# data[].attributes.body
I like how the content understanding and technology use are on two separate axies; it felt more straightforward than SAMR.

# data[].attributes.body
The website also had an interactive one, but the noninteractive had a more condensed format.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
This printable rubric is for teachers, administrators, field instructors and other educators who are evaluating the connection between the technology in a lesson plan and the learning goals of the lesson plan. This PDF includes details on reading the results and instructional moves to foster authentic learning through technology tools. Click on the image below to download the printable PDF.

Karen McKinley an ELA curriculum specialist from Warren County Educational Service Center in Lebanon, Ohio shared this user friendly rubric that she designed based on the Triple E Framework. She gave permission for other educators to use and share the chart with teachers in their districts. Thank you Karen!

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Triple E Printable Rubric for Lesson Evaluation

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This printable rubric is for teachers, administrators, field instructors and other educators who are evaluating the connection between the technology in a lesson plan and the learning goals of the...

# data[].attributes.body
Do you agree that technology is the hardest to blend in?

# data[].attributes.body
Scroll down to the ocean picture for SAMR (Padlet couldn't load the image? so I posted the URL to access it). The submarine makes for a nice visualization of the SAMR levels. However, I do feel it's a bit of stretch. In the classroom, the gaps between technology don't feel as drastic as the differences between a snorkel and submarine. Moreover, some tasks, like notetaking, can be done without technology which makes comparing them to a man stuck on the shore unfair.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Access Google Sites with a personal Google account or Google Workspace account (for business use).

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The Technology Integration Matrix

The Technology Integration Matrix (TIM) provides a framework for describing and targeting the use of technology to enhance learning. The TIM incorporates five interdependent characteristics of meaningful learning environments: active, collaborative, constructive, authentic, and goal-directed. These characteristics are associated with five levels of technology integration: entry, adoption, adaptation, infusion, and transformation. Together, the five characteristics of meaningful learning environments and five levels of technology integration create a matrix of 25 cells, as illustrated below. All TIM descriptors apply equally well to online and face-to-face instruction, Developed by the Florida Center for Instructional Technology (FCIT) in 2005, the TIM is now in its third edition (2019).

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Triple E Framework

A framework for educators to measure how well technology tools integrated into lessons are helping students engage in, enhance and extend learning goals. Learning First, Technology Second #tripleE

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Triple E Framework is a model for integrating technology into K-12 teaching

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Dr. Puentedura graciously Creative Commons-licenses some of his papers to allow for reproduction on other sites with attribution.

I have taken one of the PDF files and turned it into a slideshow below. I have included links to the original PDF files in case you want to download it from Dr. Puentedura's site.

Bloom's and SAMR:
​My thoughts based on the work of R. Puentedura, A. Churches and L. Nelson

I feel teachers need to both create tasks that target the higher-order cognitive skills (Bloom's) as well as design tasks that have a significant impact on student outcomes (SAMR). A visual to illustrate that follows.

Educators will argue they have seen redefinition tasks that only target the remembering level or have a creative assessment that is only at the augmentation level. Of course that is true, but I believe we should be planning for technology tasks, activities, and assessments that include both the higher levels of Bloom's Revised Taxonomy and the transformation area of the SAMR model.

My vision of how the Bloom's and SAMR models work together and intersect follows below.

Bloom's and TECH: My thoughts

Work by others

Videos by others

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
SAMR is a model designed to help educators infuse technology into teaching and learning. Popularized by Dr. Ruben Puentedura, the model supports and enables teachers to design, develop, and ...

# data[].attributes.body
article proposing TPACK by creators

# data[].attributes.body
For this submission, this is the first article I ran across. I almost hated to use it because I didn’t want it to look like I wasn’t trying to learn and being lazy. However, this article is jam packed with real nice insides, videos, and even suggestions to help improve lesson plans. Really cool site!

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Access videos, whitepapers, eBooks, webinars, blogs, infographics, case studies, demos and more in our resource hub to support your success.

# data[].attributes.body
This article actually talks about the video we watched, SAMR in 120 seconds. It gives good examples on how to use this in lesson plans for many different subjects. This idea can be applied to math and science.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Examples of Applying the SAMR Model can Help Teachers Understand and Embrace it

The SAMR Model for integrating technology into teaching, developed by Dr. Ruben Puentedura, has gained a good deal of exposure in recent years. "SAMR" is an acronym that stands for Substitution, Augmentation, Modification, and Redefinition. The SAMR model provides a technique for moving through degrees of technology adoption to find more meaningful uses of technology in teaching and move away from simply using edtech for tech's sake.

We recently discussed the SAMR model during an Academic Technology Work Group meeting at The College of Westchester. We examined the video, SAMR in 120 Seconds. One thing that really struck me is how much the example helped, so I made it a point to gather and/or create some more examples.

Following are 8 examples of the SAMR process, each taking an example of a typical classroom exercise that does not use technology and walking it through each phase of SAMR. For half of these, I searched and borrowed from examples that teachers had written about online (original sources are provided - in some cases I tweaked the example a bit). I also created examples of my own. In working through this, it became apparent to me that while Substitution and Augmentation can be relatively straightforward conceptually, there is even more room for interpretation when it comes to Modification and Redefinition.

The goal of this exercise was to help me (and readers) better understand the SAMR model, and to really see how lessons and assessments can be transformed while considering the benefits of evolving them through these stages. I find it particularly interesting to see the vast difference between the original lesson and the redefined lesson - there is often a much wider range of skills required in the latter stages, and lessons can become much more engaging and collaborative when modified or redefined.

Lesson: Writing a Short Paper
Taken from: http://www.educatorstechnology.com/2013/08/samr-model-explained-through-examples.html. A modification of an idea found at https://edofict.wikispaces.com/SAMR+Examples. Taken from: https://edofict.wikispaces.com/SAMR+Examples and modified. Idea taken from: https://sites.google.com/a/msad60.org/technology-is-learning/samr-model and slightly modified. In this example, we take a simple form of assessment and evolve it into a collaborative group project.
Original Assignment: A hand written paper.

Lesson: Geography & Travel

Original Assignment: An overview of a location consisting of hand written content supplemented with compiled cut-and-pasted magazine clippings.

Lesson: Understanding Shakespeare

Original Assignment: Read a Shakespeare play in traditional printed format.

An Assessment Exercise
Original Assignment: Show understanding of fractions on a worksheet by coloring in blocks.
Original Assignment: Take a quiz, answers handwritten in a printed form.

Following are some example lessons, evolved through the SAMR model, that I have tried my hand at creating.It's easy to get caught up in worrying about how effectively an approach constitutes "modification" or "redefinition", but that's not the point of the exercise. To my way of thinking, it's more about understanding the difference between a just replacing or augmenting a "paper" lesson with a "digital" one and actually evolving it in a beneficial way and exploring new possibilities.

Lesson: Art/Painting
Creative Commons license image source.
Original Assignment: Drawing a picture using traditional brush, paint, paper. Of course, there is a a big difference between doing this by hand in the traditional manner and doing it digitally. Digitally is by no means better, it is just different and opens up some interesting possibilities.

Substitution: Use a digital drawing/painting program (like MS Paint) to draw/paint a picture.

Augmentation: Use a tool that allows the creation of your masterpiece to be layed back (like Educreations, for example).

Modification: Pull a background image to use as a canvas. You could even scan something hand drawn and use that.

Redefinition: Create Artwork Collaboratively using a Collaborative Online Whiteboard (like Twiddla or one of these other tools).

Lesson: Email Etiquette

Original lesson: Review printed copies of Email Etiquette concepts and guidelines.

Lesson: Learning Fractions

Substitution: Use an Excel Worksheet to let students color in the blocks.

Augmentation: Use Google Sheets to let students color in the blocks, where the teacher can offer feedback directly on Google Sheets.

Modification: Use Google Sheets and direct students to online examples and supplementary learning materials for areas that they might struggle with.

Redefinition: Use a Fractions App instead (here are a handful of examples for iOS devices).

Lesson: Phys Ed - Learning To Hit a Baseball Well

Original Assignment: Learning how to hit a baseball by watching and listening to a Coach or Phys Ed instructor show you and then trying it yourself.

Hopefully these example of lessons modified through the SAMR cycle help to encourage you to think about how you leverage technology to make some of your lessons more interactive, collaborative, and engaging with some of the many great technology tools available today! Here is a set of tools that may be helpful when working to evolve your lessons: 10 of the Most Engaging Uses of Instructional Technology (with Dozens of Resources and Tools).

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
8 Examples of Transforming Lessons Through the SAMR Cycle - Emerging Education Technologies

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Examples of Applying the SAMR Model can Help Teachers Understand and Embrace it The SAMR Model for integrating technology into teaching, developed by Dr. Ruben Puentedura, has gained a good deal of exposure in recent years. "SAMR" is an acronym that stands for Substitution, Augmentation, Modification, and Redefinition.

# data[].attributes.body
This website breaks down some levels that determine how well a teacher is using EEE. It gives great insight on the framework while also pointing out that the teacher is not going to be perfect at using it starting off. The important thing is to get out of the “red zone.”

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
By Susan Gaer, World Education Partner, OTAN Subject Matter Expert, and Kristi Reyes, ESL Faculty at MiraCosta College, OTAN Trainer
Have you ever wondered how well you were integrating technology into your lessons? The Triple E Framework , developed by Dr. Liz Kolb in 2011, is a framework designed to help educators measure how well they integrate technology tools into instruction and provide ways to help increase its use. The Triple E Framework is a useful extension of previous technology integration frameworks like SAMR ( Puentedura, 2012), TPACK (Thompson & Mishra, 2007), and (University of Florida 2005), which focus guidance on how teachers should design learning. In contrast, the Triple E Framework focuses more on what students do with technology. The goal of the framework is to ensure that technology use supports student engagement, and then, while engaged, their learning is enhanced and extended by technology. Figure 1 illustrates the model of the Triple E framework: Engage, Enhance, Extend.

How does it work?

The Triple E Framework is a four-step process.

1. Define learning goals

2. Select an appropriate technology tool

3. Engage students with the tool by having them be active and social learners

4. Connect what students are learning with real world tasks and contexts. Technology tools are used in class as a way to connect what students are learning with real-world tasks and contexts.

Each aspect of the framework is described in Kolb's (2017) book, Learning First, Technology Second: An Educator's Guide to Designing Authentic Lessons. (1)

Initially created to support technology adoption in K12 settings, we are adapting this framework for use with adult education teachers. Kolb introduces four components to the framework. The letters A, B, C, etc in Figure 1 represent the different layers of technology integration.

"A". There is technology, but there is no integration occuring. For example, students are working on a fill-in-the-blank activity which the teacher printed out from the computer.

"B". The students are engaged. This is where the first "E", engagement, is present. Students spend more time on task, and there is co-use, which Kolb defines as the person-to-person social use of a digital tool (16). This means the tool shifts the behavior of the students from passive learners to more active social learners, and students are focused on their learning goals while on a device.

"Co-use" is the key to successful engagement, yet not all use of technology in teaching reaches this standard. For example, a teacher takes students to a computer lab once a week for independent work on a software program. This is engagement if students are spending time on task, if they are focused on the program the whole time, and the program is focused on the learning objectives of the class. However, because the students are working independently on the computer and not actively socially engaged, this would not be co-use. Kolb (2017) writes that more successful technology integration happens when we create lessons that have students "focus on creating content and learning materials around technology tools rather than using apps and websites with a 'drill and practice' approach to learning" (p. 14). The latter type of technology integration used in isolation has little to no measurable effects on student achievement (Kolb, 2017). Some examples of engagement are students playing a Quizlet Live game or a game. Many adult education teachers these days are integrating these games into their classes, but that is where they stop. Engagement is not enough.

"C". Technology integration should enhance learning. Kolb (2017) writes, "In life, we don't select a tool and create a problem just so that we can use the tool; rather, we select a tool to meet the needs of the problem," (p. 3). Use of a tool also must enhance students' learning. Enhancement means the student creates content to demonstrate learning. For example, playing a Kahoot game is engagement, but creating a Kahoot game is enhancement. To support enhancement, which requires pushing students' critical thinking, analysis, and evaluation skills, Kahoot has developed a printable game planning template for students to create their own games. Similarly, playing Quizlet Live is also engagement, but having students create and maintain their own Quizlet flashcard stacks is enhancement, C.

To support enhancement the teacher must develop scaffolds to make it easier for students to understand ideas and concepts. That is, teachers need to support differentiating learning. All classrooms have students at different levels. A key question is whether a technology tool allows students to achieve their learning goals at different learning levels. For example, students collaborate on a or Word document online, giving each other feedback before submitting it to the teacher. This activity would allow students at a higher level to help those at a lower level. In another example, students write questions on class content and create a quiz that students practice as homework. Then they play a live Quizizz game in class. Students who still need more practice can return to the quiz to study.

Finally, to achieve perfect enhancement, students should be able to demonstrate their understanding better through technology than they could with a more traditional tool. Does the activity show you that the students have learned a concept? Student learning could be measured by having students respond to prompts on an audio discussion board or a text-based discussion forum on a learning management system such as , , or Google Classroom , or by submitting a video on , or by posting on a wall. Teachers can even implement project-based learning and give students choices of tools to use to demonstrate their learning. Technology options for this work might include a traditional PowerPoint or Google Slides presentation; a poster, flyer, or brochure with ; a newsletter with ; an infographic with Piktochart ; a podcast with the app; or a narrated digital story with Adobe Spark .

"D. Technology integration should extend learning. Extension is a result of students learning outside the class. Teachers typically think of extension as homework, but the authors believe that homework that does not extend into the students' every day lives is not useful. Technology tools are available to students 24/7, and if you find an activity that the students think is important and related to their technology learning needs, they will spend time outside the classroom learning. For example, instead of giving the students a vocabulary list to remember, have them open a Quizlet stack on their phones, such as these on and interior parts of a car for beginning ESL students. Having students use their phones for activities such as this builds students' comfort with using apps. They can then study the vocabulary at home, at work, on the bus, or during lunch. The Quizlet sets now become a bridge between school and their everyday lives when they need to speak to a mechanic about car problems or if they are involved in a car accident. Students can create digital artefacts with photos they take of their own vehicles. If students create their own Quizlet set, they are then using the tool to help them learn in their everyday lives. Once students see the impact on their learning, Quizlet stacks will become a part of their own personal learning network.

Evaluating Activities

Needless to say, if you achieve B, C, and D you will hit the "sweet spot" - the perfect lesson. However, this is not necessary in order to have a well-integrated lesson. Kolb (2017) has developed a simple rubric to assess how well the technology is integrated into each lesson. The uses a traffic light system shown in Figure 2.

Red is the lowest level of integration. Many activities that use technology fall in this category, for example, when the activity just requires students to play an online game in their classroom. Activities that rank in the red zone do not use authentic engagement. According to Kolb "...part of measuring engagement must consider whether or not the students are dynamically involved in the learning process." (p 40) . We must strive to do more with our technology use to increase authentic engagement.

The yellow zone usually indicates that the lesson has either engagement and enhancement or engagement and extension. While it is great that instructors are using technology more purposefully, there is still room to develop a more student-focused learning with technology tools.

Scoring in the green zone is the sweet spot. These are lessons that help students connect their learning to their worlds outside of the classroom, keep them engaged in the classroom, and keep them focused on their learning goals.This is the type of lesson for which teachers should ultimately strive.

Start Somewhere!

While hitting the sweet spot is ideal, it is more important that we as teachers get out of the red zone. Using the Triple E Framework rubric to analyze your lessons will help you see where you can improve over time. Reflecting on our own use of the framework, we might have started by providing a teacher-made Padlet board on an idea or concept covered in class. Students would be assigned to work on similar Padlet boards in groups in the classroom but would go home and add to that Padlet board with photos or concepts from their everyday lives of their communities, work, family, and friends. Students might then see how a Padlet board could be used to digitally tell a story, organize a family outing, or even present a concept to team members at work. This is what we want happening in our classrooms with technology integration: students engaged, learning enhanced, and learning extended outside the classroom.

1 Kolb, L. 2017. Learning first, technology second: An educator's guide to designing authentic lessons. Portland, Oregon: International Society for Technology in Education.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Triple E Framework for More Effective Technology Integration in Adult Education - EdTech Center @ World Education

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
By Susan Gaer, World Education Partner, OTAN Subject Matter Expert, and Kristi Reyes, ESL Faculty at MiraCosta College, OTAN Trainer Have you ever wondered how well you were integrating technology into your lessons? The Triple E Framework, developed by Dr. Liz Kolb in 2011, is a framework designed to help educators measure how well they...

# data[].attributes.body
This website gives a good break down within the matrix and even explains how to read/use it.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Technology Integration Matrix: 21st Century Learning - Level 1

# data[].attributes.body
I liked this article because it was mainly an opinion piece explaining why the author personally agrees with and likes the TPACK framework.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The three components of TPACK:

Technological Knowledge: The technological knowledge helps teachers use and combine technology with teaching. As a teacher technological knowledge is about knowledge and understanding of tools that you can use to teach. Eg apps games devices. Technological knowledge is about how teachers use technology.

Pedagogical Knowledge: Refers to the art and practice of teaching. Utilising the knowledge and putting into the practice of transmitting the knowledge in an interesting way for the students to learn. Pedagogy not only refers to the accuracy of knowledge but the effectiveness of the teaching on the student's learning. Teacher may know everything but does not know how to teach.

Content Knowledge: Content knowledge is the teacher's knowledge about the subject matter to be learnt or taught. This knowledge would include knowledge of concepts, ideas, theories and frameworks. -(Koehler & Mishra, 2009).

The importance of TPACK:
TPACK is an essential part of the education system today as it incorporates the growing demand on the use of technology in the classroom as well as continuing the focus on the content and how we teach it. Therefore it sets up education for the future as well as setting up the students for their future.
Impacts of TPACK:

Impact on the Teacher: It is important for the teacher to be completely up to date and knowledgeable with the curriculum and the components of TPCK to effectively incorporate it into their lessons.

Impacts on the Students: Students of the millennium work better through technology and quite often find the content and direct teaching quite stale. Therefore by adding the technology component to the already existing PCK model the students become more engaged in their learning.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Importance of TPACK and why I am drawn to it!

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The three components of TPACK: Technological Knowledge: The technological knowledge helps teachers use and combine technology with teaching. As a teacher technological knowledge is about knowledge and understanding of tools that you can use to teach. Eg apps games devices. Technological knowledge is about how teachers use technology.

# data[].attributes.body
This website is another blog piece, in which a teacher gives their opinion on the SAMR model for teaching. They explain each of the levels and also provide examples for each one. In addition, this particular article caught my eye, because it includes a section questioning its readers' purpose in order to help them avoid integrating "technology for technology's sake" into their lessons.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
What is the SAMR model?

The SAMR model is a framework that orders strategies for classroom technology implementation into four stages:

In each stage of the SAMR model, the use of educational technology (EdTech) becomes increasingly sophisticated.

Substitution and augmentation strategies use EdTech to enhance learning and add value, whereas modification and redefinition stages harness EdTech to transform learning and make new things possible.
The effectiveness of any of these four strategies depends on when and how it is used.
Here's how you can harness each stage for more powerful classroom learning:

Substitution

This is the simplest stage, where EdTech is used as a direct substitute for traditional practices.

Substitution strategies can save you time and space by cutting back on laborious pen and paper tasks. Instead of printing out twenty-plus paper resources that clog the cupboard, you can use technology to manage resources with just a few clicks.

Substitution also provides a much more accessible introduction to technological soft skills than modification and redefinition. It's the perfect opportunity for students to get comfortable with new technology before you start to transform their learning.

Examples of substitution

having students type their work instead of handwriting it

using online quizzes and programs instead of pen and paper

uploading a worksheet in PDF for student access, as opposed to photocopying

using a digital interactive whiteboard as opposed to a traditional whiteboard and saving the results as a document.

Remember: Substitution strategies do not change the learning process or outcome. Ask yourself what you and your students will gain from the technology before implementing it. If it adds nothing but hassle, stick to pen and paper.

Augmentation

At the augmentation stage, technology adds something to the learning process beyond just convenience. It might give your students a clearer understanding of a complex topic or making it engaging in a way that traditional methods can't.

It also allows for the introduction of more independent and student-centric learning. By using technology as a source of information, students can start actively learning without requiring constant teacher-led instruction.

Examples of augmentation

Students give more informative and engaging oral presentations accompanied by a PowerPoint or Prezi containing multimedia elements.

Students use the internet to independently research a topic, as opposed to relying on teacher input.

Students use an EdTech program that gamifies curriculum content for student engagement and allows students to track progress in an accessible way.

Teacher instruction is supplemented with a video that clarifies a particularly hard to explain concept.

Modification

At the modification stage, technology is used to design interactive and dynamic tasks that go beyond the limitations of a traditional classroom.

For example, students can collaborate on shared documents, or work in large groups, allowing for seamless collaboration and knowledge sharing. This peer-to-peer work nurtures a more cooperative and dynamic class culture.

Technologically modified tasks also allow students to generate inspired and innovative work that isn't confined to paper. Some students will jump at the opportunity to get in front of a camera, while others will do anything to make it onto the global Mathletics leaderboard.

Examples of modification

Students produce podcasts summarising a topic, which can then be accessed by other students as a revision resource.

Students create an informative video presentation in place of a standard oral presentation. They can use their voice alongside a broader variety of creative multimodal components.

Students use a technological tool that makes an abstract concept visible in a hands-on, responsive way (e.g. voyaging on Google Earth to better understand measurement and geography).

Redefinition

The most sophisticated stage of SAMR, redefinition sees you using technology to make entirely new learning opportunities possible.

Redefining learning has the potential to connect learning with the real world and produce authentic outcomes. It also gives students strong technological soft skills such as digital collaboration, communication, technological literacy, and the ability to adapt to new systems and processes.

Most importantly, using technology to redefine learning in your classroom translates to vibrant and engaged students who embrace a growth mindset.

Examples of redefinition

connecting your students with other people around the world as part of the learning journey

having students publish their work online where it can be viewed by peers and the broader community

recording students as they deliver a presentation or practice a physical skill, then using this recording to prompt student reflection

experimenting with tasks that use extensive multimodal elements (e.g. producing documentaries or short films, webpages, print documents with creative layouts).

Remember, redefinition isn't the same as 'high tech'. A learning experience is redefined when it integrates technology seamlessly and meaningfully to open new doors for student learning - regardless of how sophisticated that technology might be.

In an English classroom, this might involve learning how to critically assess online media during web-based research. In mathematics, students might look at data represented through amazing visuals and get inspired to create their own.

Find your purpose

Starting with a purpose avoids the 'technology for technology's sake' that sometimes infiltrates the classroom.

Ask yourself:

What am I hoping to achieve by using this technology?

How will it make a difference to my students' learning?

Why is it preferable to not using technology?

How equipped are my students and I to use this technology?

How much time do I have to invest in making it work?

These simple questions can make it simpler to determine which stage of the SAMR model suits your needs. Remember that you don't always have to redefine your students' learning. A few simple technological additions to an already effective teaching strategy might be all you need to make a difference.

Using technology in the classroom sends a clear message to students. It shows them that you're connecting learning to the rapidly changing world outside the classroom walls, and you aren't afraid to adapt to a new challenge. Get creative with technology and you'll inspire as well as teach.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The SAMR Model Explained (With 15 Practical Examples)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
What is the SAMR model and how does it apply to learning? Here's how you can harness each stage for more powerful classroom learning.

# data[].attributes.body
This article warns its reading of the possible distractions that come from using technology in lessons, but on the other hand, it also promotes the benefits from doing so. It provides information about the EEE lesson framework and how a rating system of questions could (and should be used) to determine if the technology will enhance the lesson in question. Further, it highlights the EEE's motto of 'Learning first, technology second.'

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Literacy Daily is a space to connect educators, students, and leaders with the latest news, ideas, tools, strategies, and research in literacy instruction.

# data[].attributes.body
Here is a short youtube video that briefly explains and introduces TIM.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
AZ K-12 Center TIM (Technology Integration Matrix) Introduction Video

# data[].attributes.body
I really liked this article because it really broke down each part of TPACK into a very detailed explanation. I liked how this article explained how technology should be integrated into a classroom

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
TPACK: Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge Framework - Educational Technology

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
What is TPACK? Technology has become an increasingly important part of students’ lives beyond school, and even within the classroom it can also help

# data[].attributes.body
I liked this article because it laid out SAMR very clearly while also using a picture. The article referenced SAMR as a sort of mountain. I also liked how they gave examples for each category regarding online learning.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Good technology integration isn't about using the fanciest tool, it's about being aware of the range of options and picking the right strategy-or strategies-for the lesson at hand.

The biggest obstacle to teaching online probably isn't the technology. Teachers seek out educational technology, in fact, because it "can have considerable positive impacts on student performance," according to a 2016 study -improving test scores and allowing teachers to assess student achievement more efficiently. The big problem is how to integrate it: Beyond the sheer number of tech tools available, the same researchers identified "inadequate professional development and training" as the primary obstacle to using technology productively in classrooms.

Understandably, the emergence of the coronavirus has dramatically accelerated the process of integrating edtech, as educators around the country race to get online as fast as they can. But as many of our teachers have noted, the current state of K-12 online learning is more like triage-a form of crisis management-and not at all like skillfully managed distance education.

What's missing from the conversation right now, which makes sense given the immediacy of the need, is a focus on the bigger question of what the highest quality technology integration actually looks like. That's an important conversation to have, because in a post-coronavirus world there's likely to be a greater emphasis on digital learning, even as we return to physical schools and take advantage of face-to-face opportunities.

A Hierarchy of Tech Uses

A powerful conceptual tool to think about technology integration-and edtech's best uses-is the SAMR model, developed in 2010 by education researcher Ruben Puentedura, who was the 1991 recipient of a Phi Beta Kappa teaching award.

The SAMR model lays out four tiers of online learning, presented roughly in order of their sophistication and transformative power: substitution, augmentation, modification, and r edefinition. When switching to an online format, teachers often focus on the first two levels, which involve replacing traditional materials with digital ones: converting lessons and worksheets into PDFs and posting them online, or recording lectures on video and making them available for asynchronous learning, for example.
Creative Commons
Those are important steps, especially when teaching online for the first time, but in classrooms where tech integration has moved to the mastery level, the last two levels of the SAMR model-modification and redefinition-should also be in the mix. Students in classes where this kind of mastery is embedded find more novel and immersive uses for technology. They are creators and publishers of their own work across multiple forms of media, for example, or they are inviting professionals to provide feedback on their work products, or participating in digital forums with other peers around the world.

It's tempting to think of SAMR as a mountain to be summited. But good technology integration isn't about living at the top of the SAMR model; it's about being aware of the range of options and picking the right strategy-or strategies-for the lesson at hand.

Here's a closer look at good classroom practices at each level in the model:

Substitution

"Substitution" means replacing traditional activities and materials-like in-class lectures or paper worksheets-with digital versions. There is no substantial change to the content, just the way that it is delivered.

The goal here is to keep things simple: there's no need to reinvent the wheel. Scan your lessons and worksheets, convert them into PDFs, and post them online using Microsoft OneDrive, Google Drive, or a similar file-sharing service. Think about the information you have on your walls, such as the classroom norms, the daily schedule, or vocabulary lists, and convert them into digital formats that students can easily reference.

It may also help to provide synchronous as well as asynchronous versions of your lectures. If you're holding class meetings over a videoconferencing service like Zoom or Skype, provide a recording for students who can't attend. You can also create your own instructional videos for students to view at their own pace.

Augmentation

This level involves incorporating interactive digital enhancements and elements like comments, hyperlinks, or multimedia. The content remains unchanged, but students can now take advantage of digital features to enhance the lesson.

For example, students can create digital portfolios to create multimedia presentations, giving them more options to demonstrate their understanding of a topic. And instead of handing out paper quizzes, you can gamify your quizzes with tools like Socrative and Kahoot.

Teachers can also create virtual bulletin boards-using an app like Padlet -where students can post questions, links, and pictures.

Modification

At this level, teachers can think about using a learning management system like Google Classroom, Moodle, Schoology, or Canvas to handle the logistical aspects of running a classroom, like tracking grades, messaging students, creating a calendar, and posting assignments.

Teaching online opens up new channels of communication, many of which can help students who have traditionally been marginalized. Research shows that girls may be less likely to speak up in class, for example, so they may benefit from backchannels -alternative conversations that can run alongside instruction-that encourage participation.

Zoom's text chat feature, meanwhile, gives students an opportunity to write their questions out, which can feel less intrusive if there are dozens of students participating in the call. Also, students who prefer to collect their thoughts may benefit from slower-paced, asynchronous discussions in an online forum or email threads.

Redefinition

Learning is fundamentally transformed at the "redefinition" level, enabling activities that were previously impossible in the classroom.

For example, virtual pen pals can connect students to other parts of the world, whether it's with other students or experts in a field. Virtual field trips enable students to visit locations like the Amazon rainforest, the Louvre, or the Egyptian pyramids. After reading a book in class, you can invite the author to chat about their work and answer questions.

Technology also provides an opportunity to bring authentic audiences into your virtual classroom, and can make publishers out of your students. Kids can write their own wikis or blogs for public consumption and feedback-and platforms like Quadblogging can connect distant classrooms together so students both write and respond. Students can tackle local problems-like investigating the water quality of a nearby river-and invite members of the community to assess their digital proposals.

Going Beyond SAMR

Finally, consider how technology can be used not just as a way to deliver content, but also to strengthen relationships with your students. For elementary school teacher John Thomas, Seesaw and Flipgrid allow him to share a daily greeting, which his students then respond to-or to each other-with a typed or voiced comment. It's a good way to provide some stability while they're isolated.

How can my lesson be improved using technology?

How can I engage and empower students through technology?

How can online learning more closely resemble authentic, real-world learning?

Remember, again, that SAMR is sometimes thought of as a mountain to summit, but it's really more like a toolbox. The goal isn't to use the most sophisticated tool, but to find the right one for the job. More importantly, however, it's a way to reflect on your technology integration by thinking about a few key questions:

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
A Powerful Model for Understanding Good Tech Integration

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Good technology integration isn't about using the fanciest tool, it's about being aware of the range of options and picking the right strategy-or strategies-for the lesson at hand.

# data[].attributes.body
I am fascinated of seeing how different countries in the world handle educations. This video covers all the same information over TPACK but is based in Africa. This shows that the tool is used globally.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Understanding TPACK in under four minutes

# data[].attributes.body
I enjoyed that this video is brief and drives in the point that there is a difference between utilizing technology to advance education and utilizing technology to replace older mean such as paper.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
What is the SAMR Model and what does it look like in schools?

# data[].attributes.body
This is a blog that evaluated a few lesson plans in the classroom and gave critiques on them as well.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
In this teaching case, a 5th grade ELA teacher is using some basic technology (PowerPoint and Laptop) in an incredibly effective way. The teacher has a learning goal of helping students better understand how to visualize when reading. To do so, she took an article and removed the images, put the images in a PowerPoint, and added a few other maps that were mentioned in the story. She pulled up the PowerPoint at key moments as the students and teacher discussed what the thought the imagery would look like. It's a very simple use of tech, but incredibly effective.

Triple E Scoring

Engagement 6/6: Students are working together and talking about the article together, and co-viewing the PPT (co-engagement). The technology is helping bring the students into the learning (not distracting from it).

Enhancement 2/6: The PPT helps to add features and supports students using higher-level thinking skills in the discussion. Now, this could have been done without a PPT (possibly with the images on paper).

Extension 3/6: The teacher brought in real world images and maps to help the students better connec the reading to the real world.

Key Instructional Strategies Used: Discussion in small team, guided instruction with the PowerPoint, predicting, questioning.
11/18: A Strong Connection between the learning goals and PPT used.

Elementary Teachers John Heaton and Chrisara Moore co-developed a 5th grade science and literacy lesson about the human body, where the students researched, gathered information and wrote brochures to be displayed in a local physical therapy office. Below John Heaton and Chrisara Moore describes the project, and how it fits into the Triple E Framework.

Learning goals of the project
The ability to gather information and clearly communicate it to an audience is a skill that is crucial for success at most levels of schooling and the job market. A well-executed research report holds the potential to stir deep interest and curiosity in the minds of both the author and her readers. However, most assignments of this nature emphasize only the mechanics of the process and neglect the capacity for wonder and excitement. In order for children to learn the power of this type of writing, they must be given opportunities to experience and practice it in meaningful ways. During this initial foray into the craft of research writing, students will use multimodal literacy practices to create brochures that explain the various systems of the human body. The project will have particular meaning as students' finished products will be placed in a local medical facility for consumption by the public. A medical professional from the facility will also communicate with the students to express a need for comprehensible materials for patients thus adding an air of importance to the task. To launch the project, the teacher will share with students an article that describes the problem of overly complex health literature. During this launch time, the students will also hear from at least one local medical professional making a request for more understandable materials. The teacher will then introduce the ultimate goal of the unit which will be to create brochures, using Google Docs and Pages that clearly explain systems of the human body.

How does the technology engage students in learning? Co-engagement/social use?
To launch the unit I created an iMovie that aimed to show students the amazing things our bodies are capable of. Within this movie I interviewed a physical therapist at ATI Physical therapy in downtown Ann Arbor. The physical therapist told students how important it is that health literature can be understood by patients. The physical therapist then went on to tell the students that he needed them to create brochures to distribute to the patients that would teach them the importance of maintaining the various systems within their body. By using popular athletes and many different sports, along with the instrumental of a popular song, students were very engaged and excited to help educate the patients at ATI Physical Therapy. For this unit students were responsible for writing a report about a specific body system, as well as creating a brochure that would be displayed at ATI Physical Therapy. However, students were assigned their system based on their table groups. This allowed for lots of co engagement. Students were able to conduct research and then share their findings with their tablemates on a shared google doc. Also, by creating groups, students were constantly working together on the computer, conducting research, peer editing reports, and creating brochures.

