A petici\u00f3n popular \ud83d\ude09 algunas referencias a investigaciones sobre el uso de pizarras electr\u00f3nicas en clase, principalmente del Reino Unido. Se incluyen res\u00famenes (en ingl\u00e9s, lo siento) y enlaces. Algunos art\u00edculos son \u00abde pago\u00bb. Desde las universidades se debe poder acceder a ellos (si sus bibliotecas est\u00e1n suscritas, naturamente). (Ya hemos tratado en otras ocasiones el tema de la privatizaci\u00f3n de los resultados de la investigaci\u00f3n financiada con fondos p\u00fablicos y del compromiso \u00e9tico del investigador\/a en este tema).<\/p>\n
En general, las investigaciones destacan las implicaciones pedag\u00f3gicas de la tecnolog\u00eda, especialmente el \u00e9nfasis en el enfoque \u00abpresentacional\u00bb de la ense\u00f1anza, y la necesidad de formaci\u00f3n de los docentes para extraer la \u00abinteractividad\u00bb de las pizarras. Nada muy nuevo, en realidad. Pero si alguien necesita referencias sobre este tema…<\/p>\n
All\u00e1 va.<\/p>\n
Armstrong, V., Barnes, S., Sutherland, R., Curran, S., Mills, S., & Thompson, I. (2005). Collaborative research methodology for investigating teaching and learning: The use of interactive whiteboard technology. Educational Review, 57(4), 457\u2013469. http:\/\/www.interactiveeducation.ac.uk\/Publications\/Armstrong%20&%20Barnes%20-%20proof.pdf<\/a><\/p>\n Abstract: Beauchamp, G. (2004). Teacher use of the interactive whiteboard in primary schools: Towards an effective transition framework. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 13(3), 327\u2013348. http:\/\/dx.doi.org\/10.1080\/14759390400200186<\/a><\/p>\n Abstract Hennessy, S., Deaney, R., Ruthven, K., & Winterbottom, M. (2007). Pedagogical strategies for using the interactive whiteboard to foster learner participation in school science. Learning, Media and Technology, 32(3), 283\u2013301. http:\/\/www.educ.cam.ac.uk\/research\/projects\/istl\/LMT_IWB.doc<\/a><\/p>\n Abstract Kennewell, S. (2006). Reflections on the interactive whiteboard phenomenon: a synthesis of research from the UK Swansea School of Education. http:\/\/www.aare.edu.au\/06pap\/ken06138.pdf<\/a><\/p>\n Abstract Moss, G., & Jewitt, C. (2008, February). Pace, interactivity and multimodality in teacher design of texts for interactive whiteboards in the secondary school classroom. Paper presented to Pedagogies for Interactive Technologies: Whiteboards and Visualisers conference, Institute of Education, University of London. http:\/\/www.informaworld.com\/smpp\/content~content=a781200493~db=all~tab=content~order=page<\/a><\/p>\n Abstract Slay, H., Sieb\u00f6rger, I., and Hodgkinson-Williams, C. (2008). Interactive whiteboards: Real beauty or just \u00ablipstick\u00bb?. Comput. Educ. 51, 3 (Nov. 2008), 1321-1341. http:\/\/dx.doi.org\/10.1016\/j.compedu.2007.12.006<\/a><\/p>\n Abstract
\nThis paper discusses the results of a research project which aimed to capture, analyse and communicate the complex interactions between students, teachers and technology that occur in the classroom. Teachers and researchers used an innovative research design developed through the InterActive Education Project (Sutherland et al. , 2003). Video case studies were carried out in four classrooms, focusing on the use of interactive whiteboard technology for teaching and learning. The case studies were analysed using StudioCode, an analytic tool which allows researchers to mark and code segments of video data into categories and themes. Teachers developed coding systems drawing on the learning aims and objectives of their particular lessons. The case studies illustrate that the introduction of interactive whiteboards (IWBs) into the classroom involves much more than the physical installation of the board and software. Teachers are the critical agents in mediating the software, the integration of the software into the subject aims of the lesson and appropriate use of the IWB to promote quality interactions and interactivity.<\/strong><\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\nThe growing use of the interactive whiteboard (IWB) in primary school teaching forms part of a number of initiatives within the schools of the United Kingdom to develop the use of information and communications technology (ICT) in teaching and learning. The IWB presents both challenges and opportunities to teachers, particularly in terms of staff development and training. This study uses classroom observation and semi-structured interviews with teachers now working in a recently built, technology-rich primary school to develop a generic progressive framework and developmental model for schools introducing the IWB. This framework can be used to assess and guide teacher progress on the continuum towards becoming a ‘synergistic user’. As teachers make this transition there is a fundamental requirement to adopt an interactive teaching style, alongside the gradual development of specific ICT skills.<\/strong> The study also examines implications for teacher education and training for schools, both prior and subsequent to the introduction of the IWB into classroom use. These include specific technical and pedagogical competencies which need to be addressed for effective interactive use of the IWB in classroom teaching<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\nThis study aimed to extend the currently limited understanding of how pedagogy is developing in response to the influx of interactive whiteboards (IWBs) in schools in the UK and some other countries. A case study approach was employed to investigate how experienced classroom practitioners are beginning to harness the functionality of this technology to support learning in science. The methods included focus group interviews with four secondary science departments, plus lesson observations and interviews with two teachers and their pupils.
