I heard about the SAMR Model of technology integration at a recent meeting, and since that time, I’ve been looking into the work of Dr. Ruben R. Puentedura, the creator of SAMR. There are some really good aspects to the model, but also some caveats which I describe below. To get started exploring , watch a brief video of Dr. Puentedura describing SAMR with concrete examples:
Schoology.com’s Exchange site also gives a good introductory explanation to SAMR
Image: SAMR Model (Puntedura) @ Schoology.com – More info at http://www.hippasus.com/rrpweblog/
This model can be used to think about your current use of educational technology, but also as a creative catalyst in the course design process to make changes to current instructional practices. It is worth a look and a listen!
On the other hand, there has been some criticism of Dr. Puentedura’s lack of research or peer-reviewed publication around his model. Some writers describe his work as promising work gone viral too soon without the scholarly peer review necessary to scrutinize the ideas. I can see how this could happen. An instructor thinks about his/her own practice and comes to some insights about it. The ideas are shared with others, and they catch on. The instructor then gets invited to speak at educational conferences and the ideas spread further. In this case, the ideas took on a life of their own, spreading far and wide across the Internet, but what seems to be missing is the literature review which connects existing knowledge and research about learning science with the ideas about SAMR, and the scholarly conversation which arises through the formal publication process. Use of the term “model” seems to bestow on SAMR something more formal, as if it had gone through rigorous research and testing, which critics of SAMR point out. Dr. Puentedura doesn’t seem to “oversell” his model in this light, and I do think there is value in the way he thinks about ed tech integration, but you might also want to read additional published pieces on assessing your ed-tech integration and choices. Here’s one example:
Hughes, J., Thomas, R. & Scharber, C. (2006). Assessing Technology Integration: The RAT – Replacement, Amplification, and Transformation – Framework. In C. Crawford, R. Carlsen, K. McFerrin, J. Price, R. Weber & D. Willis (Eds.), Proceedings of SITE 2006–Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference (pp. 1616-1620). Orlando, Florida, USA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved July 30, 2019 from https://www.learntechlib.org/primary/p/22293/.
France, P. E. (October 18,2018), What the SAMR Model May Be Missing, https://www.edsurge.com/news/2018-10-18-what-the-samr-model-may-be-missing
See additional online discussion about the model here:
http://www.litandtech.com/2013/11/turning-samr-into-tech-what-models-are.html
https://www.schrockguide.net/samr.html
This tale reinforces the importance of critical review of educational resources on the web. A current Google search returns 2,250,000 hits for SAMR which could lead one to think that SAMR is a widely researched and validated formal educational model. In this case, it demonstrates how hugely popular the ideas around SAMR have become. Additionally, this example points out the importance of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning as a process by which educators can legitimize their work. There is absolutely nothing wrong with sharing ideas about what works in our personal experience as teachers, but we can and should (especially when ideas catch fire) consider putting our ideas through the formal publication and peer review process which can ensure that our good ideas are underpinned by and built upon solid research, ultimately so they can reliably be used as a foundation for new discoveries.
