This morning, we discussed the SAMR technological integration model. SAMR stands for Substitution, Augmentation, Modification, and Redefinition. In our pod groups, we discussed examples of each in a classroom. Our group focused on elementary or middle school students and how SAMR can be used to integrate technology into their education in different ways. 

Our group discussed that substitution could include allowing students to type their assignments rather than writing them; this substitutes typing for writing, offers no functional change, but may be easier for some students. Another example of substitution would be listening to an audiobook or reading an ebook on a tablet rather than reading a traditional paper book. Again, it is functionally the same, but technology gives us different avenues for reading; perhaps in an environment where some students benefit more from audio, or like ebooks so they can enlarge the text, substitution can help us incorporate UDL into our classrooms.

An example of augmentation we discussed was using text-to-speech to write; although it substitutes for writing with a pencil and paper, it can also create functional improvements for students who struggle with spelling or writing. I noticed that I struggle a little bit to find the line between substitution and augmentation, especially as it applies to inclusion or differentiation. I think the line between the two can blur, as it can with many levels of SAMR. However, I think this is inherent to technology integration; it can become a domino effect, where one incorporation leads to more, which leads to more improvements and functional changes in class.

The “no tech” phase has its place, as sometimes we want students to use paper and pencils and read traditional books; in math, especially at a young age, we want students to learn mental math before we allow calculators.