Article Review # 2

Beauchamp, G., & Jones, S., & Kennewell, S., & Tanner, H. (2008). Analysing the use of interactive technology to implement interactive teaching. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 24 (1), 61-73. Retrieved from http://web.b.ebscohost.com/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=1926f8df-d5fa-4916-b2ab-b9c6782f06a2%40sessionmgr112&vid=3&hid=107

The purpose of the study conducted in the article was to determine how including a piece of Information and Communication Technology (ICT) in a classroom altered the learning atmosphere and outcomes.  The particular technology used for the study was interactive whiteboards (IWBs).  A feature of the IWB that was used is the ability to “manipulate items directly on the display” (61).  This study was conducted in England, where a majority of the IWBs are found in mathematics classrooms.  The characteristics used to determine the level of interaction was based on how student’s involvement in the lesson is encouraged, expected, and extended to higher order thinking.  Also the increased level of interaction should lead to more control by the student over the direction of the lesson.  In an interactive classroom, the group should be able to investigate new ideas through exploration.  The goal of the IWB is to increase the ability and productive outcome of this exploration.  Thus the emphasis should be changing from teacher-centered to student-centered.  The study was broken into two parts: the first part comparing the difference in interactivity between classrooms that are ICT based and classrooms that are not ICT based for students ages 5-14, and the second part involved looking in depth at teacher’s lessons specifically for the ICT based classrooms. 

I will focus on the second part of the study.  The teachers who were selected for the study were chosen based on their effectiveness in teaching in general, rather than an extensive knowledge of the IWB technology.  One particular lesson observed was a mathematics class of 29 boys and girls between the ages of 9-11.  The classroom had an IWB at the front of the classroom, as well as 3 network computers in the back.  There was a teacher and two aides in the classroom for the lesson.  The math lesson involved teaching students how to add and subtract, first with a number line setting, and then extending their understanding to be able to use purely mental math to complete a problem.  The lesson began with the entire class working together on a problem presented on the IWB involving a temperature question.  Students were invited to come to the board and explain their answer to the class utilizing the IWB to assist them.  The teacher then validated or questioned the student’s response.  After the class explored the topic together, students broke up into several groups.  One particular group of six students was allowed to work at the IWB, while three other groups worked at the desktop computers.  At the IWB, the group was manipulating questions to help solve addition and subtraction problems randomly generated by the technology.  The goal was to move from counting on the number line to using mental math.  After a problem was completed, a student was told they found the right answer, or a wrong answer would trigger a noise from the machine indicating a mistake was made. 

The results of the study found that while the IWB assisted students initially in discovering answers, students quickly became more interested in avoiding the noise made by a wrong answer.  Students were reluctant to switch to using mental math, because they wanted to optimize their number of correct answers.  Thus the importance of the lesson objectives diminished, and students focused mainly on completing a base goal of finishing their task. 

When reflecting on the results of the study, several ideas come to mind.  Perhaps the most important understanding gained from this study is that “technical interactivity is not in itself effective in securing learning, and that students also need the intention of learning and the skills required to marshal resources – including the features of ICT, their own cognitive faculties and those of their peers – towards learning goals” (71).  This means the technology can be used as an aide, but the structure of that use in the lesson is extremely important.  Technology by itself will not raise scores, but technology is a useful tool that can be used to enhance lessons and provide a valuable tool for interaction between students.  When continuing this discuss of interactive technology, a focus on the role of the teacher, the role of reflection, and the dynamic of student interactions would be important aspects to examine to decide the best way to implement ICT into our classrooms.  It is obvious that technology provides a great resource for education, but further analysis is needed to create a path for best practices.