The Interactive White Board...

The Interactive White Board is getting more and more popular in Brazil. The Culturas Inglesas, for example, have been using them in their ads in huge billboards around the country (except for São Paulo, due to "Cidade Limpa").

I confess that I have never had the opportunity to use it in a real teaching situation, but have used them in two workshops I held in Brasília and Campo Grande. The feeling in both occasions was the same: I was really intimidated by this technology and afraid that pressing the wrong key would ruin my presentations (well, and I must admit that if I hadn't had minders to help me, this would have happened, hehehe...)

I don't have a formed opinion on that, and the debate around it is pretty interesting. So, I've decided to post two texts with different points of view on the use of the IWBs in the ELT classroom.

Below you can see some extracts of a text written by Graham Stanley and posted on http://blog-efl.blogspot.com/


The Interactive Whiteboard - white elephant or teacher's pet?

The Interactive Whiteboard (IWB) is a technology that promises to truly transform the classroom and yet is seen as a threat or a waste of money by many teachers. Their views range from luddite, regarding the introduction of any teaching technology as unnecessarily contaminating the classroom to the (more reasonable) preoccupation that this tool will lead to a overly teacher-focused environment and a group of learners passively sitting dazzled by the bells and whistles used by the sage on the stage.It doesn't have to be that way though. In this post, I will reflect upon the recent discussion on the Dogme (teaching unplugged) list about the pros and cons of IWBs, and put forward the view that the key to a successful IWB implementation is in the training, something which seems to be missing when many organisations unpack and install these shiny new toys.

A good workman never blames his tools

Before I continue, let's stop and take a look at the tool itself. There are many different types of IWBs, but features are similar (consult the Wikipedia entry on Interactive Whiteboards for further details).The market leaders at the moment are Promethean, Smart and Mimio. These manufacturers make IWBs which have similar features (but with some important distinctions) but it is important to note that the software used by each company is not compatible.
(...)

Interactive White Elephant

The discussion on the Dogme (teaching unplugged) list began when Scott Thornbury appealed to its members for "ammunition" after calling the IWB an 'interactive white elephant' during a conference in Brazil.It wasn't the first time that the subject of IWBs had appeared in the Dogme list. Previously, in April 2007, Alan Pulverness had mentioned that there was a tendency for "the technology to produce a more frontal style of teaching, and consequently fewer opportunities for genuine interaction."I think this is true if teachers are let loose without any training on how to use the IWB effectively. One of the ironic things about the IWB is that although it resembles a tool that is familiar to all teachers, it requires a sea change in methodology if it is to be used optimally in the classroom. Of course, you can use it in the same way as any other (black or white) board (i.e. by walking into class and writing on it without any prior preparation), but this is akin to using a truck to drive to the corner shop for groceries and coming back home with a bottle of milk and a tin of baked beans. Strangely enough, writing on an IWB during class time takes longer than on a regular whiteboard, and you'll probably not be able to fit as much on the board. And as for those teachers who are used to sectioning a board with part for class agenda and space for vocabulary? This is a waste of space and time on the IWB, especially as you have unlimited number of pages to flip back and forth through whenever you want. And there's no need to make students wait while you write something from a coursebook on the board - you should have done that before the students even entered the room. Breaking old teacher habits that have no place and make no sense when using this tool is as important as experimenting with new ways of using it.It should come as no surprise that training and practice are the keys to using the IWB effectively. The interactive whiteboard is not cheap technology, but this is one of the hidden costs. Another is a need for increased technical support in situ, but as far as learner impact is concerned, the sure way to drive a stake through the heart of an IWB project is to try to cut costs in training. But, because it looks like a reglular board, there is a temptation for organisations to hand teachers a pen and let them get on with it. This results in the learners losing out. Back to the Dogme discussion . Browsing the other posts written by members of the Dogme list about IWBs, it becomes clear that some of these teachers have had as much experience of and interest in using an interactive whiteboard as Paolo Freire had of playing with a Nintendo Gameboy. Then there are others that have formed opinions based on observing sales reps. giving ten minute demonstrations of the technology at conferences.
(...)

Conclusions

So, what was the result of all this debate? I'm pleased to say that some of the Dogme die-hards have been prompted to take another look at the technology. And if we can persuade organisations to invest more in training teachers how to use the interactive whiteboard well, then this will do a great favour to teachers and learners who find themselves having to use it. Will all teachers have to use one in the future? Who knows? I have started to see "experience in using an IWB" appearing in some of the job advertisements for teachers, and I think we will see more of this in the future. So long as the potential of this fabulous tool is not wasted by misuse and methodological abuse.