SlideShare a Scribd company logo
1 of 42
TECHNOLOGY
INTEGRATION
MODELS/FRAMEWORK
PRESENTED TO: DR. SAMINA MALIK
PRESENTED BY: TAHIRA RAFIQ
REG. NO. : 161-FSS/PHDEDU/F19
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
INTERNATIONAL ISLAMIC UNIVERSITY, ISLAMABAD
1
WHY TECHNOLOGY? WHY NOW?
2
TECHNOLOGY IN THE CLASSROOM
PROS
 Enables you to experiment more in
pedagogy and get instant feedback.
 Helps ensure full participation
 Countless resources for enhancing
education and making learning more
fun and effective
 Can automate a lot of your tedious tasks
 Students have instant access to fresh
information that can supplement their
learning experience
 We live in a digital world,and
technology is a life skill
CONS
Technology in the classroom:
 Can be a distraction
 Can disconnect students from social
interactions
 Can foster cheating in class and on
assignments
 Students don’t have equal access to
technological resources.
 The quality of research and sources they
find may not be top-notch
 Lesson planning might become more
labor-intensive with technology
3
ADVANTAGES OF TECHNOLOGY
NOW
Summative & formative
assessments automatically
graded
Virtual reality presentations
Adaptive technology so that
all students can demonstrate
their learning
Student histories accessible
THEN
Grading assessments by
hand
Slide show presentations
Students struggle with
learning
Binders of student records
4
LEARNING THEORYAPPLICATION
5
LEARNING THEORIES
 Behavioral Theory: The learning processes should be developed in order from
least difficult to most difficult while integrating the positive principles of
behaviorism (Rias, & Zaman,2011).
 Cognitive Theory: The learning subject and the presentation order should be
structured with the objective at the beginning and a sequenced learning
process (Rias, & Zaman,2011).
 Constructivist Theory: The multimedia should be developed by combining
new information with existing knowledge (Rias, & Zaman,2011).
 Cognitive-Constructivist Approach: Interactivity should be embedded in
the multimedia technology. The approach is also known as student- centered
learning (Rias, & Zaman,2011).
6
TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION MODELS
• SAMR Model
• TIP Model
• TPACK Model
• Triple E Framework Model
7
THE SUBSTITUTION, AUGMENTATION,
MODIFICATION, AND REDEFINITION
(SAMR) MODEL
DR. RUBIN PUENTEDURA, 2012
8
9
SAMR MODEL – EXPLAINED
• Substitution
• Augmentation
• Modification
• Redefinition
10
TIP (Technology Integration Planning)
Model
Thompson & Mishra, 2007
The TIP model gives teachers a general approach to addressing
challenges involved in integrating technology into teaching.
The TIP model serves as a helpful guide on procedures and to
address issues for new teachers and those just beginning to integrate
technology into their classroom.
The TIP has five phases. Determining relative advantage, Decide on
objectives and assessments, Design integration strategies, Prepare
the instructional environment, and Evaluate and revise integration
strategies
11
WHAT IS THE TIP MODEL?
• Model designed for teachers,
especially those new to
technology.
• Helps teachers to plan for
effective classroom uses of
technology.
• Composed of five distinct phases.
12
FIVE PHASES
• Phase 1: Relative advantage
• Phase 2: Objectives and assessments
• Phase 3: Integration strategies
• Phase 4: Instructional environment
• Phase 5: Evaluation and revision
Each phase is accompanied by a checklist of questions to insure effective uses.
13
PHASE ONE: RELATIVE ADVANTAGE
• Figuring out instructional problems
• Deciding if a technology-based solution is best
• Ask questions as to the impact of a technology-based solution.
14
PHASE ONE CHECKLIST:
• Do I have topics, curriculum objectives, or insights I have difficulty
teaching?
• Are any of the above a good match for a technology-based solution?
• What is the relative advantage of the technology-based solution?
• Is the relative advantage sufficient to justify the effort and expense of
using these solutions?
15
PHASE TWO: OBJECTIVES AND
ASSESSMENTS
• State desired outcomes in terms of improving students'
• Achievement
• Attitude
• Performance
• Match appropriate assessment strategies to each outcome.
16
PHASE TWO CHECKLIST:
• What outcomes do I expect of students after the instruction to
show me they have learned?
• What is the best way for me to assess students' learning (written
tests, products)?
• Do the assessment instruments (tests, rubrics) exist or do I have to
develop them?
17
PHASE THREE: INTEGRATION
STRATEGIES
•Decide on activities that incorporate technology
resources.
•Use websites to help plan lessons and find resources.
18
PHASE THREE CHECKLIST:
