers, the program is costly, the need for repair and support in the upkeep of these computers, and a lack of clear goals.

Awareness of the pros and the cons should prevent teachers from just getting on the bandwagon in the use of technology, but to be objective and use it in a manner to enhance students’ learning. Teachers need to consider ways of achieving educational goals with fewer risks and at lower costs.

Why over-kill the IWB?

Lecture is one of many strategies used in teaching. The IWB can be used to optimize the use of the lecture. It is good practice to vary and to use the most appropriate strategies. Should the teacher feel pressured to use the IWB frequently and thus compromise variety because it is present in the classroom?.  

 

Do we need to redefine the term interactive?

Thornbury(2009) indicated that for the transmission of information the IWB is unrivalled except by the data projector  hooked up to a networked computer.  He indicated that though the IWB delivery capability is impressive ,because learning is socially situated and mediated, the way it is used does not lend for much social interaction and thus its overall impact on students learning is only marginal I agree with this view. Considering this and the statement ‘Before you can take advantage of the technology you have to change the pedagogy’, the question is, which interaction do teachers see as more significant?– the social interaction or that with the IWB? If we see the social interaction as being important should not the interactive white board be used in such a way as to incorporate more social interaction?

 

Why not use IWB for testing?

Scott Thornbury (2009) points to studies in which the students benefited from use of  IWB in classroom instruction  and where the teachers involved expected the use of the IWB to improve students test scores but where there were no significant differences in the students’ test scores. The students were instructed with the aid of the IWB but tested in the traditional way. I wonder if there would have been a difference if they were tested using the IWB. With so much interest and expectation generated from IWB instruction why not use it to administer the test and see if there is any impact?

My initial contact with IWB

My first exposure to the use of the IWB was in England more than four years ago. As graduate students we went to observe a classroom in a school where PDAs were being piloted and the teacher was using an IWB. The use of the PDI as well as the interactive whiteboard was new and fascinating to me. I was however concern about the teachers’ ability to effectively monitor all the students individually while at the same time coordinating the whiteboard, This corresponds well with one of the disadvantages that was pointed out in the readings; that the teacher’s  freedom to move about the classroom is somewhat restricted. The use devices such as wireless slates  can now help to address that problem.