I enjoyed reading
about the SAMR and TPACK models as frameworks for evaluating the usage of
technology in the classroom and see them as necessary first steps to the
course, where we will be evaluating and trying out many different technologies
we can use in our own classrooms as TESL teachers. Like all teaching practices,
it is absolutely essential to be able to evaluate our use of technology
including why we chose that particularly technology matched with that
particular content for a particular group of students - in short, its
effectiveness, appropriateness, and relevance.
While I think TPACK is as essential as it is intuitive - perhaps because the TESOL program has amazing professors who constantly remind us that we need to reflect on our choice of pedagogy in relation to the content we're teaching, and by extension reflect on the technology we use in relation to our chosen pedagogical method as well as the content - I find it a little complicated as a reliable framework for evaluating instructional technology usage. I don't think it is realistic to expect teachers to monitor three different realms (pedagogy, content, and technology); their relation to one another; as well as the relationship among all three of them (the center of the venn diagram) - not to mention, the many other external factors that relate to all three, as shown in the diagram here.
Thus, I identify more with the SAMR model, because I think it is a more
realistic framework for teachers to evaluate their use of technology,
especially when we consider that the lowest level, Substitution, is not bad but merely less
"meaty" than the other three. This video explains it easily, using a
Google Doc and its various functions as an example of all four levels: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=us0w823KY0g.
On the commute home from school, the time when many teachers reflect upon their lessons during the day, it seems far easier to think about: Did the technology I use merely substitute for a pencil and paper? Did it add anything? Was it absolutely essential? Bottom line, did it enhance my students enjoyment of the lesson and their learning?
Rather than: Which intersection of pedagogy, content, and technology did
I achieve today?
This is not to say that I think the TPACK is a bad model. For instance, it can be used effectively as continuing education for teachers who are older and might need/want to learn more modern ways of engaging their students. It is a clear diagram that people can identify with in order to note their strengths and weaknesses and determine which of the venn diagram circles they fall into. Thus, it is useful for determining overall, broad strengths in teaching ability, whereas the SAMR model is a concise, realistic model for evaluating technology use in real time, per lesson, and in more specific terms.
