The specialist classes in the middle school (French, band, art, drama) previously met 3 days during an 8 day cycle. This year they now have .5 credit (3 out of 8) and 1 credit classes (6 out of 8). In an attempt to give middle school students more flexibility in their schedule, our MS principal decided to pilot incorporating the MYP Design Cycle into the full credit specialist classes. This makes it so that not all students have to take a formal Design Tech class. Two units in each of the specialist classes during the 2013-14 school will be assessed on both subject and design criteria. It was agreed last year that the technology integration coaches (there are 3 of us PK-12) would be the ones to assess the design cycle criteria.
I have been assigned to work with the French and art classes. During a meeting with the MS principal (Dave Botbyl) and the art teacher, Dave suggested that I use a unit in art next semester for my COETAIL final project. Genius! 🙂
We are using the the ‘old’ design cycle and not the new one from the next generation materials.
I have shared the course 5 final project details with Lindsay (our MS art teacher). Next semester her classes will be doing a unit on photography. It is a brand new unit that she will be building from the ground up. She has agreed to let me write the unit with her – yay!
After learning more about problem-based learning, I’m excited to incorporate the design cycle into art. I think there is a lot of potential! But it is also a lot of pressure…a brand new unit with a brand new concept. Solving problems with design and art just makes sense. Lindsay is currently doing a unit on logo design with her 8th grade visual arts class. It looks like a great unit and I’ll be eager to see the results.
I’ve started brainstorming for the photography unit but Lindsay and I haven’t sat down together to plan yet so it’s all pretty rough. A recent presentation to Language B teachers about visual interpretation had me mulling over how these tools might be applicable to the photography unit. When I think about SAMR and redefinition, the ability to collaborate, share and learn from others around the world is where my mind goes. Below is a working list of ideas. I’ve shared the document and made it open for comments – I’d love any input from YOU!
I spent 3 years in South Carolina teaching French and trying my hardest to meaningfully integrate technology into my curriculum. Sometimes it worked really well. Other times, not so much. Sometimes lessons were redefined. Other times the tech was just a substitute. No matter the lesson, technology integration wasn’t the easy way out. It was frustrating, difficult and usually took more time. But the learning experiences that were created made all the hard work worth it.
I’m now a Technology Integration Coach helping teachers meaningfully use technology in their classrooms. It’s actually been an even harder job. [Many] Teachers want the easy way out: they want me to hand them ready-made materials or ‘have an app for that.’ Technology integration needs to be more thoughtful than that and should be about choosing the best tool to fulfill lesson objectives. I see my job as continually challenging teachers to change the way they teach. As long as technology is seen as an extra, integration is not happening. Every single teacher in the entire world should read What is Technology Integration? (or “What Technology Integration is NOT”). That might sound a bit dramatic but this is pure gold:
I strongly believe that SAMR, TPACK and the TIM should be used together in order to guide teachers and leadership on effective technology integration. We have started slowly introducing SAMR to our staff and have created a resource page for teachers to access. One thing I like to stress to our teachers is that SAMR isn’t a hierarchy and not all of their lessons are going to be redefinition. My long term goals would include introducing TPACK and TIM to our staff as well.
Integration is an instructional choice that generally includes collaboration and deliberate planning – and always requires a classroom teacher’s participation. It cannot be legislated through curriculum guides no will it happen spontaneously. Someone with a vision – an administrator, a teacher, or a specialist – needs to model, encourage, and enable integration, but only a classroom teacher can integrate technology with content-area teaching.
Although I’ve learned about TPACK, I hadn’t read Mishra and Koehler’s article. These guys are cool. My two biggest takeaways that could benefit all educators:
- “We would argue that almost everything that is artificial … is technology, whether low tech or high tech.”
- “Repurposing these cool tools for educational purposes, however, is not simple. If educators are to repurpose tools and integrate them into their teaching, they require a specific kind of knowledge.”
Technology is all around us and we need to be working hard and working smart in order to choose the best tool for the job. Technology isn’t a fad…it’s been around for centuries. But we, as educators, are continually being challenged to purposefully and meaningfully help our students learn with technology. Technology can most definitely make our job harder…but can’t it also make it better?
It’s been awhile since we actually did phase 2.0 but I’ve been bad at blogging. I do want to make sure I get some thoughts down before I completely forget!
In Phase 1 we went into Divisional meetings. Phase 1.5 was done with only the Middle School teachers. For Phase 2.0 we attended Department (HS/MS) and Grade Level (ES) meetings. I attended the Language B, Science and Language A Arabic Department meetings. To date we have been invited into KG1 and Grade 3 meetings (only 5 to go…maybe).
