By the end of this session, participants will be able to:

1. confidently navigate the Canvas platform by identifying and accessing key sections, including using the discussion forum to introduce themselves;

2. discuss how each level of the SAMR model differs regarding pedagogy, technology integration, and its impact on learning in their context; 

3. analyze digital tasks and identify at least two levels of integration according to the SAMR model;

4. discuss the use of digital tools, including AI tools, and how tools differ in terms of levels of integration based on the SAMR model and pedagogy;

5. enhance ONE digital task to the Augmentation level considering purpose, teacher, and students’ roles;

6. create ONE digital task for the Modification considering purpose, teacher, and students’ roles;

7. redesign ONE digital task to the Redefinition level considering purpose, teacher, and students’ roles;

8. discuss how the augmentation, modification, and redefinition levels can enhance their teaching practice and learning outcomes by reflecting and providing at least two concrete examples in a peer discussion;

9. showcase the digital tasks they produced, their reflection on the learning process they experienced while designing their tasks, including the tools they used, and highlight the challenges and achievements they encountered.

Session Description:

Important note:

The content and tasks in this session are cumulative; each week builds on the previous one(s). If participants register late, they cannot complete the work as each week closes by a specific deadline. 

Participants are awarded weekly digital badges and a completion certificate when they complete all the required tasks satisfactorily. Registrations will close on Jan. 19 -- after that date, it is not possible to register for the session and post in the Registration week.

Registration Week January 6 - 12

Focus of the week: Canvas navigation and resources; Digital Avatars; Introductions.

By the end of the week, participants will be able to: 

1. Navigate the learning spaces confidently by locating key sections to effectively participate in this session;

2. Engage with other participants by introducing yourself and reflecting on peers’ introductions to identify shared experiences and interests by utilizing digital avatars.

Task #1: explore and use the Canvas platform by watching an orientation video, setting your notifications on, navigating to different sections of the course, and completing your Canva profile; 

Task #2: watch tutorials on how to create a digital avatar to introduce yourself by sharing your teaching background (e.g. who you teach), how you use technology in your practice, a professional challenge or goal, and a fun fact about yourself;

Task #3: post your digital avatar in the discussion forum. Then, find at least ONE participant with whom you have something in common. Comment on their post, explaining how you relate to their experience, and ask a follow-up question to learn more about their use of technology or professional challenge/goal.

Week 1: January 13–19

Focus of the week: Common Non-digital Tasks Used in ELT; SAMR Model Introduction and Applications; Technology Integration in Non-digital Tasks.
 

By the end of the week, participants will be able to: 

1. describe at least TWO common non-digital tasks or activities you use in your teaching practice;

2. analyze five teaching scenarios to identify the level of technology applied according to the SAMR model.

Task #1: Share at least TWO non-digital tasks or activities, including a short description of the tasks or activities, learning objectives, and the teacher and the students’ roles during the application. Then, choose one post to suggest a digital tool you would use to enhance the non-digital task.

Task #2: Write in a discussion forum a short reflection (100-150 words) on which SAMR level you find most applicable in your teaching context and why according to Ruben Puentedura’s SAMR Model. After posting your reflection, read another participant’s reflection and write a reply by comparing their reflection to yours and asking one further question to deepen the discussion.

Task #3: Reflect on the scenarios presented and identify the level of technology integration applied in each scenario.

Synchronous session: It will take place on Jan. 19. The purpose of the live session is to discuss the key points of week 1, answer questions, and promote live interaction around what they produced in the week and briefly give an overview of the Week 2 expectations.

Week 2: January 20–26

Focus of the week: Digital tools and enhancement levels; Creation and evaluation of digital tasks at the Augmentation level; Peer reflection.

By the end of the week, participants will be able to: 

1. analyze the benefits and strategies for enhancing a non-digital task to a SAMR level by reading at least one article on task design and one on SAMR model, and reflecting on digital integration in a discussion forum;

2. classify the key features of digital tasks at the substitution and augmentation levels by filling a comparison table;

3. design a digital task at the augmentation level by transforming a non-digital task you commonly use in your practice using an appropriate digital tool;

4. evaluate how the enhanced digital task at the augmentation level can improve learning outcomes. 

Task #1: Select at least one article on task design and one article on digital integration with SAMR model. Then, write a short reflection (100-150 words) in the discussion forum explaining why and how you could enhance the non-digital task with technology. Remember to cite the articles you have read. 

Task #2: Explore the digital tools provided and fill a comparison table with the key features that can be applied at the Substitution and Augmentation levels. 

Task #3: Select ONE non-digital task you commonly use in your practice and an appropriate digital tool to design a digital task at the augmentation level.

Task #4: Write an evaluation on how the digital task you have designed can improve learning outcomes. 

Task #5: Post the digital task at the augmentation level and your evaluation in a Padlet breakout for a small group discussion.

