Transcript The impact of IWBs on standards and pedagogy in primary

Maureen Haldane
Senior Learning + Teaching Fellow
Manchester Metropolitan University
Part 1:
The impact of IWBs on standards
and pedagogy in primary schools:
an evaluation of the PSWE initiative commissioned by the DfES
--------------------------
Part 2:
My own research findings
Dublin
3.12.2007
With thanks to the SWEEP Team led by Professor Bridget Somekh:
Maureen Haldane, Cathy Lewin, Peter Scrimshaw, Stephen Steadman, Kelvyn Jones (University of Bristol),
John Cummings and colleagues at MMU
Objectives of SWEEP





Assess the extent of the impact on literacy and
mathematics
Identify the effects on a range of other outcomes
Investigate the contribution to development of
pedagogies and cross-curricular embedding of ICT
Evaluate the impact on teacher professional
development
Evaluate the effectiveness of the implementation and
operation of the PSWE initiative (2004-06) (see the
full report)
an evaluation commissioned by
the DfES
General points




The IWB has been welcomed enthusiastically by primary
teachers; its take-up in primary schools has been rapid; it is
seen as immediately useful for whole class teaching
Additionally, particularly at KS1, it is used for small-group
work and occasionally for individual work in the middle part
of the lesson
Typically it is linked to the internet and the school server
and on all day – making the internet easily available at any
time
Primary pupils are universally enthusiastic about IWBs:
visibility (“We can see!”), access/touch, variety in lessons –
and always an element of surprise (hence the ‘wow’ effect
does not go away completely)
an evaluation commissioned by
the DfES
Quantitative Data





(see report)
Survey of Heads/ICT Co-ordinators and two
teachers in each school (Nov 2004, repeated
June 2005)
Tracking pupils who took national tests in
both 2005 and 2006
Schools provided UPNs and these were
matched with NPD data to track individual
pupils.
MLM data analysis
Analysis based on the length of exposure to
IWBs (in months) experienced by classes of
pupils.
an evaluation commissioned by
the DfES
Impact on Attainment in Maths,
Science and English
The length of time pupils have been taught with an IWB is the major
factor that leads to attainment gains.
This appears to be an effect of embedding IWB use in teachers’ pedagogy –
the qualitative data strongly supports this interpretation.
KS2 Maths:
 Average and high attaining pupils made greater progress
 Little effect on progress of low attaining pupils – but gains once
IWB embedded
KS2 Science:
 Cohort 2, once IWBs were embedded, showed clear benefits for all
except high attaining girls (ceiling effect)
KS2 English:


Indications of positive gains
Cohort 2, once IWBs were embedded, showed a positive trend in low
attaining boys’ writing (p<0.094) of 2.5 months additional progress
an evaluation commissioned by
the DfES
Impact on Attainment (contd)
KS1 findings are less robust because Foundation Stage Profiles for
these children were in the trial stage

KS1 Maths


KS1 Science


IWBs appear to have a positive impact on attainment once
teachers have experienced sustained use
IWBs used much less for Science in Cohort 1. However, girls of
all attainment levels appear to make greater gains with an IWB,
and there were indications of positive impact on average and
above average boys.
KS1 English


Once IWBs become embedded average and high attaining pupils
appear to benefit from exposure to IWBs.
No effect on low attaining pupils, which may lead to widening the
gaps in progress between them and their peers.
an evaluation commissioned by
the DfES
Data from Visits to Schools

Cohort 1: 10 representative schools selected from Quest’rs







Two day visits
Classroom observation and digital video in 4 classrooms (analysed
using a grounded theory approach)
Interviews with teachers and selected pupils following observation
Interviews with Heads and ICT / literacy / numeracy coordinators
Observed teachers’ logs of use of IWBs over two weeks prior
Questionnaire data also scrutinised
Cohort 2: 9 teachers selected whose pupils in 2005 showed
progress in national tests different from the main trend


Classroom observation and digital video (qualitative analysis to test
hypotheses from prelim MLM analysis, and focused on the role of
the IWB in mediating the interactivity between teacher and
pupils).
Interviews with observed teachers and pupils, Heads and ICT
coordinators
an evaluation commissioned by
the DfES
Impact of the IWB on Pedagogy and
Embedding ICT across the curriculum



The IWB is embedded in teaching and learning across the whole
curriculum in these primary schools.
When connected to the internet and the school’s network, the IWB
acts as a multi-modal portal to the full range of ICT resources and
teachers model use of the internet.
The IWB is an ideal resource to support whole class teaching (WCT):
it focuses pupils’ attention and increases engagement. NB: if children
have cognitive difficulties in learning to read which WCT does not
address, the addition of an IWB may make lessons more enjoyable, but
no more effective.

