My last rant started with the broadband divide and ended with tired pedagogies (as exemplified by IWBs). I follow up today with a conversation hosted by Tom Barrett.

Barrett shared his views after getting his students to use surface computers (Smart Tables) and invited other educators to share their thoughts. Sharon Elin responded and here are some choice quotes:

You have described flaws that echo the fears I was harboring about not only the Smart Table but about IWB’s in particular….

In my opinion, the danger in the use of IWBs in general is the difficulty in bringing project-based, exploratory constructivism into classroom lessons when using the hardware as an instructional delivery tool, activity, or as a game-playing device.

Unless a teacher is creative and deliberately avoids the tendency, an IWB or Smart Table remains one-dimensional and keeps the focus on the front of the room, with the teacher as the main source of instruction and the device as the hook (”sage on the stage”). This focus is not always a bad thing and is actually useful in some parts of some lessons, but many IWB proponents want to make these devices the one and only focal point of the classroom — the demigod of instruction.

The interactivity of IWBs and Smart Tables is definitely engaging and entertaining, and works well to excite students, but I don’t see critical thinking, global exploration, and collaborative activities becoming part of the devices’ repertoire yet.

I’m betting creative educators will find ways to increase the collaborative use of IWBs and Smart Tables eventually, but I think we need to slow down our excitement and guard against the seduction of the “wow” factor. We need to remind ourselves that it’s not about the tool… it’s about the learning.

I could not have said it better!

So don’t just take in this teacher educator’s ivory tower point of view. Consider what that veteran on the battle field had to say!