Lightboard technology was invented by Michael Peshkin (Rogers and Botnaru, 2019). A lightboard is a large glass panel coupled with technology that allows an instructor to write or draw on a large surface (McCorkle & Whitener, 2020). The presenter uses a set of fluorescent dry erase markers to draw or write on the back side of the glass while the camera records the session from the front view (Corkish, Davidson, Haakansson, Lopez, Watson, Spagnoli, 2023). The recording is flipped in post-production to allow for natural viewing by the learner.
Lightboards require minimal instructor training. Certain lightboard studios can be outfitted with a monitor system so the instructor can view themself through the glass panel on the monitor while they record. A second monitor can be added to the setup for the instructor to view any lecture notes or to serve as a teleprompter that can be controlled through a laptop connected to the Lightboard CPU module. Some lightboards can be setup to be one button studios controlled exclusively by the instructor.
Relevance for Learning, Instruction, and Assessment
Adult learners have unique needs that require consideration when designing instruction. Since adult learners are motivated to learn independently, consideration should be given to planning for the use of educational technology that can further increase learner motivation while also helping learners to understand more problem-solving-oriented content tied to real-world problems (Knowles, 1980). Lightboards serve as a potential technology to fill this void in asynchronous online courses.
Lightboards are a potential solution for helping learners codify more complex knowledge. Cognitive load theory states that our working memory is limited (Sweller, et al., 2011). Human memory can only process small amounts of information at once. By utilizing a two-channel approach to deliver instruction, the presenter can use voice and visual hand movement to help the learner codify knowledge (Mayer, 2021). Using this two-channel approach allows a learner to process the information and then code it for storage in long-term memory (Tulving, 1972). This can be accomplished using a lightboard.
Planning a lightboard video is critical to ensure maximum learning can take place to not overwhelm the learner. This planning process should include the video content and how and when the instructor will use the markers to draw on the glass. Instructional designers can be particularly helpful with suggestions on how to deliver the video to ensure maximum learning. Planning how to deliver the video is critical to maximizing learning through short video segments of four to 12 minutes to maximize memory retention (Bradley, 2016).
Although Lightboard videos have also been useful in traditional brick-and-mortar settings for students as just in time review after classroom sessions (Schweiker, Griggs, Levonis, 2020), online learning presents a different challenge because the instructor is not available in real-time to answer questions or elaborate on difficult concepts. Additionally, adult online learners may be more intrinsically motivated to learn difficult concepts in-depth, leading to knowledge building that could help in their personal and work lives (Knowles, 1980). Lightboard technology provides an avenue to bridge the gap between the traditional classroom and online space. Instructors who use a Lightboard to create instruction for asynchronous online learning can replicate what they would do in a traditional classroom when they draw or write on a whiteboard. Instructors who use a Lightboard to teach difficult concepts to asynchronous online students also bring resident faculty expertise to the online space, non-dependent on the course facilitator. Instructors can communicate content area expertise in the online space through the Lightboard video which has the potential to increase student engagement and make online learners feel part of the larger university community.
Lightboard examples can be tied to both formative and summative assessments. Formative assessments are informal ungraded assessments to check a student’s knowledge of lesson material as they progress through the lesson. Summative assessments are more comprehensive measurements of understanding of a lesson or unit. Formative assessments in the form of knowledge check questions can be used after a lightboard video to informally assess student knowledge of the video example. Some technologies also allow for knowledge check questions to be embedded in the video. Other software allows for final videos to be embedded in software where stop points can be designed to check for understanding of the video content up to that point. Likewise, the Lightboard video approach can provide a foundation for the elaboration of difficult concepts and serve as an avenue for helping learners avoid confusion on topics that may be difficult to understand on their own.
Technology in Practice
Lightboard technology should be used in a purposeful way to maximize learning. Decisions on how to implement Lightboard technology can be determined through partnerships between course authors/subject matter experts (SMEs) and instructional designers. One important consideration in developing a Lightboard video is the presence of the instructor (Lubrik, Zhou, Zhang, 2019).
