Learning, Media and Technology

ISSN: 1743-9884 (Print) 1743-9892 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/cjem20

The evolution of an effective pedagogy for

teachers using the interactive whiteboard in
mathematics and modern languages: an empirical
analysis from the secondary sector

Derek Glover , David Miller , Douglas Averis & Victoria Door

To cite this article: Derek Glover , David Miller , Douglas Averis & Victoria Door (2007)
The evolution of an effective pedagogy for teachers using the interactive whiteboard in
mathematics and modern languages: an empirical analysis from the secondary sector,
Learning, Media and Technology, 32:1, 5-20, DOI: 10.1080/17439880601141146

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17439880601141146

Published online: 15 Feb 2007.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 1624

View related articles

Citing articles: 24 View citing articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=cjem20

Download by: [Derek Glover] Date: 22 April 2016, At: 07:34

 Learning, Media and Technology,
Vol. 32, No. 1, March 2007, pp. 520

The evolution of an effective pedagogy

for teachers using the interactive
whiteboard in mathematics and modern
languages: an empirical analysis from
the secondary sector
Downloaded by [Derek Glover] at 07:34 22 April 2016

Derek Glover, David Miller*, Douglas Averis and Victoria Door

Keele University, UK
Learning,
10.1080/17439880601141146
CJEM_A_214045.sgm
1743-9884
Original
Taylor
102007
32
derek@derekglover.co.uk
DerekGlover
00000March
and
&Article
Francis
Media
(print)/1743-9892
Francis
2007
andLtd
Technology
(online)

There has been considerable investment in the use of interactive whiteboard technology in schools
in the UK. There is evidence that whilst teachers understand such technology, many do not
understand the nature and implications of interactive learning. Observation and analysis of
50 video-recorded lessons taught by successful teachers drawn from mathematics and modern
foreign language departments in secondary schools led to the classification of three types of practice
representing a spectrum of increasing interactivity. The nature of this good practice was analysed
together with criteria for assessing the changes being wrought by technology in approaches to
learning and teaching. The investigation concluded that the use of new technology alone cannot
lead to enhanced learning. Teachers also need training to develop awareness of the relationship
between approaches to interactive learning and conceptual and cognitive development in subject
areas.

Background
Evidence suggests that use of interactive whiteboards (IWBs) can have positive effects
on teaching and learning (British Educational Communications and Technology
Agency (BECTA), 2003). Glover and Miller (2001a, b, c, 2002, 2003) have shown
that IWB use in both primary and secondary schools promotes pupil interest, more
sustained concentration, and more effective learning where teachers are aware of the
ways in which such technology can be used to support a variety of learning styles.
There has been specific work in assessing pedagogic use in some subject areas.

*Corresponding author. School of Criminology, Education, Sociology and Social Work: Educa-
tion, Keele University, Keele, Staffordshire, ST5 5BG, UK Email: eda19@educ.keele.ac.uk

ISSN 1743-9884 (print)/ISSN 1743-9892 (online)/07/01000516

2007 Taylor & Francis
DOI: 10.1080/17439880601141146
 6 D. Glover et al.

Amongst these Miller et al. (2003) and Edwards et al. (2002) have summarised the
impact on mathematics teaching in a number of secondary schools; Cooper and Brna
(2002) and Blanton and Helms-Breazeale (2000) have shown how pupil motivation
and understanding can be fostered for those with special educational needs, and
Smith (2001) has shown the gains to be made in primary teaching. These research
reports show how presentation is improved, pupils are motivated and learning
enhanced during the early stages of the use of the technology (Passey et al., 2003).
Research during the first phase of IWB installation in schools concentrated on the
benefits accruing from the technology rather than on analysis of the ways in which
pedagogy may need to be changed. Without this there are dangers that the technology
will be a passing presentational aid, or motivational spur rather than a means of
enhancing learning effectiveness.
There is also evidence that missioner (Glover and Miller, 2001b) teachers who are
both competent and confident in technology use then seek changes to the way in
Downloaded by [Derek Glover] at 07:34 22 April 2016

which they teach (Beeland, 2002; BECTA, 2003, 2004). Davison and Pratt (2003)
argue that this change occurs as teachers move from offering purely static visual
support to the use of kinaesthetic affordances with enhanced pupil participation.
Beauchamp and Parkinson (2005) see this as moving beyond the wow factor as
teachers explore the potential of interactivity for enhanced learning. Jones and
Tanner (2002) show that interactivity is most effectively sustained through effective
questioning as well as a wider range of activity in lessons. Simpson et al. (1998),
Cogill (2003), Robison (2000) and Damcott et al. (2000) demonstrate the use of
interactive technology within mathematics as a subject area and stress the need to
move from didactic (defined in this paper as a teacher-centred approach) to the
experiential to optimise both the teaching and learning value of the technology.
The starting point for changed pedagogy has been identified as teacher awareness
and implementation of interactivity with the IWB. Materials can then be presented in
visual form and software programs used to mediate learning through a variety of
techniques. Latane (2002) argues that interactivity needs to be pupilpupil as well as
pupilteacher based and that this may require changes in classroom practice. Glover
and Miller (2002), basing their work on Gardners (1991) concept of multiple intel-
ligences, have indicated the need for immediacy of response and the opportunity to
explore ideas as an adjunct to varied and enhanced presentation of material, and
Iding (2000) working in initial teacher education for scientists has shown the need for
the co-ordination of pictorial, textual and audio materials in fulfilling teaching aims.
There has, however, been little attempt to explore sequentiality in concept
development and the ways in which the IWB can foster responses to a range of
learning processes.
There has been a concern that, unless changes in teaching and learning do occur,
investment will be of limited help in enhancing pupil understanding, retention and
the application of learning. Indeed, Moore (2001) questions whether the investment
is a luxury too far. Kennewell (2001) argues that effective use is only possible if
students themselves make regular use of the IWB or else they will revert to being
passive learners. The importance of effective training to ensure changed use is
 Effective pedagogy for teachers using the interactive whiteboard 7

