EDU 807 Master - Week 2 - How to Apply the SAMR Model with Ruben Puentedura - Summer 2018 - Group 3
1 How to Apply the SAMR Model with Ruben Puentedura
2 In the video, you will hear Dr. Puentedura talk about four levels of technology integration -- substitution, augmentation, modification, and redefinition -- as well as an example of how teaching a specific topic might change at each of these levels.
3 View the entire video, then describe a way that you currently use technology to substitute or augement a current assignment or activity you use in your classroom/context, and then describe a way that you might modify or redefine that same assignment.
4 Of course, once you share your own ideas, please reply to your classmates. Questions that might help push their thinking:
- 5 How do you think the way you have changed __ will lead your students to __?
- 6 What do you predict your students will have difficulty with when doing __?
- 7 What might they find easier or more interesting about __?
- 8 How will __ help your students engage more deeply with __?
14 General Document comments
0 Sentence and Paragraph comments
0 Image and Video comments
General Document Comments 14
In the video, you will hear Dr. Puentedura talk about four levels of technology integration — substitution, augmentation, modification, and redefinition — as well as an example of how teaching a specific topic might change at each of these levels.
View the entire video, then describe a way that you currently use technology to substitute or augment a current assignment or activity you use in your classroom/context, and then describe a way that you might modify or redefine that same assignment.
Of course, once you share your own ideas, please reply to your classmates. Questions that might help push their thinking:
How do you think the way you have changed __ will lead your students to __?
What do you predict your students will have difficulty with when doing __?
What might they find easier or more interesting about __?
How will __ help your students engage more deeply with __?
I have the luxury of being in a simulation lab, so our learning sessions typically involve new forms of technology for educating medical students and other learners in the medical field. I am going to use an example of CPR because I am a Basic Life Support Instructor.
They used to teach and some places still do, CPR on half-torso dummies that acted as a person. Now, they have a new tool in CPR technology called QCPR. These high-tech CPR manikins help to ensure the students are enhancing their learning. Instead of not really understanding how far they need to push down when doing compressions, learners are able to see in real-time how they are doing. A tablet comes with the manikin that allows the facilitator to see exactly how far down the learner is compressing, how fast they are going, that they are lifting off the chest properly, their hands are in the correct place, and if they are giving breaths, that they are getting enough volume pushed into the lungs. This QCPR manikin is a substitute for any of the older CPR dummies and it lets facilitators augment the education by using it. In addition, the education is transformed because of the modification of the high-tech manikin and redefined by allowing the learners access to the real-time data of their encounters. The QCPR manikin is a great tool in CPR teaching because it gives the learners a better sense of how to actually perform CPR correctly. Just watching a video and taking a test does not ensure that one knows how to perform CPR on a human being. The data that can be collected using this tool is infinite, as well.
It would be interesting to test the learners before the class started using the QCPR manikin and then again afterwards to see improvement or a decline. I think that would be a great project to help understand if the videos and hands-on practice of CPR is really helping students learn. The only downfall to these manikins is that they are expensive and the dummies that have nothing to them are cheap. That is why not many institutions use QCPR.
Thanks, Michelle, for sharing this example of the QCPR. I had never heard of it, and it is quite interesting to think about the ways in which we can use this type of response of technology to help students, in the moment, learn what they are doing right and wrong with that immediate feedback.
I think that most people have not heard of it. It’s pretty new but still a few years old. I think it is just too expensive for most places to use. However, at some point cost alone is not enough to outweigh the benefits that it is providing.
I think the instant feedback is the main benefit to it. Without that, the students might as well be using a dummy to practice on. They appreciate that they instantly know what they are doing right and wrong and what they can do to fix it.
Hi Michelle,
That’s really cool – I still remember the half-torso dummies from when I took a CPR class in high school. I have to imagine the instantaneous feedback is extremely beneficial to both students and instructors. With the students receiving so much reinforcement and direction from the application, it probably frees up the instructor to work individually with users and facilitates greater time-on-task engagement for the students. Have you noticed any significant increase in learning outcomes since adopting the QCPR system? Do you get the sense that it boosts student engagement?
Michelle,
This application of technology sounds really great! We still have the dummys that you first referred to. I find that the child ones are pretty inauthentic. You have to press really hard to get the clicking feedback. So they do have a bit of immediate feedback but it is pretty basic.