Way back in Phase 1 of the SAMR series, we left teachers with the question “How have you used technology in your classroom as a direct tool SUBSTITUTE?” We wanted to make sure that we followed-up and didn’t leave teachers hanging so this was our first order of business. My priority was to give teachers a comfortable space to share what they have been doing. I think it is incredibly important that teachers are able to share with each other (without feeling judged) in order to foster discussion and ideas.
I then asked teachers to share a lesson (that they recently taught or will be teaching in the near future) that didn’t originally include technology but that they would like to brainstorm ways to transform. As a group we brainstormed ways that technology might be used, focusing on the great lesson plan and THEN the technology. I then briefly shared our Tech Coaches website with them. I included Jeff Utecht‘s SAMR Circle and my adapted Thinking Critically flow-chart. I didn’t go into detail about either but hope that we will be able to next year.
One of the challenges in the meetings was keeping everyone focused on the things we CAN control. Understandably teachers enjoy having a place to vent. Nonetheless it was great to get the conversation going and some great ideas were thought up. Below are excerpts from the emails I sent out after each meeting (my goal is to always follow-up!).
During the course of our SAMR series, I came across this visual from Mark Anderson. I liked the idea but it was a little confusing for me. I changed some words and reworked it a bit in order to share it with staff.
After introducing SAMR to our entire PreK-12 staff, we were granted a little extra time with the middle school teachers. Here’s how it went down:
1. Compile a list of how teachers answer the question “How are you using technology in your classroom as a direct tool substitute?” in a Google Doc to be shared with the entire middle school staff.
2. Allow teachers time to brainstorm tasks that they ask students to do.
3. Share out, creating a Popplet.
4. Brainstorm technology tools that teachers could use to accomplish their tasks (stress task first, tool selection second), adding to Popplet.
After the meetings, we finalized the Google Doc and all 4 Popplets. We also added more tools that we thought would best fit the tasks (quality over quantity). We sent the links to all the documents to the MS staff reminding them that the Popplet compilations are a work in progress and a toolbox for them to start using.
Do you have tools to add?
Grade 8 (there was a different thought process for this one)
Lots of thanks and props to my wonderful co-worker (and husband) for helping brainstorm and give this PD! The popplet suggestion was genius! Thanks Jeff 😉
You may have noticed that one of the slides in my last post was a little funny looking. We have many teachers at our school in Kuwait who are native Arabic speakers and are at varying levels of English proficiency. We did quite a bit of searching and asking around but we weren’t able to find any resources to introduce SAMR to our Arabic staff. One of our wonderful HS Arabic as a Foreign Language teachers was amazing enough to sit down with me and work on a translation of SAMR. This translation keeps the English words for Substitution, Augmentation, Modification and Redefinition (to keep the acronym consistent). In addition, it is not a direct translation but gives an idea of the meaning behind S, A, M & R.
Feel free to use our translation as needed (with attribution of course). 🙂
SAMR is something I’ve wanted to introduce to our staff for awhile…we were just waiting for the right time. We’ve had some setbacks with our 1:1 iPad initiative this year and I’m ready to step away from the device towards quality pedogogy and technology (not iPad) integration. After blogging about the proposed PD plan for COETAIL course 1, we’ve finally been able to put a few pieces into action here! It’s initiated some great discussions thus far and I’m looking forward to continuing with the SAMR mindset (we’re avoiding the terms framework and model) as we bring in new staff in August.
We went into the Elementary and High School divisional meetings and the Middle School grade level meetings. [Side note: One thing we’re quickly realizing is how different the vibe is between divisions. I’ve only ever taught in a high school so I’m used to the (sometimes) close-minded and bitter vibe (NOT saying that all HS teachers are this way!). Elementary teachers (while still a little bitter) are much more open to doing activities and having discussion.] Prior to the ES & MS meetings, the principals asked staff to read an article from the NASSP that we provided. Here is how each meeting was run:
1. Give teachers a couple minutes to talk about anything/everything they know about SAMR and do a little research on what it is (they had their iPads). We gave groups butcher paper in case they wanted to write anything.
2. Give them a little help (links to specific SAMR websites/articles).
3. Share out to the group about what they knew/found. Show them the SAMR visual.
4. Provide them unmarked examples of S, A, M & R (in paper & electronic formats). Allow them to discuss & debate in order to match the examples to ‘phases.’
5. Go over together which example matches S, A, M or R and ask teachers WHY.
6. Leave teachers with a question to ponder (to be followed up): “How have you used technology in your classroom as a direct tool substitute?”
We stressed that teachers are already doing these things and that we are just giving them common vocabulary to use. We are also avoiding the hierarchy mentality ..that’s not what SAMR is! After each meeting, we sent an email to all teachers with the resources used and a reminder of the question. See our slides (with examples linked) below. (They are very similar, only the examples are different.)