stressed by Smith et al. (2005) who point to the need for investment. Overall, the
research literature points to effective learning where teachers have been convinced of
the value of the technology and fully understand the nature of interactivity and its
pedagogic implications. Glover et al. (2005) summarise this mainly positive literature
emanating from research with teacher and student users but argue for the need to
provide teacher training focused on understanding interactivity. Smith et al. suggest
that the literature may overplay the gains from IWB use and caution that such
technology should be used in unique and creative ways above and beyond that which
is possible when teaching with normal whiteboards or other projection methods
(2005, p. 99). In short, the technology alone cannot support educationally effective
change.
The aim of the investigation was to ascertain the way in which teachers who had
embraced the technology in mathematics and modern foreign languages (MFL) then
developed their pedagogy through observing practice and eliciting teachers
Downloaded by [Derek Glover] at 07:34 22 April 2016

perceptions. It was hoped that charting this development would offer pointers for
both initial and in-service teacher education.

Methodology
During 2003 and 2004 the research team at Keele University identified teachers from
12 secondary schools in mathematics departments within the teacher training part-
nership, and practitioners and subject leaders in university education departments
identified a further 12 mathematics and 12 MFL teachers in schools throughout
England as making particularly successful use of IWBs. No attempt was made to
ascertain the level of technical competence or pedagogic reflection shown by our
nominated volunteers. The basis of participation was thus subjective. There was an
imbalance of participants from the two subject areas, with two-thirds being mathema-
ticians, but it was agreed that as the focus was changing teacher behaviour then the
subject-specific issues were less relevant.
Arrangements were made to video-record 50 lessons. These were taught by
36 teachers (24 mathematics and 12 MFL) in 34 different departments (20 mathe-
matics and 12 MFL). Fourteen teachers agreed to be video-recorded with a second
different teaching group and so were observed twice. Teachers had between 2 and
27 years experience of classroom practice in differing teaching contexts and all
observed lessons were with pupils aged 1114 (Key Stage 3). Of the 50 lessons
analysed, 34 were mathematics and 16 either French, German or Spanish. The
lessons were recorded using a fixed camera at the rear of the room focused on the
IWB and the area used by the teacher around the IWB. This limited observation of
activity on some tables in classrooms but the camera recorded verbal exchanges both
between pupils, and between pupil and teacher in the unseen area. Researchers
ensured that the camera was functioning correctly but then left the room so that
teachers were not inhibited by the presence of a further observer.
Structured interviews were undertaken with all participant teachers. Questions
related to equipment installation, training, perceptions of the problems inherent in
 8 D. Glover et al.

IWB use, development of IWB competence (both teacher and pupil), changing
approaches to classroom management, lesson content and changes in pupils concep-
tual and cognitive understanding. The 12 members from the partnership schools (all
mathematicians) also took part in termly workshops in 2003 and 2004 developing
materials for classroom use. It may be that this involvement prompted pedagogical
change but the first analysis of recorded lessons showed that they were represented in
all three level of use groups. It became evident, however, that an element of peer
coaching took place and all members of the group except one became more ready to
develop interactive approaches in their work.
A structure for analysis of the video-recorded lessons was developed by the research
team drawing upon departmental observation practice to investigate both the
presentational and pedagogic aspects of IWB use. This included:

Lesson structure
Downloaded by [Derek Glover] at 07:34 22 April 2016

The timeline and activity sequence, the identification of concepts and the material
used to develop these in each phase of the lesson.
The nature of IWB techniques used and pupils perceptions of these.
An assessment of the teaching style used on a range from didactic to experiential.

Classroom management issues

Room layout and how this favoured or inhibited IWB use for all pupils.
Group arrangements when pupils were at their tables or at the IWB.
The use of other teaching materials such as textbooks and worksheets, and their
integration with the IWB.
Practical issues such technical problems, physical access and selecting pupils to use
the IWB.
The use of associated normal black or whiteboards.