Your example is a good one demonstrating modification. While the task is basically the same. I would say the amount of feedback and the mobile app might take this beyond the augmentation level. This would be especially true if the app could run different medical scenrios and even be part of an OSCE!
What a great idea about using it during an OSCE. I think that would be a excellent use of this kind of technology. There are a few apps out there that can control manikins, but I don’t think there are any that can control the particular one for QCPR. To implement this into an OSCE would allow the facilitator to just have control. I am definitely going to look to see if there is anything out there for that.
And don’t even get me started on the lack of realistic kids dummies for CPR testing. It’s hard to believe that they practice on some of the stuff they do. :)
I will use faculty development as an example. Right now we have workshops that are Face-to-Face with some content push and an application activity. So this might be something like “ Apply Gagne’s 9 Events of Instruction to a course module”. These activities allow the participants to apply the content we have just discussed. The whole workshop will typically last an hour. During this process I might also use poll everywhere or just ask the room for feedback on the content and their experience.
We want to create online versions of the workshops as well. We already record and post them using lecture capture software. A better way to do this is to use Articulate Storyline to post the content with some interactive elements. We can still present the activities for download for the online user. In these ways we are replicating the f2f experience and adding some basic interactivity. This would be augmentation.
What I would like to do is get to the modification and redefinition levels for the online users of the workshops. I have developed ways to include asynchronous polling. I have also considered adding social elements like Twitter, WordPress discussions or Yammer. I think there might be an opportunity for collaboration software here too. So participants might work online together to build and improve course module collaboratively, creating authentic work products. However, to be honest I am open to ideas. I want to have the online users not only have and equal experience, but also have the online experience add value. I would love to use technology to get to those higher levels for these asynchronous users!
Hi Adam,
I like that your workshop attendees are able to practice what was just taught to them during the time. That way they are able to put it into place and hopefully have a better concept of how to use it and the applications that it can provide for them.
I had never heard of Articulate Storyline before. I just actually looked it up and it looks like a very cool program that has a variety of uses. Looks like the users can be very interactive with it. And I think that is the key to online material, interactivity.
I really like your polling ideas too. My son has a teacher that lets them use their phones in class and he does random polls throughout to make sure everyone is participating. It’s easy to setup something where he can ask questions and they answer using their phones. I think it helps keep them focused on what they are learning about. Even though it is a face to face environment, it lets them use technology and the students appreciate that, I think.
Great job on your post this week!
Hi Adam,
I like your example of adding a collaborative component to your recorded lectures. Being you are doing these lectures live and recording for future use, you essentially have two different audiences. For this reason, I thought it was very wise to include both synchronous elements and asynchronous elements. This would allow both populations an opportunity to interact with the material in a deeper way and gain additional insights from collaborating with their peers.
I have as well always like polling as a tool for building engagement and integrating learner feedback. Does your system have a chat feature? I have seen some really well designed online presentations that have dedicated chat facilitators. This allows for users interaction and input, along with a filter to ensure a level of “classroom management.”
Thanks Ryan. That’s a great idea. I think that the idea of them being two different groups might form a false dichotomy. They might just be participants in a different potion of the workshop.
We do use Zoom for the face to face portions but we don’t have an asynchronous chat component. That would be great to set up!
Our institution offers a Licentiate in Sacred Theology program where priests from all over the world have the opportunity to complete the program in a blended delivery format. Students completed the program by taking online classes in the Fall and Winter terms, with a one month residency component during the month of July. A large section of the programs is the homiletics component where priests refine their preaching skills. There is a strong interpersonal component to teaching this material and instructors will use Panopto, our lecture capture tool, to present the material. This is an example of the substitution level where instructors are using old methods with a new tool. In recent semesters instructors have been requiring students to use Panopto to record their homilies and post them to the LMS for peer review. This would represent moving toward the Augmentation stage. Looking forward, instructors could start using Zoom as a tool to allow students to work collaboratively in a synchronous setting to develop and co-author homilies as a learning exercise. This would maintain the heart of the current assignment, but also facilitate a new social component in the learning process. This next step would represent moving into the Modification stage.
icons on the left to see existing comments.