How much were smart boards?

Kai Yoshida

Interactive whiteboards began gaining popularity in the late 1990s. One of the leading companies was SMART Technologies, which created the SMART Board.

From blackboards in the 1800s to whiteboards in the 1960s, technological advancements enabled the creation of interactive whiteboards in the 1990s.

Xerox PARC invented the first interactive whiteboard in 1990, allowing people to directly connect their computers to a board while maintaining regular whiteboard capabilities. In 1991 the leading interactive whiteboard company, SMART Technologies, released its first product, the SMART Board. Initially, these boards were geared towards offices and small meetings. However, in the late 90s, interactive whiteboard companies adjusted the target consumers towards schools.

Thousands of schools across the world, including Carlmont, thought this new device would revolutionize education.

On paper, interactive whiteboards seemed like the real deal. Connecting a computer straight to the front of the classroom makes lesson planning much quicker and simpler. Teachers can immediately display notes on PowerPoint presentations without having to write them out during a lecture. But in reality, how would they perform?  

“My first impression of the SMART Board was being terrified and confused, as I usually am over new technology, but as I gradually learned how to use it, I felt more comfortable with it. Pre-pandemic, I was using it every day in class, all day long,” said David Gomez, a history teacher at Carlmont.

SMART Boards came with steep learning curves for many teachers. Once they overcame this, interactive whiteboards began to show their worth. Along with simpler lesson planning, a study in 2009 showed an increase in student engagement, suggesting that it was easier for students to participate and made class more enjoyable.

“The pros of a SMART Board are the ability to access information and materials from online sources and display them in front of the class; particularly things which previously had to be photocopied and distributed,” Gomez said. “Students use it all the time for presentations and projects as well.”

The Pros and cons of smart boards by Kai Yoshida

Related links:
Glucose meters | OneTouch®
Does a tablet have a touch screen?
Shopping a “final sale” section? 5 tips before you buy.
4k vs 1080p Surveillance Cameras: What's the Best Choice?
How Much Do Commercial Access Control Systems Cost?

In addition, interactive whiteboards help many students grasp concepts much quicker through increased engagement and visual learning. According to the International Institute for Science, Technology, and Education (IISTE), increased engagement stimulates thinking and leads to an increased personal understanding of concepts. Furthermore, according to the Social Science Research Network (SSRN), 65% of the population are visual learners, and SMART Boards can display high-resolution photos and graphics.

“I think SMART Boards are really helpful because it helps our teachers stay organized, which helps us learn better because we can clearly see and understand what they are teaching us,” said Saya Deshpande, a junior.

However, there are two significant drawbacks to SMART Boards. The first one is the price. Interactive whiteboards do not come cheap; they could cost anywhere from $700 to north of $3000. Installation coupled with maintenance could easily set back a school tens of thousands of dollars. The second drawback is the actual functionality of the boards. Interactive whiteboards quickly become outdated, but replacement is not an option because of the cost. Many of Carlmont’s SMART Boards are now over a decade old, which causes them to become defective, and writing on them becomes inconvenient. They often lag and are inaccurate, so teachers tend to write on adjacent whiteboards and only use the SMART Board as a projector.

“I don’t like how SMART Boards are unreliable and that teachers often waste time by switching between the whiteboard and SMART Board pens and needing to fix the writing on the board when it glitches,” Deshpande said.

Many question the importance of interactive whiteboards since many teachers avoid interacting with them.

By no means are interactive whiteboards a dying market; in fact, the industry is projected to reach a value of $2.8 billion by 2027 with a compound annual growth rate of 7.6%, according to Grand View Research. Despite the drawbacks, SMART Boards ultimately allow users to be more efficient. 

“Teachers sometimes say, ‘I can get by with a whiteboard and a marker.’ I would say, I can do that too if I must, but it’s not ideal,” Gomez said, “the SMART Board allows for things that can’t be done with just a whiteboard and a marker.”

A major selling point at the advent of the $315 million long-range facilities plan, also known as the Red Plan, most of the interactive boards are past their prime. And there isn't money to replace them.

Red Plan money wasn't intended to buy eventual replacements of the technology it first paid for, but district technology manager Bart Smith expected new money would follow to address evolving needs.

"It really hasn't happened," he said.