IWB impact on effective teaching

The technological fluency of teachers in the preparation of materials and IWB use,
and pupil fluency in IWB use.
The impact on conceptual learning in relation to revision of past work, establishing
new principles and data, sequencing of information and learning, demonstration
of understanding of processes and reinforcement of learning through recall and the
use of examples.
The impact on cognitive development in relation to the establishment and attain-
ment of objectives, the use of varied learning styles to enhance understanding and
the occurrence of episodes of recall and review, linking past to further learning.
Additionally one pupil randomly selected as being visible for most of the video-
recorded lesson was observed to establish the extent of on task work when the
 Effective pedagogy for teachers using the interactive whiteboard 9

IWB was the focus of attention and when other work was being undertaken. It is
recognised that the pupil in the view of the camera may not be representative of
the group, may not be continuously visible, and that whilst a pupil may apparently
be engaged this might not be so. Analysis also included a measurement of the
percentage of the lesson when the IWB was the focus of teaching and learning. To
ensure consistency five videos were independently analysed by two of the team.
This resulted in an agreed framework of analysis, which was then consistently
applied.
Each of the observed lessons was summarised to facilitate comparison of data both
within schools and across the range of schools. The findings were then used at the
termly group meetings of practitioners as the basis of a grounded typology of practice
under the headings of presentation, motivation and pedagogy. Presentation and
motivation have been reported elsewhere (Miller et al., 2004); our intention here is to
consider the findings related to pedagogy.
Downloaded by [Derek Glover] at 07:34 22 April 2016

Findings
Three approaches to teaching were evident to a greater or lesser extent in each of the
observed lessons. Following the progression from apprentice to synergistic noted
by Beauchamp (2004) and the developmental approach to pedagogy noted by
Haldane (2005), but with a greater emphasis on classroom interaction rather than on
IWB use alone, the research group classified IWB use in the following way.

Supported didactic. This teacher-centred approach was characterised by the teacher

making some use of the IWB but only as a visual support to the lesson and not as
an integral strategy for conceptual development. For example, one mathematics
teacher used a visual fraction wall to demonstrate equivalence but did not use any
other presentational techniques to bring about interactivity. An MFL teacher used
the IWB to present new vocabulary but then asked the pupils to copy the words
into their exercise books. In these situations the teacher was the focus following
traditional approaches with minimal pupil activity except in response to teacher
questioning or when completing written tasks. The effect is that pupils see the use
of the IWB as a novelty in the lesson but in pedagogic terms it illustrates, rather
then develops concepts.
Interactive. This approach marks progression from the supported didactic stage
because the IWB is used to challenge pupils to think by using a variety of verbal,
visual and kinaesthetic stimuli. Teachers become conversant with the technology
and its uses, marked by a tendency to further explore the potential of, for example,
PowerPoint and Excel, and to look for ways of using the IWB tools. The IWB
becomes the focal point of pupil attention whilst it is in use, usually to illustrate,
develop and test discrete concepts. Occasionally teachers reverted to the use of
conventional approaches to ensure cognitive development and there was evidence
of lack of confidence in the technology or its teaching power. At these times teach-
ers frequently made use of adjoining non-IWBs. The IWB was no longer a novelty
 10 D. Glover et al.

to the pupils, and was integrated into teaching and learning but its full potential
had not been developed. For example, in one maths lesson the teacher used a
programme on vectors downloaded from the Internet but then used an adjoining
normal whiteboard to develop the processes involved. MFL teachers at this stage
were using the IWB to give a rsum of sentence structure and to link pictures to
text but they had not yet become proficient at moving data around the board and
reverted to copying an exemplar at some stage. However, teachers at this stage
showed evidence of searching for new approaches and there was evidence of
considerable co-operative activity between teachers who were learning from each
other. Sharing of resources was reported in 17 of the 34 subject departments
involved.
Enhanced interactivity. This approach marked a progression from the previous
stage with a focus on using the technology as an integral part of most teaching in
most lessons, and integrating concept and cognitive development in a way that
Downloaded by [Derek Glover] at 07:34 22 April 2016

exploits the interactive capacity of the technology. As a result teachers were aware
of available techniques and were fluent both in technology use and in flexibly
structuring the lesson ensuring considerable opportunity for pupils to respond to
IWB stimuli either as individuals, pairs or groups, enhancing active learning. The
IWB was used to prompt discussion, explain processes, develop hypotheses or
structures, and then to test these by varied application. In mathematics teaching
this was demonstrated by the use of simple movement, colouring, shading and
overwriting in teaching about angles at a point and on a line. In MFL a class was
reinforcing prior learning through a comprehension exercise on camping costs
with an invoice for a stay at the camp site linked back to vocabulary. Teachers
who reach this level of competence show considerably enhanced understanding of
the learning process, talk about the ways that technology can support learning,
and show ingenuity in developing materials to meet specific learning needs.
There is much more evident differentiation of task for pupils, often focused on
the board. Such teachers understand the contribution made by the IWB to
kinaesthetic learning. This stage is also marked by considerable teacherteacher
interchange such as sharing resources.

