SAMR or OSAMR

Dr. Ruben Puentedura is the creator of the SAMR model for selecting, using, and evaluating technology in education. The SAMR model is a way to reflect upon how you are integrating technology into your classroom. On the other hand, O-SAMR is an allegory to notice the barriers to integrate technology in education. 


SAMR stands for... Is it an act of Substitution? Tech acts as a direct tool substitute, with no functional change. Augmentation? Tech acts as a direct tool substitute, with functional improvement. Modification? Tech allows for significant task redesign. Redefinition? Tech allows the creation of new tasks, previously inconceivable. 

Educators know that there is no silver bullet (a simple and seemingly magical solution to a complicated problem) to cope with tech integration in schools. Designing and Creating new contents and activities, that belong to the highest position of the SAMR model, is a time consuming task. A great amount of energy and intellectual skills are required to significantly integrate tech into teaching and learning. Furthermore, the action doesn't end in the classroom, IT coordinators and school policies makers have a great influence as they conduct management processes.

Teachers, coordinators and school leaders different objectives must converge to create a context suitable for teaching with ICTs. I think schools behave much like a symphonic orchestra, individual great musicians that play from previously composed sheet music. Problems arise as soon as an individual musician plays detuned.    

Just to mention some of the most common barriers to successfully integrate technology in classrooms, is a common place. And it brings no solution to the problem. Yet, I invite the reader to consider any barrier of this kind as an obstruction of learning as in "obstruction of justice". This might sound way beyond reasonable limits, but considering learning and teaching as a human right, it just might not. 

   

Is this happening to us?

I recently got involved in a very interesting discussion with a group of teachers attending a rather expensive (and high quality) 5-days "ed-tech" training. After they successfully finished their training, their expectations were literally sky-high, as high it was the disappointment as they encountered barriers to implement. They argued that, the training program (mostly SAMR based) was not enough to let them foresee the upcoming barriers they had recently found. Furthermore, in real life implementations of the model, they felt like "the dream is over".

Some time ago, I came across another technology integration model. The MiTICa model by Eduteka, The beauty of this model lies in bringing infrastructure policies and management methods to the mix. The basic idea is to provide with a process model, that involves IT professionals and institutional leadership to successfully conduct learning (and teaching).

To finish, I would like to note that good classroom methods and best learning and teaching practices are suitable in a context where teachers do not have the need to fight infrastructure and institutional policies back. This, definitely is not a problem to a specific school, nor to a specific group of well intentioned high skilled professionals. I´m completely convinced, innovation means changing the current state of things, thus tension between the past practices and the design of future ones is inevitable. That tension sets a great amount of learning opportunities for all of us.