Abstract
Interactive whiteboards (IWBs) have been widely introduced to English primary schools (5–11 years) in the last decade and this has generated much research interest. In the past, research has focused on IWB-use in teacher-led sessions, attending particularly to the nature of teacher-pupil interaction at the IWB and the apparent motivational advantages for children. In contrast, this study focuses on children’s communication and thinking during their semi-autonomous use of the IWB during collaborative groupwork in primary school science lessons, aiming in part to see if the IWB is suited to this type of use. Over the course of one school year, twelve primary teachers of Years 4 and 5 (8–10 years) took part in a professional development and research programme which involved them in devising a sequence of three science lessons incorporating small-group activity at the IWB. The functionality of the IWB is analysed here as means for supporting the children’s joint communication and thinking, using embedded cues and the availability of certain features in the IWB technology. Our observational analysis of two examples of children’s collaborative activity in different classrooms, together with subsequent group interviews, suggests that the IWB can make some identifiable contributions to children’s productive communication and thinking. However the IWB is not seen to be an entirely distinctive or pedagogically transformative learning resource in the primary classroom. In our developing conceptual framework, the children’s knowledge building is closely related to their active engagement in using IWB affordances and their productive dialogue, essentially supported by the teacher’s scaffolding strategies, the establishment and use of “talk rules” in conversation, and the opportunities and constraints applying in classroom participation structures. These conditions help the children to deal with interconnected social, cognitive, and technical problems arising over time. Certain aspects of this form of computer-supported collaborative learning (CSCL) are discussed. These relate to the integration of the IWB with other classroom learning systems and resources, and to the nature of progression in children’s activity and learning with this new type of highly integrated system of CSCL.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Alexander, R. (Ed.). (2010). Children, their world, their education: Final report and recommendations of the Cambridge Primary Review. Abingdon: Routledge.
Barnes, D. (2008). Exploratory talk for learning: Notes on an emerging pedagogy. In N. Mercer & S. Hodgkinson (Eds.), Exploring talk in school (pp. 1–15). London: Sage.
BERA. (2004). Revised ethical guidelines for educational research. Southwell: BERA.
Cazden, C. B. (1986). Classroom discourse. In M. J. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (3rd ed., pp. 432–463). New York: Macmillan/AERA.
Daniels, H. (2001). Vygotsky and pedagogy. London: RoutledgeFalmer.
Dawes, L. (2008). The essential speaking and listening: Talk for learning at Key Stage 2. Abingdon: Routledge.
Dawes, L., Mercer, N., & Wegerif, R. (2003). Thinking together: A programme of activities for developing speaking, listening and thinking skills for children aged 8–11. Birmingham: Imaginative Minds Ltd.
Gillen, J., Littleton, K., Twiner, A., Kleine Staarman, J., & Mercer, N. (2008). Using the interactive whiteboard to resource continuity and support multimodal teaching in a primary science classroom. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 24, 348–358.
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), 283–301.
Higgins, S., Beauchamp, G., & Miller, D. (2007). Reviewing the literature on interactive whiteboards. Learning Media and Technology, 32(3), 213–225.
Howe, C., & Tolmie, A. (2003). Group work in primary school science: Discussion, consensus and guidance from experts. International Journal of Educational Research, 39(1–2), 51–72.
Hutchins, E. (2005). Material anchors for conceptual blends. Journal of Pragmatics, 37, 1555–1577.
Jewitt, C., Moss, G., & Cardini, A. (2007). Pace, interactivity, and multimodality in teacher design of texts for interactive whiteboards in the secondary school. Learning, Media and Technology, 32(3), 303–317.
Kennewell, S., & Beauchamp, G. (2007). The features of interactive whiteboards and their influence on learning. Learning, Media and Technology, 32(3), 227–241.
Lemke, J. L., & Sabelli, N. H. (2008). Complex systems and educational change: Towards a new research agenda. In M. Manson (Ed.), Complexity theory and the philosophy of education (pp. 112–123). Chichester, W. Sussex: Wiley-Blackwell.
Mercer, N. (2000). Words and minds: How we use language to think together. London: Routledge.
Mercer, N. (2004). Sociocultural discourse analysis: Analysing classroom talk as a social mode of thinking. Journal of Applied Linguistics, 1(2), 37–68.
