Techy-Tech-Technology Discussion M7

Considering technology integration models, I am most familiar with SAMR. Up until this week I had never heard of the RAT model nor the TPACK framework. After reading the article Teaching Effectively with Technology from Micool Online, I became more familiar with the RAT model and how in my opinion it is quite similar to the SAMR model. Both models are excellent, but I like the simplified version of the RAT model. In terms of the SAMR model it took me considerable time to move beyond the substitution level. At this point I feel confident that I am instructing mainly within the Modification level and at times reaching the Redefinition level. With the advent of so many great technologies including G Suites, Verso, Newsela and many more, it is easier for teachers to instruct within and maintain at the Redfinition level. In comparing the SAMR model to the RAT model, the Redefinition level (SAMR) appears to correspond to the Transformation level (RAT). I like the description of the Transformation level. According to the RAT model, Transformation is...Tech allows forms of instruction and learning that were previously inconceivable. This seems more reader-friendly to me than the SAMR model of Redefinition...Tech allows for the creation of new tasks previously inconceivable. The wording of the two is very similar, yet for some reason, in my opinion, the RAT model makes more sense to me. Moving forward I think I will reference the RAT model as it is simplified and easier to understand than the SAMR model.

One of the difficult issues I face and I believe many teachers do as well is knowing for sure that we are at the Redefinition (SAMR) or Transformation (RAT) levels. I often find myself wondering, “Is this lesson integrating instruction and learning that without the technology would be inconceivable?” I think the word that makes me pause and doubt myself is the word inconceivable. It is such a big word. Teaching and learning that would be inconceivable if I didn't have the tools and technology I currently do...This seems like a very difficult task to achieve at its purest form. Based on this I am not confident that I am at this level; although, I hope to learn to be instructing at this level soon. I do, with little doubt, feel confident that I am operating in the Modification level (SAMR) and I am extremely confident I am in the Amplification level (RAT). It seems that the Amplification level is a mix between the Substitution and Augmentation levels (SAMR).

To simplify above: I am more familiar with the SAMR model, but moving forward I will most likely use the RAT model. I mainly operate within the Modification level (SAMR) and Amplification level (RAT). I am least familiar with the TPACK framework and I don’t expect to reference it in the future as it seems fairly confusing.

Comments

  1. UnknownJuly 19, 2017 at 1:34 PM

    anytime I see the word "inconceivable" i think of Vizzini from Princess Bride. Anyway, I digress. I think the SAMR model is one of the easiest to follow. It gives good knowledge of where a teacher might fall. I think what teachers need to understand, no matter what level of technology experience, is we don't have to live in "Redefinition" or "transformation". That's like saying that our everyday teaching should always be an "Excellent" (if using Danielson). I agree with you that most teachers probably float between Augmentation/Modification most of the time, which is awesome! Continue doing what you do Jason, the students will appreciate it!

    ReplyDelete
  2. Stephanie July 20, 2017 at 11:56 AM

    Jason,
    Previous to this assignment, I also had no knowledge of the RAT or TPACK framework. I assume this is because our district taught us about SAMR. I know many others in our district were someone perplexed by this model, and I am wondering if they would have showed us multiple models, some people may not have been so hesitant to embrace the technology integration. I 100% agree with your statement that RAT and SAMR are very much alike, only RAT is a little more simplistic and easy to understand. I also see your point about the wording between the two models. To me the transformation level is saying the types of learning that are occurring were previously inconceivable, but the in the redefinition the focus is on the tasks that were previously inconceivable. I wonder if this creation of new tasks also results in a change in the learning of students. In short, I agree that the wording seems more user friendly and is more simplistic in the RAT framework than the SAMR model. This was definitely my biggest takeaway from this assignment. I too think I will reference the RAT model over SAMR when possible.

    I also have a hard time with the word inconceivable. I have wondered this before myself, is this something that really couldn’t have been done before? It’s a hard, very abstract concept. I would like to see more examples of what this looks like and also what would have been done without the technology. I think this would help distinguish how it is so vastly different.

    ReplyDelete
  3. ScottJuly 21, 2017 at 8:59 AM

    " I think the word that makes me pause and doubt myself is the word inconceivable. It is such a big word. Teaching and learning that would be inconceivable if I didn't have the tools and technology I currently do...This seems like a very difficult task to achieve at its purest form. Based on this I am not confident that I am at this level; although, I hope to learn to be instructing at this level soon."

    Jason, that's an excellent point in reference to the word, inconceivable. Don't be too intimidated by that. The more you use technology, the more you'll start reaching the transformation level. Technology tools that we use today will allow us to easily reach that level.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Reflection

Image
Reflection This course was beneficial to me as an educator in that I learned not only a few new technologies to incorporate into my teaching but also how to create a PBL, a UbD and develop a grant. In the past, I had considered all of these to be too time-consuming. The PBL is somewhat time-consuming, but if you have an idea and sources, the process goes rather quickly. The UbD took considerable time. There were many components to consider, but in the end, I had a unit that will last at least a month and provide students with a unique learning experience. I was most surprised about the ease of writing the grant. I know some grants require letters of references and lots of other data, but the NEF grant that I chose was pretty straightforward. It was a form and you basically just fill it out and get a few signatures. I also looked at several other grants and many of these were simply comprised of completing a form with three or four boxes - seems easy enough. Moving forward, I plan
Read more

EEND 677 Artifact 1

Image
Artifact 1 GOOGLE DRAW LINK I choose this artifact because I am happy with the final product. I didn't think it was possible to make such professional graphic designs using Google Draw. After spending a short time trying the various tools, Google Draw proved to be an easy resource to use. When first assigned this activity I was worried as I had not used Google Draw in quite some time and the last time I used it I did not like the resource. It seemed a bit disconnected and difficult to use. This time it was much better. It still took me a while to get comfortable with the tools and how to use them correctly, but once I became comfortable the creation of the graphic was simplistic, yet creative. I created a graphic that I plan to make a poster of and use in my classroom regarding the CUE strategy (context, use quotation, explain) for writing papers. There were no major problems when using this technology other than my biased opinion from when I had used the technology
Read more

EEND 678 Artifact 2

Image
Artifact 2 Student Device Agreement Form The second artifact I choose was the student device agreement form that I created. With technology becoming more and more present in all schools, it is important that the first thing students learn is digital citizenship and what it means to be responsible and accountable when using technology. Often in my classes, we discuss the importance of being cautious of an individual's digital footprint, but we tend to overlook the responsibility that comes with borrowing a device. My school is 1:1 Chromebook and most students do a great job of keeping their devices maintained; however, there are approximately 2-3 students in each class with Chromebooks that are on the verge of being unusable - shattered screens, missing keys, frame coming off of monitor, keyboard not attached properly and so on. When I speak to these students about the condition of their device, they do not seem to mind or even care. In my opinion, if a student cannot m
Read more