• Will the instruction be single subject or interdisciplinary?
• Will students work as individuals, pairs, small or large groups,
whole class, a combination?
• Should activities be directed, constructivist, or a combination of
these?
• What strategies should I use to encourage female and minority
student involvement?
• What sequence of activities should I teach?
• Will students have enough time to learn the technologies before I
begin grading?
• Do I have demonstrations of equipment and the software skills
student will need? 19
PHASE FOUR: INSTRUCTIONAL
ENVIRONMENT
•Deciding on resources and conditions to support the
activities.
•Put the resources and conditions into place for the best
support.
•Requires the most planning and checking.
20
PHASE FOUR CHECKLIST:
•How many computers and copies of software do I need to
carry out the activities?
•How many computers and copies of software are
available?
•Over what time period and for how long will technology
resources be needed?
•Do I need to schedule time in a lab or media center? 21
PHASE FOUR CHECKLIST CONTD.
• Have I provided for students' privacy and safety?
• Have I made all necessary access provisions for students with
physical disabilities?
• Am I familiar with troubleshooting procedures specific to the
hardware or software?
• Have I built in time to test-run an equipment setup before the
students arrive?
• Have I built in time to back up important files? Have I trained
students to back up theirs?
22
PHASE FIVE: EVALUATION AND
REVISION
•Collect information on student achievement.
•Determine if the activities were successful in meeting
outcomes.
•Determine what can be improved for next time.
23
PHASE FIVE CHECKLIST:
• Were objectives achieved? What evidence do I have to indicate
success?
• Have I solicited feedback from students about how to improve
activities?
• Do data and comments indicate changes are needed to improve
outcomes?
• Are there other ways to arrange technology resources or activities
to improve results? 24
THE TECHNOLOGICAL
PEDAGOGICAL CONTENT
KNOWLEDGE (TPACK) MODEL
LEE SHULMAN
25
T = TECHNOLOGICAL KNOWLEDGE /
TECHNOLOGY CONTENT KNOWLEDGE
=KNOWLEDGE ABOUT USING TECHNOLOGY
P= PEDAGOGICAL KNOWLEDGE / PEDAGOGICAL
CONTENT KNOWLEDGE = KNOWLEDGE ABOUT
THE SCIENCE, THEORY AND ART OF TEACHING
AND
C = CONTENT KNOWLEDGE = CORE SUBJECTS,
SKILLS AND STRATEGIES
K = KNOWLEDGE
26
• Technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) is a framework to
understand and describe the kinds of knowledge needed by a teacher for
effective pedagogical practice in a technology enhanced learning environment.
• In this model there are seven components of teacher knowledge
1.Content
2.Pedagogy
3.PCK (Pedagogical Content Knowledge)
4.TPK (Technological Pedagogical Knowledge)
5.TPACK
27
CONTENT KNOWLEDGE (CK)
•Content knowledge (CK) is teachers’ knowledge about
the subject matter to be learned or taught. Knowledge of
content is of critical importance for teachers. It may also
include knowledge of concepts, theories, conceptual
frameworks as well as knowledge about accepted ways of
developing knowledge.
28
PEDAGOGICAL KNOWLEDGE (PK)
• Pedagogical knowledge (PK) is teachers’ deep knowledge about
the processes and practices or methods of teaching and learning.
This generic form of knowledge about how students learn, general
classroom management skills, lesson planning, and student
assessment.
29
CONTENT KNOWLEDGE (PCK)
• Pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) is knowledge about how to
combine pedagogy and content effectively. This is knowledge
about how to make a subject understandable to learners' covers the
core business of teaching, learning, curriculum, assessment and
reporting, such as the conditions that promote learning and the
links among curriculum, assessment, and pedagogy.
30
TECHNOLOGY KNOWLEDGE (TK)
• Technology knowledge (TK) refers to an understanding of the
way that technologies are used in a specific content domain. TK
does however go beyond digital literacy to having knowledge of
how to change the purpose of existing technologies (e.g. wikis) so
that they can be used in a technology enhanced classroom.
31
TECHNOLOGICAL CONTENT KNOWLEDGE
(TCK)
• Technological Content Knowledge refers to knowledge about how
technology may be used to provide new ways of teaching content.
For example, Viewing the heart as a pump, or the brain as an
information processing machine are just some of the ways in
which technologies have provided new perspectives for
understanding phenomena.
32
TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL
KNOWLEDGE (TPK)
• Technological Pedagogical Knowledge is an understanding of