\nWe analysed the data from a sociocultural perspective on learning, focusing on the strategies that teachers used to exploit the dynamic, manipulable objects of joint reference and annotative tools afforded by the technology to foster the cognitive, social and physical participation of learners in whole class activity. The case study teachers demonstrated contrasting approaches to designing and supporting activity in which pupils shared, evaluated and developed ideas using the IWB. Pupil manipulation of objects on the IWB was deemed desirable but \u2013 along with pedagogical interactivity \u2013 was constrained by systemic school and subject cultures, curricular and assessment frameworks. Observed and potential opportunities for active cognitive and social participation are outlined.<\/strong><\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\nIt is unusual to focus educational research on a particular piece of equipment, but the interactive whiteboard (IWB) seems to have a pedagogical and cultural status which makes it different from other new pieces of ICT equipment<\/strong>. It particular, it has been enthusiastically adopted by nearly all the teachers who have one installed in their classrooms, and is sought after by most of the teachers who do not currently have access to one. A group of researchers has formed within BERA New Technologies SIG, covering several projects in the UK which have been funded to investigate, directly or indirectly, the impact of the IWB on teaching and learning.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\nTeachers making texts for use in the classroom is nothing new, it is an established aspect of pedagogic practice. The introduction of interactive whiteboards (IWBs) into UK secondary schools has, however, impacted on this practice in a number of ways. Changes in the site of design and display\u2014from the printed page or worksheet and the blackboard to the electronic site of the screen, together with easy access to multimodal resources, including colour, image, sound and movement\u2014bring new potentials for teacher text design for IWBs. The texts designed and used with IWBs can be viewed as a meeting point for the agenda of educational policy, the interests of the commercial sector, teachers’ pedagogic concerns and the facilities of technology. Pace, interactivity and multimodality are converged on by policy and research literature as key benefits of IWBs for pedagogy. In this article, we discuss teachers’ design of IWB texts with a focus on these three resources. Drawing on three illustrative examples of IWB use in secondary schools maths, we examine how these resources are articulated and mediated in the classroom through teachers’ text design. We highlight the role of teachers in digital text design and the potential of text design as a pedagogic tool for change (and non-change). We conclude that pedagogic text design for IWBs would benefit from a more nuanced approach to these (and other) resources that foregrounds pedagogy and backgrounds technology.<\/strong><\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\nThere has been extensive investment by governments and individual schools in interactive whiteboard technology in developed countries premised on the assumption that their use in education will impact positively on learners’ achievements. Developing countries, such as South Africa, keen to raise attainment among their learners are following suit. While at least one of the nine provinces in South Africa had undertaken pilot roll-outs of interactive whiteboards (IWBs) in schools, the Eastern Cape Department of Education commissioned a feasibility study to determine teachers and learners perceptions of the potential benefits and drawbacks of using interactive pen technology, specifically the eBeam, in their teaching and learning environments, before embarking upon a large scale roll-out. This paper reports on a case study of three government schools and highlights the learners and teachers’ enthusiasm about the \u00bbbig screen\u00bb and the multimedia options, but also raises concerns about the lack of ICT literacy displayed by teachers and learners and the cost of technology. As most of the benefits mentioned by the teachers and learners seemed to accrue to the use of the laptop and data projector combination and most of the drawbacks emanated from the use of the interactive pen technology itself, we suggest that it may not be expeditious to attempt to \u00bbleap-frog\u00bb the use of interactive technologies. Instead we suggest that an evolution of ICT related pedagogy is necessary to make optimal use of interactive pen technologies such as the eBeam and that teachers should be offered technologies, not have them imposed upon them.<\/strong><\/p><\/blockquote>\n