That means that as millions of dollars in technology fails, it won't be replaced. What continues to operate will run well beyond recommended lifespans — and it's not just Smart Boards. Video security systems, computers, printers, projectors and classroom sound amplifiers installed as part of the Red Plan — approved in 2007 and completed in 2013 — are outdated.

No money for tech

The district's entire technology infrastructure is worth about $8.4 million.

Red Plan money couldn't be used for technology replacement, said Kerry Leider, retired property and risk manager for the district, who managed the plan for the district.

"There was a lot of conversation about the fact that those systems would need some ongoing financing plans," he said, because the large initial investment meant upgrades would be needed all at once, and much more quickly than building repairs.

For example, Leider said, every 7-10 years the district would have to determine replacement funding, which could include a potential request to the community to pay for it.

While a technology referendum is up to the School Board, superintendent Bill Gronseth said he wants to learn what the community wants before making any kind of recommendation. This month, the board is set to vote on a separate ask for more operating levy money in November — the sort of tax increase that pays for smaller class sizes and other classroom expenses.

The district currently has no savings to invest in updated technology, and the district is required to offer basic necessities first: things like busing and heating.

New money would be necessary to invest heavily in a technology upgrade, Gronseth said.

Last year in Minnesota about a dozen school districts asked taxpayers for more technology money through bond referendums. Most were successful, according to Minnesota School Boards Association data.

"You never saw them 10 years ago," said Greg Abbott, communications director for the association. "But today (technology referendums) are very common because kids need to work with (updated) technology."

On the district's wishlist is a device for every student — likely a Chromebook — to be used in class for interactive learning. But Chromebooks come at a cost: about $1.6 million annually, according to district calculations.

Those costs include a Chromebook for each of the 8,000-plus students, employee training, licenses, cases, repairs and additional tech staff.

Installed in the 17 district schools — including alternative locations — are 572 Smart Boards and their projectors, some of which were installed well before the Red Plan. They cost about $5,000 each.

The plan is to remove the oldest first, at a pace of 60 per year through 2028. The first 60 will go if the district's technology budget is increased enough; still an unknown. That would allow the purchase of display screens.

Up first are Lakewood and Stowe elementary schools, among the first schools to have Smart Boards. The boards will be replaced by large screens to display information from the teacher's computer and, if the money ever comes, information from students' computers.

'Sign of the times'

Money designated for technology spending via state aid and property tax income is drawn from the same pot as textbook and equipment purchases, like snow-blowers. Less than $2 million is available in 2019 to cover all those needs.

Technology will get about 70 percent of that, said Peggy Blalock, the district's finance manager. The tech department also receives about $700,000 in general fund money, along with some rebate cash, which amounted to $140,000 for the 2017-18 school year. The budget — which was $2.1 million in 2018 — will likely see a small increase for the 2018-19 school year, Blalock said.

That supports the district's basic needs, including emergency communication, a computer for each teacher, internet access and some computers for student use. Consultants have told Smith a district of Duluth's size should be spending twice that to keep current.

"It will take us 10 years to replace Smart Boards at the current pace," Smith said, compared to a more typical 1-2 years.

That means the last schools that received them — Congdon and Myers-Wilkins elementaries — will potentially use theirs for 15 years, or nearly twice as long as a typical life cycle.

Districts across the country are beginning to offer personal devices for each student, Smith said. It eliminates the need for computer labs and keeps kids in class with a familiar device for things like testing. So far, each school in Duluth has at least one cart of Chromebooks to share.

Lincoln Park Middle School teacher Dean Herold — who first began teaching using chalk — said many teachers have lesson plans using Smart Board resources and will have to adjust those as boards are phased out.

"The biggest question is how long before we are able to afford new technology," he said. "No district that I have heard of is able to purchase these tools districtwide without help from the state through legislation and local levies/referendums being passed."

Today, kids need to be taught with the latest technology to enter the workforce or college successfully, said districtwide Parent Teacher Student Association president Stacey DeRoche.

"It's a sign of the times," she said. "But we've got to fund it."

©2018 the Duluth News Tribune (Duluth, Minn.) Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.

