Frameworks of Educational Technology

    This week in ED 350-01: Technology in the Classroom, we learned about two frameworks of educational technology, SAMR and TECH, and their benefits.

    SAMR, we discussed in much detail.  It's a tiered model that was created by Dr. Ruben Puentedura to facilitate examination of the extent unto which technology modifies any given classroom task.  While tasks that fall into the lower two tiers of SAMR, substitution and augmentation, are enhanced by technology, those that fall into the higher tiers, modification and redefinition, are transformed by technology.

    Admittedly, SAMR is quite difficult to grasp in full.  We probably talked about it for two hours in class this week, and my understanding of it is still incomplete!  Should the reader wish to look into SAMR further considering my brief summarization, I highly recommend watching through the following YouTube videos:

Furthermore, I find the following graphic particularly helpful:

Retrieved from Google Images, Originally Posted at weinquireandinspire.blogspot.com

    To provide an example of how a task might fall into SAMR, consider a task wherein students must write a book of ten poems.  With no (modern) technology, this would look like students writing on pieces of paper and combining pages with staples, a binder, or something similar.  If the task involved students typing their books in a simple text document, it would fall into "Substitution" as the text document does little beyond substitute pen(cil) and paper.  If the task involved students typing their books in a word processor, it would fall into "Augmentation" as the technology would then be functionally improving the creating experience, allowing students to format in detail, seamlessly add images, and much more.  If the task involved students working in Google Slides to make their books, the task would (likely) fall into "Modification" as they would then be able to collaborate throughout the creative process and create digital books boasting animations, videos, page transitions, read-alouds, and much more.  If the task involved students taking their favorite books and running them through Tagxedo, or a similar program for creating word clouds, to devise a list of words to use for the poems and then combining their poems to make new, unique word clouds to use as book covers, it would fall into "Redefinition" as such a task would be previously inconceivable without modern technology.

    Relative to SAMR, we discussed TECH quite briefly.  Though, such is not to imply the latter model without merit.  Created by Jennifer Roberts, TECH is presented as an alternative to SAMR and what Roberts considers its various shortcomings, boasting an explicit focus on the interplay between people of the classroom and technology rather than classroom tasks and technology.  Here's the original TECH model graphic, created by Roberts herself:

Put simply, the higher a classroom has progressed through the model, the more students are in control of their own learning and effectively utilizing available technologies.

    Should the reader wish to look further into TECH and Jennifer Roberts' personal thoughts and comments on SAMR, I highly recommend the following blogpost: Turning SAMR into TECH: What models are good for (litandtech.com).

    Though I find much merit in both SAMR and TECH, I must admit that I'm fonder of the latter.  SAMR can be extraordinarily beneficial to the educator who needs help understanding the extent unto which technology is legitimately at play in any given lesson.  However, I agree heavily with points made by Roberts in her aforementioned blogpost that SAMR, intentionally or otherwise, places too much emphasis on an unrealistic need for technology as well as the teacher's design of even high-level tasks; ideally, a high-level task is "designed" by the students who are involved in it.  I feel that TECH addresses these concerns with SAMR in full while also being more understandable and, thus, approachable.

    Learning about SAMR and TECH has altered the way I think about integrating technology in the classroom by placing on my mind an important emphasis: technology is an educational tool.  Too often, technology is considered a saving grace of the classroom or a given lesson, but such consideration belittles the power of technology and the role of the educator.  A program that can do anything the user wants is useless without an informed directive.  And an educator who puts the burden of teaching, rather than facilitating, on technology has failed his students, robbing them of a legitimately meaningful learning experience.