how teaching and learning can change when particular
technologies are used in particular ways. It refers to the
affordances and constraints of technology as an enabler of
different teaching approaches. For example online collaboration
tools may facilitate social learning for geographically separated.
33
TECHNOLOGY, PEDAGOGY, AND CONTENT
KNOWLEDGE
• TPACK is an emergent form of knowledge that goes beyond all
three “core” components (content, pedagogy, and technology).
Technological pedagogical content knowledge refers to the
knowledge and understanding of the interplay between CK, PK
and TK when using technology for teaching and learning. It
includes an understanding of the complexity of relationships
between students, teachers, content, practices and technologies.
34
CONT..
• TPACK is the basis of effective teaching with technology,
requiring an understanding of the representation of concepts using
technologies; pedagogical techniques that use technologies in
constructive ways to teach content; knowledge of what makes
concepts difficult or easy to learn and how technology can help
students’ prior knowledge and theories of epistemology; and
knowledge of how technologies can be used to build on existing
knowledge to develop new epistemologies or strengthen old ones.
35
TRIPLE E FRAMEWORK MODEL
DR. LIZ KOLB, 2011
36
• The triple E is a practical framework that measure the degree to which
the technology in a lesson is helping students meet the learning goals
stop. The framework is based on three components
1. Engagement in learning goals
Students participate in active social learning activities focused on
learning goals
2. Enhancement of learning goals
Students learn through technology and learn in a new way
3. Extension of learning goals
Students experience a natural connection between school and every day
life through technology use. 37
TRIPLE E
• A framework for personal and organizational development. The execution of this model is
based on:
1.Want to Have to Need to
2.The triple model is used to purposefully change who you are, where you are going, and how
you get there-Bjom Karlsson.
3.It is based on three pillars:
• Essence
• Evolution
• Execution
38
PILLARS OF TRIPLE E
• Essence is about the three core elements we consist of. Survival strategy,
Higher Purpose, and Legacy.
• Evolution is about the three elements of change. Continuous Incremental
Improvement, Error Correction, and Survival of the Fittest.
• Execution is about the three underlying drivers that invoke action. Want to,
Have to, Need to.
39
Triple E framework is a five step process:
1.Define learning goals
2.Select an appropriate technology tool
3.Engage students with the tools by having them be active and social
learners
4.Connect what students are learning with real world tasks and contexts.
5.Technology tools are used in class in way to connect with real work
tasks and contexts.
40
REFERENCES:
Babiker, M. E. A. (2015a). For effective use of multimedia in education, teachers
must develop their own educational multimedia applications. Turkish Online
Journal of Educational Technology –
TOJET, 14(4), 62-68. Retrieved From
https://lopes.idm.oclc.org/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com.lop
es.idm.oclc.org/login.aspx?direct=true&db=eric&AN=EJ1077625&site=eds-
live&scope=site
Common Sense Education. (2016, July 12). What is the SAMR Model? [Video File].
Retrieved from https://youtu.be/9b5yvgKQdqE
Common Sense Education. (2016, July 12). What is the TPACK Model? [Video File].
Retrieved from https://youtu.be/yMQiHJsePOM
41
REFERENCES
Harris, Jo. (2014, February 21). A Brief Overview of 4 Learning Theories [Video File]. Retrieved from
https://youtu.be/ACowHxGEAUg
Himmelsbach, V. (2017). Education technology. Retrieved from https://tophat.com/blog/6-pros-cons-
technology-classroom/
Kolb, L. (2017). Learning first, technology second. International Society for Technology in Education:
Portland, OR.
Kolb, L. ( 2017, April 19). Triple E Framework Introduction [Video File]. Retrieved from
https://youtu.be/ySAhSuSQItE
Dr. Ruben Puentedura, educational consultant
Video: What is SAMR?https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=us0w823KY0g
Rias, R. M., & Zaman, H. B. (2011). Designing multimedia learning application with learning theories: A
case study on a computer science subject with 2-D and 3-D animated versions. Asia-Pacific Forum On
Science Learning & Teaching, 12(2), 1-32. Retrieved from
https://lopes.idm.oclc.org/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&
db=ehh&AN=73182463&site=eds-live&scope=site
Triple E Framework. (n.d.). Triple E framework. Retrieved from http://www.tripleeframework.com/about.html
42