Task #6: Read and provide feedback in the Padlet breakout for your group. Use the guided questions to provide constructive feedback to another participant in your group. 

Synchronous session: It will take place on Jan. 26. The purpose of the live session is to discuss the key points of week 2, answer questions, and promote live interaction around what they produced in the week and briefly give an overview of the Week 3 expectations.

Week 3: January 27–February 2 

Focus of the week: Key aspects of modification level; Digital Tools for Modification Level; Digital tasks at the Modification Level.

By the end of the week, participants will be able to: 

1. compare and contrast the Augmentation and Modification levels, using examples from readings and their teaching practice in a discussion forum;

2. analyze two digital tools to identify at least one that can effectively modify a non-digital task to the modification level;

3. redesign a non-digital task to the Modification level selecting a digital tool stating the task objective, giving instructions on how to implement it considering the role of the teacher and the students.

4. analyze the process of modifying a non-digital task, identifying strategies that could enhance learning and potential challenges that may arise in their teaching context.

Task #1: Read at least ONE article on the SAMR model. Share a reflection comparing and contrasting Augmentation and Modification levels. Provide examples based on the readings and your practice. 

Task #2: Explore at least two digital tools and choose at least one to write a summary on. Explain in your post how its features can help modify a non- digital task to reach the Modification level.

Task #3: Redesign one of your non-digital tasks to reach the Modification level using the tool you selected in Task #2. Post your redesigned task on a Google Document, including a plan that outlines: the task objective, implementation instructions, and justification.

Task #4: Write a reflection analyzing the strategies you chose to modify your non-digital task. Consider how these strategies could enhance learning in your teaching context. Identify two potential challenges that teachers may encounter when redesigning tasks to this level of modification, and discuss how these strategies might work in your teaching context. 

Synchronous session: It will take place on Feb. 2. The purpose of the live session is to discuss the key points of week 3, answer questions, and promote live interaction around what they produced in the week, and briefly give an overview of the Week 4 expectations.

Week 4: February 3–9 

Focus of the week:  Exploring Spatial.io; deepening knowledge of redefinition tools; reflecting on Spatial.io experiences. 

By the end of the week, participants will be able to:  

1. explore Spatial.io to identify its unique features and potential for creating technology-driven learning opportunities at the Redefinition level. Reflect on how these features could be applied to transform teaching practices and enhance student engagement in your context.

2. interpret the capabilities of Spatial.io and other immersive digital tools to facilitate globally connected tasks, and identify one or two key features it offers that can promote language learning and teaching;

3. analyze the requirements of the Redefinition level in the SAMR model, reflecting on personal competencies to design tasks at this level;

4. reflect on your experience using a 3D avatar to assess the learning opportunities Spatial and similar platforms offer, recording your insights in Spatial.io space;

5. Optional: design a task at the Redefinition level using Spatial, outlining the learning objectives, teacher and student roles, and implementation steps. Justify how this task meets Redefinition criteria in a document submitted for moderator feedback.

Task #1: Explore our session space in Spatial.io and identify its unique features. Focus on tools, functionalities, and immersive elements that enable new learning opportunities. Document examples of how these features could transform your teaching practices and enhance student engagement in your Week 5 S2R-TEL Guide for Week 4.

Task #2: Reflect on Spatial.io's features and evaluate how they facilitate globally connected tasks. Identify one or two features that could promote collaboration and language learning. Post your insights in the discussion forum, and suggest one concrete teaching example for each feature.

Task #3: Watch the demo video on the Redefinition level of the SAMR model. Reflect on the teacher’s competencies necessary to design tasks at this level, focusing on your strengths and areas for growth. Share your reflections in the provided form.

Task #4: Add a post-it in S2R-TEL Spatial.io space reflecting on one of the prompts below:

• • How controlling a 3D avatar could create new learning opportunities. 

  • The benefits of immersive interactions compared to traditional methods. 

  • How this experience could be applied in your teaching context.

Task #5:  (Optional)  Using Spatial.io, design a task that aligns with the SAMR Redefinition level. Outline the task objectives, teacher and student roles, and implementation steps. In your Google document, justify how this task meets the Redefinition criteria. Reference insights from earlier tasks to support your justification. Submit your Google doc in the Padlet for feedback. 

Synchronous session:  It will take place on Feb. 9. The purpose of the live session is to discuss the key points of week 4, answer questions, and promote live interaction around what they produced in the week and briefly give an overview of the Week 5 expectations.

Week 5: February 10–16

Focus of the week: Differentiation and impact on pedagogy; showcasing and reflecting on their learning experience; session evaluation.

