I recently read a blog posting about how bad an idea SMARTBoards were for school investments and couldn't help but respond. I hope you don't get too bored reading both, but here goes:
I can’t argue cost effectiveness in
the context of technology because no technology is cost effective until it’s
too old to be effective at all (in the classroom, that is)… What I can and do
disagree with is the limitations of a SMARTBoard in any setting (though
specifically classrooms here), especially with what the author describes. I cannot,
therefore, “acknowledge” that SMARTBoards only “amuse… students” and “save
content.”
SMARTBoards are a giant interface, to
this I will agree; but let me give you a brief soap-box-sermon on how/why I
think they should be used:
1.
Your computer monitor is too small
for everyone to see and your mouse and track pad are too small to share. (Not
to mention limited to one user at a time)
a.
The current incarnation of the
SMARTBoard is multi-touch (currently 2 points) and DViT camera based. Other
models include these features and do not require a projector as they are built
into an LED display.
i. As a side note, think of the possibilities for special needs
students and small group instruction if teachers had a TV stand allowing for
swiveling to the horizontal plane! Basically, you would have an interactive
monitor as a table/desk/learning center…
2.
SMARTBoards do enable more dynamic
presentation of content. What is wrong with that? Student showcasing and
modeling of lessons by the teacher are vital to instruction. This is most
effectively done on a SMARTBoard.
a.
With Applications like Reflection, you can
use your computer like an Apple TV. Meaning you can share from iPad to the
computer driving the SMARTBoard in it’s own window. Any student could share to
the teacher through airplay. With other apps for iPad like SplashTop, you can
control a computer from iPad! i.e. Teachers can allow students to interact with
SMARTBoard, computer, or iPad to communicate with the computer running the
Board.
i. Be mindful of display limitations on your hardware… I recommend
a Mac Mini for the scenario above.
3.
Saving content on a computer is easy
and the methods are numerous. Saving a worksheet a student wrote on last year
for a student this year would be silly. So would saving inked materials in a
Notebook file. What would be powerful is creating an electronic worksheet for
students to click through on their computers or mobile devices. Creating this
on a SMARTBoard, using Notebook software’s page recording, is so much more
interactive and responsive than a screen capture. Saving ink on a page is like
saying a Cadillac has cup holders…
4.
Using a tool in the classroom to do
something you used to do with a different tool is not ideal, but it’s also not
wrong. If you can be more effective and efficient at a beneficial activity,
then the benefits must simply balance out with the cost. To truly do something
new (like having two student solving a problem on a large interactive display
in front of the class or in a small group setting) is my hope. This is directly
dependant on the ease of use of the tool (hardware or software), the skill
level of the learner, and the professional development of the
instructor/facilitator.
5.
The model is certainly “broken” in
this I agree wholeheartedly with the author. Implementing rolling cushy chairs
in every classroom in hopes that comfortable seats would improve engagement
would be an expensive misguided venture to continue the broken system. But
SMARTBoards, just like laptops or iPads, are tools, not furniture. It is all
about the use of these tools. We don’t stop buying textbooks when instructors
teach from the textbook and students vandalize or hit each other with them; so
why stop buying technology when teachers and students don’t know how to use the
tool properly?
a.
The answer is professional development.
Short of a complete cessation of the compulsory educational process in the US,
the best we can do is improve what we have. What we have is an army of talented
educators and millions of learners disengaged due to a disconnect between the
words ‘school,’ ‘education,’ and ‘relevant.’
6.
The following points were made
quickly and I will try to respond accordingly:
a.
Not adaptive – the SMARTBoard allows
for on-the-fly adaptation from the teacher live during direct instruction.
Combined with any common formative assessment tool, whether Neo2’s, SMART
Response, or cell phones, this is the very definition of an adaptive classroom.
b.
Not differentiation – perhaps I am
off the mark here, but differentiation includes the use of multiple senses,
various means of interaction, and references the multiple intelligences. The
SMARTBoard is big, bright, physically interactive, easy to integrate with
multimedia, and collaborative.
c.
No social feedback – being a giant
image of a collaborative interface, it seems fairly social… though in essence I
think the author makes a good point.
d.
Teacher workload – if the SMARTBoard
does anything, I think it decreases teacher workload. Projecting worksheets and
writing on them digitally is a lot easier than the old printing on transparency
method. Clicking through Google Earth in front of the class is much easier than
hiding at the desk with a mouse. Saving student work and delivering it electronically
is infinitely easier than creating catch up packets for missing students… I
could go on, but I thought this one was an easy one to disagree with.
e.
Lesson planning – the SMARTBoard is
obviously not a lesson planning tool, but I would argue it should be a part
time teacher presentation tool, part time small group learning center, part
time student presentation tool. Meaning teachers would only plan activities for
it 33% of the time... If they have never used a SMARTBoard before there will be
a learning curve, but suddenly this fictional class is student driven (i.e.
less planning).
7.
“SMARTBoards are an administrative
cop out” - I think this comment
was both thought provoking and comical. First, if you assume a principal had
the money to spend in the first place (comical), what else might they spend
money on? The fact is one-one computing is difficult to manage, nearly
impossible to convince newcomers to technology to implement (especially at the
classroom level), and a complete paradigm shift for traditional education.
All said and done, I think the author did an great job
summarizing where we should be heading in the future, but was unaware of some
pedagogical possibilities of using the device. I hope if they read this they
know I respect them very much and our minor disagreements are simply a
conversation and never to be misconstrued as antagonistic. Please comment below
on what you think of the concepts shared in either blog.