More Related Content

Similar to Integrating Technology Models.pptx

Kopcha article week 9
Kopcha article week 9Kopcha article week 9
Kopcha article week 9
SFiocco
 
Introduction-to-technology-for-teaching-and-learning-kissie.pptx
Introduction-to-technology-for-teaching-and-learning-kissie.pptxIntroduction-to-technology-for-teaching-and-learning-kissie.pptx
Introduction-to-technology-for-teaching-and-learning-kissie.pptx
Andrew_Braza
 

Similar to Integrating Technology Models.pptx (20)

EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY
EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGYEDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY
EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY
 
Edci 351-full-course-manual-2015-1
Edci 351-full-course-manual-2015-1Edci 351-full-course-manual-2015-1
Edci 351-full-course-manual-2015-1
 
Kopcha article week 9
Kopcha article week 9Kopcha article week 9
Kopcha article week 9
 
Document
DocumentDocument
Document
 
ITLA Presentation at AACTE 2013
ITLA Presentation at AACTE 2013ITLA Presentation at AACTE 2013
ITLA Presentation at AACTE 2013
 
Strategically Integrating Technology into your Instruction (2014)
Strategically Integrating Technology into your Instruction (2014)Strategically Integrating Technology into your Instruction (2014)
Strategically Integrating Technology into your Instruction (2014)
 
11.docx
11.docx11.docx
11.docx
 
Teaching & Learning Frameworks for Integrating Technology in the Curriculum
Teaching & Learning Frameworks for Integrating Technology in the CurriculumTeaching & Learning Frameworks for Integrating Technology in the Curriculum
Teaching & Learning Frameworks for Integrating Technology in the Curriculum
 
beepresentation-130324201525-phpapp02.pdf
beepresentation-130324201525-phpapp02.pdfbeepresentation-130324201525-phpapp02.pdf
beepresentation-130324201525-phpapp02.pdf
 
Concepts about Educational Technology
Concepts about Educational TechnologyConcepts about Educational Technology
Concepts about Educational Technology
 
Mike
MikeMike
Mike
 
Ed tech 2. Evaluating Technology
Ed tech 2. Evaluating TechnologyEd tech 2. Evaluating Technology
Ed tech 2. Evaluating Technology
 
Principles of Effective Technology Integration
Principles of Effective Technology IntegrationPrinciples of Effective Technology Integration
Principles of Effective Technology Integration
 
University teachers' experiences of, and impact on academic practice, of a co...
University teachers' experiences of, and impact on academic practice, of a co...University teachers' experiences of, and impact on academic practice, of a co...
University teachers' experiences of, and impact on academic practice, of a co...
 
Balancing pedagogy &-technology
Balancing pedagogy &-technologyBalancing pedagogy &-technology
Balancing pedagogy &-technology
 
Module 4: Assessment of D.E Needs
Module 4: Assessment of D.E NeedsModule 4: Assessment of D.E Needs
Module 4: Assessment of D.E Needs
 
Introduction-to-technology-for-teaching-and-learning-kissie.pptx
Introduction-to-technology-for-teaching-and-learning-kissie.pptxIntroduction-to-technology-for-teaching-and-learning-kissie.pptx
Introduction-to-technology-for-teaching-and-learning-kissie.pptx
 
Bed science
Bed scienceBed science
Bed science
 
Long and winding road
Long and winding roadLong and winding road
Long and winding road
 
Hiramis Marife M.
Hiramis Marife M.Hiramis Marife M.
Hiramis Marife M.
 