The importance of context

Having developed a typology of competence and practice the research group then
considered how analysis of practice could contribute to teacher development at all
levels. Data for each lesson were checked against interview evidence and this illus-
trated the way in which the use of the IWB accorded with the management of
resources and learning in the schools. This is something larger than the use of
technology in the classroom and reflects active encouragement from leadership
within the school. Where we observed effective teaching focused on the IWB it
was evident that missioners had convinced colleagues of the advantages of using
the technology and had sought senior management help in obtaining the
technological resources and the professional development necessary for successful
 Effective pedagogy for teachers using the interactive whiteboard 11

introduction. These were also teachers who spoke of the importance of under-
standing how pupils learn. In 26 of the 36 interviews it was clear that teachers had
been made aware of accelerated learning in some form through whole-school
professional development and were using teaching methods that catered for a
range of learning styles. They used the subject-specific IWB software to offer a
combination of pedagogic approaches in carefully stepped learning processes. In all
of the schools where lessons were observed there were at least two IWBs in each of
the subject departments concerned. This brought with it the opportunity for teach-
ers to develop fluency in use, to share ideas, personal learning and technology with
colleagues. The existence of a school structure enhancing the ability to network
and share software resources within the departments was obviously a factor and
the effective use of the technology was further enhanced because (with three fleet-
ing exceptions) there were no issues of pupil behaviour.
All these add up to a developing culture of IWB use within schools. In an attempt
Downloaded by [Derek Glover] at 07:34 22 April 2016

to summarise the elements of practice we made use of the strategic planning analytic
framework used by Johnson and Scholes (1993). They suggest that four factors offer
a framework for scanning the environment within which strategic planning and the
inherent management of change operates. The pedagogy determines the way in which
participants know of, and coped with, the demands of change but this is influenced
by external pressures such as government-imposed training requirements. However,
the pace of change is also affected by social context, and the technology that either is
or supports change. Our evidence suggests that the nature of learning was of greater
importance than the external pressures which had already affected pedagogic
approaches. Observations were coded according to the overall classification of the
lesson being observed and practice within these lessons was characterised as shown
in Table 1.
It is recognised that there is a degree of subjectivity in such an analysis. With
another group of pupils, or indeed, with the same group on another day it is possible
that some of the more didactic lessons could have been judged as interactive. Simi-
larly, some topics might lend themselves more obviously to an interactive approach
whilst others may seem to be easier to teach with conventional exposition. Four of the
36 teachers involved commented that their planning varied according to topic and
that they would not use the IWB unless they were sure of the learning gains. The
classification of lessons could be differently applied by different observers but the
standardisation process was such that criteria for inclusion within a certain interactiv-
ity descriptor group were similarly applied by the two researchers. Subsequent discus-
sion leads to the view that there could have been a 10% error in this subjective
process. All users were enthusiastic about the technology and argued that the nature
of their teaching had changed since the introduction of IWB technology. Of the 36
interviewed, three had some reservations about the way in which the IWB was
prompting them into a certain whiz-kid form of teaching, but all the others were
enthusiastic to the point of suggesting that major changes had occurred in their
classrooms as a result of their understanding and use of both technology and
pedagogy. These included:
 Downloaded by [Derek Glover] at 07:34 22 April 2016

Table 1. A summary of practice by teachers using IWB technology according to level of interactivity used by teachers

Supported didactic (28% of 50 Interactive (30% of 50 lessons; 13 maths, Enhanced interactive (42% of 50 lessons;
lessons; nine maths, five MFL) two MFL) 12 maths, nine MFL)

Pedagogy IWB as visual support. IWB as stimulation occasionally and for IWB to prompt, explain, develop, and
demonstration with lively content. test concepts throughout lesson.
Considerable pace with frequent informal
12 D. Glover et al.

assessment.
Engagement Pupils largely receptors with focus on Pupils encouraged to question, discuss and Development of IWB as means of
(in teaching teacher, characterised by copying and develop ideas when the IWB is in use but combining differing modes of learning.
and learning) conventional board focus. Occasional then become receptors when focus reverts to Verbal, reinforced by audio, visual and
use of IWB as illustration. the teacher. kinaesthetic approaches. Learn from the
IWB as focus stimulated by teacher input.
Social Teacher dominates, pupils respond as Teacher encourages and develops dialogue Teacher orchestrates full dialogue with
context askedtendency for teacher to direct with pupils and learns from other teachers. and between pupils and co-operates with
learning. Teacher encourages discussion and learning other teachers. Pupils seen as equals
but within conventional frameworks. learning together.
Technology Occasional use with imported Teacher aware of potential of IWB software Teacher uses IWB complexity with
PowerPoint, Excel or commercial and draws on commercial and some locally fluency to stimulate, respond to and
software. developed software. develop ideas for and with pupils.
Limited use of IWB. Regular use of IWB. Use of IWB for most lessons.
 Effective pedagogy for teachers using the interactive whiteboard 13

Teaching has become more interesting and I know that the youngsters are maintaining a
higher level of engagement throughout the lesson. (MFL teacher)
Recognising when the pupils havent understood something and then being able to offer
them the same concept in a different way offers both them and me a feeling of achieve-
ment. (Maths teacher)
the penny drops more easily than it did in the days of me making a statement, showing
them an example and then hoping that they can do the exercises. I now realise that break-
ing ideas into segments and then teaching at the rate of understanding is a real possibility.
(Maths teacher)

Achieving interactivity
Further consideration of the way in which teachers worked in the 21 lessons classified
as showing enhanced interactivity offers pointers to future professional development
Downloaded by [Derek Glover] at 07:34 22 April 2016

work. Good practice as identified by reference to both Advanced Skills Teacher

standards (Department for Education and Skills, 2005) and the criteria for enhanced
interactivity outlined above, is characterised by the following.

