5.5 Interview Data Related to Research Question 4
5.5.7 Variable 7 – Pedagogy
Diane enjoyed using technology in her primary school teaching role and described her teaching style as “very interactive” (1:44). She was confident using Easiteach software1 and used a lot of visual cues for her students on her IWB. She was able to split her IWB screen in two halves in order to switch between teaching tools for multiple purposes, regardless of the subject. Saving, filing and retrieving student work on the IWB was standard daily practice for Diane, as was using multimedia resources and connecting to the internet. She gave examples of using her IWB as a resource tool, a teaching tool, and for student brainstorming. Her students expected to use it and they used it often; it was common for students to share a piece of work that the class would edit together. Diane integrated her IWB into practically every lesson on a daily basis, and never used a regular whiteboard; she considered IWBs to be a valuable “resource tool for every unit of work” (4:209).
University staff member, Mark, was confident using technology and appreciated the value of IWBs in a classroom, but thought that it was justifiable for universities to teach pre-service teachers the theory and skills for choosing the right technology for a task, rather than focusing on specific IWB education. He also believed that his teaching style would need to change a little bit if he were to effectively incorporate an
Chapter 5 – Interview Results ¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
________________________________________________________________________ 159 IWB into his tutorials; if he had more skills in using an IWB, he thought he would be able to adapt his pedagogy to suit. Mark had used an IWB as a medium for his students to present a lesson, and acknowledged the relevance and benefits of an IWB to his teaching area. He could see scope for a broader range of interactive lesson deliveries from both students and teacher if greater access to IWBs was available. University staff member, John, liked using technology and thought that education in the use of IWBs should be part of teacher education courses, because IWBs were so commonplace, “we need to be engaging with the resources and technology that students are going to see in the classrooms” (1:13-14). However, he did not think that IWBs suited his teaching style as he tended to focus on practical, hands-on learning, although he acknowledged that there were virtual simulations that could be used to support his students’ learning. He thought that there was “concern by both students and staff that students perceive a difference between what they learn at university and what they learn on prac” (1:46-48). Furthermore, he had also “heard it mentioned specifically when I was visiting students on prac, that they haven’t had the experience of the IWB that are so much a part of the primary classroom” (1:46-50). Hence, he was concerned that the pre-service teachers are disadvantaged as “they are going into their prac situations and they haven’t actually had any experience, turning it on, manipulating it, setting it up, and finding things and organising things” (3:164-167). John did not have ready access to an IWB at UTAS, and in his past teaching career, had mainly used an IWB as a projector screen with little use of its interactive features. He could envisage modelling IWB use by having students interacting in meaningful ways in his face-to-face classes and thought that his teaching would benefit from further development of his IWB skills.
All 18 pre-service teacher interviewees were very positive about the value of IWBs as a teaching tool in schools and all believed that they should be utilised at university for teacher education. In Julie’s words, “I think it should be mandatory. I think while we learn a lot of theory and that might be quite useful, there are a lot of practical skills that aren’t taught or modelled and integrating something like that into everyday teaching would assist teachers to then use them in their own practice” (1:21-24). All 18 interviewees also said that they needed further education in the use of IWBs. Of these pre-service teachers, 17 felt they needed to learn how to troubleshoot IWB
Chapter 5 – Interview Results ¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
________________________________________________________________________ 160 issues, 16 wanted to learn more about manipulating hands-on interactive features, 15 wanted to know more about locating and developing resources, and 13 wanted to learn more about the pedagogy associated with using an IWB. Emily, when considering her lack of experience and skill with using an IWB, said she felt “nervous about how [she would] find the time to learn them and maximise the usage and develop [her] knowledge before [she] becomes just another whiteboard type of teacher” (3:159-162). In comparison, Robyn felt that her teaching style suited the use of an IWB as she used an interactive and student-centred approach and was relatively confident in her IWB skills. All of the pre-service teacher interviewees felt that using an IWB would suit their teaching style and were very positive about using IWBs and technology in general, apart from Maddy. A self-professed technophobe and traditionalist, Maddy thought it to be unlikely that she would use an IWB in her teaching, but acknowledged that education in how to use one may influence her view in this regard.
5.5.8 Summary
Variable 1: Perceptions about the Usefulness of IWBs.
All the interview participants from all three participant groups thought that IWBs were a useful teaching tool. However, two pre-service teachers and both the university staff members found it difficult to think of ways to use them. The majority thought that an IWB would improve their teaching; one university staff member and one pre-service teacher disagreed.
Variable 2: Participants’ Attitude towards IWB use.
The primary school teacher and 13 pre-service teacher interviewees had a positive attitude towards IWB use. The remaining five pre-service teachers were unsure due to their limited experience. Neither of the two university staff interviewees were interested in IWBs, nor did they consider IWBs to be an important tool.
Variable 3: IWB Self-Efficacy.
IWB self-efficacy was evident in the responses of the primary school teacher interviewee and approximately half of the pre-service teachers. Signs of IWB self-
Chapter 5 – Interview Results ¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
________________________________________________________________________ 161 efficacy were lacking in the responses of the university staff interviewees and approximately half of the pre-service teachers.
Variable 4: Perceived Ease of Use of IWBs.
The primary school teacher interviewee’s responses indicated that she thought IWBs were easy to use. In contrast, one university staff member interviewee was unsure, and the other did not perceive IWBs to be easy to use. Overall, pre-service teacher interviewees indicated that IWBs were not easy to use, particularly for those who were relatively inexperienced with technology.
Variable 5: Perceptions regarding Technological Complexity of IWBs.
The primary school teacher interviewee was not concerned by the technological complexity of IWBs because she had developed an appreciation of their value as a teaching tool which had inspired her to keep improving her ability to use one. Neither university staff member interviewee was worried by the technologically complex nature of IWBs, however a mixed response was received from the pre-service teacher interviewees. This generally originated from the pre-service teachers’ lack of IWB education as well as ineffective attempts (or lack thereof) by colleague teachers to use IWBs during professional experience.
Variable 6: Facilitating Conditions for Using IWBs.
The primary school teacher interviewee experienced supportive facilitating conditions for using an IWB at her school. She had constant access to an IWB, and the management had provided support and encouragement and set clear expectations for IWB use in classrooms. Technical support was available, and she had received some education in IWB use from external experts and had ongoing opportunities to learn from her peers.
The university staff interviewees’ facilitating conditions were very different to those experienced by the primary school teacher. Limited IWB access was available, there was little managerial support and there was no expectation for IWB use in teacher education courses. Although technical support was available, education in IWB use had not been available for these staff members, possibly due to timetable clashes.
Chapter 5 – Interview Results ¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
________________________________________________________________________ 162 Pre-service teacher interviewees’ facilitating conditions were similar to those experienced by the university staff members. Limited or no IWB access was available for the majority of these pre-service teachers. Although many pre-service teachers had an expectation to receive IWB education as part of their studies, this was not a reality for the vast majority. Education in IWB use could not be counted on during professional experience as it depended upon the school’s facilities, technical support and colleague teacher’s own level of IWB expertise.
Variable 7: Pedagogy.
The primary school teacher interviewee described her pedagogy as interactive and suited to using an IWB. As such, she found it easy to embed IWB into all her units of work for a variety of purposes. Neither university staff member interviewee thought their pedagogy suited the use of an IWB and acknowledged that it would need to change if they were to incorporate an IWB in their teacher education course. All the pre-service teacher interviewees thought that university staff should model IWB use as part of their teacher education course. All of these interviewees also indicated that they need more education in IWB use, with 13 specifically indicating they needed to learn more about the appropriate pedagogy for using an IWB.