David Lowbridge-Ellis MBE

Mini-white boards are great. I genuinely love them. But as with any means of participation, they have benefits and limitations and teachers should be aware of both and use accordingly. On the upside, they offer maximum observational efficiency. When everyone writes i can see the full data set—everyone’s answer—and when they hold them up I can scan and review with maximum speed. That’s a big win. Plus they feel low stakes to students and therefore low-risk… if it’s wrong I just erase it. Ideal for settings like retrieval practice. And when the routine is installed well they are fast and engaging. Some limitations to consider though. There’s a downslide to disposable writing that disappears. It’s harder to go back to it: to study and revise it later or to improve it. The answers are not in your notes! By the way we have a video of a chemistry teacher, Abi Mincer of Totteridge Academy in London who writes the answer on her smart board after students erase so there’s a list of the answers permanently visible. Love that. MWBs can also socialize hasty or even sloppy writing- with the sloppy referring to the production or to the thinking. The goal can easily become speed of response. The marker slips easily across the board and this just maybe makes it so that students don’t write as slowly and thoughtfully as they might on paper. Slow, deliberate thinking leads to careful word choice, the inclusion of new ideas and assists with encoding. MWBs can be a crutch. It’s an easy way to engage students. A bit easier than other also important ways to engage them such as cold call and stop and jot. That means there’s a risk of over relying on it. It’s a great tool for some situations. But a craftsperson needs lots of tools. I’m sure you can think of other benefits and limitations. Just wanted to share a few so that teachers are more likely to use a great tool for maximum gain.