Meeting SAM R - not a person, but a pedagogical model!

Evaluating my Technology Use
with my friend S.A.M.R.

Image Source: www.tenor.com

When I think of writing in a classroom setting, I imagine a student sitting at a desk with a pen and pencil. Although writing by hand is still a fantastic way to write, I’ve learned that integrating technology in the writing process can be an invaluable resource for the learning process of young writers.

During quarantine, technology became not just an asset, but a necessity. When our library closed to the public, all in-person library programs came to an abrupt halt. As a library associate in a youth department, I went from working at a library with hundreds of daily visitors, to working at home with only my pet snake keeping me company. In lieu of in-person programs, our library offered virtual programs.

To play my part in keeping kids connected with the library, I redesigned my Writing Club program into a virtual program. The goal of this program is to give writers and artists a space to create writing and art, as well as a space to connect with fellow writers and artists. In order to provide this space, I led writing classes on Zoom.

Initially, I perceived these virtual programs as a substitution for in-person programs. However, my perception shifted over time. I learned that technology didn’t have to solely substitute; technology could revitalize both the writing process and the learning process for students.

In order to evaluate myself as an instructor, I decided to evaluate my virtual Writing Club programs through the SAMR model. This model encourages teachers to integrate technology in the classroom through substitution, augmentation, modification, and redefinition. Although frequently applied to school classrooms, this model can also help libraries redesign and revitalize their programs and services. 

At first, I was intimidated by this model (and this video!) I interpreted the strategies as a hierarchical spectrum - with substitution as the bare minimum, and redefinition as the crowning jewel. However, when I treated the strategies as their own unique, equally valuable gems, it empowered me to ask the right questions. Which tool is the best tool for this situation? Do I over rely on a certain tool? Do I underutilize a certain tool? How can I use these tools in tandem to create an engaging library program?

Image Source: www.PowerSchool.com

Starting with Substitution

Substitution is a direct substitute, with zero functional change. For example, I can type a poem, rather than write a poem on paper. There is no functional difference - it’s simply swapping the way the poem is written. The task (writing a poem) is exactly the same.

When I first offered virtual writing programs, I asked myself, What in the world is a Zoom? I learned how to host Zoom meetings, welcoming students to a virtual classroom. I treated this classroom similarly to an in-person library program. I discussed the writing prompt, gave students time to write and illustrate, and invited students to share their work with the class. This structure mirrored the in-person Writing Club program.

At first, substitution worked well. During a time period (quarantine) when connection was difficult to find, I believe that students enjoyed the time to connect with other students in a way that felt familiar. I also believe that many students (and myself, for that matter) were still getting accustomed to seeing our own faces looking back at us. SAMR is often depicted as a pool. We were swimming in the shallow waters of SAMR, getting comfortable in a brand new pool (virtual programs) when the other pool shut down (the physical library).

Over time, I wondered how I could use Zoom’s unique features to make the Writing Club programs more engaging. I think of this step as adding toys to the pool. Since it may get a bit monotonous to just keep swimming, I started integrating the next letter in SAMR - augmentation.

Image Source: www.jaclynbstevens.com

Advancing to Augmentation

Like substitution, augmentation is a direct substitute. However, augmentation improves functionality. Let’s say I finish writing a poem on a Google document. After writing the first draft, I can access the poem from any device, which increases the functionality by providing more opportunities to edit the poem.

For Writing Club, I improved functionality by integrating Zoom’s unique features. I encouraged students to type their work in the Zoom chat - either as a direct message to myself, or as a group message for everyone in the classroom to read. This feature gave off-camera writers the opportunity to share their work in a way that was comfortable for them. This feature also gave unique opportunities for group writing, since one student could start a story with one line, then another student could type the next line. Although group writing can be done in person by passing a paper around the classroom, the process was much smoother on Zoom - and arguably more fun, since it turned into a competition to see who could type the next line first.

