Ethical Concerns

Ethical Concerns

 In addition to social implications of bringing IWB into education, there are ethical consequences. Does the introduction of this technology change the traditional way children are taught? Education is a field that is critical to human development; therefore the risk of altering it always brings up the question whether this change is for better or worse. The idea that the instructor’s lecture is not the main source of the lesson and increased autonomy for students is a foreign concept to older educators. Ultimately, researchers have deduced that education as a whole is changing and technology is simply being used in a way to compliment such a change (Manny-Ikan & Dagan, 2011). This may cause conflict between the older educators and the younger generation of educators, but through technology training and open communication this adversity towards IWBs can be overcome. 

Another ethical caution involving the IWB is the question of distributing funds to schools so that they can acquire such boards. “Decisions to allocate serious financial resources for the purchase and installation of this technology are made without necessarily being informed by convincing research about how the boards impact learning…(Northcote, 2010).” The question of purchasing a new form of technology without first knowing the ramifications of such a choice is an ethical one. Bill Ferriter (2010), a successful language arts teacher from North Carolina, believes that IWBs are put into place without a follow up evaluation and therefore become a tool that only serves to be shown off to parents and supervisors. He goes on to say, “Interactive Whiteboard programs are nothing more than vain attempts to buy change.  Rarely paired with a clear vision of the classrooms we’d like to see, a set of tangible objectives that can be measured, or any systematic attempts to evaluate outcomes, Interactive Whiteboards are sad examples of the careless decision making and waste that are crippling some of our schools and systems (Ferriter, 2010).”

Unfortunately in his blog Ferriter fails to explain how exactly IWBs cripple school systems other than a teacher’s mediocre knowledge of the new technology. Although prior to initial installation, school systems may or may not have done sufficient research. It is clear in conducting this research paper that in recent years IWBs have been researched in a variety of different settings. Also, to address the issue of teacher’s poor technology skills, there are, at least in Fairfax County, Virginia, numerous opportunities to receive training to help teachers better use their IWB.

School boards or administrations that make such technological decisions, should ethically consider what technology they bring into the classroom by doing proper research and taking advantage of research already available to the public. Furthermore, if IWBs better classrooms and improve student learning, then there is an ethical issue as to deciding which students receive the opportunity to enhanced education. This issue is not only wide-spread in terms of whether urban or rural schools should have IWBs but also whether math or science, English or history classes should have IWBs in their classrooms within a single school.