how are primary teachers’ pedagogy and practice affected by using an iwb?
DESCRIPTION
How are primary teachers’ pedagogy and practice affected by using an IWB?TRANSCRIPT
How are primary teachers’ pedagogy and practice affected by using an IWB?
RITWIT ConferenceUniversity of Cambridge June 2009
Julie [email protected]
Outline of the presentation
• Background to research • Pedagogical models and the IWB• Change in pedagogy and practice, post
IWB use• Interactivity and the IWB• Implications for teaching and further
research
Research Questions
1. Do teachers change the way they teach during one year of IWB use?
2. What are the factors that may influence IWB pedagogy?
Methodology
• All teachers new to IWB use at the start of the research
• 11 teachers in 2 UK primary schools, all experienced and confident. (Primary: children age 4-11, teachers teach all subjects)
• Interviews each term across one year with all teachers and heads of both school at the start and end of the year
• Observations of all teachers each term
• In total 37 interviews and 33 observations across 1 year
What affects teachers’ pedagogy?
• Pedagogical knowledge (PK)• Content Knowledge (CK), • Pedagogical Content Knowledge (PCK) • Teachers’ beliefs in how children learn and
teachers’ previous experience • The context in which they are teaching • A teacher’s learning disposition
(Refs: Schulman, Banks et al, Alexander …)
Model for pedagogical change basedon previous models and frameworks (Cogill, see fig 2 )
Base of model for pedagogical change (Cogill, see fig 1)
Pedagogical knowledge
Content KnowledgeCurriculum Knowledge
Knowledge of observable practice
Intersection of teachers’ beliefs and educational
context
PCK
TEACHERS’
BELIEFS
&
EXPS
EDUCATIONAL
CONTEXT
PedagogicalContent Knowledge
Content KnowledgeCurriculum Knowledge
Area of intersection of teachers’ beliefs, experiences and educational context
Knowledge of learning
processes in the curriculum
Content knowledge
for the curriculum
Teachers’ pedagogical change
Struts representing the flow of learning between elements on base of
pyramid and change in whiteboard pedagogy
Fusedknowledge
contributing to observable
practice
Pedagogical Knowledge
Influences of the IWB on teachers’knowledge subsequent to analysis
PK: Planning preparation and classroom management
CK: Selection of resources for whiteboard use and the way teachers’ reflect on the use of theseresources
PCK: Change in delivery of content, effects on motivation and interactive teaching
NOTE: PK, CK and PCK were used as a framework for analysing teachers’ knowledge as there is considerable overlap and differentiating between knowledge features is not straightforward
Pedagogical Knowledge and the IWB Positives
• Better lesson planning• Sharing plans and
pedagogy• Recap on understanding• More time to teach • Children reflecting and
thinking about own work• Whole class collaboration • Frees teacher time for
class discussion• Behaviour management
easier
Negatives• Lack of flexibility• Sharing lesson plans may
only be a time saver• Loss of practical work• Whole class teaching
may result in passive learners
• Children spending a third of their time listening
• Loss of group work
Content and Curriculum Knowledge (CCK)(In UK primary schools all subjects taught)
Positives• Facility to access huge
range of new resources• Teachers learning
themselves through range of software
• Visual and dynamic resources may provide greater understanding
• Internet provides opportunity to respond spontaneously to questions
Negatives• The IWB cannot replace
books• Funding for ICT
resources may replace other materials
• The IWB is not the only learning tool what matters is relevance to children’s learning
Pedagogical Content Knowledge (PCK)
Positive• Adapting own resources• Innovative use of IWB
tools• More ways of teaching
the same thing• Creating discussion• Engaging visual learners• Capturing attention with
motivating resources • Involving children: sense
of theatre• Interactive teaching
Negative• Teacher exposition too
long• Neglect differentiation• Presentation may be dull• Class may be inactive
while others are at the board
• Children only motivated by ‘whizz’ factor
• Board resources used for the teacher, not children’s learning
Base of revised model of pedagogical change as a consequence of IWB use (Cogill, see fig 3)
Pedagogical knowledge:Planning, preparation, management
Content and Curriculum Knowledge: Use of and reflection on