More from ShaistaRiaz4

Case Study(Analysis of Algorithm.pdf
Case Study(Analysis of Algorithm.pdfCase Study(Analysis of Algorithm.pdf
Case Study(Analysis of Algorithm.pdf
ShaistaRiaz4
 
oppositional-defiant-disorder495.pptx
oppositional-defiant-disorder495.pptxoppositional-defiant-disorder495.pptx
oppositional-defiant-disorder495.pptx
ShaistaRiaz4
 
Summary and Evaluation of the Book.pptx
Summary and Evaluation of the Book.pptxSummary and Evaluation of the Book.pptx
Summary and Evaluation of the Book.pptx
ShaistaRiaz4
 
MH&PSS for L&NFBED 7-8 April 2020.ppt
MH&PSS for L&NFBED 7-8 April 2020.pptMH&PSS for L&NFBED 7-8 April 2020.ppt
MH&PSS for L&NFBED 7-8 April 2020.ppt
ShaistaRiaz4
 

More from ShaistaRiaz4 (20)

Lecture3(b).pdf
Lecture3(b).pdfLecture3(b).pdf
Lecture3(b).pdf
 
Algorithms Analysis.pdf
Algorithms Analysis.pdfAlgorithms Analysis.pdf
Algorithms Analysis.pdf
 
Case Study(Analysis of Algorithm.pdf
Case Study(Analysis of Algorithm.pdfCase Study(Analysis of Algorithm.pdf
Case Study(Analysis of Algorithm.pdf
 
02_Computer-Evolution(1).ppt
02_Computer-Evolution(1).ppt02_Computer-Evolution(1).ppt
02_Computer-Evolution(1).ppt
 
01_Introduction.ppt
01_Introduction.ppt01_Introduction.ppt
01_Introduction.ppt
 
Algo_Lecture01.pptx
Algo_Lecture01.pptxAlgo_Lecture01.pptx
Algo_Lecture01.pptx
 
02_Computer-Evolution(1).ppt
02_Computer-Evolution(1).ppt02_Computer-Evolution(1).ppt
02_Computer-Evolution(1).ppt
 
01_Introduction.ppt
01_Introduction.ppt01_Introduction.ppt
01_Introduction.ppt
 
Bisma Zahid (1)-1.pdf
Bisma Zahid (1)-1.pdfBisma Zahid (1)-1.pdf
Bisma Zahid (1)-1.pdf
 
MNS Lecture 1.pptx
MNS Lecture 1.pptxMNS Lecture 1.pptx
MNS Lecture 1.pptx
 
Plan (2).pptx
Plan (2).pptxPlan (2).pptx
Plan (2).pptx
 
Lecture+9+-+Dynamic+Programming+I.pdf
Lecture+9+-+Dynamic+Programming+I.pdfLecture+9+-+Dynamic+Programming+I.pdf
Lecture+9+-+Dynamic+Programming+I.pdf
 
Lecture 3(a) Asymptotic-analysis.pdf
Lecture 3(a) Asymptotic-analysis.pdfLecture 3(a) Asymptotic-analysis.pdf
Lecture 3(a) Asymptotic-analysis.pdf
 
oppositional-defiant-disorder495.pptx
oppositional-defiant-disorder495.pptxoppositional-defiant-disorder495.pptx
oppositional-defiant-disorder495.pptx
 
Development Education.pptx
Development Education.pptxDevelopment Education.pptx
Development Education.pptx
 
WISC-IV Introduction Handout.ppt
WISC-IV Introduction Handout.pptWISC-IV Introduction Handout.ppt
WISC-IV Introduction Handout.ppt
 
Summary and Evaluation of the Book.pptx
Summary and Evaluation of the Book.pptxSummary and Evaluation of the Book.pptx
Summary and Evaluation of the Book.pptx
 
MH&PSS for L&NFBED 7-8 April 2020.ppt
MH&PSS for L&NFBED 7-8 April 2020.pptMH&PSS for L&NFBED 7-8 April 2020.ppt
MH&PSS for L&NFBED 7-8 April 2020.ppt
 
Intro_to_Literature_2012-2013-1.ppt
Intro_to_Literature_2012-2013-1.pptIntro_to_Literature_2012-2013-1.ppt
Intro_to_Literature_2012-2013-1.ppt
 
