EDT 204 EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY

Dr. Gracemary Moluayonge (Gracia)

Google classroom code: kbvqpc4
Week 9

Principles for meaningful technology integration into the classroom

Here we will be analyzing the issue of technology integration for teaching and learning and
developing a set of principles that can aid teachers in the decision-making process of
integrating new technologies in different contexts, with a strong focus on pedagogical
implications.

Existing models and perceptions

Some popular beliefs about technology integration that exist are:

-The need to have high-tech equipment

- The need to have extensive technological knowledge

- The need for constant updating

-The need for extensive contact hours with the students to be able to obtain productive results.

Some existing models of standards for technology integration are the TPACK model by
Mishra & Koehler (2006) and the SAMR model by Puentedura (2006), which look at
technology integration from different perspectives.

TPACK MODEL

The TPACK model looks at technology integration from a teacher’s perspective. What are the
different areas of knowledge a teacher must command in order to be able to integrate
technology more effectively?

The triple Venn diagram in the Figure below shows that the ‘hot spot’ happens at the
intersection of the technological knowledge, pedagogical knowledge and content knowledge.
So for teachers, the ideal person to integrate technology into a teaching learning situation
should be someone who knows the content, who knows how to teach it and who knows about
technology. This has deep implications for teacher training programmes, which should
include technology integration from the very beginning.

Content Knowledge: Describes the knowledge about the topic being taught and associated
knowledge.

Pedagogical Knowledge: Describes the knowledge about teaching and techniques to help
students learn. Knows the teaching methods.

Technological Knowledge:Describes the knowledge about the technology being used to teach.

Pedagogical Content Knowledge: Describes the knowledge about teaching techniques specific
to the content.

Technological Pedagogical Knowledge: Describes the knowledge about how to teach with the
necessary tools.

Technological Content Knowledge: Describes the knowledge about how the tools work with
the content.

Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge: Describes the knowledge about the tools and
techniques you use to teach the content.
SAMR Model

A second model is SAMR by Ruben Puentedura (2006). It looks at technology integration

from the perspective of the tools used by both teachers and students. It analyses the way in
which tech tools can be simple replacements of traditional procedures or whether they can
enhance or transform the educational tasks. Puentedura sees this model as a ladder, in which
the first step is S for substitution, the second is A for augmentation, the third is M for
modification and the last is R for redefinition. In Substitution, tech acts as a direct tool
substitute, with no functional change. In Augmentation, tech acts as a direct tool substitute but
with some functional improvement. In Modification, tech allows for significant task redesign.
And in Redefinition, tech allows for the creation of new tasks, previously inconceivable. He
further describes the first two steps as an Enhancement phase and the last two steps as a
Transformation phase. The understanding of this model has led to the development of a set of
principles and guidelines to aid teachers in the decision-making process of technology
integration. This analysis focuses heavily on the pedagogical implications and knowledge
needed for the process to be successful.

Here’s a closer look at good classroom practices at each level in the model:
Substitution: At this stage, technology is directly substituted for a more traditional teaching
tool or method. It is a simple, bare-bones, direct replacement. For example, if you are
teaching a lesson on the Cameroon’s Constitution of 1972, you might use an electronic or
web-based version of the document instead of a hard copy.
-Students might also answer questions about the Constitution by typing them in Microsoft
Word instead of filling out a worksheet with a pencil.

-Substitution might also include a student using Keynote, PowerPoint, Prezi, Slides, or a
similar program to present information about an article or amendment to the class.

*In this step, ask yourself what students stand to gain by replacing traditional tools with
technology. Invariably, some situations will be better served by pen and paper.

Augmentation: The technology is again directly substituted for a traditional tool or method,
but with significant enhancements to the student experience. Ask yourself if the technology
increases or augments a student’s productivity and potential in some way.

Returning to the Constitution example, a student might use classroom technology to augment
a presentation on the Amendments through 2008 with a video clip of what was amended in
the 1972 constitution in 2008. It could also include interactive links to aspects of the
constitution like the executive, judicial, legislative etc.

Modification: In this stage, you are beginning to move from enhancement to transformation
using the SAMR Model. Instead of replacement or enhancement, this is an actual change to
the lesson’s design and its learning outcome. The critical question here is, “does the
technology significantly alter the learning task?”

A student presenting research on the 2008 Amendment—to continue our example—might

create their own unique graphic organizer for the class that not only includes the usual
multimedia resources but represents a new product or synthesis of existing material. As
another example, a group of students might collaborate in the learning management system
(LMS) to propose a modern definition of some of the aspects of the constitution and solicit
feedback on their proposals from classmates in the discussion section.