resources
Pedagogical content Knowledge:
Teaching and interactivity
Fused knowledgecontributing to IWB practice
Intersection of teachers’ beliefs and educational
context
TEACHERS’
BELIEFS
&
EXPS
EDUCATIONAL
CONTEXT
Knowledge ofeffective ICT
resources
Content and Curriculum
Knowledge: Influences on use of resources
Pedagogical content knowledge: Influences
on teaching and interactivity
Area of intersection of teachers’ beliefs, experience and educational context
Knowledge of interactive
teaching and learning
processes
Knowledge of resources for interactive teaching
Change in pedagogical practice as a consequence of whiteboard use
Struts representing the flow of learning (teachers’learning disposition) between elements on base of pyramid and change in whiteboard pedagogy
Fusedknowledge
contributing to whiteboard
practice
Pedagogical Knowledge: planning, preparation and classroom management
Links with Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPCK) http://tpack.org/ (Mishra & Koehler )
Change in pedagogy and practice post IWB
Integrating ICT: Hokanson and Hooper (2000)• Re-presentation: reproduction of information• Generative: foster creative thinking
ICT changing pedagogical practice: McCormick and Scrimshaw (2001)
• Practice becomes more efficient or effective• Practice is extended in some way• Practice is transforming (whole teacher)
Using these ideas teachers’ practice was categorised into:efficient, extending or transforming
PK: Planning, preparation, classroom management
Efficient Extending Transforming
Sharing lesson plans
Adapting others’resources
Sharing pedagogy with teachers
Preparing lessons in advance
Spontaneously answering children’s questions
Sharing teaching and learning with children
Saving writing time in lessons
Using saved time for effective discussion
Encouraging child-child discussion
Accessing previous teaching
Accessing children’s learning
Integrating board effectively with own teaching
CCK: Use of and reflection on resources
Efficient Extending Transforming
Using images and video
Searching for appropriate resources
Demonstrating more ways of teaching the same thing
Using shapes and models from IWB’s software
Using IWB tools effectively
Using IWB tools to improve learning
Use of some software resources
Using software resources for a specific purpose
Teachers learning themselves through new resources
Collaborative problem solving with software
PCK: Children’s learning and interactivity
Efficient Extending Transforming
Children use IWB to answer questions
Children illustrating their learning
Extending from one to whole class
Use of facility to recap on work
Children learning from their work
Facilitating relevant discussion
Problem solving with whole classCollaborative work to produce an end resultChildren: thinking and reflecting; presenting own research; being ‘a bit of a teacher’
Interactivity and the IWB: technological facilities
It’s about a teacher and their set of students• Facilitates whole class collaboration by creating eg a
poem or diagram• Show and amend children’s own work• Brainstorm a topic, categorise ideas and to show
thinking processes• Predicting outcomes and testing these predictions• Collaborative problem solving• Group preparation of resources to show the whole class• Access to images to create a story or investigate the
image• Use of diagrams that can be manipulated in response to
ideas
Implications for teaching with an IWB and further research
• Transparency of practice is essential• ICT skills: basic skills are required and teachers may
need specific training• ICT skills: need to differentiate between good and
mediocre software• Pedagogical skills are of greater importance than
technological skills
• Need for a pedagogical framework on which to base future IWB research
• Provide greater clarity for teachers on what is meant by interactive teaching and learning
• Snapshot research not enough
Conclusions If positive influences prevail the IWB changes teachers’• PK through facilities for lesson planning, preparation and
classroom management• CCK though use of and learning from software resources• PCK through the facility to teach for interactive learning
In an age where teachers are increasingly competent in their use of ICT, professional development in IWB use should focus on pedagogy rather than technology if the IWB is to create dynamic classrooms through interactive teaching and learning.