The DfES Primary Schools Whiteboard Expansion project (PSWE) provided substantial funding to 21 Local Authorities in 2003-04 to support the acquisition and use of interactive whiteboards in primary schools.

The implementation and impacts of the project were evaluated by a team at Manchester Metropolitan University, led by Professor Bridget Somekh.

This major study into the the impact of interactive technologies on student performance standards, involved 20 Local Authorities and 7272 learners in 97 schools. Variables considered in this detailed research included; length of exposure to interactive whiteboard technology, the age of pupils (down to individual birthdays), gender, special needs, entitlement to free schools meals and other socio-economic groupings.

Dr. Vanessa Pittard from BECTA had the following to offer after her presentation:

“The findings are stunning. They clearly show that when teachers fully integrate interactive whiteboards, and they make best use of their functionality, pupils really do benefit.”

She went on to say that it is also a story that gets better over time:

“A consistent finding across all data was that the length of time pupils have been taught with an IWB is a major factor that leads to attainment gains. The impact of interactive technology is also bigger with second cohorts… when the technology has been more embedded. “

The research was also clear in where barriers to student attainment lay and how interactive technology helps address them. Vanessa stated that:

“Socio-economic group is a significant factor in student attainment – which remains a core challenge. The evidence around low attaining boys in the study however, suggests clearly that use of interactive technology improves the performance of less engaged pupils.”

The research also addressed some concerns that interactive whiteboards supported old fashioned instructional models. She said.

“Too much focus on whole class teaching was shown to be not true – with many examples of small group activity and individual and one to one work being found. Interactive technology clearly does increase the interaction between pupils and teachers – with more questioning time & longer pupil answers. This is not just a didactic technology.”

Overview of the findings

The research showed that interactive whiteboard technology led to consistent gains across all key stages and subjects. Gains were measured in ‘months progress’ against standard measures of attainment over the two year study period.

In infant classes, ages 5 – 7:

• In Key Stage 1 Maths, high attaining girls made gains of 4.75 months over the two years, enabling them to catch up with high attaining boys.
• In Key Stage 1 Science, there was improved progress for girls of all attainment levels and for average and high attaining boys.
• In Key Stage 1 English, average and high attending pupils all benefited from increased exposure to interactive whiteboards

There was also clear evidence of similar impacts in Key stage two – ages 7 – 11

• In Key Stage 2 Maths, average and high attaining boys and girls who had been taught extensively with the Interactive Whiteboard made the equivalent of an extra 2.5 to 5 months progress over the course of the two years.
• In Key Stage 2 Science, all pupils, except high attaining girls made greater progress with more exposure to the IWB, with low attaining boys making as much as 7.5 months additional progress
• In Key Stage 2 writing, boys with low attainment made 2.5 months of additional progress.

There was no adverse impact at any level. Vanessa Pittard says that this is a very critical finding. It means “schools can explore this particular type of technology without risk of failure.”The study also indicated how interactive whiteboards have very positive impacts on the attention, attitude and motivation of all pupils and produces a co-operative, ‘community of learning’ ethos in the class. It also shows how Interactive Whiteboards help with teaching abstract and difficult concepts and complex ideas – visual tools help pupils concentrate for longer and understand more fully.

BECTA summarise the research as follows:

“This study clearly shows the benefits that can be gained from effective use of an interactive whiteboard. We know that technology has the capability of bringing lessons to life and making that much more enjoyable for the learner.

Not only do the lessons become more fun, the study clearly shows the very real benefits in terms of learner attainment and engaging pupils in lessons.”

We asked Vanessa about where research could be looking next. We discussed Promethean Planet and the tools Promethean are putting in place to support of a global, resource sharing, practitioner community.

“Teacher workload is a major factor – sharing of resources and ideas will have great impact over time.”

With the Reveal project already highlighting classroom successes with learner response systems, there is clearly an opportunity to explore how other technologies designed to work in close conjunction with interactive whiteboards are impacting learning.

