Although this assignment for my Teacher-Librarian course was centred on SAMR, I couldn’t help but feel like questions to ask about the educational value of tech had to be a little more holistic. As Lacruz (2018) points out, the SAMR model examines one dimension of technology use and this dimension is not the be-all, end-all of tech integration. We can do all the amazing transformative tasks in the world, but if we aren’t thinking about curriculum, authenticity, and inclusivity, we aren’t using technology to its full potential.
Sources:
Duckworth, S. (2015, April 02). New #SKETCHNOTE the SAMR MODEL [Tweet]. Retrieved April 15, 2021, from https://twitter.com/sylviaduckworth/status/583778319235031041
Fairchild, K. (2013, December 09). SAMR poster for classrooms. Retrieved April 15, 2021, from http://sduhsdtech.blogspot.com/2013/12/samr-poster-for-classrooms.html
Lacruz, N. (2018, July 09). SAMR model. Retrieved April 15, 2021, from https://techandcurriculum.pressbooks.com/chapter/samr/
Hi Jessica, it’s Rachel. I really like your approach to this assignment. I agree that questions about the educational value of technology need to be holistic. I think my own questions would be stronger if I looked beyond SAMR and considered everything I already know about integrating technology. Well done!
Hi Jessica, it’s Beverley!
I like the colour scheme of your poster and your questions are very practical. You might consider avoiding white text simply because I know a lot of people have a hard time reading it.
I appreciate that you wanted to address the bigger picture of tech use as it relates to student learning, especially questions of inclusion, because that’s what makes tech so powerful. I skimmed the Lacruz article and it’s really interesting, so thanks for a good find! However, I also think that the criticisms are a bit simplistic because they assume that the SAMR model will be used in isolation. I don’t think any model in education is truly intended that way, so I would lean towards being more fair-minded and assuming that it’s meant to complement other ideas. Nonetheless, I appreciate you bringing this issue up; I actually don’t love the SAMR model myself because it presents as a hierarchy even though it maybe shouldn’t be… lots to keep pondering!
Thanks for the reply, Beverley! It’s a good point that, although this model doesn’t bring in other contexts, that this means the model is intended to be used in isolation. Can you clarify why you feel that it shouldn’t be a hierarchy?
I think of it a bit like Bloom’s Taxonomy; just because something is at the top doesn’t make it inherently better. Redefinition may be more sophisticated and the “ideal” when tech is fully integrated, but there are times when the lower levels are necessary and useful. You could definitely argue that substitution is “tech for the sake of tech” but the others all have their advantages. I think this is why I prefer TPACK over SAMR!