Kidder, L.C., Romrell, D. & Wood, E. (2014) The SAMR
Model as a Framework for
Evaluating
mLearning. Online Learning: Official
Journal Of The Online
Learning
Constortium, 18(2). Retrieved from
Summary:
In this
article the authors defined mLearning as learning that is personalized, situated,
and connected through the use of a mobile device. mLearning is personal because each student
can use their own mobile device and have a choice for the colors, fonts, apps,
and accessories with their device.
mLearning is situated because the mobile devices allow for learning to
be situated within a real-world setting.
The mobile device allows learning to come to the student regardless of
time or location. mLearning is connected
because the mobile device allows for instant connectivity to the internet,
video, phone calls or text messaging.
The authors
in the article then went on to use the SAMR model as a framework to evaluate
mLearning. The SAMR model consists of
four classifications; substitution, augmentation, modification and
redefinition. If mLearning is in the
substitution classification then the learning activity could have been done
without the use of a mobile device. If
mLearning is in the augmentation classification the activities go beyond the
substitution level in that they provide some type of functional improvement
over what could have been achieved with traditional tools. If mLearning is in the modification
classification then use of the mobile device has made the learning transform. If mLearning is in the redefinition
classification then students were able to participate in learning that would
not have been possible without the use of the mobile device.
The authors
found that when using the SAMR to help design instruction then learning can be
transformed. The authors found that if
students only used mobile devices at the substitution and augmentation
classifications then there wasn’t as much of an impact on what the students
learned or how long they retained the information. However, when students used the mobile
devices more at the modification and redefinition classifications then the
learning was transformed and students were able to retain the information
learned for a longer period of time.
Reflection:
I like the
ide of using the SAMR model as a tool for evaluating how effective the
technology is in the lesson and to what degree the technology is being
used. I have been guilty of doing the
same thing I could have done with paper and pencil but I used technology
instead. I think many of us are stuck in
the substitution classification of the SAMR model. This article helped me understand the
difference in just using technology because it is there versus using the
technology to transform the learning that is happening in the classroom. I feel that there are times when technology
should just be used as a substitution, but a teacher can get stuck just
there. Teachers need to push themselves
to move through the SAMR model and transform learning. In the real-world students are going to be
just answering questions on paper. They
are going to have to know how to communicate with each other and how to problem
solve quickly. Having lessons that force
the students to do that will help prepare them for their future.