So the results are in and according to the research it looks like a win for interactive technology?

Read the full report here: Evaluation of the Primary Schools Whiteboard Expansion Project

• what struck you as most important today?
• what idea will you take away with you?
• if you could make just one radical change - which one would it be and why?

Please share a comment about the first day with everyone using the comments link below and add to the debate.

Sir Geoff Hampton sees a ‘blended’ future. Learning is and will continue to be a social process and we are social things – we only need to look at our cities and villages to see the evidence of that. He also highlighted the risk in relinquishing the link between a teacher and a learner through technology.

Tom Greaves offered that when computers first appeared in schools there was a great worry that it would break down and reduce the level and quality of teacher-pupil interaction – but the research actually indicates the opposite. It is clear that the presence of certain types technologies actually creates much higher levels of discussion and debate.

Sir Geoff finished the day with a serious observation. Too many teachers still focus on WHAT they are going to teach. Instead of knowing WHY they are teaching it and trying to understand HOW their teaching will work! 

A early question was raised about Colleges of Education. Are they old fashioned in their outlook? How do we bring them into the 21st Century?

Sir Geoff Hampton asked us to consider what skills we should be providing trainee teachers with in the modern age. He said trainees need to be trained for teaching in tomorrow’s world. He also advised on some approaches that are showing signs of successfully working, including how a much closer, on-going cooperation between trainee teachers and working practitioners could encourage development of more up to date skills. If the trainee and the teacher are dealing with the same issues together, then there can be effective cross-fertilizing of ideas. (a form of teaching apprenticeship perhaps?)

A higher education institution in the US commented that they had put Activboards in 17 classrooms at the College of Education. Now two thirds of their faculty are adopting the technology. A key factor in their success has been in the integration of Promethean professional development programmes into the staff and student training.

Stephen Jury from Promethean noted that Promethean are keen to partner with more Schools of Education in order to explore the industry/academic partnerships needed to address this skills gap and Tom Greaves suggested making a level of basic IWB competency an employment requirement.

A US district replied, describing their programme, “The best in everyone” – a compulsary 9 hour course in effective Interactive Whiteboard use that all teachers must take.

Is the nature of how we measure the outputs of our education systems fundamentally determining the inputs?

A delegate from the North East of England raised the issue of how OFSTED judge schools. Although it was highlighted that there was a massive will to change and adapt from the teachers themselves, they felt that the only ‘roadblocks’ left that stop them putting their radical ideas into practice lie outside the school itself.

Clearly we have to continually question the purpose of our assessment system and who it needs to serve – the learner or the institutions. The Parlimentary session on Wednesday will focus on this critical issue.

“The multi pen board from Promethean is an amazing beauty we have yet to fully appreciate and understand.

To me, the London study into Interactive Whiteboards highlighted how teachers, who had not got the benefit of strong professional development support, could misuse the immense potential of an Interactive Whiteboard. Examples of this included bringing single students up to work through questions and slowing down the flow of the lesson.

I think this Promethean development will literally change everything. Collaborative, shared use of the board cannot be avoided. Students walking into a Promethean Activclassroom will instantly know they can expect more than an instructivist experience.”

On the wider, long term impact of the Activboard and Activclassroom in classrooms, Tom had the following to say:

We are just starting the journey to understand how Activboards will change everything. We are perhaps only 5 years into a 30 year cycle. The whole idea of a large, group centric, interactive display system will become ubiquitous. The connection to the curriculum will migrate to it, content will migrate, assessment will migrate.

In a short time we can expect that there will be little curriculum that is not tied to the interactive whiteboard presentation. Currently teachers have to look at their state standards, look at the curriculum, look at the paper based tests and then look at the Activboard and Activote and try to make sense of it all.”

