This year we have been installing projectors and document cameras into all
classrooms K-8 as well as implementing the use of IWB in about 14 classrooms
(after a couple of "pilots" last year). I agree with Steve that a "blanket"
approach like this may mean some equipment that does not get used much
(particularly without a strong PD plan. UGH). However my Admin team argued
that there is no point in training people/encouraging adoption if the
equipment is not "at hand" when a teacher is ready (i.e. loaners are not
sufficient). Agreed. I have recently had some of my tech-reticent teachers
exclaim about how handy it was to have the projector/camera there for a
"teachable moment," and how excited the students were when it was used.

What I am seeing is that the projector is the pivotal piece: once that is in
place, people begin to explore the content they can project, with or without
the DocCam or IWB. THEN they begin to see the "value added" of a DocCam over
an overhead projector, then what IWB can add. In many instances, however, a
projector and wireless mouse/keyboard is sufficient for the level of
adoption. IWB is not for everyone.

One of the fascinating aspects of our implementation has been observing how
much of instruction is dependant on physical space/where the teacher (or
students) are positioned during instruction. Adapting to using technology in
instruction is causing people to rethink some practices, which has it's pros
and cons. Change is hard.


on 2/3/10 9:44 AM, Stephen Barner wrote:

> I can't really agree with that as a blanket statement.  There are
> benefits to piloting interactive whiteboards before a full
> implementation.  Different schools and teachers have different needs.
> We still have teachers who don't use projectors, yet they are very
> effective.  It would be better to give another teacher an interactive
> whiteboard than to mount a projector that doesn't get used.
> Steve Barner
> South Burlington High School
> -----Original Message-----
> From: School Information Technology Discussion
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Raymond Ballou
> Sent: Wednesday, February 03, 2010 8:59 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Need a couple of stories concerning Smartboards
> We are a smartboard shop but I would agree with Eric, and would go
> further in this point. That for equity amongst teachers (and therefore
> 'equal' or 'fair'
> impact on students) it is a better system that every teacher have a
> projector before any one teacher has a projector AND an IWB.
> R
>> I am concerned that this message specifies one particular product. ...
> Eric
> on 2/2/10 12:31 PM, Peter Drescher wrote:
>> of anecdotal examples of how a Smartboard
> ______________________________________________________________
> ______________________________________________________________
> This email may contain information protected under the Family
> Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) or the Health Insurance
> Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA).  If this email contains
> confidential and/or privileged health or student information and you
> are not entitled to access such information under FERPA or HIPAA,
> federal regulations require that you destroy this email without
> reviewing it and you may not forward it to anyone.
> --
> This message has been scanned for viruses and
> dangerous content by MailScanner, ClamAV and Bitdefender  and is
> believed to be clean.

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message, including any attachments, is
for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential
and privileged information protected under the Family Educational Rights and
Privacy Act. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is
prohibited. If you are not an intended recipient, please contact the sender
by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the message.