Technology Integration

Technology is an integral part of our students lives and they want to use technology in the
classroom. Todays students are not content learning from traditional teaching methods
(Prensky, 2001). Because technology is such a vital tool in other facets of their lives, it must
play a role in their education as well. Traditional, teacher-centered instruction must be replaced
with technology-based, student-centered instruction (Kadijevich, 2006).
The SAMR model represents the stages of technology integration within a lesson. At the
bottom of the model is the Substitution (S) and Augmentation (A) level, where technology is
used to teach the same concept, but with technology. During this S stage, a book report is
typed instead of written; technology is not needed to complete the task. The Modification (M)
and Redefinition (R) levels encompass redefining the concept. Without technology, the lesson
cannot be completed. For example, middle school students may collaborate with high school
students using Skype or an interactive site. In order for innovation to occur, the ideal level for
students and teachers to be is M and R level.
Fullen writes about Stratosphere as connecting technology, pedagogy, and change knowledge to
improve and innovate education in his book Stratosphere. Essentially, the whole book discusses
the move to the M and R level in the SAMR model. Fullen believes that in order for students to
reach a deeper understanding of the world, a disruptive innovation must occur in our education
system. He mentioned there is not an entire school system that has fully implemented
technology effectively into the schools, but spotlights s school like Park Manor that have made
the change.
The chapter that this model fits best in is Chapter 3, Pedagogy and Change: Essence as Easy.
On page 25 of the book, Fullen says the answer to deeper integration comes from Prenskys
term partnering with our students. This is student centered learning to include problem
solving and case-based learning. In this case as well as the M and R level of the SAMR, the
teacher takes on a new role- the change agent. Partnering of students is made easy by
technology is also an integral part of the learning process (p. 25). Collaborating among students
to learn a concept is better than brainstorming alone. Fullen also includes ideas from Sir Ken
Robinson and tapping into students creativity. Fullen suggests using technology to allow
students to find and pursue their passion (p. 27).These ideas are similar to the way Tim Holt
describes the M and R levels in the SAMR model.
As educators, it is our job to prepare students for life beyond the classroom. As technology
becomes increasingly more important to our society, it is becoming increasingly important to
utilize technology in the classroom. Todays students spend a great deal of time using
technology to watch videos, play games, locate and share information, and communicate with
others. Technology motivates students and holds their attention for extended periods of time
(Prensky, 2001). Todays teachers, however, often complain that students are not able to
maintain attention in class. Student motivation and engagement is vital to successful learning;
therefore, it makes sense that teachers integrate technology into their instruction in a way
that motivates and engages student learners (Papert, 1993). When I taught using an overhead
projector and transparencies, I struggled to maintain student attention and motivation
throughout my lessons. Using an interactive whiteboard allows me to access and integrate a
variety of technology tools that engage the students in learning experiences.
For me, this self-study reinforces the importance of providing support to teachers as they
integrate technology. Even as a tech-savvy teacher, it is necessary to receive support from
colleagues. It is beneficial for teachers to bounce ideas off one another when planning for
instruction, as each teacher brings their own ideas and experiences.
Many teachers shun the idea of incorporating technology into their instruction, often
referencing the time and effort exerted to learn technology. My more powerful moment was in
repurposing this interactive classroom into a professional development opportunity. The new
goal was to change staff members ways of thinking about utilizing technology, in a way that
feels comfortable and is applicable to instruction. Educators use technologies in many ways for
many different reasons. Users redefine the uses of technologies because all people have
different purposes and needs for technologies. Therefore, we can create a new purpose for a
technology (Mishra et al., 2008).
Driscoll (1994) states that "providing complex learning environments that incorporate authentic
activity" is essential in developing a meaningful learning experience for children of the Nintendo
generation.

Back Home

References
Kadijevich, Dj. (2006). Achieving educational technology standards: the relationship between student teachers
interest and institutional support offered. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 22(6), 437-443.
Retrieved from EBSCOhost.
Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. (November 20, 2008). Technology integration in teaching: The TPACK framework.
Retrieved August 23, 2010 from
http://iste.adobeconnect.com/p92764644/?fcsContent=true&launcher=false&pbMode=normal
Papert, S. (1993). The children's machine. New York: Basic Books.
Prensky, M. (2001a, September/October). Digital natives, digital immigrants. On the Horizon, 9(5), 1-6.
Prensky, M. (2001b, November/December). Digital natives, digital immigrants, part 2: Do they really think
differently? On the Horizon, 9(6), 1-6.