A Shark in the SAMR Pool

SAMR is a dynamic model for designing learning activities for students of all ages in the digital age. SAMR stands for Substitution, Augmentation, Modification, and Redefinition, represented like so:

As the diagram shows, the bottom tiers represent enhancement, while the upper tiers reflect transformation of traditional pen and paper assignments.  Let's review SAMR a little more:

Now that we understand how SAMR works, we need to also recall that there is a slightly different view of SAMR, the SAMR Pool.  In the SAMR Pool, it no longer looks like the traditional ladder where redefinition is the ultimate goal to reach with each assignment.  It is more of a flow back and forth between each type of task.

As you can see, in swimming, you can go back and forth between the different levels more fluidly than one be able to climb the steps of a ladder.

"But, Julie," you say, "that is a picture of an ocean, not a pool."

Ah! Right you are, my friend!  You see, there is a SHARK in the SAMR Pool!!

So I like a little drama.  Take a moment, though, and hear me out.

SAMR is a great model, but there is an inherent danger with it.  This model focuses on the assignments/activities/tasks of learning in a way that loses focus on a teacher's primary target: the student.  The danger of the model is a focus entirely on these things while forgetting the students that are doing the learning.  It would be quite easy for  teacher to get caught up in attempting to constantly achieve "redefinition," and completely lose track of where the individual students need to go in the learning process.  Even when looking at the "pool" model, redefinition appears in the "deep end," thus appearing as the ultimate goal. Assignments, activities, and tasks are tools in learning. Instructors must not lose sight of goals for the student.  

Let me take this a step further.  In becoming caught up with the ideal "redefined assignment," a teacher may lose sight of the actual quality of the assignment.  There are times when reinventing the wheel is not the way to go.  Granted, creating a new, exciting assignment can be fun and is often quite useful.  The trouble with the SAMR model with its focus on the tasks, is that the task may actually be unsuitable for the material or it could end up being a shoddy assignment thrown together so that the teacher can say, "Look! I used technology." Consider this image:

The above implies that assignments designed "above the line" are the best.  I disagree.  Teachers need to be aware of the dangers of forcing technology into assignments just for the sake of using technology.  

So, am I completely against the SAMR model?  No.  I like swimming in the ocean (and in pools!), so taking a dip into SAMR is not something I would avoid.  I do, however, strongly believe it is important to be aware of the dangers inherent in this model.  Technology should enhance the lesson.  Technology should not be the focus.  Just as students do not have to think overly hard about how to write with a pencil, they should not have to focus on learning how to use the technology to complete the task.

It is also important to remember that the "substitution" and "augmentation" tasks can be very useful as well.  There are benefits to the traditional way some learning activities are designed, so do not fall victim to the shark of forgetting this.  One great way that this is accomplished is by combining with Bloom's Taxonomy, like so:

When combined with Blooms, SAMR looks like a great place to swim!  With this example, it is easy to recall that things that fall under "Substitution" in SAMR, are still great, still vital and needed, assignments for students.  Do not leave them out by trying too hard to "teach above the line."

You can have a lot of fun swimming in SAMR, just make sure to avoid the sharks!