SAMR and TPACK- What are they?
SAMR and TPACK are two different frameworks used to measure technology integration. So what are they? How do I use them?
SAMR-
The SAMR framework measures four levels of technology integration in the classroom. It is a great tool for educators to assess where your lesson falls on the ladder. Here is an example of the SAMR model.
1. Substitution- The substitution level means that teachers are using new technology to replace old ones. An example of substitution would be to replace a math fraction worksheet with an excel sheet and using colored blocks.
2. Augmentation- The augmentation level is still substituting but building on the features of the substitute. Continuing the example of the fraction math lesson, augmentation would be to have students use Google Sheets and the teacher giving feedback directly on the work the students are doing.
3. Modification- The modification level has the students redesigning the task to acquire deeper thinking on part of the students. To achieve this level in teaching fractions an example of this would be for the teacher to direct students to different examples and learning materials through Google sheets. Students can access these to improve on areas they struggle with.
4. Redefinition- The redefinition level has students achieving a new higher level of learning that was not possible before. Students learning fractions can access the use of a fraction app and use the Recordit app to share their work with their educator.
TPACK-
The TPACK is a framework that combines three knowledge areas to measure how technology is being integrated. Each area interweaves with each other and connects. As an educator looking to integrate technology in the classroom you are looking for a connection of all three, or Technological, Pedagogical, and Content Knowledge (TPACK).
These are the questions to ask when integrating technology in the classroom following TPACK.
1. Technological Knowledge (TK)- What digital tools are available to you, which do you know well enough to use, and which would be most appropriate for the lesson at hand?
2. Pedagogical Knowledge (PK)- How do your students learn best and what instructional strategies do you need to meet their needs and the requirements of the lesson plan?
3. Content Knowledge (CK)- What are you teaching and what is your own knowledge of the subject?
Rodgers, D. (2018, January 19). The TPACK Framework Explained (With Classroom Examples). Retrieved from https://www.schoology.com/blog/tpack-framework-explained
Personal Reflection:
In my own school, I feel the SAMR model is a simpler model to follow and remember. Personally, it feels simpler to classify where my lessons are on a SAMR grid. It is important to establish where the lines are clear between each level. It could be easy to get confused with substitution and augmentation if educators have not defined them and model them. It also allows for reflections of why you would place your lesson at a modification level and not augmentation, or defend why you feel you are at the redefined level with your lessons. It is a great tool, and teachers do not have to transition far with the idea of categorizing their lessons if they are familiar with Bloom’s Taxonomy, which also categorizes elements of a lesson. It is also important to let teachers know that not all their lessons need to be at the redefined level, and it is okay that some are just substitutes.
SAMR-
The SAMR framework measures four levels of technology integration in the classroom. It is a great tool for educators to assess where your lesson falls on the ladder. Here is an example of the SAMR model.
1. Substitution- The substitution level means that teachers are using new technology to replace old ones. An example of substitution would be to replace a math fraction worksheet with an excel sheet and using colored blocks.
2. Augmentation- The augmentation level is still substituting but building on the features of the substitute. Continuing the example of the fraction math lesson, augmentation would be to have students use Google Sheets and the teacher giving feedback directly on the work the students are doing.
3. Modification- The modification level has the students redesigning the task to acquire deeper thinking on part of the students. To achieve this level in teaching fractions an example of this would be for the teacher to direct students to different examples and learning materials through Google sheets. Students can access these to improve on areas they struggle with.
4. Redefinition- The redefinition level has students achieving a new higher level of learning that was not possible before. Students learning fractions can access the use of a fraction app and use the Recordit app to share their work with their educator.
TPACK-
The TPACK is a framework that combines three knowledge areas to measure how technology is being integrated. Each area interweaves with each other and connects. As an educator looking to integrate technology in the classroom you are looking for a connection of all three, or Technological, Pedagogical, and Content Knowledge (TPACK).
These are the questions to ask when integrating technology in the classroom following TPACK.
1. Technological Knowledge (TK)- What digital tools are available to you, which do you know well enough to use, and which would be most appropriate for the lesson at hand?
2. Pedagogical Knowledge (PK)- How do your students learn best and what instructional strategies do you need to meet their needs and the requirements of the lesson plan?
3. Content Knowledge (CK)- What are you teaching and what is your own knowledge of the subject?
Rodgers, D. (2018, January 19). The TPACK Framework Explained (With Classroom Examples). Retrieved from https://www.schoology.com/blog/tpack-framework-explained
Personal Reflection:
In my own school, I feel the SAMR model is a simpler model to follow and remember. Personally, it feels simpler to classify where my lessons are on a SAMR grid. It is important to establish where the lines are clear between each level. It could be easy to get confused with substitution and augmentation if educators have not defined them and model them. It also allows for reflections of why you would place your lesson at a modification level and not augmentation, or defend why you feel you are at the redefined level with your lessons. It is a great tool, and teachers do not have to transition far with the idea of categorizing their lessons if they are familiar with Bloom’s Taxonomy, which also categorizes elements of a lesson. It is also important to let teachers know that not all their lessons need to be at the redefined level, and it is okay that some are just substitutes.
Comments
Post a Comment