When teachers have used an IWB for a considerable period of time
(at least two years in our observations) the IWB becomes embedded in
their pedagogy as a mediating artefact to increase their interactivity
with pupils. New patterns of teaching practice (or new developments
of established patterns) are observable and some teachers can
articulate the advantages clearly (for others the knowledge is “tacit”).
an evaluation commissioned by
the DfES
Impact of the IWB on pedagogy




Teachers say that the IWB is particularly useful when teaching
difficult concepts or demonstrating skills (it supports visualisation)
Young children who have not yet acquired writing skills, and older
pupils with special educational needs, are highly motivated by being
able to demonstrate their skills and knowledge with the tapping and
dragging facilities of the IWB. Teachers say this provides an
excellent resource to assess children’s learning.
Children with SEN (including those who are not achieving ‘the
expected level’) do not benefit in terms of attainment from the
IWB’s impact in improving the pace, variety and interest of WCT.
However, in some high achieving classrooms, pupils whose baseline
scores were low had been taught regularly in pairs or threes by a
teacher or trained TA using the IWB. This appeared to be an
important factor in their success.
Where children are partially sighted or completely blind the use of
the IWB creates the need for new kinds of support from TAs.
an evaluation commissioned by
the DfES
Impact of IWBs/ PSWE on CPD






Learning together with a pressing ‘need to know’ is a powerful
strategy for CPD.
LA training (cascaded from the NWN team) was increasingly
effective over time. But in-school support from the ICT coordinator
was also crucially important
Teachers with continuous use of an IWB rapidly become confident,
skilled users of ICT with a level of competence in IWB use.
Advanced use of IWBs requires sustained training over time.
By autumn 2006 the base of expertise in IWB use had moved out of
the LAs into the schools.
The IWB has had a transformative impact on lesson planning and
the storing and availability of teaching resources: plans and
resources have become integrated. They are kept in folders on the
school’s server giving easy access to the Head and other teachers.
Competence in using the IWB is essential, but advanced skills in its
use appear to be less important than the way that good teachers
have embedded their use in their pedagogy as ‘extensions of
themselves’ (McLuhan).
an evaluation commissioned by
the DfES
Recommendations





Consideration should be given to installing IWBs in all
classrooms in primary schools (the job seems to be half done)
Serious consideration should be given to developing strategies
other than whole class teaching (WCT) for using IWBs to
support pupils of lower ability: the IWB gives the potential for
real gains in conjunction with new strategies for teaching in
pairs and threes.
Small group teaching with the IWB for children who are in
danger of failing to reach the ‘expected levels’ in English and
Maths needs to be provided by teachers or TAs trained in
teaching literacy and numeracy (most TAs quickly acquire basic
competence in using the IWB).
IWB manufacturers need to develop interoperability of
software between boards.
Technical support is essential. Some schools have sent TAs on
specialist courses (this has proved very successful for dealing
with day to day problems).
an evaluation commissioned by
the DfES
Part Two
. . . and some of my own
research findings . . .
Maureen Haldane
Senior Learning and Teaching Fellow
MMU
Findings from research carried out
by M J Haldane
Control and Power
Use of peripherals: Where teachers appropriately
integrate peripherals (eg: ACTIVslates, Digiblues,
microscopes, laptops etc) into their IWB lessons, an
interesting shift in power can occur:



where the teacher orchestrates the lesson from the back of the
room and manipulates the board with an ACTIVslate
(shift from T/P  IWB)
where pupils are allowed to use Digiblues and microscopes and
subsequently take some control over what’s displayed on the IWB
(shift from T  Ps/IWB)
Where pupils work in pairs/groups with laptops linked to the IWB
(shared control Ps/T/IWB)
Findings from research carried out
by M J Haldane
IWB Skills, IWB Pedagogy and CPD
IWB Skills and IWB pedagogy “Flow”
High
Irritation/
Negativity
IWB
s
k
i
l
l
s
a
c
q
u
i
s
i
t
i
o
n
“Flow”
Apathy
Anxiety/
Stasis
Low
Low
IWB pedagogic challenge
Findings from research carried out
by M J Haldane
High
Adapted from Csikszentmihalyi (1996)
Some food for thought . . .
From a teacher . . .
From some children . . .
Findings from research carried out
by M J Haldane
Some useful reading . . .
1.
Learning, Media and Technology, Volume 32
Issue 3 2007
http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/title~db=all~content=g781206338
2.
The SWEEP Report and Executive Summary
http://partners.becta.org.uk/index.php?catcode=_re_rp_02&rid=14422&section=r