Reflection 1

Standard: Students will select, use, create, and evaluate construction technologies
Lesson:  Understand how workers use construction framing to frame a modern house.

To go along with the SAMR model, the "S" model is a simple teaching method that would just use a basic PowerPoint presentation to teach the methods and elements of a house frame.
The "A" model would represent a slight difference, perhaps using the PowerPoint as a foundation for the lecture, then using a simulated model of a framed house.
The "M" model would represent a small lecture to get the information across, then having the students use construction lab tools to physically create their own model of a framed house in partners.
The "R" model would represent a small lecture for the information, then have the students use a designer program such as AutoCAD to design the plan/virtual model of a framed house, and then use it to develop a physical model using construction tools.

For each SAMR level, the teacher and student roles change depending on the activity. At the beginning, it is the typical teacher/student role. For the We Do role, students and teachers take turns taking on each role as a whole group and within independent groups. At the end, the students become the teacher as they discuss and talk about their assignment that was completed in group time. Often, students will share more details that other students may not have thought of.

I really enjoyed the process of working through this lesson. I decided to go with science because it is a subject I really like, And I tied in an engineering standard to help me incorporate more technological ways of learning. At each SAMR level each things can change. Instructional decision is changed based off how much technology will be incorporated, this is true because of how much dependent and independent. work will be done by the teacher and the students. The technologies will change based off of how involved students will be in their own learning. If they are doing more independent work they will be more hands on with technology. 

I have never used the TPACK or SAMR processes for planning a lesson and integrating technology. I found it was a thoughtful approach to purposeful technology in the classroom. I feel we as educators often think through these things, but not necessarily this in-depth. It was beneficial to think through the process from start to finish with a diagram.

For my lesson on slope-intercept form, I feel when starting with simple substitution it was an easy swap out that didn't take much effort on my part nor the students. As I got further into the process I had to think more about how the students could be actively involved in learning the material, sharing the material, and really interacting with one another with the use of technology. 

At the redefinition level of SAMR, I'd say students are the most in control of their own learning, while the teachers take a backseat. The students are creating, explaining, answering, inquiring of others' work, etc, while I am there in more of a facilitator role.

With that being said, as far as planning at the full TPACK and SAMR level it is a much more involved process. Working within the special education setting, I feel like bringing it all together was the most difficult step in the process for me. I'd love to use this lesson and see if I can get students to be engaged in a project like this, with the end goal being a deep understanding of slope-intercept form, how to graph lines, and applying it to the real world.

I believe going through planning like this is beneficial to ensure we as educators are empowering our students to learn the material in a way that is meaningful and pertinent to them.  I am personally interested to see if a language arts lesson is easier than a math lesson to plan using this method.

I found that the SAMR model helped me as a teacher hone in on how technology can be used to redefine assignments instead of only as a substitution piece. In the past, technology in my teaching has focused mostly on substitution. With this model, I have felt challenged to think about technology as a larger piece to the pedagogy puzzle. Technology is possible to use as a substitution piece, but then it lacks the potential for students to use deeper level thinking. In order to promote higher order thinking, I am realizing more and more that technology needs to be used in the other roles (augmentation, modification, and redefinition) as well. 

I believe the process of the SAMR is more suited to classroom, but could also be well used in my area as a tutor. It provides steps (or a path) to follow when planning a lesson out. I made me think beyond what I would normally in terms of options in presenting a lesson to a student. And in that way, is tremendously helpful for me in helping a student reach their goals.

As I began planning this lesson, my main goal was to focus on how the students were using or creating technology. The S & A in SAMR focus on the teachers usage, so I thought of scenarios where this lesson only incorporated the teacher using the technology. The M & R in SAMR focus more on the student's use of the technology and how the student is sharing their creations with other people. For the M, I tried to think of a way that the student could create something using technology, but they did not share it with people outside of the classroom. For the S, I thought of a way that students could create something using technology and they could share it for the community or world to see. I started my TPACK diagram by focusing on creating a lesson that fell under the S in SAMR. I then went backwards through the lesson deciding how this lesson could fit into the other categories. 

I had not heard of the TPACK or SAMR models before this. In my preschool class, I do this general lesson almost daily, especially during remote learning. I read a book, they draw a response picture, and we share. At this point, it's a relatively simple lesson. However, it took much more critical thinking and brainstorming to align it with TPACK and SAMR.` I wanted to highlight the most useful and maybe less common tech in it.  With the SAMR model in mind, I was able to take something simple, like just the whiteboard app, and transform and build upon it to elevate my lesson. Students roles changed because they are now able to collaborate with peers through direct interaction, with the collaboration doc. Upon first thought, it might be hard to imagine that pre-k students could do this but the voice dictation tool makes it possible! 

When using the SAMR model to reflect on a daily lesson I teach to my Kindergarten reading students, I noticed that using this model allowed the lesson to become less teacher centered and more student centered. This lesson became less focused on how the teacher presents the material to help student be successful and more on how the students are using all the material and resources provided to them and how they are using them to be successful.

When looking at all parts of my Kindergarten Guided Reading ABC book lesson and the parts of the SAMR, here is what my lesson now looks like using the SAMR model: 

S: For Substitution, the traditional paper format of the teacher created ABC book can be improved with the creation of a digital version of this book using Google Apps, including Google Slides and Google Docs. Creating a digital version of the ABC book, allows for students to be able to access it anywhere at any time. This is very help with the COVID-19 pandemic precautions as well because it allows virtual students to access while they are at home as well as allows in-person students to opportunity to use their iPad and eliminates multiple touching of paper by many people. 

A: For Augmentation, creating the ABC book on Google Apps allows the opportunity to share the book with anyone. This allows the teacher to share the book with each individual student and their parents/guardians so they can access it anywhere and on multiple devices. Making individual books for each student allows me to also progress monitor and knowledge track (moving letter picture to completed/known letter page) while they are reading each day/week. This allows me to easily access what they know with just one click anywhere. 

M: For Modification, I have noticed that many of my students started kindergarten with no prior knowledge of the letters and letter sounds. Knowing this, on the cover page of my ABC book, I have provided a clickable link to access the YouTube video Learning Letter Sounds By: Jack Hartmann. We already listen to this song everyday as our lesson intro but providing this link will allow struggling students to have unlimited access to the video to support them. 

R: For Redefinition, each letter page in the ABC book provides a clickable link to individual letter YouTube videos to help students with unknown letters. This could not have been done with original paper version. My students this year are gaining a deeper understanding of the ABC book quicker than in my previous years of teaching Kindergarten. I made these changes originally because of the COVID-19 pandemic and teaching guided reading groups virtually, but I am going to continue to use this digital book in the future. It promotes student engagement and technology use for young students.