Lesson preparation. There was a general view (evident in 16 of the 21 lessons)

amongst those interviewed that IWB use could lead to efficient and more effective
learning, with tighter planning and the implementation of lesson plans according to
the need to cover the prepared material. Teachers felt that the technology required
them to plan with greater precision than in traditional teaching approaches. They
were able to draw on a range of sources without breaks in a lesson and felt that this
allowed teachers greater freedom to attend to individual needs during the lesson. This
was evident in 20 of the 21 lessons for participants. Teachers were then able to depart
from the prepared script and use fresh or recalled screens to explain or discuss issues
arising. Furthermore, the pace that was generated by such planning left less time for
behaviour issues to emerge, with pupils apparently on-task for a significant propor-
tion of the lesson. This was closely linked with the amount of teaching and learning
that can happen in a lesson:

When we are teaching there is now much more intervisibility and we can give constant
support from the front of the room with more focus on the task because of reduced
amounts of paraphernalia. As a result there is no get out for the invisible child and
progression is maintained for everyone. (MFL teacher)

Tighter pre-planning encouraged teachers to design activities involving all pupils

and building on the use of verbal, visual and kinaesthetic approaches. This was
achieved in 18 of the observed highly interactive lessons. There was frequent refer-
ence in the interviews to the need to match materials to the specific subject needs
of the pupils and that some differentiation of task, activity or outcome required
teachers to be flexible, adaptable and aware of the ways in which consolidation
can occur without going back to old-fashioned practices such as copying (maths
teacher).
 14 D. Glover et al.

Lesson structure. The need for tight lesson preparation meant that effective teachers
maintained a structure that had inherent progression for conceptual development and
offered opportunities for cognitive growth through reflection. This was true of 18 of
the highly rated lessons. The technology was often used to support a lesson structure
with an introduction or starter, a developmental phase with a sequence of learning
incidents, and a plenary reviewing learning and developing metacognition of the
subject. Awareness of these three elements appeared to give teachers a framework for
lesson preparation. This ensured that each lesson was planned to:
take advantage of what the board has to offer and link that to the way in which kids learn,
and so although it has taken longer to plan the lessons I am sure that they are now properly
planned because of trying to incorporate a verbal explanation, a visual example,
kinaesthetic learning through movement and then trying to make it relevant to their
daily lives. (Maths teacher)

In the plenary or review sessions 18 of the 19 teachers also drew attention to the need
Downloaded by [Derek Glover] at 07:34 22 April 2016

for a clear match of objectives to activities and the need for pupils to use the IWB to
help in their evaluation of progress.

Learning management. Teachers said they felt much more in control of what was
happening than in a normal classroom because they could look at pupils work in
progress, centred on board-based materials, controlling the IWB from the computer
often sited to one side of the room. Recalling material using previous screens meant
that issues arising could be dealt with, thus giving pupils queries and contributions
more time and attention, seemingly indicating to them that their responses were
valued. In addition, the print-off facility meant that deviations from the script could
then be recorded and retained with the material for revision purposes or for pupils
absent from a particular lesson. However, for a number of reasons, some manage-
rial, the facility to print off resources was evident in only four of the 21 observed
lessons.
Assessment procedures were being integrated with the lesson plans so that staged
tests allowed for rapid progress checks. For example, in one lesson, time for assess-
ment was minimised by displaying screens for checking homework, allowing students
to self-mark quickly as a group, while the teacher circulated. In 17 of the 21 lessons
classified as showing enhanced interactivity there were at least three formative assess-
ment points, and in nine lessons there was a summative assessment before the final
plenary session. One teacher commented:
It helps to be able to see who has understood what as we move alongI just wish that we
had got the money to invest in voting systems because we could pack even more into each
lesson then. (Maths teacher)

Storing and editing lessons. Using an IWB all the time means that teachers could save
and re-use resources. Initially lessons were stored with inappropriate names and non-
systematically. Generally, once teachers had realised that this was an issue, they
tended to organise resources in one of three ways:
 Effective pedagogy for teachers using the interactive whiteboard 15

catalogued by topic and extracting as each lesson was prepared;

catalogued by lesson and then copied if to be used in another lesson;
catalogued by intended year group and then developed with further material if
being used in a different context.
It was evident that teachers saw the benefits of saving materials as the basis of future
lesson planning. This meant that basic lessons could be refined from class to class or
year to year, in the light of changing pupil need and context. Teachers were able to
access material quickly within a lesson, responding to the needs of the class at that
moment as was shown in 19 of the observed lessons. Teachers recognised that often
changes needed to be made to materials, but still saw this resource re-use as a major
benefit.

Pedagogic change
Downloaded by [Derek Glover] at 07:34 22 April 2016

Where teachers were gaining confidence in the technology they also appeared to show
increasing awareness of a variety of learning styles. In part this stems from whole-
school professional development work in ICT as described by Terrell and Capper
(2003), and in part from a desire to exploit the kinaesthetic capacity of the IWB
software. In our sample many teachers recognised that pupils learn in different ways.
One of the most effective language teachers said
we both enjoy teaching and learning more you can give clearer examples which are more
interesting because of access to colour and clip art. Its more aesthetically pleasing and is
good for visual and kinaesthetic learners and its useful in that you can jumble up sentences
and get them involved in reconstruction.

