Foucault (1976) has revealed the symbolic meaning of the so called ‘cells & bells’ school organizational model, typical of industrialized societies and tayloristic teaching; and the pop culture (i.e.:  Another brick in the wall, part 2, Pink Floyd 1979) has spread the dissatisfaction for this education discipline. And the ‘effet du lieu’ has been underlined again by Bourdieu (1991) while Weinstein (1991) defines “the classroom as social context for learning”. During the last decades have movements towards a socio-constructivistic didactic flourished again, following i.e. the Dewey and Montessori instances. And Jonassen (1999) has proposed a model for developing constructivist learning environments (CLEs) that provides an authentic context for tasks, plus information resources, cognitive tools, and collaborative tools. Their guidelines have inspired new school architectures (Hertzberger 2009; Lippman 2010) and the ICT teaching-learning strategies (Beauchamp, Kennewell 2010).

Nowadays the mainstream framework of education is the socio-constructivist paradigm. Learning psychology (Vygotskij 1978; Palincsar 1998), ICT teaching strategies, school architecture (Wilson, 1996; Dumont, Instance, Benavides, 2010) and international policies adopt and suggest this theory as the most useful for learning for democracy.

But sometimes it seems to be only a wishful thinking.

 In Italy, according to the Ministry of Education in the latest official presentation of “The  Italian Education System” (2014): “The most common teaching methods used are traditional lessons, exercises and group work … Increasing numbers of classrooms are equipped with interactive whiteboards (IWB)”  (http://www.indire.it/eurydice/content/index.php?action=read_cnt&id_cnt=15135, p.38). Every age-group of pupils spend almost the whole schooltime in the same classroom (cell) and different subject teachers switch from one class/classroom to another every one or two hours, when the bell rings. Usually the standard classroom setting is for “one to many” teaching: one teaching post, one blackboard, many aligned desks. So the teachers role and teaching-learning relation is inscribed within this classroom setting.

“Teachers in Public schools are civil servants with a private contract, which can be either a temporary or a permanent contract.” (ibidem) Many teachers have a temporary contract and teach also without any traineeship and/or teaching qualification or certificate and/or selection overcome. These teachers replace permanent ones when are absent/sick for some days, weeks, months or the full session. The Teaching Certificate (Abilitazione all’insegnamento) is compulsory to enter selections for permanent contracts.

In Sardinia, during 2013 all the classroom have been equipped with IWB. Therefore many temporary teachers had the chance of working in renewed classrooms.

At the same time the Ministry of Education allowed the temporary teachers (for at least three years and without any teaching qualification) to enter Special Courses in order to achieve the Teaching Certificate (Abilitazione all’Insegnamento). These Special Courses (Percorsi Abilitanti Speciali - PAS) were designed by the Ministry of Education, organized and developed by Universities (including University of Sassari) during the first semester 2014. Digital competencies for teaching with ICT were one of the core compulsory PAS objectives stated by the Ministry.

Within this context, our research questions concern (a) the actual classrooms settings equipped with IWB and therefore (b) the teaching-learning strategies suggested by the classrooms  settings to the (temporary) teachers; (c) the tacit professional model suggested by school organization and permanent teachers to temporary teachers through the classroom settings and thus (d) the coherence and alignment of local school settings and practices with the socio-constructivist paradigm.

Cutrim-Schmid E., Whyte S. (2012). Interactive Whiteboards in State School Settings: Teacher Responses to Socio-Constructivist Hegemonies, Language Learning & Technology, 16(2), pp. 65-86. Dumont H., Istance D., Benavides F. (ed) (2010), The nature of learning – Using research to inspire practice, Paris: OCSE-CERI Foucault M. (1976), Sorvegliare e punire: nascita della prigione, Torino: Einaudi Bourdieu P. (1991), Lezione sulla lezione, Genova: Marietti Glover D., Miller D. J. (2005). Leadership implications of using interactive whiteboards: linking technology and pedagogy in the management of change. Management in Education, 18(5) pp. 27–30. Hertzberger H. (1996), Lezioni di architettura, Bari: Laterza Hille R.T. (2011), Modern Schools: A century of design for education, New Jersey: Wiley Huberman M. (1993), The model of the indipendent artisan in teachers’ professional relations. In Little J.W. &.McLaughlin M.W (Eds) Teachers’ Work: individuals, colleagues and contexts, New York:Teachers College Press TALIS (2013), Results An International Perspective on Teaching and Learning, DOI:10.1787/9789264196261-en, Paris: OCSE Knoblauch H., Baer A., Laurier E., Petschke S., Schnettler B. (2008), Visual Analysis. New Developments in the Interpretative Analysis of Video and Photography. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung / Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 9(3), Art. 14, http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:0114-fqs0803148. Lippman P. (2010), Evidence-Based Design of Elementary and Secondary Schools: A Responsive Approach to Creating Learning Environments. New Jersey: Wiley Palincsar A.S. (1998), Social constructivist perspectives on teaching and learning. Annual Review of Psychology, 49, 345–375. Pink Floyd (1979), Another brick in the wall part 2 - http://www.thewallanalysis.com/main/another-brick2.html Smith H., Higgins S., Wall K. & Miller J. (2005), Interactive whiteboards: boon or bandwagon? A critical review of the literature. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 21, pp.91–101 Somekh B., Haldane M. (2006), How can interactive whiteboards contribute to pedagogic change? Learning from case studies in English primary schools. Paper presented at: Imagining the Future for ICT and Education Conference, 26-30 June. , Norway: Ålesund Jonassen D.H. (1999), Theoretical foundations of learning environments, New York: Routledge Vygotskij L.S. (1980), Il processo cognitivo, Torino: Boringhieri Weinstein C.S. (1991), The classroom as social context for learning. Annual Review of Psychology, 42, pp. 493- 525 Wilson, B. G. (1996), What is a contructivist learning environment? In B. G. Wilson (Ed.), Construtivist learning environments. Case studies in instructional design. (pp. 3-8), Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications