Module 2 - Tech Integration Case Study

Khenra Granger and Brittany Lambdin

Department of Educational Technology and Literacy, Towson University
ISTC 735 Technology, Learning, and Design
Dr. Jeffrey M. Kenton
November 8, 2022
 The instructional lesson that we have chosen to analyze for this assignment is called

“Practice Video: Fact Families”. This lesson video was found on USF TIMS Project website

(Appendix A) and created for a kindergarten, first, or second grade math classroom. The teacher

is narrating the entire video, starting off by telling us that students will be reviewing fact families

using familiar technology websites. The teacher states the student’s online math text was used to

initially teach the math lesson that day and students were then going to review fact families by

going to Think Central where their math text and other activities they use are accessed. The

students proceed to engage in a math review activity which the teacher narrating describes as

“really fun and engaging” about fact families. The teacher then gave the students two different

options to summarize their learning from the fact families review. The first option was to email

the teacher a summary of what they had learned from the lesson on fact families and the activity

they had completed on the concept. The second option was for students to create a movie using

characters’ dialog to demonstrate understanding. Students who chose the second option accessed

a site they have used before called Xtranormal to create their movies. On Xtranormal, students

then worked with their software to build a mini movie in which the characters they have

programmed have a dialogue. It is through this dialog that students are able to summarize their

learning about fact families. The lesson, although very short, has a good foundation and strength

within it incorporating technology.

One strength of this lesson and the technology used is that, based on the video lesson

plan, technology is incorporated throughout the lesson. As we are educating 21st century

learners, younger students currently in schools and future students are becoming very tech savvy.

Finding ways to incorporate various types of technology is important to keep these students from

becoming bored or uninterested. Allowing for students to summarize their learning, something
that typically may not be as engaging if done through a more traditional method such as pencil

and paper, may produce a better result when looking at the teacher’s data on this specific lesson.

The only difference being when students are choosing the summative assessment option for

submitting their summary of their learning about fact families.

The teacher narrating says that she allows students to choose from two options for

summarizing their learning, one is to just send the teacher an email or students can use a familiar

website to create an animated movie demonstrating their understanding. This can be seen as

either a strength or a weakness depending on the level of engagement the teacher is looking for

from students in the level of their summary explanation. Students who are simply emailing the

teacher their summation are not fully utilizing technology in the same sense that the students

who choose to create a mini movie are, so for the purposes of this case analysis, this part of the

lesson could be seen as more of a weakness than a strength. As we continue through this case

study, we suggest other possible ways the teacher could have the students submit their

summaries using a different technological platform to ensure the technology engagement is met

to its highest potential for all students.

To analyze the overall effectiveness of the technology integrated into this lesson, we

chose to use the Taylor Framework for this case study. The Taylor Framework was developed

and published in 1980 by Robert Taylor in his book, The Computer in the School: Tutor, Tool,

Tutee (Taylor, R. P.,1980). The Taylor Framework suggests three modes (Tutor, Tool, and

Tutee) for the application of technology in education. According to Taylor, when technology is

used to teach the student as assisted instruction, the technology is considered a Tutor. When

technology amplifies teacher and student ability to address academic tasks, it falls into the

technology as a Tool mode. Lastly, when students learn by programming or “tutoring” the
technology to create something new, said technology is considered as a Tutee. After reviewing

the lesson video: Fact Families in 1st grade classroom (Appendix A), we have determined that

this lesson plan successfully integrated technology to meet all three modes of Taylor’s

Framework.

Immediately, the lesson video opens with the teacher narrating how her students were

planning to engage with the math concept of fact families. She states that students first access

their math text online. This online math text was used to initially teach the math lesson being

discussed. While she does not narrate in detail about the layout or elements with this online math

text, you can see a snippet of the students’ screens while viewing the video. Through the video

you can see a talking character which appears to support student learning while they access this

text as well as a book icon and segmenting tools through a “GO” and “return” arrow button.

These features in conjecture suggest that instruction is being directly assisted through the use of

the online math book as a tutor.

Next, as the lesson narration continues, students access their Black Board site to login to

Think Central. On Think Central, students engage in a math review activity which the teacher

narrating describes as “really fun and engaging” about fact families. Without this online tool, a

fact family review might have been completed in a more traditional method using paper and

pencil. Instead, Think Central amplifies both the teacher and student ability to address the

academic task of a fact family review. The teacher then asks her students to summarize their

learning by emailing a write up about fact families which allows for another integration using

technology as a tool for learning.

The teacher goes on to narrate that she gave her students the option of the email summary

or a summary through the creation of a movie using characters’ dialog to demonstrate

understanding. Students who chose this option accessed the site of Xtranormal to create their

movies. On Xtranormal, students engage with their software to build a mini movie. Students

program two or more characters to exchange in a dialogue. It is through this dialog that students

can summarize their learning about fact families. In this lesson, using the site Xtranormal,

students can program or “tutor” the technology to create something new thus engaging the mode

of technology as a Tutee. The teacher goes on to mention that Xtranormal can be used for

students to demonstrate their understanding of any lesson through the creation of a mini movie.

While we determined all modes from the Taylor model to be addressed through this

lesson, noting technology as a Tool vs Tutee is reliant upon students’ choice of assessment. If

students choose to email their review, we note that technology is only being used as a Tool to

amplify student ability to address a task which is to demonstrate their understanding of fact

families. While if students choose to use Xtranormal to create a movie to demonstrate their

understanding with character dialog, the mode of technology as a Tutee is engaged. When

considering UDL (CAST, 2018), the teacher’s choice to allow for an email summary or a movie

creation to demonstrate understanding does allow for multiple means of action and expression,

however, it is now based on student choice whether all three modes of the Taylor Framework are

engaged or not.

To overcome this and ensure that technology is being integrated to address all three

modes for all learners, as well as ensure that highest level of Bloom’s Taxonomy (Armstrong,

2010) is being engaged, there can be a slight modification made to the assessment requirements.

Instead of giving the email summary option (since the Tool mode is already being addressed

through the review activity on Think Central), learners can have the option to create a mind map

using a free site such as Padelet or SimpleMind. Both sites have free options for educators and
are user friendly enough for the audience of this lesson (1st grade students). By exchanging the

email summary option to the use of one of these sites, learners are still being given multiple

means of action and expression while also using different software options to create something

new to demonstrate their understanding.

 References

Armstrong, P. (2010). Bloom’s Taxonomy. Vanderbilt University Center for Teaching; Vanderbilt

University. https://cft.vanderbilt.edu/guides-sub-pages/blooms-taxonomy/

CAST. (2018). The UDL guidelines. Udlguidelines.cast.org; CAST. https://udlguidelines.cast.org/

Taylor, R. P. (1980). Introduction. In R. P. Taylor (Ed.), The computer in school: Tutor, tool, tutee (pp.

1-10). New York: Teachers College Press. Reprinted by permission of the publisher from Taylor,

R., Ed., The Computer in School: Tutor, Tool, Tutee, (New York: Teachers College Press, ©

1980 by Teachers College, Columbia University. All rights reserved.), pp. 1-10.

The Technology Integration Matrix. (2021). Practice Video: Fact Families. TIM.

https://fcit.usf.edu/matrix/project/practice-video-fact-families/
 Appendix A

Below you will find the video lesson link to the lesson analyzed in this case study. This

lesson has been noted as a technology integration practice video by the Florida Center for

Instructional Technology as part of their project The Technology Integration Matrix.

Fact Families in 1st grade classroom:

https://fcit.usf.edu/matrix/project/practice-video-fact-families/