All lessons with enhanced interactivity drew upon a range of styles and three practi-
tioners were particularly skilful in working with the less able. Some interview evidence
pointed to scepticism that identification and use of learning styles might be as much
of an answer to learning problems as IWB itself (maths teacher), but over half of the
mathematics teachers had taken part in the Cognitive Acceleration in Mathematics
Education (CAME) project and were seeking alternative presentation of concepts as
reinforcement for learning in the subject. Whatever the level of understanding of the
variety of learning styles all the teachers interviewed spoke of presenting ideas in
different ways. Fifteen of the teachers offering enhanced interactivity were aware of
an approach involving the following elements.
Planning for cognitive development. A striking feature of enhanced interactivity was
the way in which the IWB was being used to underpin lesson structure, to enhance
the way that pupils were thinking and to develop their mental powers. This
reflected the much tighter planning as materials were organised to support
learning.
Clear visual representation of concepts. Teachers commented on the particular advan-
tages for some pupils who needed reinforcement through more than one learning
style. This was shown in 15 lessons where pupils appeared to gain from additional
 16 D. Glover et al.

visual representation in contrast to oral explanations alone. The ease of visually

demonstrating principles on the IWB encourages greater and more varied use
including animation, Internet linkage, video clips and annotation of board-based
text.
Activities that encourage an active, thinking approach. In all the observed lessons
teachers were clearly using learning of concepts as a basis for cognitive understand-
ing. As a result there were discernible cognitive aims and a series of activities to
explore, develop, explain and reinforce subsequent understanding. This was
summed up by one teacher as follows:
Sustained learner interest works in a number of different levels. It is not just a gimmick
the interaction is important, like kids coming out to the IWB, having choices, e.g. they can
decide on the verb ending, find the stem and match up the right pronoun. It makes
concrete in their minds how the language works. (MFL teacher)

Progression. In 18 of the observed lessons, there was a continuing upward progres-

Downloaded by [Derek Glover] at 07:34 22 April 2016

sion in learning and attainment. One lesson commenced with the aims of the lesson
on the IWB, offering a clear structure for activities and assessment so that
pupils get a continuing spur to go further, a check that they have understood what they
have done, and a set of targets towards which they are working. (Maths teacher)

Illustrating concepts in different ways. Annotation was seen to offer scope for assisting
cognitive and conceptual development by showing the same thing in different
ways, opening up an argument to ensure that it was understood and overcoming
the tedium of copying rules and processes from the conventional board.
The importance of sequencing. Research shows that the way teachers structure the
material or ideas that they are presenting is crucial to motivation. In 18 of the
observed lessons learners were encouraged by the easy identification of key concepts,
engaging with complex concepts rather than having material dumbed-down. One
commented that
maths is much more of a challenge because we spend less time waiting for everybody to
complete the exercises and then checking the answers throughthere is more chance to
go at our own pace. (Pupil, maths)

Immediate feedback. Immediacy of feedback, either within programmed software

or through the use of presentational tools, may aid conceptual development and
be thought of by language learners as desirable (Chenoweth et al., 1983;
Cathcart & Olson, 1994). These programs were most effective as starters or for
work with the least able when rapid responses and progression enhanced both
number and word manipulation. However, in 16 of the observed lessons with
more able pupils teachers prompted worthwhile discussion and explanation at
some stage in the lesson by getting pupils to explain, illustrate and direct from
the IWB and thus to have to verbalise what they had been learning. Because of
the facility of virtual manipulation, where pupils can move items on the IWB,
this was regarded as being easier to do, and far more effective than with other
presentational means.
 Effective pedagogy for teachers using the interactive whiteboard 17

Recall to strengthen learning. In 20 of the 21 lessons showing enhanced interactivity

teachers emphasised the impact of recall from lesson to lesson as a means of
sustaining pupil understanding and achievement. In these lessons there was
evidence of recall at the start of the lesson, at an intermediate stage and during the
plenary sessionand the IWB remained the focus throughout.

Conclusions
There was evidence from both observations and interviews that the teachers deliver-
ing enhanced interactivity in nine lessons thought that they had changed both prepa-
ration and style in order to access the potential of the IWB compared with traditional
classroom aids. Other, equally effective, teachers of 12 of the lessons argued that they
had always tried to teach in this interactive way, but had been limited by equipment.
The IWB enabled them to extend and develop their existing approach. There was also
Downloaded by [Derek Glover] at 07:34 22 April 2016