By the end of the week, participants will be able to:  

1. analyze the distinctions between the augmentation, modification, and redefinition levels in the SAMR model, evaluating how each level’s technology integration impacts teaching practice and learning outcomes; 

2. evaluate which SAMR model level presents the greatest challenge in your teaching context, justifying your evaluation with at least two concrete examples;

3. synthesize the digital tasks from Weeks 2, 3, and 4 into a multimedia digital book using BookCreator, including the distinctions between SAMR levels, the most challenging level to implement in your teaching context, and key takeaways or suggestions for improving the S2R-TEL sessions. 

4. evaluate the overall session experience through reflective assessment, providing insights on personal growth and session impact.

Task #1: Based on your learning during this session, post in the discussion forum a reflection analyzing how each level of technology integration affects teaching practice and learning outcomes. Include specific examples to illustrate the distinctions and comment on at least two peer posts, discussing their analysis.

Task #2: Write a short reflection (100-150 words) in a discussion forum about the most challenging SAMR model level to implement in their teaching context with at least two reasons to support their claim. After posting their reflection, respond to at least one’s peer post by suggesting a potential solution or strategy they could apply to overcome their challenge.

Task #3: Using Book Creator, create a digital book with the following content: distinctions between SAMR levels, the most challenging level to implement in your teaching context, a description of the digital tasks you created in Weeks 2, 3, and 4, highlighting the purpose, tools used, and implementation strategies and the key takeaways or suggestions for improving the S2R-TEL session.

Task #4: After publishing your digital book in Book Creator, submit it for the moderator's assessment and feedback according to the rubric provided by the moderators. 

Task #5: Share the link to your digital book on Week 5 S2R-TEL Padlet and comment on each other’s post. Leave at least one message of encouragement to one of the participants.

Task #6: Finalize our EVO session by filling out the EVO Final Participant Survey to evaluate the overall session experience.  

EVO25 Wrap-up live session:  It will take place on Feb. 9. All participants are invited to join us. 

Canvas as a content and asynchronous interactive space.

Google Meet for live sessions—Live sessions will be recorded, but we strongly encourage participation. We will promote live discussions and activities, and provide space for participants to ask questions and network.

Padlet, PDFGear, HeyGen, Voki , Adobe Avatar Animator, Google Document, Google Presentation, Canva, Google Blogger, Google Sites, Spatial.io, Book Creator, Lucidchart, Magic School, Generative AIs (such as ChatGPT, Gemini, and Co-pilot), Kahoot, Quizizz, Liveworksheets, Mizou, Storynest.ai, Parlay and Quizlet.  

1. Cáceres-Nakiche, K., Carcausto-Calla, W., Yabar Arrieta, S. R., & Lino Tupiño, R. M. (2024). The SAMR Model in Education Classrooms: Effects on Teaching Practice, Facilities, and Challenges. Journal of Higher Education Theory and Practice, 24(2). https://doi.org/10.33423/jhetp.v24i2.6816

2.  Green, B. (2023). Five design principles for language learning materials development. ORTESOL Journal, 40, 4-20. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1402220.pdf  

3. Jin, S., Huang, J., & Zhong, Z. (2024). Application of Immersive Technologies in Primary and Secondary Education. Frontiers of Digital Education, 1(2), 142-152. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s44366-024-0001-3. 

4. Lyddon, P. A. (2019). A Reflective Approach to Digital Technology Implementation in Language Teaching: Expanding Pedagogical Capacity by Rethinking Substitution, Augmentation, Modification, and Redefinition. TESL Canada Journal, 36 (3), 186–200. https://doi.org/10.18806/tesl.v36i3.1327 

5. Oded, Y., & Oded, I. (2022). SAMR Model in Action: Effective Technology Integration in LCTL Teaching. CALICO Journal, 39(3). https://ncolctl.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/9771930903006_0806_Text_B_Proof-1_Part4-1.pdf 

6. Ordóñez-Procel, G. J., Freire-Medina, M. L., Ortiz-Joutteaux, M. R., & Herrera-Lopez, A. P. (2023). Virtual Reality in English Teaching: Immersion and Practice.  MQRInvestigar, 7(2), 1680-1702. https://doi.org/10.56048/MQR20225.7.2.2023.1680-1702 

7. Sabah, S. (2018). Differences between task, exercise, and drill in L2 education: A systems-thinking perspective. Advances in Language and Literary Studies, 9(6), 9-13. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1204695.pdf 

8. Sweet, M. G. (2023). Designing effective second language instruction: Digital technologies to support learning. In Integration of instructional design and technology  (Vol. 3, Chap. 3). Pressbooks. https://pressbooks.pub/idandtech3/chapter/designing-effective-second-language-instruction-digital-technologies-to-support-learning 

9. Tang, F. (2024). Understanding the role of digital immersive technology in educating the students of English language: does it promote critical thinking and self-directed learning for achieving sustainability in education with the help of teamwork? BMC psychology, 12(1), 144. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10938835/