Lightboarding requires an instructor to be present in the designated studio to write, draw, and speak. Lightboard segments may be best limited to select cases where instructors need to explain difficult concepts through in-person writing/drawing and speaking. Drawing and speaking helps students to process the information as it is being delivered while minimizing cognitive load (Mayer, 2021). The table below shows a few examples of how Lightboard technology can be used in online learning to promote better understanding of difficult concepts to the asynchronous learner.
Table 1: Lightboard Use Case Examples
| Subject | Instructional Concept | Lightboard Approach |
| Math | Calculus Problem | Instructor writes out each step of the problem while explaining how to reach the solution. Problems could apply to job-related situations. |
| Philosophy | Arguments | Instructor explains how to construct an argument then uses words and pictures to illustrate the concepts. Example could relate to work-related problems. |
| Music | Augmented Sixth Chords | Instructor pre-draws or overlays a five-line, four space music staff. Instructor draws and explains how to construct Italian, French, and German augmented sixth chords on the staff. Example could be applied to a composition assignment. |
| History | Timeline | Instructor draws a timeline while adding hand-drawn pictures and text to mark specific points on the timeline with verbal explanation. Example could be applied to a written assignment. |
| Business | Decision Tree | Instructor draws a decision tree while explaining pertinent points of why someone would choose a specific pathway. Example could relate to business scenario. |
| Science | Cell | Instructor draws a cell, labels the various parts, and explains how it functions. Example could relate to a student training to be a medical professional. |
The table above is a small sample of effective use cases. Notice in the table that each example represents a concept that might be complex to explain in written words alone or through a static image. These examples could benefit from the instructor creating a video using words and pictures (Mayer, 2021). Lightboard video segments created using this approach should be targeted to four to eight minutes in length where possible and should not exceed 10-12 minutes to maximize learner retention (Bradbury, 2016). If the explanation takes longer, then multiple shorter video segments should be planned and recorded. Utilizing short video segments will give the learner the best possible chance at retaining knowledge.
Conclusion
Lightboards continue to present an open opportunity for educational institutions to bring faculty expertise to the online setting. Instructional designers can play a pivotal role by helping faculty understand how to use the lightboard and assist with the video planning process. Lightboards hold the potential to transform learning in the asynchronous online environment.
Jeff Puhala is an instructional designer at Penn State University. He earned a Doctor of Education degree in curriculum leadership from Northeastern University, a Master of Education from California University of Pennsylvania, a Master of Music in saxophone performance from Penn State University, and a Bachelor of Science in education (music education) from Clarion University of Pennsylvania. Jeff is passionate about learning and improving the quality of online course design and instruction to benefit returning adult learners.
References
Bradbury, N. A. (2016). Attention span during lectures: 8 seconds, 10 minutes, or more? Advances in Physiology Education, 40(4), 509–513. https://doi.org/10.1152/advan.00109.2016
Knowles, M. S. (1988). The modern practice of adult education: From pedagogy to andragogy. Cambridge Adult Education.
Lubrick, M., Zhou, G., & Zhang, J. (2019). Is the future bright? the potential of Lightboard videos for student achievement and engagement in learning. EURASIA Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 15(8). https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/108437
Mayer, R. E. (2021). Multimedia learning. Cambridge University Press.
McCorkle, S., & Whitener, P. (2020). The lightboard: Expectations and experiences. International Journal of Designs for Learning, 11(1), 75–84. https://doi.org/10.14434/ijdl.v11i1.24642
Pearsall, E., Corkish, T., Davidson, M., Haakansoon, C., Lopez, R., Watson, P., & Spagnoli, D. (2021). Chapter 6: A how-to guide for making online pre-laboratory lightboard videos. In Advances in online chemistry education (pp. 77–91). essay, American Chemical Society.
Schweiker, S. S., Griggs, B. K., & Levonis, S. M. (2020). Engaging health student in learning organic chemistry reaction mechanisms using short and snappy Lightboard videos. Journal of Chemical Education, 97(10), 3867–3871. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.0c00619
Sweller, J., Ayres, P., & Kalyuga, S. (2011). Cognitive load theory in perspective. Cognitive Load Theory, 237–242. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-8126-4_18
Tulving, E. (1972). Episodic and semantic memory. In E. Tulving & W. Donaldson, Organization of memory. Academic Press.