a consensus that they had not in any way fully explored the potential of the IWB and
were on a learning curve that might lead to enhanced interactivity in their teaching.
It is clear from our observations and discussions that it is still the quality of the
teaching that ensures progress; the IWB alone does not guarantee it. For example,
comparison was made between two lessons of vocabulary development with year 7
groups. In one the seven screens were interspersed with pair work, a brief exercise and
a discussion about rooms in the house. The pupils were animated throughout. In a
comparable lesson, again with seven screens, the teaching approach was much more
didactic and there was little variation in activity. Other examples show that whilst
enhanced interactivity may be the preferred style teachers have not yet achieved the
technical and pedagogic fluency to maximise the potential for continuous interactiv-
ity, and for others, especially in mathematics, board exemplars followed by textbook
or worksheet exercises are still the norm.
Teachers need time to develop their technological fluency, apply pedagogic princi-
ples to the available materials or to the development of materials, and then to incor-
porate the IWB seamlessly into their teaching. Few teachers base all their lessons on
the IWB all the time, and over half of those interviewed stressed that the IWB has to
be seen as part of the equipment available but that there was still a need for the use
of texts, exercises and other media. Teachers appear to become more aware of the
nature of interactivity and its stimulation as the basis for conceptual development and
cognitive understanding. Pupils also need to have a range of manipulative skills if they
are to take part in lessons without loss of self-esteem as technologically incompetent.
Even so, good practitioners ensure that all pupils have access to the board, and are
given help if there are signs of unhappiness with the medium.
It is only when basic technological fluency and pedagogic understanding have been
achieved that teachers can then overcome the novelty factor. This is not to suggest
that the IWB is a panacea for all ills. Our evidence suggests that there is a teacher
progression from supported didactic to enhanced interactivity and that this is neither
continuous nor consistent depending upon the groups being taught and the lesson
material. Effective learning is inhibited where the IWB is given a novelty value by the
 18 D. Glover et al.

teacher so that it becomes something different, where the physical surroundings are
not conducive to IWB use and where the lesson lacks pace. It is not sufficient to argue
that the use of the IWB will, of itself, bring the classroom into the twenty-first century
and the visually stimulated environment. Effective teaching requires that the technol-
ogy and the pedagogy are directed towards enhanced and structured understanding.
The response from one teacher that I love my board because it gives so much to the
kids offers the hope that enthusiasm can be fostered not just in the pupils, but also
in the staff.
Such enthusiasm suggests that there is change in pedagogy as a result of change
to the use of IWB technology in mathematics and MFL teaching. Our evidence,
although subjective in both video-recording analysis and interview data, is that
once teachers become competent in using the technology they are receptive to
changing teaching techniques so that they can enhance the value of the IWB as a
pedagogical tool. This accords with the research literature in that it indicates a
Downloaded by [Derek Glover] at 07:34 22 April 2016

progression from technology to pedagogy as shown in the BECTA research

reviews, and in the literature review offered by Glover et al. (2005). However,
although teachers explain their developmental needs, there is no evidence of the
rate at which teachers make this progression and for those who are still using the
IWB to support didactic approaches Smith et al. (2005) are right in their view that
progress towards more effective use of the technology is limited and, as yet,
unproven.
That said, our contention is that where teachers are working with each other, and
with their pupils, at the level we have called enhanced interactivity, the technology
offers a way into lively, challenging and thought-provoking pedagogy. Our evidence
is that this requires: potential IWB users to become confident operators of equipment
and software (often supported by peer coaching); opportunities for reflection on the
way in which the IWB can present concepts (often achieved through departmental
pooling of practice); and willingness to link subject-specific work to thinking about
the process of learning (often through whole-school professional development). For
all except five of the 36 teachers involved in this investigation this combination has
been the way to what they believe to be means to an evolving, and increasingly effec-
tive pedagogy.

Notes on contributors

Derek Glover is research associate with the Interactive Whiteboard research group
and honorary professor in Education at Keele University.
David Miller is senior lecturer in mathematics education and the leader of the Inter-
active Whiteboard Group. He is responsible for CAME courses and professional
development for mathematics teachers at Keele University.
Douglas Averis is Tutor Fellow in the Education Department at Keele where he
lectures on the PGCE and delivers CPD courses with David Miller. He is a
research member of the Interactive Whiteboard Group.
 Effective pedagogy for teachers using the interactive whiteboard 19

Victoria Door is a lecturer in education at Keele University and leader of the PGCE
in Modern Languages. She is currently working with ITE students to explore the
potential for using the interactive whiteboard to enhance attention and engage-
ment in language learning.

References
Beauchamp, G. (2004) Teacher use of the interactive whiteboard in primary schools: towards an
effective transition framework, Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 13(3), 327348.
Beauchamp, G. & Parkinson, J. (2005) Beyond the wow factor: developing interactivity with the
interactive whiteboard, School Science Review, 86(316), 97103.
British Educational Communications and Technology Agency (BECTA) (2003) What research
says about interactive whiteboards. Research reviews, paper No. 7 (Coventry, BECTA).
British Educational Communications and Technology Agency (BECTA) (2004) Getting the most
from your interactive whiteboard: a guide for secondary schools (Coventry, BECTA).
Downloaded by [Derek Glover] at 07:34 22 April 2016

