On the Path to Technology Integration…We Need a Map

Posted on January 15, 2013 Updated on November 17, 2013

Great things are happening here at The Ridge!  I’ve always believed that the leadership, innovation, and vision of individuals on this campus have the potential to make us leaders in education, especially in regards to raising student engagement and closing the achievement gap.

Recently, Fossil Ridge was awarded a KISD Education Foundation Grant.  The project titled, “Closing the Gap” was the collaborative brainchild of a handful of these leaders.  

The goals of the project are:

1. Close the gap in access to technology that exists in our student population, allowing for equity to digital tools and resources and extending the school day to a 24/7 model.
2. Investigate the role that technology has on learning.
3. Inform the long-range vision for technology integration and strategic plan for our campus.

I am pleased that the community and district leaders recognize the efforts and leadership capacity on our campus and am thankful for the present and future support we will receive as we work towards these goals.

As discussions took place regarding deployment of our project, which involves selecting twenty AVID students to receive Dell tablets and Verizon mi-fi cards for use at home and at school, we all agreed that in order to truly understand how technology impacts learning.  We needed to form a leadership team, who would engage in a PLC that explores theory, methods, and tools for educational technology.  It’s not enough to simply provide students with access to technology.  Even the largest 1:1 programs in schools, without a professional development plan for teachers, will not produce the impact on learning that designers anticipate.  

This team will visit schools in the Metroplex who have adopted some kind of technology model (1:1, BYOD, etc.) and observe how their deployment model impacts learning, what type of systems are in place to support student and teacher integration of technology, and measures that can capture the data we need to inform our vision.  In addition to field trips, the team will also meet regularly to share resources, explore models, and create lessons that integrate tools.  But, it all has to come back to the same point:  How does technology impact student engagement and learning?

This past weekend I was explaining our project to another National Writing Project teacher consultant who is an instructional leader in a neighboring district that is exploring these same questions and working to support teachers as they grapple with technology that is integrated into instruction.  She suggested that we start with the SAMR model developed by Dr Rueben Puentedura.  Through this model, Dr. Puentedura demonstrates how our goal when considering a long-range technology adoption cycle on any scale, from district-level down to the classroom, should be to move from enhancement to transformation.

SAMR stands for substitution, augmentation, modification, and redefintion.Substitution:  At this stage you are using technology as a direct substitution for another tool. Think using a word processor in lieu of a type writer without utilizing functions such as spell check, grammar check, etc.  Dr. Puentedura argues that at this level, productivity actually decreases. 
 Augmentation:  If we continue with our example of the word processor, then at this next level we would use its built-in features such as Spell Checker, word count, copy and paste, etc.  Productivity or work flow might increase at this level, perhaps students can produce a finished draft more quickly using a word processor, but how has the tool transformed their thinking?

Notice the dotted line between the Augmentation and the next level in the model.  This is meant as a target.  When considering tools and tasks that integrate technology with learning, our goal should be to be above this line.

Modification: Again, if we consider the word processor as a tool, how could we modify the tool to allow for greater productivity?  Rather than printing the file and sharing it, what if we integrated another tool such as email or drop boxes to publish and share?  Or, what if we integrated a product or feature of another tool such as a chart from Excel, digital photos of artificats, etc.  At this level, Dr. Puentedura claims, student learning begins to transform.

Redefinition:  Here’s where my mind really starts to bend…In the redefinition level, technology allows us to do things otherwise impossible to create new products in new ways.  Rather than a word processor where one student is authoring a product, what if students utilized Google Docs to collaborate in real time!  This would not have been possible before.  Students couldn’t work from their own houses from their own devices on a task at the same time.  Now, technology allows for this level of collaboration and creation.

http://msdwc.edublogs.org/files/2010/04/itlog_techlifecycle1.png

My colleague explained it to me much more simply…instead of old things in new ways, our goal is to shoot for new things in new ways.  

I did some reflecting over some of the tools I’ve highlighted in the blog that meet this goal. Below you’ll find a list of tools and links to those blog posts that help us reach the Enhancement level of learning through technology.

Google Earth

My Big Campus

GoAnimate and Sock Puppets

Socrative

Glogster

VoiceThread

Prezi



I’m curious to hear your take-away after thinking about this model and how it applies to your decision making and lesson planning process.  Limitations, drawbacks, confusions, applications?  Leave your comment!