Coping strategies-Farzana Razi.ppt
Coping strategies-Farzana Razi.pptCoping strategies-Farzana Razi.ppt
Coping strategies-Farzana Razi.ppt
 

Recently uploaded

1029 - Danh muc Sach Giao Khoa 10 . pdf
1029 -  Danh muc Sach Giao Khoa 10 . pdf1029 -  Danh muc Sach Giao Khoa 10 . pdf
1029 - Danh muc Sach Giao Khoa 10 . pdf
QucHHunhnh
 
Activity 01 - Artificial Culture (1).pdf
Activity 01 - Artificial Culture (1).pdfActivity 01 - Artificial Culture (1).pdf
Activity 01 - Artificial Culture (1).pdf
ciinovamais
 

Recently uploaded (20)

Basic Civil Engineering first year Notes- Chapter 4 Building.pptx
Basic Civil Engineering first year Notes- Chapter 4 Building.pptxBasic Civil Engineering first year Notes- Chapter 4 Building.pptx
Basic Civil Engineering first year Notes- Chapter 4 Building.pptx
 
This PowerPoint helps students to consider the concept of infinity.
This PowerPoint helps students to consider the concept of infinity.This PowerPoint helps students to consider the concept of infinity.
This PowerPoint helps students to consider the concept of infinity.
 
Dyslexia AI Workshop for Slideshare.pptx
Dyslexia AI Workshop for Slideshare.pptxDyslexia AI Workshop for Slideshare.pptx
Dyslexia AI Workshop for Slideshare.pptx
 
PROCESS RECORDING FORMAT.docx
PROCESS      RECORDING        FORMAT.docxPROCESS      RECORDING        FORMAT.docx
PROCESS RECORDING FORMAT.docx
 
Key note speaker Neum_Admir Softic_ENG.pdf
Key note speaker Neum_Admir Softic_ENG.pdfKey note speaker Neum_Admir Softic_ENG.pdf
Key note speaker Neum_Admir Softic_ENG.pdf
 
SKILL OF INTRODUCING THE LESSON MICRO SKILLS.pptx
SKILL OF INTRODUCING THE LESSON MICRO SKILLS.pptxSKILL OF INTRODUCING THE LESSON MICRO SKILLS.pptx
SKILL OF INTRODUCING THE LESSON MICRO SKILLS.pptx
 
Magic bus Group work1and 2 (Team 3).pptx
Magic bus Group work1and 2 (Team 3).pptxMagic bus Group work1and 2 (Team 3).pptx
Magic bus Group work1and 2 (Team 3).pptx
 
Grant Readiness 101 TechSoup and Remy Consulting
Grant Readiness 101 TechSoup and Remy ConsultingGrant Readiness 101 TechSoup and Remy Consulting
Grant Readiness 101 TechSoup and Remy Consulting
 
Food safety_Challenges food safety laboratories_.pdf
Food safety_Challenges food safety laboratories_.pdfFood safety_Challenges food safety laboratories_.pdf
Food safety_Challenges food safety laboratories_.pdf
 
1029 - Danh muc Sach Giao Khoa 10 . pdf
1029 -  Danh muc Sach Giao Khoa 10 . pdf1029 -  Danh muc Sach Giao Khoa 10 . pdf
1029 - Danh muc Sach Giao Khoa 10 . pdf
 
Micro-Scholarship, What it is, How can it help me.pdf
Micro-Scholarship, What it is, How can it help me.pdfMicro-Scholarship, What it is, How can it help me.pdf
Micro-Scholarship, What it is, How can it help me.pdf
 
Explore beautiful and ugly buildings. Mathematics helps us create beautiful d...
Explore beautiful and ugly buildings. Mathematics helps us create beautiful d...Explore beautiful and ugly buildings. Mathematics helps us create beautiful d...
Explore beautiful and ugly buildings. Mathematics helps us create beautiful d...
 