Promethean has set out to help teachers make the best of the opportunity presented by interactive technology through the creation of Promethean Planet and the Promethean Learning portals. What is Tom’s view on these?

“The huge success of Promethean Planet is because the intrinsic value of the activboard is fully understood by educators.

The teachers recognise the potential of the solution to change the outputs of their their teaching to such a degree that they are prepared to help drive the community to evolve itself to maximise it.

This is unprecedented with any other learning technology that schools are embracing.

Teachers are doing this because they feel the Activboard has the promise of doing ‘extraordinary things’ in the classroom – and in light of that – teachers are prepared to do extraordinary things to celebrate and share this…. they know their contribution will help another educator do something extraordinary.”

I asked Tom what other research could help those considering an Interactive technology purchase understand the benefits.

“One thing that has struck me in reading the research reports is that there is at least 30 different kinds of uses of Interactive Whiteboards – while many of them are highly productive academically, some are only mildly productive and some potentially damaging. What I think is missing – as far as I can tell – is that no one has made a ranked list of board uses based on expected student outcomes. For Example – one use of the board is that the teacher can create a graphic representation of something at the board in moments. Compared with using a chalkboard – each time this skill is applied – time is saved. Time is a measurable and valuable commodity in a busy classroom. If you are just using the board to help slower student work our problems – then the board has little if any advantage over a chalkboard.”

An empirical study into the 20 or 30 most common teacher activities and how the use of the Activclassroom changes them will generate data that makes clear where and how teacher productivity is actually being maximised. It is also important that rubrics are in place that measure not only time but quality, richness and depth.

We also need to capture and understand what makes for ‘the Ah ha!” moments.”

Perhaps our readers have something that needs to be on the list of existing and new teacher techniques that can be facilitated using Interactive Technology.  Please comment!

So what does the Crystal Ball say? In a summary of the report, the following points were made:

• US schools are transitioning from a desktop world to a mobile world
• 19% of US computers and currently mobile – by 2010 it will be 50%
• Ubiquitous computing is growing rapidly – students already have many wirelessly connected computing devices.
• 24% of school districts are moving to 1:1 learner to computer ratios
• Professional development and administrative support are the main pre-requisites for success with IT in education initiatives. 65% of superintendents see it as ‘extremely important’
• Where technology was ubiquitous, moderate to substantial academic improvements were identified in 87% of schools/districts.
• Online learning (enrollment in electronically delivered courses) is growing – with a four fold increase in online course enrollment of 15.6% projected by 2011

Some important issues were also identified:

A bandwidth crisis is looming in the USA. Current projections only provide students with 9.57Kbs second – less than a quarter of the bandwidth needed to support effective use of web based technologies.

Despite the promise of the Internet to provide endless free content. It has not turned out to be that easy to find and integrate. New, publisher content is needed. Content that is small enough and that can be flexibly managed for educators by educators is needed.

Total Cost of Ownership (TCO) is important and not often thought about upfront. TCO encompasses, maintenance, updates, and effectiveness. Superintendents were most sensitive to this issue. Looking at the cost of initial purchase can lead to costly mistakes in the long term.

Finally Tom advised those setting out on a major interactive education initiative need to share the experience of others and think about the ‘breakthroughs’ that technology can enable for students – not just its short term impact on SATS score

… a set of familiar ‘transformational’ language that could feature in any Building Schools for the Future Brochure – but the language turned out to be extracted verbatim from a 1957 Pathe video about the launch of Comprehensive education.

It seems that although the content of what is being talked about in class may have changed-  it is in fact still taught the same way as a century ago.

What Marcus made clear is that we do know that organisational change is altering the working world. Our education system needs to prepare young people for a very different world. Their working world will increasingly feature:

• Less Hierarchy
• Careers that allows working anywhere
• Work that has a social aspect in people’s lives
• ‘Shortstay’ career paths - working in one place for a while and then moving on with the new skills gained instead of climbing the corporate ladder
• Ideas and futures – companies need innovative thinking and creative individuals to compete in the modern, fast paced world
• Co-location – You can shop, eat and do your banking in the same building – one day you will work in the same place.

