Handheld Learning - learning with mobile and ubiquitous technologies

Aaaaah if only F-S had included a picture of a cuddly teddy bear on the front, they would have sold millions....

But seriously, thanks Dave (and team) for the behind the scenes work that you have done in pushing to get the product made it really does look like it meets so many of the needs that a learner may have.

One note about the training voucher, will there be any regional training? London is a long way from Redcar and a free voucher becomes useless when we add on the costs of travel and possibly accomodation.

Thanks

Andrew

Yep One Note would be good but interestingly many of the excellent things that Gerry showed could have been done by Smart Notebook (or does it do a lot of things that you didn't have time to show?). If we had that as a version on the PDA the children would have a very powerful authoring and organising piece of software to use. This is particularly relevant in that teachers usually use the software for the collaborative "bits at the board" so is very familiar to teachers and children already. I had the chance to talk to some people from Smart and they are beginning to think about the logistics of it.

One thing I did want to ask though Gerry is that you asked your staff to maybe not use the whiteboard (I presume you meant interactive) and use the tablet PC instead. They do the same job don't they, or am I misunderstanding something? Your presentation was the highlight of the conference for me because it showed lots of examples of classroom practise using a device. 

Thanks

Andrew

Hello,
I was one of the six consultants (one from each authority in the original pilot) that led the training with the interactive whiteboards that the Newcastle report refers to. Several issues are not recognised clearly within that report and subsequent press articles have merely ignored reported what they wanted to.
Firstly the training was almost ENTIRELY focussed on pedagogy, i.e., given that you are whole class teaching, how do you engage and motivate individual children? The mantra "what are the children actually doing" probably sums up the training. I agree entirely that many, many whiteboard lessons could be replaced by showing The Simpsons on a projector and you would have the same high levels of engagement but perhaps low level learning going on. We looked at ways to allow children to work collaboratively and often independently but use the board as the original stimulus so we had a shared purpose of what the lesson was, perhaps a demonstration of what the children were to do (or could do), then use the board to bring back together ideas (scribed, scanned work, vid clips. photos - however the children were recording). They were also very useful for annotation of images, manipulation of text, capturing vid clips and sorting the stills etc, etc, etc. The training that went with these boards was very much based on how they worked in the context of effective whole class teaching. I was actually lambasted by a literacy consultant when delivering some national training because "the board is only being used for 5mins of the lesson" (sic). I think the fact that the boards are very much seen as a piece of ICT kit instantly creates a mind set that is unhelpful for getting across the key pedagogical messages. I worked closely alongside 44 teachers in the original pilot and I would honestly say that only 20% of them really took on board (lol) the pedagogy, the rest to various extent thought ICT and tried to make "whizzy" lessons. This was then  further exacerbated by the roll out of the funding for boards to the rest of the country. This roll out included no provision for consultant support, LAs had to find their own. It usually fell to ICT consultants with a day here or there devoted to it. As you can imagine this further enforced the mindset.
Secondly, the report refers to whiteboard use as a blanket term, although backing up with evidence from the Newcastle report which had a Year 5/6 focus. When we were given extended funding to extend the pilot we put boards into 50% of our early years settings. These were set at child height (roughly hip height of the average child in the class, and placed in role play areas so that they focussed on a key strand of the curriculum. Although teachers do use them as a direct teaching tool with small groups or individual children, many of the activities are set up then used without adult intervention (though often observed for assessment reasons). I would argue that these have actually been the most successful installations in the project as a whole. The boards in Year 2 onwards have tended to be used in the way described in earlier posts and I won't defend that use but I would not use it as evidence that boards are a waste of time because I have plenty of evidence (albeit from a smaller group of colleagues) of how teaching can be far more effective with one. The challenge is not to rubbish them but how to get people to use them effectively.
As a teaching consultant I see the use of a whiteboard with the use of handhelds as a fantastic opportunity. For years, when teaching with a whiteboard, I have wanted to share files with the children so they could then go and work on them, then bring them back and share them with the rest of the class. It is only very recently that I had actually seen the power of a pocket pc to deliver those elements.
So don't be fooled by a bit of sensational journalism that has used the facts to support a story in the way that they wanted to. Whiteboards are one fantastic tool to use in the classroom but it requires excellent pedagogy to stop them being glorified projector screens.
ST