In the fifth episode of Season 2, I talk with Mike Mohammad about PearDeck, Flipgrid, NearPod, The Answer Pad, Formative, Classkick, Seesaw, Google Sites, student voice, learner profiles, digital portfolios & a wardrobe malfunction.
Tag: educational technology
SAMR ain’t *That* Simple
I’ve developed a new pet peeve recently. It’s handy-dandy graphics that tell you exactly which educational technologies match up with the different levels of the SAMR model (or Bloom’s or DoK, etc.). Are they handy? Yes. Are they dandy? Um, sure, I guess. Are they 100% accurate? Nope.
What gives? Why is Jake so down on these easy to follow graphics that conveniently tell us that ThingLink and Google Search are Substitution, while YouTube and Explain Everything are Redefinition? Because it ain’t that simple.
If you think that just by using YouTube, you’re at Redefinition, you should just hand in your teacher’s license now. Starbucks needs another barista. You’ll know exactly how to make drinks anyhow because you probably love this graphic too. Okay, okay, don’t quit teaching; just keep reading so I can help you. (BTW – apologies to the creator of that graphic. It’s not that bad, but it’s just not my cup of . . . coffee)
Seriously, one of the graphics I’ve seen says that Twitter is Substitution. And then, on the same graph, has Prezi as Redefinition. The creator of that one may have consumed too many PSL’s. What, praytell (I’ve always wanted to say praytell in a blog post), is the equivalent non-tech activity that using an engaging global social media tool (Twitter) is a substitution for!? And Prezi, the tool that’s essentially a slideshow with a side of vertigo is Redefinition!?
Listen, can Prezi have a key role in a fantastic, engaging, empowering learning experience? Certainly. Can it also be part of a trainwreck lesson? Of course! And the same can be said of Twitter.
So, how do we match technologies up with the levels of the SAMR model? Well, as I said before – It ain’t that simple. We have to look at the factors of these educational experiences that these handy-dandy graphics are ignoring:
- The students. What is the right tool for this group of students? What will engage and empower them?
- The standards. What are we trying to teach? Different technologies impact different learning standards in different ways.
- The pedagogy. The method and practice of teaching. It just can’t be boiled down to a handy-dandy chart.
In closing, these charts are wrong . . . sometimes. But they are also right . . . sometimes. What we need to realize is that good teachers are skilled, knowledgeable and talented in their craft and that they make difficult, informed decisions about what benefits their students. Stop trying to make graphics that make a skilled profession simple. Even the best educational technologies require rockstar teachers.