Alas, augmentation didn’t always lead to an improvement in functioning. Since some students had spotty wi-fi, sharing over Zoom didn’t always work well, particularly when students cut out right in the middle of a good story. Access to technology didn’t guarantee access to reliable technology. Providing tech assistance for students during a program also had its own challenges - luckily, the issue was often as simple as reminding a student to unmute themselves.

Image Source: www.tenor.com

Zoom troubleshooting aside, it was rewarding to see students become not only comfortable with technology, but excited to use technology. Their enthusiasm inspired me to explore the deeper waters of the SAMR pool, swimming to the next letter - M for modification. 

Moving on to Modification

Unlike substitution and augmentation, modification involves the redesign of a task. For example, I can share my Google Doc for my writing friends to add comments to the poem, rather than just read the poem. The task changes from sharing a poem (passive reading) to receiving constructive feedback (active engagement). The writing process shifts from individualistic to collaborative.

Writing Club also included unique opportunities for modification and collaboration. For example, I led a Writing Club: Pet Penpals program. The task involved writing a letter to a pet penpal. By creating Zoom rooms, I redesigned the task. Students could choose which room to join - the puppy room, or the snake room. Students looking for a social writing space joined Brody the therapy dog in our puppy room. Students looking for a quiet writing space joined me and my snake GG in the snake room. Saying hello to the students, GG loved getting close to the camera - sometimes, a little too close!

Image Source: Personal Photo

At the library, I could’ve never had a dog and a ball python in the same program. In fact, I wouldn’t have been able to bring GG at all, since he only ever works from home. (Not to mention that bringing a snake to work would’ve violated plenty of library policies.) Virtually, however, students could even bring their own pets. Some students wrote nonfiction stories about their pets with their pets, moving their webcams to show their pets to the class. By sharing their screen, students shared not only their stories, but also the animal friends who inspired their stories. It could be argued that these virtual pet pen pals not only modified the task, but redefined the task, leading to the final stop in the SAMR pool - redefinition.

Racing to Redefinition

Redefinition involves making new tasks possible because of technology. Although I find it tricky to differentiate between modification and redefinition, I imagine modification uses technology as a brush, while redefinition uses technology as the paint. With modification, the brush shapes the art, but other tools could still be used to get the paint on the canvas. With redefinition, the paint is the art, and this art wouldn’t exist without the paint.

I admittedly haven’t dived too deeply into redefinition, but a couple examples do come to mind. I’d used Beanstack to create writing challenges for National Novel Writing Month, inspired by the NaNoWriMo writing challenge. Students earned points for completing writing and art activities. When they earned 100 points, they earned a prize. Students also earned tickets that they submitted to prize baskets for a chance at extra writerly goodies. These challenges would not exist without Beanstack, making technology inseparable and integral to the program.

Another example that came to mind is a Writing Club workshop video, shared on the library’s Facebook page. This Writing Club program involved using Google Earth to choose a setting for a story. The writing prompt (Google Earth), the format (video), and the delivery (Facebook) all had technology at their core.

What's Next?

Although I’d started using technology solely as a substitute, I loved learning how to include technology as an augmentation, modification, and redefinition. It’s not just about having a tool, but knowing when and how to use this tool. In other words, context matters. For example, Zoom library programs were well attended during quarantine. Now, many students are experiencing zoom fatigue, and virtual attendance has dropped. The needs of our library’s community members gradually shifted from virtual programs to in-person programs. Now, it’s less about providing a virtual space, and more about integrating technology in a physical space. Hence, Writing Club is being offered in person once again, empowering students to make stories like Alebrijes Got Talent, a story inspired by the library's exhibit Alebrijes: Creatures of a Dream World.

Image Source: Personal Photo

Going forward, I’d like to be more mindful about bringing technology into the classroom in ways that benefit students’ learning and creativity. I was very mindful about using technology when technology was a necessity. Now that everyone’s back in the library, rather than Zooming in, I haven’t used technology with as much intentionality. Granted, not all library programs need technology at their core. When offered the choice between a journal and a laptop, the vast majority of students choose the journal. Nonetheless, I'd like to bring back that spirit of augmentation, modification, and redefinition by exploring ways to integrate virtual tools in the physical classroom.