In this version of Bloom’s Digital Taxonomy from Educational Technology and Mobile Learning, there is a valuable array of technology integration possibilities presented specific for iPads (the only BYOD in my division). This image possibly has more implications for upper Elementary than my 3 year-olds but has some apps that I am comfortable with and were/are important mechanisms for digital learning such as Seesaw, Flashcards+, Google Slides, Google Drive and iMovie. These were mechanisms for digital learning and so, were mostly located in the bottom half of Bloom’s Taxonomy (Remembering, Understanding & Applying). If I were to teach upper Elementary grades, I would have a steep learning curve to create meaningful digital learning opportunities for my students to take them from Remembering to Creating (Marcovitz et. al., 2015).
The above image from Dincer (2020) demonstrates my interpretation of the SAMR Model as it highlights the nature of each level acting as a “stepping stone” to the next level, both from the teacher’s perspective of technology integration, and from the student’s progression from knowledge to understanding. Just like the first module reading, I feel that I would find it necessary to be at every level of the SAMR Model during a teaching day depending on the students needs (Phillips, 2015). An example of this progression in my PK 3 (3 year-olds) class is:
Substitution- the teacher writing letters for student recognition on a SMARTBoard.
Augmentation- students playing a levelled letter recognition game app with feedback.
These activities often provide the foundation for building upon so students can reach the level of transformational integration such as:
Modification- students recognize the letters from their name and organize them appropriately in a Seesaw activity.
Redefinition- students select images of things that begin with each letter of their name that tells the audience something about them to practice letter sounds.
Despite the emerging popularity of the SAMR Model of technology integration, there is little research and also “blind spots” of the model that do not take into consideration important aspects of an ICT school framework that the educator needs to be aware of and prepare for according to Hamilton et. al. (2016).
References
Dincer, N. (2020, February). The SAMR Model for Technology Integration. http://myeltcafe.com/teach/the-samr-model-for-technology-integration/
Educational Technology and Mobile Learning. (2016). New Visual on Bloom’s Digital Taxonomy for iPad. Image. https://www.educatorstechnology.com/2016/06/new-visual-on-blooms-digital-taxonomy.html?utm_source=bloglovin.com&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed:+educatorstechnology/pDkK+(Educational+Technology+and+Mobile+Learning)&m=1
Hamilton, E. R., Rosenberg, J. M., & Akcaoglu, M. (2016). The substitution augmentation modification redefinition (SAMR) model: A critical review and suggestions for its use. TechTrends, 60(5), 433-441. https://link-springer-com.ezproxy.csu.edu.au/article/10.1007/s11528-016-0091-y
M. Phillips. Digital technology integration. In Henderson, M. & Romeo, G. (eds) (2015). Teaching and Digital Technologies: Big Issues and Critical questions. Melbourne: Cambridge University Press. https://doms.csu.edu.au/csu/file/8dceecc0-ca68-4ea7-890b-3a41dae43521/1/phillips-m.pdf
Marcovitz, D., & Janiszewski, N. (2015). Technology, models, and 21st-century learning: How models, standards, and theories make learning powerful. In Society for information technology & teacher education international conference.1227-1232. Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). http://technologyandclassrooms.weebly.com/uploads/1/0/7/6/107687009/technology_models_and_21st_century_learning.pdf