Read the following article and watch the video. After completing both, write a blog that shows how PBL and technology connect through SAMR. Attempt to show this connection while thinking about student voice and choice and higher level thinking skills. If you are working on your STEM certification relate how STEM/STEAM connects to both technology integration through SAMR and PBL as a learning pedagogy
https://21centuryedtech.wordpress.com/2014/09/15/essential-connections-of-stem-pbl-and-tech-integration-what-would-dewey-think/
https://www.commonsensemedia.org/videos/introduction-to-the-samr-model
Michael Gorman is a long-time advocate of STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics) education, technology integration, and Project-Based Learning (PBL). He argues that PBL “provides an important process and pedagogy that allows for the integrated delivery of this (STEM) content” (Gorman, 2014). In today’s day of Common Core State Standards, there is a strong emphasis on scientific inquiry surrounding student writing about process. Gorman suggests “these standards also demand that students understand concepts in depth while making relationships to real-world applications” (Gorman, 2014).
PBL projects are authentic, allow students to make deep connections, and help to kick-start the inquiry process. PBL integrates science, technology, engineering, and mathematics, which, in turn, allows students to make authentic connections between the content areas and their community. Gorman suggests that unlike previous technology integration, “today’s computing devices provide both an opportunity for students to learn and inquire, as well as to produce, publish, and connect to the real-world” (Gorman, 2014). Gorman further suggests that this type of learning leads to allowing students to develop a sense or “flow", as well as opens the door to more authentic and engaging learning opportunities. According to the BIE (Buck Institute of Education), PBL makes schools more engaging for students, improves learning, builds success skills for college, career, and life, helps address standards, provides opportunities for students to use technology, makes teaching more enjoyable and rewarding, and connects students and schools with communities and the real world (Why Project-Based Learning, 2016).
Gorman ends his blog entry with a quote from John Dewey, "Give the pupils something to do, not something to learn; and the doing is of such a nature as to demand thinking; learning naturally results- John Dewey” (Gorman, 2014).
To connect my learning from Gorman to the SAMR model, it is easy to see how PBL projects take learning to new levels on the SAMR model. According to developer Dr. Ruben Puentedura, the SAMR model is a way for teachers to evaluate how they are incorporating technology into their instructional practice. There are four levels of the SAMR model, each scaffolding off of the previous layer. The four layers include: redefinition (technology allows for the creation of new tasks, previously inconceivable), modification (technology allows for significant task redesign), augmentation (technology acts as a direct tool substitute, with functional improvement), and substitution (technology acts as a direct tool substitute, with no functional change) (Introduction to the SAMR model, 2016). While augmentation and substitution can be used to enhance learning, redefinition and modification can be used to transform learning. This Common Sense Media video suggests that transforming learning promotes higher-level thinking skills such as analyzing, evaluating and creating which are essential to Common Core State Standards and 21st century learning (Introduction to the SAMR model, 2016). Gorman would certainly agree that the goal of PBL learning should be to have students reach higher-levels on the SAMR model. At these levels, the higher-level thinking skills and student voice and choice are prevalent. As teachers, we can use the SAMR evaluate the way we are using technology in our classrooms. We can use this model to help design tasks that promote higher-order thinking skills. In doing so, we are engaging our students in rich, authentic learning experiences and directly impacting their student learning experiences.
I am not currently working on my STEM/STEAM (Science, Technology, Engineering, Arts, and Mathematics) certification, however, I can certainly see the STEM/STEAM connection to both technology integration through SAMR and PBL as a learning pedagogy. STEM/STEAM includes all of the important content standards that have often been taught in isolation. I view STEM/STEAM as the content, and PBL as the delivery of the content- the process/pedagogy that allows teachers to teach this content. According to Gorman, “both STEM and PBL depend on a student need to know and inquiry, which allows for higher level learning- technology integration provides tools to drive this process” (Gorman, 2014). In simpler words, STEM/STEAM is the content, PBL is the delivery of the content, and the SAMR model is how/what tools we will use to drive this process.