SOC 101 Demonstration of Learning Presentation
SOC 101 Demonstration of Learning PresentationSOC 101 Demonstration of Learning Presentation
SOC 101 Demonstration of Learning Presentation
 
TỔNG ÔN TẬP THI VÀO LỚP 10 MÔN TIẾNG ANH NĂM HỌC 2023 - 2024 CÓ ĐÁP ÁN (NGỮ Â...
TỔNG ÔN TẬP THI VÀO LỚP 10 MÔN TIẾNG ANH NĂM HỌC 2023 - 2024 CÓ ĐÁP ÁN (NGỮ Â...TỔNG ÔN TẬP THI VÀO LỚP 10 MÔN TIẾNG ANH NĂM HỌC 2023 - 2024 CÓ ĐÁP ÁN (NGỮ Â...
TỔNG ÔN TẬP THI VÀO LỚP 10 MÔN TIẾNG ANH NĂM HỌC 2023 - 2024 CÓ ĐÁP ÁN (NGỮ Â...
 
Activity 01 - Artificial Culture (1).pdf
Activity 01 - Artificial Culture (1).pdfActivity 01 - Artificial Culture (1).pdf
Activity 01 - Artificial Culture (1).pdf
 
Python Notes for mca i year students osmania university.docx
Python Notes for mca i year students osmania university.docxPython Notes for mca i year students osmania university.docx
Python Notes for mca i year students osmania university.docx
 
2024-NATIONAL-LEARNING-CAMP-AND-OTHER.pptx
2024-NATIONAL-LEARNING-CAMP-AND-OTHER.pptx2024-NATIONAL-LEARNING-CAMP-AND-OTHER.pptx
2024-NATIONAL-LEARNING-CAMP-AND-OTHER.pptx
 
microwave assisted reaction. General introduction
microwave assisted reaction. General introductionmicrowave assisted reaction. General introduction
microwave assisted reaction. General introduction
 
Introduction to Nonprofit Accounting: The Basics
Introduction to Nonprofit Accounting: The BasicsIntroduction to Nonprofit Accounting: The Basics
Introduction to Nonprofit Accounting: The Basics
 
Mehran University Newsletter Vol-X, Issue-I, 2024
Mehran University Newsletter Vol-X, Issue-I, 2024Mehran University Newsletter Vol-X, Issue-I, 2024
Mehran University Newsletter Vol-X, Issue-I, 2024
 