Marcus says – Desired activities and emotions should drive the requirements for spaces to prepare student for their future lives. Spaces do influence emotions and enable activities

He also reminds us it is also not just about money…. Multi-purpose rooms are just a matter of thinking! Off the shelf furniture is cheap and attractive – a far better proposition than much institutional furnishings.

Some of the key questions that Marcus raised:

• Are we aiming at running a schools where 1000 pupils are educated or a place where 1000 people discover their potential?

• Does a school’s D&T thinking stop at the door of the D&T classroom or should it be seen everywhere across the site in the design of the building, hallways and public areas? Do we actually ‘walk the talk’ with kids- or just ‘walk the talk’ in our classrooms?

He reminds us that building schools for the future is about clever thinking and challenging all our assumptions.

Your comments welcome…

He says we cannot think about a modern education system without considering how this rate of change will fundamentally impact the learning spaces we currently call schools.

Mike says ‘even thinking about how the the school of the future may look is a limiting idea’. Whatever the solution is – it has to be something that can evolve and adapt.

He says we should not just refine what we have today but actually enable ourselves to build ‘something revolutionary’. That also means fully embracing technology in the learning process – not just building shiny versions of Victorian schools. Modern Education Technology does not de-personalise. Interactive technology, the Internet and other modern tools and devices have evolved learning technology to a point where it fundamentally encourages personal attention and no longer simply supports knowledge transfer.

To cope with that technological opportunity, Professional development must also reform with the current focus on ‘best practice’ becoming refocused on developing and exploring ‘next practice’.

Mike featured a few schools facing the challenge of re-inventing the education system and how they went about it

• Willow Tree Primary – the first school with an Interactive Whiteboard in every classroom.
• St Pancras – facing global warming issues though an environmentally friendly, geo-thermal heating system.
• Knowsley – original schools in the area have been closed and 8 new ones opened with radically designed spaces.
• Chesil Partnership – are developing their own curriculum
• Darlington Education Village – a federation across all phases of education.
• Shireland – opening their schools portal system up to families, the local community and the world.
• Bridgemary – 7am 11pm availability with learners and tutors negotiating individual timetables.
• Bridge Academy – redesigned the timetable to allow 1 day a week for home learning.

• How do we make a curriculum special for learners?
• How do we create a curriculum that is something that unfolds and evolves with the times?

He claims that problems in the past have been in documenting and listing the curriculum forcing regimentation and inflexibility on the education system and that things need to move on. A new curriculum must reflect the changing world and the nature of a modern, technologically rich society.

To do this means addressing key issues coming from learners:

• Why do I get taught at the speed of other pupils?
• Why do I take exams in the Summer?
• Why must I fail an exam this year when I could pass them next ?
• Why do I have to remember things when I can find out on a mobile phone?
• Why are there so few subjects when I have hundreds of TV channels?
• Why do I have to write in school when everyone types in life?

He went on to describe a vision of ‘Lifelong learning’. Learning that means more than just developing subject knowledge – Learning means developing enterprise and initiative, individual maturity and a sense of self and belonging. Schools also must adapt. In schools everyone will be learning, teachers and pupils – even parents.
The curriculum will be purposeful and authentic. Technology will be pervasive. Assessment will become ‘on demand’ seeking ‘achievement routes’ that matter to individual learners. Lessons will also persist – captured online or on a personal device – so a learner can relive the experiences.

A final presentation provided a big picture of the UK curriculum – what it is trying achieve and how it might be organised? Mick presented a picture of Successful learners, Confident Individuals, Responsible Citizens where their Skills, Knowledge and Attitudes are all equally important.

• Does this make sense to educators around the world?
• Is addressing this why we came here to the Symposium?
• What questions does it raise for you?