A True Litmus Test

A closer look at Technology Integration and the SAMR Model.

Last week in my 2^nd blog entry, I commented on Torres and Henderson’s discussion of Doing Things in a Different Way as opposed to Doing Different Things.  Admittedly, while I was a bit unclear as to how to differentiate one from another at times, Dr. Ruben R. Puentedura has most certainly cleared up that problem for me.

The SAMR Model, developed by Dr. Puentedura in the late 80s to early 90s, is a model with examines how four levels of technology each affect student learning.

While these levels use a different terminology, the ENHANCEMENT level seems to correspond to Doing Things in a Different Way, while the TRANSFORMATION level corresponds to Doing Different Things.  I will discuss each of the four levels below, using examples that I have seen in my classroom, and extensions that I could project seeing in the future.  The particular class that comes to mind is my Grade 12 religion class.  One of the most engaging units (and most personally relevant to students) is the Marriage and Family Unit.  As one of their culminating activities, I ask students to choose many of the themes, lessons, and ideas discussed during the unit, choose a married couple to interview, and see if their experiences match up with what was examined during the unit.  Here is what I believe the 4-levels have looked like in the past in this unit, and what they could look like in the future:

·         Substitution – This is where the task could be completed without the use of technology.  Many students (if not most) have simply included, along with their comments, a formatted transcript of the couple that they decided to interview.  Of course, presentation is an obvious benefit, but other than that, there was no other functional change.

·         Augmentation – This year, for the first time ever, I had two students actually videotape the interview of the couples to show to the class.  They were both informative and entertaining (especially because one student who chose to interview their parents… many do… actually added “subtitles” to clear up the thick heavy accents that were heard in the responses).  Actually seeing the couples and the nature of the responses added so much more, and this would definitely be a functional improvement.

·         Modification – Many times throughout the unit I ask students to compare the material we cover in Marriage and Family with current and popular media portrayals.  I haven’t done this before, but I see an opportunity here to have students actually find and collect media examples, and collaboratively document them together using technology, to collectively examine common themes.  If each student finds 3 or 4, multiplying that by an entire classroom would give a large sample size to examine and compare in a short amount of time.  This would definitely be a significant task redesign.

·         Redefinition – In the past I have tasked students with interviewing 1 couple, but utilizing social media, a large number of couples could EASILY be interviewed anonymously, spanning over different cultures and parts of the globe.  Ensuring accuracy and honesty in responses may be a consideration, but I don’t think it would be any more of a concern than in personal interviews as well. 

What I appreciated most about Dr. Puentedura’s presentation was that he was very clear to point out that the use of Substitution and Augmentation is not necessarily inferior, for there may be situations where such an approach is merited.  Say, for instance, if I encouraged students to find a couple to interview that they particularly admire or respect, and wish to learn from.   The Enhancement level use of technology would still be valid.  Nevertheless, opportunities for Transformation should always be actively sought and included.