How does the technology enhance student learning?
By conducting the majority of their research online, students had access to a plethora of
resources. Rather than simply reading information from a book, they studied interactive diagrams,
watched videos, and read articles. By writing their essays in Google Docs and sharing them with me, I
was able to simultaneously log in with multiple students to help them with their writing in real time.
One student with an IEP was able to use the speech-to- text feature to reduce the amount of writing
that he needed to do which served as a helpful scaffold. Finally, by having students create brochures
with the information they gathered, they were able to solidify their understanding by deciding how to
communicate it to the public and add meaning by including appropriate pictures and diagrams. An
unintended benefit of using Pages on the iPads was that it provided an opportunity for students to
develop perseverance. The app was new to them and somewhat challenging at first. They were
initially extremely frustrated- so much so that I considered not having them use it. Instead, I talked to
them about perseverance and how it was understandable for them to have difficulty on the first try. I
encouraged them to stick with it and emphasized the benefit of learning a new tool that they could
use for other purposes in the future. I was somewhat taken aback at the attitude shift and how
quickly they learned the app after that brief "pep talk."

How does the technology extend student learning? Connect to student lives, connect to authentic purposes?
Once students finished writing and revising their reports, they used the "pages" application to create a brochure to be displayed at the physical therapy office. I don't think the technology necessarily made connections to student lives, but it made those connections possible. What I mean is that in this unit the connections to student lives were made by the meaningful work they were doing. The technology simply made that work more presentable, neat, and engaging. Creating the brochures gave students another opportunity to work with the information they have been learning about, by succinctly restating the information in their reports. Being able to display the brochures in the physical therapy office provided an authentic purpose for students that engaged them in their learning. Using the pages app allowed students who are not "artistic" to be just as involved as other students. It also allowed for more presentable and professional appearance of the brochure. I think the unit in general connected to student lives since everyone has experience with each body system, and can relate to the feelings when a system is experiencing a change of some sort.

Triple E Score: 14/18 ( learn about reading the results)

The high school ELA teacher in this video (via The Teaching Channel) shares how she is using Google Hangouts to help her students extend learning by connecting with other students across the U.S.. They are able to share ideas, cultural experiences, and most importantly practice speaking to an audience. She hopes that by these informal conversations, students will become more confident with speaking to people they do not know and may be different from themselves. In addition, she uses Google Hangouts to hold informal and optional video meet ups with her in the evenings and on weekends. This allows students to ask questions and get more personalized feedback on their class work and learning objectives. In addition, it allows the students another opportunity to work on their speaking skills.

The Triple E Framework focuses on how instructional strategies can be integrated around technology tools in order to add value to learning. However, the framework can also be used to look at individual tools made for or used in education to see if there are opportunities to engage, enhance or extend learning through the tool. Keeping in mind that if there are NOT opportunities within the tool, then the teacher can still create structures around the tool that may provide those opportunities. Thus educators can use the same questions from the Triple E Framework and just change the first word of the framework from "does" to "can". For example..
Engagement

1. Can the technology allow students to focus on the task of the assignment or activity with less distraction?

2. Can the technology motivate students to start the learning process?

3. Can the technology cause a shift in the behavior of the students, where they move from passive to active social learners (co-use)?

Enhancement

1. Can the technology tool aid students in developing or demonstrating a more sophisticated understanding of the content? (creates opportunities for creation/production & other higher-order thinking skills over consumption)

2. Can the technology create scaffolds to make it easier to understand concepts or ideas? (in particular to help differentiate or personalize learning)

3. Can the technology create paths for students to demonstrate their understanding of the learning goals in a way that they could not do with traditional tools?

Extension

1. Can the technology create opportunities for students to learn outside of their typical school day?

2. Can the technology create a bridge between school learning and everyday life experiences?

3. Can the technology allow students to build skills, that they can use in their everyday lives?

Docent Example
In the Youtube video above, we look at Docent, a tool that allows teachers to annotate and provide formative assessment as students are working on documents.

Engagement: YES! The teacher is about to co-use and co-engage synchronously with the learners as they are working. This allows students to focus on the task/goal and be active learners.

Enhancement: YES! Docent has options for the teacher to help differentiate or scaffold learning differently for each student as they work. This would be difficult to do without the technology tools.

Extension: Somewhat! Docent is not naturally connected to student's everyday lives, thus the teacher will have to make instructional moves to help make these connections through and around the technology tool (eg..asking expert writers or editors to synchronously link up to students as they are working on their writing in Docent).
Total Score for Docent=14/18 (potentially a very strong connection between learning goals and technology tool---again this will be depend on the instructional strategies in the lesson).

In this lesson (via the Teaching Channel), the instructor is able to use technology to differentiation learning around poetry. Differentiated learning allows teachers to find ways for students to learn the same content as their peers but in their own leveled Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD). Notice in this lesson that the teacher integrates technology to allow students to listen to poetry, make poetry visual, allow students to create their own poetry and collaborate with others on poetry. Technology gives students opportunities to differentiate the content, the process of learning and the product.

This project by 2nd grade teacher Karen Mensing in Arizona is a strong example of all three levels of the Triple E Framework. Notice that the technology is NOT the focus of the learning, but it is essential in order for the students to fully experience the project. First, Karen engages her 2nd grade students by using technology that helps her students co-engage in the learning experiences (Google Hangouts) so that they can collaborate and construct knowledge with their pen pals. Next, the technology use enhances the learning because it allows the students to interact synchronously with their pen pal, as well as document their learning. Finally, the technology helps to extend their learning outside of the classroom by allowing them to learn from and about other students living in a different place. Connecting the classroom learning goals with real world experiences.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
In this teaching case, a 5th grade ELA teacher is using some basic technology (PowerPoint and Laptop) in an incredibly effective way. The teacher has a learning goal of helping students better understand how to visualize when reading.

# data[].attributes.body
Presentation on how to begin understanding and utilizing the TIM matrix.

# data[].attributes.body
This article explains what each E stands for in the triple E framework. Not only that, but it also has videos to watch that show how to possibly incorporate some of the ideas to have your own powerful classroom.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
While some of our most vulnerable learners are left behind due to lack of computers or internet connectivity, and we need to strive for policies to end the digital divide, the COVID-19 pandemic also has revealed the long-term staying power of teaching and learning in both brick-and-mortar and distance learning environments.

As a teacher educator preparing new and veteran teachers to use technology in learning, I know the magic sauce of technology integration is not found in the tool itself, rather the instructional strategies that teachers use in conjunction with the tool.

In order to prepare new teachers to integrate technology to support blended learning, I show teachers how to use the Triple E Framework to evaluate how well a lesson is integrating technology using research-informed approaches. The Triple E Framework is a validated research-informed tool to assess how effectively the technology and the instructional strategies around the technology is helping to engage students in the learning goals, enhance students' understanding of the learning goals, and extend students' everyday connection to the learning goals. The Triple E Framework encourages teachers to ask three questions related to each E (engagement, enhancement, and extension) when designing or evaluating lessons with technology. As the teacher answers each question, a score is given, with each question receiving a score between 0 and 2. Ultimately the teachers' lesson ends up with a total score in a range from 0 to 18. The closer the score is to 18, the better connected the technology choices, instructional strategies, and learning goals are observed in a lesson. When a lesson has a score less than 13, teachers are encouraged to 1) reconsider the tool choice, and/or 2) consider adding research-based instructional strategies around the tool to help boost the score, thus making the technology tools and strategies around the tool better connected to the learning outcomes.

To support teachers in brainstorming different tools and instructional strategies they can use in a lesson, I encourage them to use the Learner Variability Navigator (LVN), a Digital Promise free web app that uses a whole child, research-based framework designed to address the needs of each individual. LVN also includes strategies teachers and edtech product developers can use to help ensure their practice and products are equipped to meet the needs of diverse learners.

Teachers use the Learner Variability Navigator in two ways. The first method is in lesson development.

1. First, when teachers in my course are developing a lesson and have a learning outcome in mind, I encourage them to go directly to LVN's grade-level strategies and content areas they are working on.

2. Next, they are encouraged to select any factor that may be relevant to their learning goals or student needs (such as foundational writing skills or primary language).

