A point that I keep coming back to often right now is technology doesn't make learning happen. Technology doesn't make learning better; inherently anyway. Technology doesn't in and of itself motivate kids.
It's what the facilitator in the room does with the technology that makes learning happen. It's what the facilitator in the room does with the technology that makes learning better: more authentic and engaging. It's what the facilitator in the room does with the technology that makes activities more motivating.
Images like the one below are meant to depict that there is a relationship between your implementation of a technology gauged by SAMR and the learning taking place as gauged by Bloom's Taxonomy. What people in the #edtech field know is that images like this one are often taken as: If I use X app, I'll be in the Modification stage of SAMR and my principal said I should be above the transformation line, so I'll use X app and be good! Nope! Sorry Charlie. Doesn't work like that. Follow me here:
It is true that as you move up the SAMR ladder you also move up Bloom's Taxonomy. These ladders do have a lot in common to reach the pinnacle of both: greater student engagement, student centeredness of the lesson, and task redesign. BUT using a specific tool does not mean I'm doing any of the things required to reach the peak.
It's what the facilitator in the room does with the technology that makes learning happen. It's what the facilitator in the room does with the technology that makes learning better: more authentic and engaging. It's what the facilitator in the room does with the technology that makes activities more motivating.
Images like the one below are meant to depict that there is a relationship between your implementation of a technology gauged by SAMR and the learning taking place as gauged by Bloom's Taxonomy. What people in the #edtech field know is that images like this one are often taken as: If I use X app, I'll be in the Modification stage of SAMR and my principal said I should be above the transformation line, so I'll use X app and be good! Nope! Sorry Charlie. Doesn't work like that. Follow me here:
 |
| Well intentioned SAMR and Bloom's pinwheel |
It is true that as you move up the SAMR ladder you also move up Bloom's Taxonomy. These ladders do have a lot in common to reach the pinnacle of both: greater student engagement, student centeredness of the lesson, and task redesign. BUT using a specific tool does not mean I'm doing any of the things required to reach the peak.
Below is an example of how you can use a simple Google Doc to reach each level of SAMR:
I can use a Google Doc at a Substitution level where learners are simply word process on it, an Augmentation level where they word process and give peer feedback to one another through comments, a Modification level where they word process, give peer feedback, and insert video/images to represent their learning and knowledge as well, and lastly a Redefinition level where they word process, insert images, give peer feedback and then publish the document to a website such as a blog/Google Site.
The magic is in the teacher’s implementation of the tool, not the tool itself!
Comments
Post a Comment