Beeland, W. D. (2002) Student engagement, visual learning and technology: can interactive white-
boards help?, Action Research Exchange, 1(1). Available online at: http://chiron.valdosta.edu/
are/Artmanscrpt/vol1no1/beeland_am.pdf (accessed 13 September 2004).
Blanton, B. & Helms-Breazeale, R. (2000) Gains in self-efficacy: using SMART board interactive
whiteboard technology in special education classrooms. Research report. Available online at:
www.smarterkids.org.
Cathcart, R. & Olson, J. (1994) Teachers and students preferences for correction of classroom
errors, in: R. Ellis (Ed.) The study of second language acquisition (Oxford, Oxford University
Press), 4753. (Original work published 1976).
Chenoweth, A., Day, R., Chun, A. & Luppescu, S. (1983) Attitudes and preferences of non-native
speakers to corrective feedback, Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 6, 7987.
Cogill, J. (2003) The use of interactive whiteboards in the primary school: effects on pedagogy. Research
bursary reports (Coventry, BECTA).
Cooper, B. & Brna, P. (2002) Supporting high quality interaction and motivation in the classroom
using the social and emotional learning and engagement in the NIMS project, Education,
Communication and Information, 2(4), 113138.
Damcott, D., Landato, J. & Marsh, C. (2000) Report on the use of the SMART board interactive
whiteboard in physical science. Research report. Available online at: www.smarterkids.org
(accessed 13 September 2004).
Davison, I. & Pratt, D. (2003) An investigation into the visual and kinaesthetic affordances of interac-
tive whiteboards. Research bursary reports (Coventry, BECTA).
Department for Education and Skills (2005) Guidelines on standards for advanced skills teachers
(London, Department for Education and Skills).
Edwards, J., Hartnell, M. & Martin, R. (2002) Interactive whiteboards: some lessons for the class-
room, Micro Math, 18(2), 3034.
Gardner, H. (1991) The unschooled mind: how children think and how schools should teach (New York,
Basic Books).
Glover, D. & Miller, D. (2001a) A report to Blackburn and Colne EAZ on new technologies (Keele,
Department of Education, Keele University).
Glover, D. & Miller, D. (2001b) Missioners, tentatives and luddites: leadership challenges for
school and classroom posed by the introduction of interactive whiteboards into schools in the
UK, paper presented at the BEMAS Conference, Newport Pagnell, UK, 1011 September.
Glover, D. & Miller, D. (2001c) Running with technology: the pedagogic impact of the large scale
introduction of interactive whiteboards in one secondary school, Journal of Information Tech-
nology for Teacher Education, 10(30), 257275.
 20 D. Glover et al.

Glover, D. & Miller, D. (2002) Running with technology: the impact of the large-scale introduc-
tion of interactive whiteboards in one secondary school, Journal of Information Technology for
Teacher Education, 10(3), 257276.
Glover, D. & Miller, D. (2003) Players in the management of change, Management in Education,
17(1), 2024.
Glover, D., Miller, D., Averis, D. & Door, V. (2005) The interactive whiteboard: a literature
survey, Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 14(2), 155170.
Haldane, M. (2005) A typology of interactive whiteboard pedagogies, paper presented at the
Promethean International IWB Research Conference, Wolverhampton, 23 July.
Iding, M. (2000) Is seeing believing? Features of effective multimedia for learning science,
International Journal of Instructive Media, 27(4), 403416.
Johnson, G. & Scholes, K. (1993) Exploring corporate strategy: text and cases (New York, Prentice
Hall).
Jones, S. & Tanner, H. (2002) Teachers interpretations of effective whole-class interactive
teaching in secondary mathematics classrooms, Educational Studies, 28(3), 265274.
Kennewell, S. (2001) Interactive whiteboardsyet another solution looking for a problem to
Downloaded by [Derek Glover] at 07:34 22 April 2016

solve?, Information Technology in Teacher Education, 39, 36.

Latane, B. (2002) Focused interactive learning: a tool for active class discussion, Teaching of
Psychology, 29(1), 1016.
Miller, D., Glover, D. & Averis, D. (2003) The impact of interactive whiteboards on classroom
practice: examples drawn from the teaching of mathematics in secondary schools in England,
paper presented at BRNO, Poznan, Poland, June.
Miller, D., Glover, D., Averis, D., Miller, D. & Glover, D. (2004) Enhancing mathematics teaching
through new technology: the use of the interactive whiteboard. Summary of a report made to the
Nuffield Foundation on completion of a funded two-year project (April 2002 to March 2004).
Available online at: http://www.keele.ac.uk/depts/ed/iaw/nuffield.htm (accessed 6 June 2005).
Moore, A. (2001) Interactive whiteboardsa luxury too far?, Teaching ICT, 1(2), 5257.
Passey, D., Rogers C., Machell, J., McHugh, G. & Allaway, D. (2003) The motivational effect of
ICT on pupils: emerging findings (London, Department for Education and Skills).
Robison, S. (2000) Math classes for the 21st century, Media and Methods, 36(4), 1011.
Simpson, M., Payne, F., Munro, R & Lynch, E. (1998) Using information and communication
technology as a pedagogical tool: a survey of initial teacher education in Scotland, Journal of
Information Technology for Teacher Education, 7(3), 431446.
Smith, H. (2001) Smartboard evaluation. Final report. Available online at: http://
www.kented.org.uk/ngfl/whiteboards/report.html (accessed 11 October 2004).
Smith, H. J., Higgins, S., Wall, K. & Miller, J. (2005) Interactive whiteboards: boon or band-
wagon? A critical review of the literature, Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 21(2), 91101.
Terrell, I. & Capper, S. (2003) The Hedley Walter High School: cultural change in learning through the
use of new technologies. Research bursary reports (Coventry, BECTA).