Simply adding technology to K-12 technology integration environments does not improve learning. What matters is how it is used to develop knowledge and skills.
-Zucker and Light, 2009
Successful technology integration requires students to have access to a variety of tools that match the task at hand and provides students the opportunity to build a deeper understanding of content. Successful technology integration can accelerate student learning in a way that was once unimaginable. To transform student learning it is important to merge technology with content to create an enriched lesson or unit plan. Most importantly, don’t teach technology as a separate class.
When planning for technology integration and examining our practices as educators, we must keep in mind how and why we are using technology to enhance student learning. The technology frameworks: Substitution, Augmentation, Modification, Redefinition Model (SAMR Model), Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge framework (TPACK), and Technology Integration Model (TIM) can all be helpful models in guiding teachers towards using purposeful technology in our classrooms. Let’s take a closer look at the key components of each model!
Comparing Technology Frameworks
|Picking the right strategy for the lesson on hand
How can educators engage and empower students through technology?
Focus is on levels of use of educational technology (Substitution, Augmentation, Modification, Redefinition)
Makes learning engaging
|Offers pedagogical choices available to a teacher in designing a technology-infused lesson
Illustrates how technology can enhance learning
Focuses on planning, describing, and evaluating technology integration
Five interdependent characteristics of meaningful learning environments: active, constructive, goal-directed, authentic, and collaborative
Five levels of technology integration (entry, adoption, adaptation, infusion, and transformation)
|Merge technology with content to create the perfect lesson, don’t teach technology as a separate class
All about knowledge (technological, pedagogical, and content)
Makes learning more effective
Pedagogy and content are most important.
Solid teaching strategies and solid content knowledge drive instruction and tech components enhance learning.
Practices in my classroom
In my current classroom, we have 1-1 Chromebooks. My students use a computer almost every day to enhance their learning. If I were using the SAMR Model, I’d say I swim between Augmentation and Modification. One of my goals is to swim a bit deeper over to the Redefinition tier.
One way I am going to push myself to do that this week is by connecting with individuals in different areas around the world who have survived extreme weather events like tsunamis or earthquakes. My students are researching extreme weather events and one area of their research is to read first-hand experiences. I know several people who have survived some of these extreme weather events and I thought it would enhance student learning to talk to some of these people about their experiences.
Last week, students collaborated amongst their extreme weather research groups to create a quick presentation (one day to put it together) that would teach their classmates about their reading topics. First, I taught them the CARP Design Principles, then I showed them an example presentation that I designed on droughts. After that, the students used my template to create their own slides.
Using Google Slides, the students were able to collaborate and I was able to offer feedback using the comment feature. Learning for all students was enhanced. The visuals and words in the slides were especially helpful for the audience especially because they are all English Language Learners. Originally, this was met to be a quick activity as students will continue to research a second weather event. However, I wanted to deepen students’ understanding of their topics by teaching each other. By putting together a presentation I was also able to teach students the CARP Design Principles as well as presentation skills.
For each model, there are different components that I find helpful. The SAMR Model by Ruben Puentedura makes it easy to think about the role of technology in supporting learning. It is helpful in identifying where a learning activity falls on the SAMR Model.
The TIM Framework offers different approaches to integrating technology. The matrix framework of this model makes planning for technology integration easier because there are lots of videos and lessons for teachers. Seeing examples that fit into each cell on the matrix helps teachers see what each cell looks like in action. I find the website really helpful!
Lastly, the TPACK Model focuses on technological, pedagogical, and content. At its core, solid teaching strategies and solid content knowledge drive instruction, and tech components enhance learning.
After examing each model closely, I like the Technology Integration Matrix the best. I find it to be “user friendly” and the example lessons and videos help me generate ideas easier. Currently, my school does not use any of these technology integration frameworks. However, I am thinking it could be something that we start discussing. This year for the first time we have a S.T.E.M. teacher for elementary (who was once a COETAILer ). Hopefully, this is just the beginning of technology integration at our school and the development of our program will continue to grow.