Redefinition: The last stage of the SAMR model represents the pinnacle of how integrated
classroom technology can transform a student’s experience. In this case, you ask yourself if
the technology tools allow educators to redefine a traditional learning task in a way that would
not be possible without the tech, creating a novel experience.

For example, after completing their group work and soliciting feedback from classmates (both
tasks that could be completed “offline” although arguably not with the same experience as in
the modified format), students could use technology to interact in real time with citizens in
another country to examine key differences in constitutional philosophy and law.
Other examples include, 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.

Principles for technology integration drawn from the models

1. Meaningful technology integration focuses on the learning task and not the
technology: It sounds obvious, but educational aims should always come first. What do you
want to achieve? What are your aims and objectives, either in terms of content or skills? Is
there a tool that will allow you to do it better, faster or more creatively than doing it in a
traditional way? Other issues that could be taken into account are increased collaboration and
meaningful use of the content.

2. Meaningful technology integration involves the students in actively using the

technology: It is common to see teachers using presentation software, such as PowerPoint, to
present content. This is no different than presenting by writing on the board, maybe more
visual. This is a valid use at substitution or augmentation level, according to Puentedura
(2006). But we should not stop there. The use of content creation tools should be placed in the
hands of the students as well as the teachers. This will empower them to create and share their
content productions in a more meaningful way.

3. Meaningful technology integration is essential not peripheral to the activity: Choosing

a tech tool to dress up an activity is fine, but we should strive for the use of that which are
essential to the activity. Why are we using this tool? Just because you can? Or because you
can obtain more benefits doing it this way?
4. Meaningful technology integration works well for your specific context

Knowing your specific context is key to making appropriate decisions. Some context-related
issues are:

- Are they working at school or from home?

-What connectivity quality do you have in your institution? And the

students at home?

-Are you/your students using PCs or mobile devices?

-Are the mobile devices provided by the institution? Or do students bring and use their own
mobile devices?

-If they will be using their own devices, what platform are they running on: IOS, Android or
Windows?

All these questions will help to identify key information that you need in order to decide
which tools to use and how, such as setting up the tasks to be done in class or as homework,
deciding to have all students connected at the same time, choosing the most appropriate tools,
choosing a multi-platform tool or alternative tools for different platforms to carry out a
specific task.

5. Meaningful technology integration addresses 21stcentury skills’ issues and digital

literacies training: Many teachers worry about thedangers of social media and
onlinecollaboration. There are indeed issuesthat need to be addressed if you aregoing to
‘send’ your students online.This decision opens up the possibilityof learning about being
responsible andcautious digital citizens. It is a necessarychallenge that we need to take
up.Some aspects that fall under theumbrella of digital literacies are:e-safety and privacy
issues; the ability to find and select information; critical thinking and evaluation;
collaboration; cultural and social understanding.

Some teachers may think it is a waste of time to devote time and effort for this, but it is a
much needed part of education in general to teach our learners about digital literacies.

6. Meaningful technology integration facilitates learning activities that would be more

difficult or impossible without the technology: This principle holds true in direct
relationship with the SAMR model. One undeniable benefit of technology is that it allows us
to do things that were previously unthinkable or impossible. We should therefore take
advantage of this and choose tools that can take us beyond the traditional. Some examples of
tools that we can use are: i) Interactive posters creation with audio and video using Glogster
or Thinglink; ii) Digital storytelling tasks that combine text, images, audio and music using
tools such as PowerPoint, Zimmer Twins, 30 Hands, Shadow Puppet or Adobe Voice; iii)
Multiple collaboration tasks using Google docs, Padlet or Voicethread ; iv) Speaking tasks
with recording tools from mobile devices or Tellagami, Plotagon or Voki v) Video creation
with mobile devices or tools such as MailVu.

7. Meaningful technology integration breaks down classroom walls: Another undeniable

benefit oftechnology is the possibility of easilyconnecting teachers, students,families and
classes from all over theworld. This possibility of becominga connected classroom should
notbe disregarded. Using tools to archive and share students’ work is a powerful way of
connecting with the community by creating a wider audience and of revisiting the students’
productions for monitoring and assessment. Some tools that can help are blogs, wikis and
social networking tools. Using tools that promote collaboration can increase motivation by
allowing us to set up twin class projects regardless of geographical location. Some useful
starting points are Skype in the Classroom and ePals Global Community.

In conclusion,

- You can integrate technology effectively with as much or as little equipment as you have
available.

-You do not need extensive technological knowledge but specific knowledge that you can
apply in your particular context.

- The constant updating race is one you do not need to run. The really useful tools will be
filtered through time and use by tech geeks who love to try and test every single new tool.
Following a couple of teachers who are experts on technology integration will do the trick.
Social media is magic in this sense.

Discussion: After going through these notes, write a sample class room activity or assignment
and go through how technology tools can be integrated at each stage of the SAMR model.