Mercer, N. (2008). The seeds of time: Why classroom dialogue needs a temporal analysis. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 17(1), 33–59.
Mercer, N., & Littleton, K. (2007). Dialogue and the development of children's thinking: A sociocultural approach. London: Routledge.
Mercer, N., Dawes, L., Wegerif, R., & Sams, C. (2004). Reasoning as a scientist: Ways of helping children to use language to learn science. British Educational Research Journal, 30(3), 359–377.
Mercer, N., Warwick, P., Kershner, R., & Kleine Staarman, J. (2010). Can the interactive whiteboard help provide ‘dialogic space’ for children’s collaborative activity? Language and Education, 24(5), 367–384.
Palincsar, A. S. (1998). Social constructivist perspectives on teaching and learning. Annual Review of Psychology, 49, 345–375.
Pea, R. D. (1994). Seeing what we build together: Distributed multimedia learning environments for transformative communications. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 3(3), 285–299.
Rudd, P., Teeman, D., Marshall, H., Mundy, E., White, K., Lin, Y., et al. (2009). Harnessing Technology Schools Survey 2009 Analysis Report (National Foundation for Educational Research for Becta). http://research.becta.org.uk/index.php?section=rh&catcode=_re_rp_02&rid=17153. Accessed 29 April 2010.
Sarmiento, J. W., & Stahl, G. (2008). Extending the joint problem space: Time and sequence as essential features of knowledge building. In Proceedings of the International Conference of the Learning Sciences (ICLS 2008). Utrecht, Netherlands. Web: http://GerryStahl.net/pub/icls2008johann.pdf
Smith, F., Hardman, F., & Higgins, S. (2006). Impact of interactive whiteboards on teacher-pupil interaction in the national literacy and numeracy strategies. British Educational Research Journal, 32(3), 443–457.
Somekh, B., Haldane, M., Jones, K., Lewin, C., Steadman, S., & Scrimshaw, P. (2007). Evaluation of the primary schools whiteboard expansion project: Report to the Department for Education and Skills. London: HMSO.
Suthers, D. D., Dwyer, N., Medina, R., & Vatrapu, R. (2010). A framework for conceptualizing, representing, and analyzing distributed interaction. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 5, 5–42.
Teasley, S. D., & Roschelle, J. (1993). Constructing a joint problem space: The computer as a tool for sharing knowledge. In S. P. Lajoie & S. J. Derry (Eds.), Computers as cognitive tools (pp. 229–258). Mahwah: Erlbaum.
Underwood, J., Baguley, T., Banyard, P., Dillon, G., Farrington-Flint, L., Hayes, M., et al. (2010). ‘Understanding the impact of technology: Learner and school level factors’ Becta 2010. http://research.becta.org.uk/index.php?section=rh&catcode=_re_rp_02&rid=17726. Accessed 29 April 2010.
Warwick, P., & Kershner, R. (2008). Primary teachers’ understanding of the interactive whiteboard as a tool for children’s collaborative learning and knowledge building. Learning, Media and Technology, 33(4), 269–287.
Warwick, P., Wilson, E., & Winterbottom, M. (Eds.). (2006). Teaching and learning primary science with ICT. Maidenhead: Open University Press.
Warwick, P., Mercer, N., Kershner, R., & Kleine Staarman, J. (2010). In the mind and in the technology: The vicarious presence of the teacher in pupils’ learning of science in collaborative group activity at the interactive whiteboard. Computers and Education, 55, 350–362.
Wegerif, R. (2007). Dialogic education and technology: Expanding the space of learning. New York: Springer.
Wertsch, J. V. (1991). Voices of the mind: A sociocultural approach to mediated action. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Acknowledgments
This paper is based on a project entitled “Interactive Whiteboards and Collaborative Learning in Primary Science”, funded by the Economic and Social Research Council (RES-000-22-2556). We would like to express thanks to all the children and teachers involved and to the local authority that supported the research. We are grateful for the comments and advice of the editor and reviewers on an early version of this paper.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Kershner, R., Mercer, N., Warwick, P. et al. Can the interactive whiteboard support young children’s collaborative communication and thinking in classroom science activities?. Computer Supported Learning 5, 359–383 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-010-9096-2
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-010-9096-2