References:
Gorman, M. (2014). 21 st Century Educational Technology and Learning [Web log post]. Retrieved May 31, 2016, from https://21centuryedtech.wordpress.com/2014/09/15/essential-connections-of-stem-pbl-and-tech-integration-what-would-dewey-think/
Introduction to the SAMR model. (2016). Retrieved May 31, 2016, from https://www.commonsensemedia.org/videos/introduction-to-the-samr-model#
Why Project Based Learning (PBL)? (2016). Retrieved May 31, 2016, from http://bie.org/about/why_pbl
https://21centuryedtech.wordpress.com/2014/09/15/essential-connections-of-stem-pbl-and-tech-integration-what-would-dewey-think/
https://www.commonsensemedia.org/videos/introduction-to-the-samr-model
Michael Gorman is a long-time advocate of STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics) education, technology integration, and Project-Based Learning (PBL). He argues that PBL “provides an important process and pedagogy that allows for the integrated delivery of this (STEM) content” (Gorman, 2014). In today’s day of Common Core State Standards, there is a strong emphasis on scientific inquiry surrounding student writing about process. Gorman suggests “these standards also demand that students understand concepts in depth while making relationships to real-world applications” (Gorman, 2014).
PBL projects are authentic, allow students to make deep connections, and help to kick-start the inquiry process. PBL integrates science, technology, engineering, and mathematics, which, in turn, allows students to make authentic connections between the content areas and their community. Gorman suggests that unlike previous technology integration, “today’s computing devices provide both an opportunity for students to learn and inquire, as well as to produce, publish, and connect to the real-world” (Gorman, 2014). Gorman further suggests that this type of learning leads to allowing students to develop a sense or “flow", as well as opens the door to more authentic and engaging learning opportunities. According to the BIE (Buck Institute of Education), PBL makes schools more engaging for students, improves learning, builds success skills for college, career, and life, helps address standards, provides opportunities for students to use technology, makes teaching more enjoyable and rewarding, and connects students and schools with communities and the real world (Why Project-Based Learning, 2016).
Gorman ends his blog entry with a quote from John Dewey, "Give the pupils something to do, not something to learn; and the doing is of such a nature as to demand thinking; learning naturally results- John Dewey” (Gorman, 2014).
To connect my learning from Gorman to the SAMR model, it is easy to see how PBL projects take learning to new levels on the SAMR model. According to developer Dr. Ruben Puentedura, the SAMR model is a way for teachers to evaluate how they are incorporating technology into their instructional practice. There are four levels of the SAMR model, each scaffolding off of the previous layer. The four layers include: redefinition (technology allows for the creation of new tasks, previously inconceivable), modification (technology allows for significant task redesign), augmentation (technology acts as a direct tool substitute, with functional improvement), and substitution (technology acts as a direct tool substitute, with no functional change) (Introduction to the SAMR model, 2016). While augmentation and substitution can be used to enhance learning, redefinition and modification can be used to transform learning. This Common Sense Media video suggests that transforming learning promotes higher-level thinking skills such as analyzing, evaluating and creating which are essential to Common Core State Standards and 21st century learning (Introduction to the SAMR model, 2016). Gorman would certainly agree that the goal of PBL learning should be to have students reach higher-levels on the SAMR model. At these levels, the higher-level thinking skills and student voice and choice are prevalent. As teachers, we can use the SAMR evaluate the way we are using technology in our classrooms. We can use this model to help design tasks that promote higher-order thinking skills. In doing so, we are engaging our students in rich, authentic learning experiences and directly impacting their student learning experiences.
I am not currently working on my STEM/STEAM (Science, Technology, Engineering, Arts, and Mathematics) certification, however, I can certainly see the STEM/STEAM connection to both technology integration through SAMR and PBL as a learning pedagogy. STEM/STEAM includes all of the important content standards that have often been taught in isolation. I view STEM/STEAM as the content, and PBL as the delivery of the content- the process/pedagogy that allows teachers to teach this content. According to Gorman, “both STEM and PBL depend on a student need to know and inquiry, which allows for higher level learning- technology integration provides tools to drive this process” (Gorman, 2014). In simpler words, STEM/STEAM is the content, PBL is the delivery of the content, and the SAMR model is how/what tools we will use to drive this process.
References:
Gorman, M. (2014). 21 st Century Educational Technology and Learning [Web log post]. Retrieved May 31, 2016, from https://21centuryedtech.wordpress.com/2014/09/15/essential-connections-of-stem-pbl-and-tech-integration-what-would-dewey-think/
Introduction to the SAMR model. (2016). Retrieved May 31, 2016, from https://www.commonsensemedia.org/videos/introduction-to-the-samr-model#
Why Project Based Learning (PBL)? (2016). Retrieved May 31, 2016, from http://bie.org/about/why_pbl