3. Then, they will look over the suggested strategies, opening them up to learn more about the strategy, watching the video of the teacher using the strategy and consider whether the strategy can be used with technology and how it can be used. Some strategies also include a technology-based approach (such as Word Walls, which includes a sample of how you could use the tool Padlet to engage digitally with this strategy). Thus, providing the teachers with ideas of strategies they can use in conjunction with digital tools as well as digital tools that integrate these research-based strategies.

The second method is when teachers have already designed a lesson and scored it on the Triple E Framework. When their lesson receives a score less than 13, they turn to the LVN to search for new strategies and/or tools.

In the video, I share how I use the Triple E Framework and LVN together to create powerful lessons in the classroom. To learn more about the strategies mentioned in this video check out this workspace.

In the video, I share how I use the Triple E Framework and LVN together to create powerful lessons for remote learning. You can review the strategies mentioned in the video in this LVN workspace.

Integrating the LVN with the Triple E Framework is a powerful way to support teachers in developing learning activities that put learning first and technology second in a way that truly allows the technology to engage, enhance, and extend the learning outcomes. Further, for teachers who are teaching remotely, the combination of the Triple E Framework and LVN is extremely helpful in identifying strategies and tools that can support learning goals at a distance.

Below are additional resources:
By Liz Kolb is clinical associate professor of education in technology and teacher education at the University of Michigan.
Tags: innovation, technology

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Triple E Framework and Learner Variability Project: Implementing Research-Informed Technology Integration in Teaching and Learning Face-to-Face or Remotely - Ed Prep Matters | AACTE Blog

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
While some of our most vulnerable learners are left behind due to lack of computers or internet connectivity, and we need to strive for policies to end the digital divide, the COVID-19 pandemic also has revealed the long-term staying power of teaching and learning in both brick-and-mortar and distance learning environments.

# data[].attributes.body
I liked this website because it explained what the technology integration matrix is and even has a linked tool that you can use to see the different levels of technology integration.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.keywords[]
a resource supporting the full integration of technology in arizona schools

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A Resource Supporting the Full Integration of Technology in Arizona Schools

# data[].attributes.body
This website goes in depth and talks about how use of EEE could be the most effective tech integration. It broke down EEE so it would be easy to understand by anyone reading it.
The Triple E Framework for More Effective Technology Integration in Adult Education - EdTech Center @ World Education

# data[].attributes.body
This article talks about why tpack was created as well as the benefits and possible disadvantages of tpack in the classroom. Overall the goal is to integrate technology into the classroom so students can learn more effectively.

# data[].attributes.body
This article gave examples for each category of SAMR. It also emphasized that we use technology in the classroom to make task easier, but also to help the students learn, by sometimes increasing students productivity or benefiting the lesson.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Access videos, whitepapers, eBooks, webinars, blogs, infographics, case studies, demos and more in our resource hub to support your success.

# data[].attributes.body
This teacher/coach talks about his experience learning and using the triple E framework in his classroom and how it has changed the way he looks at and creates his lesson plans.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
I first learned about the Triple E Framework through ISTE. A new book, Learning First, Technology Second, was being published about a framework...my ears perked up. The geeky tech coach that I am, collector of technology frameworks, was interested. I had a chance to meet Liz Kolb, the author of the book and the primary researcher behind the Triple E Framework at a book signing. I read the book as part of a book study and realized that this framework was going to be a great tool for me to use with teachers.

For those of you who are new to our series, as a coach, I use frameworks as a tool to communicate concepts with teachers. I tend to vary the framework of reference depending on the teacher, the focus of our work together and the instructional needs in their classroom. Additionally, there are frameworks like that I might use when discussing something with another coach, but not necessarily when talking with teachers.

I was really impressed with the Triple E Framework, and the conversations that it could facilitate with teachers and I decided to host my own here at TeachersFirst. There are a number of concepts that we've been discussing that have changed the way we are looking at lessons and lesson planning. For example co-use of technology. Co-use - or using technology together - adds a social component as a factor in the learning process. Students - or a student and an adult - have the opportunity to discuss and clarify what is happening as they use the technology together. This adds to both the engagement in the activity as well as facilitates peer-to-peer learning. A few of our participants have submitted explainer videos on the concept of co-use. You can see them .

Beyond a discussion of what true engagement is, the Triple E Framework can be used to remind us that technology should be used to ENHANCE our curricular goals and EXTEND student learning beyond the classroom walls. Many times I have had a teacher come to me excited about a new tool with an expectation that I can help get it implemented. With the Triple E framework, we can have a discussion to determine if the tool should be used and how it supports existing objectives or provides additional opportunities for engagement.

Are you interested in learning more about the Triple E Framework? Here are some resources for you:

About the author: Ruth Okoye

Dr. Ruth Okoye is the Director of K12 Initiatives at The Source for Learning. As a long-time technology coach, Ruth shares ideas and strategies for professional learning and thoughts on how to motivate yourself to "dig deeper" into educational technologies. View all posts by Ruth Okoye

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
I first learned about the Triple E Framework through ISTE. A new book, Learning First, Technology Second, was being published about a framework...my ears perked up. The geeky tech coach that I am, collector of technology frameworks, was interested.

# data[].attributes.body
This website identified tools that can be used to integrate technology into the lesson.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The slide text reads as follows:

TUPS: Technology Uses and Perceptions Survey.

Classroom technology use

Teacher perceptions

Collect pre- and post- data

Results help target PD

TIM-O: Technology Integration Matrix Lesson Observation Tool

Formative feedback

Also available as:

A lesson reflection tool

A lesson plan review tool

ARTI: Action Research for Technology Integration

Action research framework

Data collection tool

Teacher-directed inquiry

Teachers as change agents

Data can be aggregated at school, district, or higher level

Tools can support PD planning, peer coaching, grant evaluation, and more

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The slide text reads as follows: TUPS: Technology Uses and Perceptions Survey.

# data[].attributes.body
https://ictevangelist.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/TPACK.png

# data[].attributes.body
This diagram shows you what each letter stands for and means by showing examples of what each student does in different situations.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Researching in 2000, Schiller argued that although computers, by this point in history, had been in use in Australian schools for over 15 years “visits to classrooms and principals’ offices indicate that information technology has not yet been integrated into the daily learning activities of the school.” (p.2).  Fast-forward ten years and the issue of technology integration was still on the agenda. In 2010, the Federal Government set out its own Digital Strategy for Teachers and School Leaders that aimed to equip educators with the ability to integrate ICT into their educational practices to provide students with the skills that are required for the 21st Century.

Technology integration does not mean simply teaching basic computer and software skills in the computer laboratory. The mere presence of digital tools in the classroom also does not equate to technology integration. Effective technology integration happens across the curriculum, encourages higher-order creative and critical thinking skills, problem solving, collaboration and results in transformational learning.

What is SAMR?

SAMR is a model designed by Dr. Ruben Puentedura to guide teachers towards effectively infusing technology into their programs. At the Enhancement stage of the model, educators use technology to accomplish traditional tasks.  Moving through the model allows teachers to create student-centred, transformational learning experiences that could not be accomplished without the technological tools.

Image the creation of Dr. Ruben Puentedura, Ph.D.

Dr. Puentedura has included Questions and Transitions Ladders to help teachers make the transitions between each level. Does the concept of the SAMR model feel familiar? Here are some excellent links showing the correlation between the SAMR model and Bloom’s Technology.

Kathy Schrock also has a fantastic infographic on the link between SAMR and Bloom’s.

What does SAMR look like in the classroom?

Key Learning Areas: Human Society and Its Environment and English

Unit of Work: Our Fleeting Past

HSIE Outcome: CCS2.1 Describes events and actions related to British colonisation of Australia and assesses changes and consequences.

Language Function: Recounting (for link to English Programming Starter, click here.)

Task: Students research the kinds of people who were on the First Fleet. They then create a historical recount from the different perspectives of those people.

SUBSTITUTION:

After researching the kinds of people on board the First Fleet, students write a historical recount of what the experience was like from one perspective. Students type out their recount using a word processing program, like Word, rather than presenting it in it’s handwritten form. The technology leads to no or little change in the teaching and learning.

AUGMENTATION:

Students enhance their Word document by embedding content and hyperlinks. At this stage, the learning task is not changed but the features of technology are incorporated.

MODIFICATION:

Students work in small groups so that a variety of researched perspectives are represented. Each group has a wiki where they each post their individual Word Documents. Other group members contribute interview questions, via the Wiki, to explore the different perspectives presented. At this stage of the model, technology is modifying the interactions between user and content and between users themselves. Communication, collaboration and contribution are emphasised at this level. The Modification stage allows for a significant functional change in technology use within the classroom.