(TNS) — Smart Boards are set to be phased out from Minnesota's Duluth school district classrooms beginning next summer.A major selling point at the advent of the $315 million long-range facilities plan, also known as the Red Plan, most of the interactive boards are past their prime. And there isn't money to replace them.Red Plan money wasn't intended to buy eventual replacements of the technology it first paid for, but district technology manager Bart Smith expected new money would follow to address evolving needs."It really hasn't happened," he said.That means that as millions of dollars in technology fails, it won't be replaced. What continues to operate will run well beyond recommended lifespans — and it's not just Smart Boards. Video security systems, computers, printers, projectors and classroom sound amplifiers installed as part of the Red Plan — approved in 2007 and completed in 2013 — are outdated.The district's entire technology infrastructure is worth about $8.4 million.Red Plan money couldn't be used for technology replacement, said Kerry Leider, retired property and risk manager for the district, who managed the plan for the district."There was a lot of conversation about the fact that those systems would need some ongoing financing plans," he said, because the large initial investment meant upgrades would be needed all at once, and much more quickly than building repairs.For example, Leider said, every 7-10 years the district would have to determine replacement funding, which could include a potential request to the community to pay for it.While a technology referendum is up to the School Board, superintendent Bill Gronseth said he wants to learn what the community wants before making any kind of recommendation. This month, the board is set to vote on a separate ask for more operating levy money in November — the sort of tax increase that pays for smaller class sizes and other classroom expenses.The district currently has no savings to invest in updated technology, and the district is required to offer basic necessities first: things like busing and heating.New money would be necessary to invest heavily in a technology upgrade, Gronseth said.Last year in Minnesota about a dozen school districts asked taxpayers for more technology money through bond referendums. Most were successful, according to Minnesota School Boards Association data."You never saw them 10 years ago," said Greg Abbott, communications director for the association. "But today (technology referendums) are very common because kids need to work with (updated) technology."On the district's wishlist is a device for every student — likely a Chromebook — to be used in class for interactive learning. But Chromebooks come at a cost: about $1.6 million annually, according to district calculations.Those costs include a Chromebook for each of the 8,000-plus students, employee training, licenses, cases, repairs and additional tech staff.Installed in the 17 district schools — including alternative locations — are 572 Smart Boards and their projectors, some of which were installed well before the Red Plan. They cost about $5,000 each.The plan is to remove the oldest first, at a pace of 60 per year through 2028. The first 60 will go if the district's technology budget is increased enough; still an unknown. That would allow the purchase of display screens.Up first are Lakewood and Stowe elementary schools, among the first schools to have Smart Boards. The boards will be replaced by large screens to display information from the teacher's computer and, if the money ever comes, information from students' computers.Money designated for technology spending via state aid and property tax income is drawn from the same pot as textbook and equipment purchases, like snow-blowers. Less than $2 million is available in 2019 to cover all those needs.Technology will get about 70 percent of that, said Peggy Blalock, the district's finance manager. The tech department also receives about $700,000 in general fund money, along with some rebate cash, which amounted to $140,000 for the 2017-18 school year. The budget — which was $2.1 million in 2018 — will likely see a small increase for the 2018-19 school year, Blalock said.That supports the district's basic needs, including emergency communication, a computer for each teacher, internet access and some computers for student use. Consultants have told Smith a district of Duluth's size should be spending twice that to keep current."It will take us 10 years to replace Smart Boards at the current pace," Smith said, compared to a more typical 1-2 years.That means the last schools that received them — Congdon and Myers-Wilkins elementaries — will potentially use theirs for 15 years, or nearly twice as long as a typical life cycle.Districts across the country are beginning to offer personal devices for each student, Smith said. It eliminates the need for computer labs and keeps kids in class with a familiar device for things like testing. So far, each school in Duluth has at least one cart of Chromebooks to share.Lincoln Park Middle School teacher Dean Herold — who first began teaching using chalk — said many teachers have lesson plans using Smart Board resources and will have to adjust those as boards are phased out."The biggest question is how long before we are able to afford new technology," he said. "No district that I have heard of is able to purchase these tools districtwide without help from the state through legislation and local levies/referendums being passed."Today, kids need to be taught with the latest technology to enter the workforce or college successfully, said districtwide Parent Teacher Student Association president Stacey DeRoche."It's a sign of the times," she said. "But we've got to fund it."