Frameworks curriculum planning:
Teaching Innovation
Teaching Innovation
SAMR (Substitution - Augmentation - Modification - Redefinition)
LoTI: Levels of Teaching Innovation
The SAMR Model
Substitution - Augmentation - Modification - Redefinition
The SAMR Model was introduced by Ruben Puentedura in 2006 in collaboration with the Maine Department of Education and their learning technology initiative. The model describes the life cycle of technology integration. It is a good framework to refer to when reflecting on how well we use technology to enhance learning.
sites.google.com/a/msad60.org/technology-is-learning/samr-model
digitallearningteam.org/2012/06/07/the-samr-model-enhancing-technology-integration
Read more at AlphaPlus: What is SAMR?
PICRAT Matrix
PICRAT Matrix
"The PICRAT model was developed at Brigham Young University in 2020 as a way of simplifying other technology analytic models."
PICRAT: A Model for Analyzing Classroom Technology Integration
The PICRAT framework is a riff on SAMR where RAT is the impact technology is having on teaching (Replace - Amplify - Transform) and PIC is the impact the technology is having on how learners are interacting with the content (Passive - Interactive - Creative).
Designing the New Normal: Enable, Engage, Elevate, and Extend Student Learning
by Jered Borup, Charles R. Graham, Cecil Short, and Joan Kang Shin
LoTi Framework
Teaching Innovation Framework
The Levels of Teaching Innovation (a.k.a LoTi) Framework focuses on the delicate balance between instruction, assessment, and the effective use of digital resources to promote higher order thinking, engaged student learning, and authentic assessment practices in the classroom—all vital characteristics of digital age teaching and learning.
The standards referred to are the InTASC Model Core Teaching Standards from the US Primary school system. These standards are not relevant to Ontario LBS program workers but some may find the questions and LoTI framework a useful way to evaluate their use of digital technology for learning. The Framework is similar to SAMR.
LoTi 0: Non-use - Learning experience is not standards-based (this refers to the InTASC Model Core Teaching Standards from the US Primary school system).
LoTi 1: Awareness - Resources are not used or are used by the teacher only to enhance lectures
LoTi 2: Exploration - Resources are used by students for information gathering or extension activities
LoTi 3: Infusion - [Learning] Products emphasize complex thinking skill strategies (e.g, problem solving, decision making)
LoTi 4a: Mechanical Integration - Unresolved classroom management or school climate issues restrict full integration
LoTi 4b: Routine Integration - Students are fully engaged in self-directed, problem-based learning
LoTi 5: Expansion - [Learning] Products are authentic and solve student-centered problems using all available resources
LoTi 6: Refinement - [Learning] Products are innovative, authentic, and extend beyond conventional strategies
Ask these questions to determine the LoTI level:
Does classroom instruction support or promote purposeful learning aligned to the content standards?
Is there evidence of content-related higher order thinking by students?
How are digital and/or environmental resources being used?
Is the learning experience student-centered? Real-world applied learning?
Is there two-way collaboration with experts outside the classroom?
Do students use digital resources exclusively to accomplish learning outcomes beyond conventional strategies?
LoTi-Input-SniffTest-Handout.pdf