REDEFINITION:

Students collaboratively film a news piece, taking on the role of the type of person they have researched. News presenters pose some of the questions developed via the Wiki. The final cut of this news piece is uploaded to a school blog and audience members can provide feedback and ask further questions via the Comments section. At this stage, students are doing something that is inconceivable without the technology. They have taken their learning beyond the walls of the classroom and are seeking feedback from an audience beyond their classroom. At this level of the model, learning tasks and technology exist not as ends but as supports for student learning. Here is an example of a news piece created by students researching the people of the First Fleet.

Feeling overwhelmed about how to use the SAMR model in your classroom to ensure effective technology integration? Here is another clip about SAMR- take note of the message at the end about the Redefinition level not being a mountain summit!

Do you have examples of Redefined learning tasks that you have been a part of in your classroom?

Further reading

Visit Dr. Puentedura’s blog where he posts many of his presentation slides: http://www.hippasus.com/rrpweblog

Kathy Schrock’s site has a plethora of information on SAMR and some excellent links to SAMR resources.

This wiki has many real-life examples of how the SAMR model can be applied in the classroom.

DET NSW (2010) Connected Classrooms Program in Action: Compendium, Sydney: Department of Education and Training, http://www.dec.nsw.gov.au/detresources/ccp_in_action_compendium_FNOouLXKim.pdf

Schiller, J. (2000) Implementation of Computing in Schools by Primary Principals: A Longitudinal Perspective, AARE, Sydney

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Integrating technology into your classroom with the SAMR model - StarTime Studios

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Home→Our Blog→Integrating technology into your classroom with the SAMR model Integrating technology into your classroom with the SAMR model Researching in 2000, Schiller argued that although computers, by this point in history, had been in use in Australian schools for over 15 years “visits to class…

# data[].attributes.body
If you go to the website, It actually shows two different diagram representations of the triple E's. The second is actually my favorite. It defines them all as instructional strategies and gives three questions to ask for each.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
​Website enacted on January 5, 2015 ​Website Updated on December 9, 2019 Author of website: Liz Kolb , Clinical Associate Professor of Education and Learning Technologies. University of...

# data[].attributes.body
This diagram gives you the characteristics of learning environments, then gives you the levels of technology integration. Finally, you have the cross over between the two categories.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The Technology Integration Matrix

The Technology Integration Matrix (TIM) provides a framework for describing and targeting the use of technology to enhance learning. The TIM incorporates five interdependent characteristics of meaningful learning environments: active, collaborative, constructive, authentic, and goal-directed. These characteristics are associated with five levels of technology integration: entry, adoption, adaptation, infusion, and transformation. Together, the five characteristics of meaningful learning environments and five levels of technology integration create a matrix of 25 cells, as illustrated below. All TIM descriptors apply equally well to online and face-to-face instruction, Developed by the Florida Center for Instructional Technology (FCIT) in 2005, the TIM is now in its third edition (2019).

# data[].attributes.body
While I was searching for something to better help me understand TPACK, I came across this video. While the example is about elementary school levels, I think the general idea is still able to be moved to a high school level. It’s a great example on how to apply TPACK in the classroom. It reminds me a lot about what we did last semester in the knowing and learning classroom.

# data[].attributes.body
I loved this article because it explained SAMR a step further than the 2 minute video. It went into more details about how it is useful in the classroom whether it’s just making learning visible or actionable to being student driven as well.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
I read an interesting article in EdSurge last week about how current educational technologies do little to move learners beyond rote recall of knowledge and it caught me off guard. It was not the belief that technology has yet to be harnessed to its highest potential that surprised me. It is true that many fields are only starting to see the benefits technology brings to their work. What struck me most was the narrative in the article, which seemingly compared the role of technology to the role of pedagogy. While educational technology does make learning visible, it is the teacher that makes learning meaningful.

As educators and curators of educational technology we know that technology is a tool that complements instruction. As such, the strength of the tool is predicated on its use by a skillful educator. There are certainly some exciting and revolutionary innovations and technology as a tool can be quite powerful if it encourages creative discovery or reinforces foundational knowledge. We crawl before we walk, just like we memorize sight words before we write prose. What follows are four ways that technology transcends analog tools in education, including those that demonstrate simple recall while providing valuable feedback to fuel learning to the true innovators in our classrooms: teachers.

A Tale of Two Taxonomies

The referenced article cites Bloom's cognitive taxonomy, a scale of increasingly complex levels of thinking that students demonstrate as they learn-moving from rote recall to higher order skills like creation and evaluation. This taxonomy provides verbs that describe the cognitive processes students use during learning. For example, a student in the application category is able to implement or execute existing knowledge in novel tasks. This is an important skill that students demonstrate whether they're applying Pythagorean's theorem when presented with a novel problem or writing alternative endings to a favorite fairy tale. In the article, author Jared Silver uses Bloom's taxonomy to suggest technology can more optimally engage learners. And while this may be true, it is the teacher who is the guide on the side scaffolding learning across these increasingly complex categories.

(source: vandycft/flickr)

By contrast, Reuben Puentedura's SAMR model suggests increasingly complex ways that technology impacts the classroom. From tools that substitute to those that redefine the nature of instruction, technology is seen as a tool that has the potential to impact the nature of teaching. For example, technology tools in the augment category provide teachers with improved ways of interacting with students. This is evident in the way that Google Forms transform exit tickets by quickly and efficiently identifying areas of confusion, highlighting opportunities to dive in to the next day's lesson.

Bloom's taxonomy is essential for teachers to identify student's levels of thinking, whereas Puentedura's taxonomy is essential for teachers to identify the tools that can be used to innovate on instruction. The two are not synonymous and point to two potential views of technology and education: one where the technology guides instruction, and the other where skillful teachers guide instruction supported by technological tools. As a student of cognitive science, I hold strong to the work of Lev Vygotsky, which suggests the latter and posits technology as a cultural tool. In the SAMR model, technology in the hands of a knowledgeable educator can transcend traditional teaching and learning in four distinct but impactful ways.

Puentedura's SAMR model with examples

The SAMR model was created to help teachers reflect on how they're using technology today while paving the way towards impacting their students' future. The four levels move from simple substitution, to augmentation, modification and finally redefinition, where each successive level increases the tool's impact on the classroom. Research shows that each level has had an effect on learning, here we dive deeper into some of the tools teachers are already using that are making significant impacts on classrooms worldwide.

Substitution: Oxford meet Oxford 2.0

The simplest level of the SAMR model is substitution. Tech tools at this level serve the same purpose as their analog counterparts without changing the nature of teaching or learning. For instance, a student may refer to the Oxford online dictionary instead of meandering to the class library and sifting through the pages to find the word "obfuscate." These tools may be used to introduce students to real scientists through Skype a Scientist instead of relying on Bill Nye videos (which I still think are pretty terrific!).

On the surface, substitution tools do not appear to significantly shift the nature of learning. But digitally documenting a student's inquiries through substitution tools makes learning visible and provides formative feedback. For example, when my students create a digital concept map in coggle about a unit on biodiversity, they substitute a paper and pencil version of a concept map with a living document that can be shared and revised from home or school. While the process of creating a concept map has not shifted, teachers can observe iterations in student learning and more accurately and quickly meet students in their "just right zone".

Augmentation: Student and Teacher Driven Tools

Augmentation level tools are powerful ways of providing both student and teacher-driven feedback for learning.Augmentation tools may ask students to understand or apply their knowledge, lower-order verbs on Bloom's taxonomy, while providing teachers with evidence of student learning and a clear focus if they need to pivot their instruction in real time.

Socrative, Kahoot and TopHat, are great tools for augmenting assessment, especially in flipped classrooms. These digital tools gamify the process of learning and help teachers quickly assess topics that require either more or less discussion, allowing students to move to independent and group work faster. Plickers are a low stakes and low tech way of ensuring students have a solid understanding of content before moving on. Seamlessly integrating into lessons, tools like PollEverywhere invite students to quickly share their interests, knowledge, questions and even hopes around a content area in real time. Most importantly, these tools mean that student responses can be used as feedback to create more relevant experiences and more meaningful instruction.

Modification: Old Problems, New Lens

Tools that modify classroom tasks encourage students to demonstrate understanding and create new ways of solving old problems. Nearpod accomplishes this by taking a traditional lesson and infusing real time assessment, interactive experiences, and differentiated extensions. These tools become truly transformative when they're used by teachers.

Modification tools are those that redesign typical classroom tasks like book reports and science projects. Typical book reports become Siskel and Ebert style video reviews using tools like YouTube Capture. And when teachers ask difficult questions about the impact of abiotic factors on marine environments students can respond using a video through new tools like FlipGrid. What is more, students can respond to teacher prompts by creating their own books or narrate new endings to a story by creating a digital comic strip or their own book using tools like Book Creator.

Redefinition: Ground Control to Major Tom

It is true that technology's impact on education is only just beginning, but ed tech tools are already redefining the way we teach and learn. No longer are we relegated to imagining weightlessness when our students listen to storytime from space as real astronauts read childhood favorites aloud while suspended in zero gravity at the international space station. Flipping the classroom is a redefinition of traditional instruction made possible by technologies like Educreations where carefully curated learning prepares students to actively apply learning.

Traditional models of engaging and assessing students are wholly transformed by tools that redefine teaching and learning. In art class, painting in watercolors becomes a three-dimensional rendering using tools like Google's Tilt Brush. Not only are growing artists able to demonstrate their understanding of depth and color but so too are their classmates able to take a walk through a shared 3D museum. Technology in education is helping break the barriers of access providing field trips to remote and exciting locations like the surface of the moon or the surface of a cell. And while medical students hone their surgical skills using tools like Osso VR, Olympic athletes gain a competitive advantage engaging in simulation tools created by STRIVR.

Learning Is the Outcome, Tech Is Just a Tool

The potential of these tools resides in their ability to untether our nation's teachers from the physical boundaries of their classrooms and untie our nation's students from arbitrary groupings while unleashing an exciting new level of truly immersive learning. To harness the true utility of these tools we must continue to address the digital divide that perpetuates inequities in our classrooms by not only bringing high speeds to our classrooms but also access to the tools that students and teachers need to support our most valuable assets, our future citizens.

A single tool, even with the greatest AI, will never be a panacea for education. But technology does help teachers take learners to worlds beyond their imagination while making learning visible and actionable. Tools that help make learning visible allow teachers to scaffold instruction and meet the needs of all of their learners. When teachers are empowered with the resources they need to thrive, students win.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
How SAMR and Tech Can Help Teachers Truly Transform Assessment - EdSurge News

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
I read an interesting article in EdSurge last week about how current educational technologies do little to move learners beyond rote recall of ...

# data[].attributes.body
I thought this video was awesome for helping provide some questions about what the frameworks are suppose to do. It provides a few questions for you to answer and based on the answer you can discover if the technology is being used in a way that follows the triple EEE frameworks.

# data[].attributes.body
This is an interesting article that talks about how TIM is applied in the classroom and the evaluation of the application. I feel like this might be an article to read after visiting the main page about TIM but it’s an interesting read for sure. The support for TIM in lesson plans is very apparent.

# data[].attributes.body
This matrix provides framework to enhance technology-designed lessons.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The Technology Integration Matrix

The Technology Integration Matrix (TIM) provides a framework for describing and targeting the use of technology to enhance learning. The TIM incorporates five interdependent characteristics of meaningful learning environments: active, collaborative, constructive, authentic, and goal-directed. These characteristics are associated with five levels of technology integration: entry, adoption, adaptation, infusion, and transformation. Together, the five characteristics of meaningful learning environments and five levels of technology integration create a matrix of 25 cells, as illustrated below. All TIM descriptors apply equally well to online and face-to-face instruction, Developed by the Florida Center for Instructional Technology (FCIT) in 2005, the TIM is now in its third edition (2019).

# data[].attributes.body
This source from Stanford identifies and integrates the three aspects of TPACK.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The TPACK framework can also be extended to understand how students might engage with the instructional elements of the course. Particularly in an online course, careful consideration should be put into the TPACK intersections. If students are not comfortable or proficient with a technology tool, it can affect their ability to approach the content.

# data[].attributes.body
This source could be used to enhance lessons to ensure that they support the SAMR design.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Examples of Applying the SAMR Model can Help Teachers Understand and Embrace it

The SAMR Model for integrating technology into teaching, developed by Dr. Ruben Puentedura, has gained a good deal of exposure in recent years. "SAMR" is an acronym that stands for Substitution, Augmentation, Modification, and Redefinition. The SAMR model provides a technique for moving through degrees of technology adoption to find more meaningful uses of technology in teaching and move away from simply using edtech for tech's sake.

We recently discussed the SAMR model during an Academic Technology Work Group meeting at The College of Westchester. We examined the video, SAMR in 120 Seconds. One thing that really struck me is how much the example helped, so I made it a point to gather and/or create some more examples.

Following are 8 examples of the SAMR process, each taking an example of a typical classroom exercise that does not use technology and walking it through each phase of SAMR. For half of these, I searched and borrowed from examples that teachers had written about online (original sources are provided - in some cases I tweaked the example a bit). I also created examples of my own. In working through this, it became apparent to me that while Substitution and Augmentation can be relatively straightforward conceptually, there is even more room for interpretation when it comes to Modification and Redefinition.

The goal of this exercise was to help me (and readers) better understand the SAMR model, and to really see how lessons and assessments can be transformed while considering the benefits of evolving them through these stages. I find it particularly interesting to see the vast difference between the original lesson and the redefined lesson - there is often a much wider range of skills required in the latter stages, and lessons can become much more engaging and collaborative when modified or redefined.

Lesson: Writing a Short Paper
Taken from: http://www.educatorstechnology.com/2013/08/samr-model-explained-through-examples.html. A modification of an idea found at https://edofict.wikispaces.com/SAMR+Examples. Taken from: https://edofict.wikispaces.com/SAMR+Examples and modified. Idea taken from: https://sites.google.com/a/msad60.org/technology-is-learning/samr-model and slightly modified. In this example, we take a simple form of assessment and evolve it into a collaborative group project.
Original Assignment: A hand written paper.

Lesson: Geography & Travel

Original Assignment: An overview of a location consisting of hand written content supplemented with compiled cut-and-pasted magazine clippings.

Lesson: Understanding Shakespeare

Original Assignment: Read a Shakespeare play in traditional printed format.

An Assessment Exercise
Original Assignment: Show understanding of fractions on a worksheet by coloring in blocks.
Original Assignment: Take a quiz, answers handwritten in a printed form.

Following are some example lessons, evolved through the SAMR model, that I have tried my hand at creating.It's easy to get caught up in worrying about how effectively an approach constitutes "modification" or "redefinition", but that's not the point of the exercise. To my way of thinking, it's more about understanding the difference between a just replacing or augmenting a "paper" lesson with a "digital" one and actually evolving it in a beneficial way and exploring new possibilities.

Lesson: Art/Painting
Creative Commons license image source.
Original Assignment: Drawing a picture using traditional brush, paint, paper. Of course, there is a a big difference between doing this by hand in the traditional manner and doing it digitally. Digitally is by no means better, it is just different and opens up some interesting possibilities.

Substitution: Use a digital drawing/painting program (like MS Paint) to draw/paint a picture.

Augmentation: Use a tool that allows the creation of your masterpiece to be layed back (like Educreations, for example).

Modification: Pull a background image to use as a canvas. You could even scan something hand drawn and use that.

Redefinition: Create Artwork Collaboratively using a Collaborative Online Whiteboard (like Twiddla or one of these other tools).

Lesson: Email Etiquette

Original lesson: Review printed copies of Email Etiquette concepts and guidelines.

Lesson: Learning Fractions

Substitution: Use an Excel Worksheet to let students color in the blocks.

Augmentation: Use Google Sheets to let students color in the blocks, where the teacher can offer feedback directly on Google Sheets.

Modification: Use Google Sheets and direct students to online examples and supplementary learning materials for areas that they might struggle with.

Redefinition: Use a Fractions App instead (here are a handful of examples for iOS devices).

Lesson: Phys Ed - Learning To Hit a Baseball Well

Original Assignment: Learning how to hit a baseball by watching and listening to a Coach or Phys Ed instructor show you and then trying it yourself.

Hopefully these example of lessons modified through the SAMR cycle help to encourage you to think about how you leverage technology to make some of your lessons more interactive, collaborative, and engaging with some of the many great technology tools available today! Here is a set of tools that may be helpful when working to evolve your lessons: 10 of the Most Engaging Uses of Instructional Technology (with Dozens of Resources and Tools).

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
8 Examples of Transforming Lessons Through the SAMR Cycle - Emerging Education Technologies

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Examples of Applying the SAMR Model can Help Teachers Understand and Embrace it The SAMR Model for integrating technology into teaching, developed by Dr. Ruben Puentedura, has gained a good deal of exposure in recent years. "SAMR" is an acronym that stands for Substitution, Augmentation, Modification, and Redefinition.