Integrating Technology Models.pptx

  • 1. TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION MODELS/FRAMEWORK PRESENTED TO: DR. SAMINA MALIK PRESENTED BY: TAHIRA RAFIQ REG. NO. : 161-FSS/PHDEDU/F19 DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION INTERNATIONAL ISLAMIC UNIVERSITY, ISLAMABAD 1
  • 3. TECHNOLOGY IN THE CLASSROOM PROS  Enables you to experiment more in pedagogy and get instant feedback.  Helps ensure full participation  Countless resources for enhancing education and making learning more fun and effective  Can automate a lot of your tedious tasks  Students have instant access to fresh information that can supplement their learning experience  We live in a digital world,and technology is a life skill CONS Technology in the classroom:  Can be a distraction  Can disconnect students from social interactions  Can foster cheating in class and on assignments  Students don’t have equal access to technological resources.  The quality of research and sources they find may not be top-notch  Lesson planning might become more labor-intensive with technology 3
  • 4. ADVANTAGES OF TECHNOLOGY NOW Summative & formative assessments automatically graded Virtual reality presentations Adaptive technology so that all students can demonstrate their learning Student histories accessible THEN Grading assessments by hand Slide show presentations Students struggle with learning Binders of student records 4
  • 6. LEARNING THEORIES  Behavioral Theory: The learning processes should be developed in order from least difficult to most difficult while integrating the positive principles of behaviorism (Rias, & Zaman,2011).  Cognitive Theory: The learning subject and the presentation order should be structured with the objective at the beginning and a sequenced learning process (Rias, & Zaman,2011).  Constructivist Theory: The multimedia should be developed by combining new information with existing knowledge (Rias, & Zaman,2011).  Cognitive-Constructivist Approach: Interactivity should be embedded in the multimedia technology. The approach is also known as student- centered learning (Rias, & Zaman,2011). 6
  • 7. TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION MODELS • SAMR Model • TIP Model • TPACK Model • Triple E Framework Model 7
  • 8. THE SUBSTITUTION, AUGMENTATION, MODIFICATION, AND REDEFINITION (SAMR) MODEL DR. RUBIN PUENTEDURA, 2012 8
  • 9. 9
  • 10. SAMR MODEL – EXPLAINED • Substitution • Augmentation • Modification • Redefinition 10
  • 11. TIP (Technology Integration Planning) Model Thompson & Mishra, 2007 The TIP model gives teachers a general approach to addressing challenges involved in integrating technology into teaching. The TIP model serves as a helpful guide on procedures and to address issues for new teachers and those just beginning to integrate technology into their classroom. The TIP has five phases. Determining relative advantage, Decide on objectives and assessments, Design integration strategies, Prepare the instructional environment, and Evaluate and revise integration strategies 11
  • 12. WHAT IS THE TIP MODEL? • Model designed for teachers, especially those new to technology. • Helps teachers to plan for effective classroom uses of technology. • Composed of five distinct phases. 12
  • 13. FIVE PHASES • Phase 1: Relative advantage • Phase 2: Objectives and assessments • Phase 3: Integration strategies • Phase 4: Instructional environment • Phase 5: Evaluation and revision Each phase is accompanied by a checklist of questions to insure effective uses. 13
  • 14. PHASE ONE: RELATIVE ADVANTAGE • Figuring out instructional problems • Deciding if a technology-based solution is best • Ask questions as to the impact of a technology-based solution. 14
  • 15. PHASE ONE CHECKLIST: • Do I have topics, curriculum objectives, or insights I have difficulty teaching? • Are any of the above a good match for a technology-based solution? • What is the relative advantage of the technology-based solution? • Is the relative advantage sufficient to justify the effort and expense of using these solutions? 15
  • 16. PHASE TWO: OBJECTIVES AND ASSESSMENTS • State desired outcomes in terms of improving students' • Achievement • Attitude • Performance • Match appropriate assessment strategies to each outcome. 16
  • 17. PHASE TWO CHECKLIST: • What outcomes do I expect of students after the instruction to show me they have learned? • What is the best way for me to assess students' learning (written tests, products)? • Do the assessment instruments (tests, rubrics) exist or do I have to develop them? 17
  • 18. PHASE THREE: INTEGRATION STRATEGIES •Decide on activities that incorporate technology resources. •Use websites to help plan lessons and find resources. 18
  • 19. PHASE THREE CHECKLIST: • Will the instruction be single subject or interdisciplinary? • Will students work as individuals, pairs, small or large groups, whole class, a combination? • Should activities be directed, constructivist, or a combination of these? • What strategies should I use to encourage female and minority student involvement? • What sequence of activities should I teach? • Will students have enough time to learn the technologies before I begin grading? • Do I have demonstrations of equipment and the software skills student will need? 19
  • 20. PHASE FOUR: INSTRUCTIONAL ENVIRONMENT •Deciding on resources and conditions to support the activities. •Put the resources and conditions into place for the best support. •Requires the most planning and checking. 20
  • 21. PHASE FOUR CHECKLIST: •How many computers and copies of software do I need to carry out the activities? •How many computers and copies of software are available? •Over what time period and for how long will technology resources be needed? •Do I need to schedule time in a lab or media center? 21
  • 22. PHASE FOUR CHECKLIST CONTD. • Have I provided for students' privacy and safety? • Have I made all necessary access provisions for students with physical disabilities? • Am I familiar with troubleshooting procedures specific to the hardware or software? • Have I built in time to test-run an equipment setup before the students arrive? • Have I built in time to back up important files? Have I trained students to back up theirs? 22
  • 23. PHASE FIVE: EVALUATION AND REVISION •Collect information on student achievement. •Determine if the activities were successful in meeting outcomes. •Determine what can be improved for next time. 23
  • 24. PHASE FIVE CHECKLIST: • Were objectives achieved? What evidence do I have to indicate success? • Have I solicited feedback from students about how to improve activities? • Do data and comments indicate changes are needed to improve outcomes? • Are there other ways to arrange technology resources or activities to improve results? 24
  • 25. THE TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL CONTENT KNOWLEDGE (TPACK) MODEL LEE SHULMAN 25
  • 26. T = TECHNOLOGICAL KNOWLEDGE / TECHNOLOGY CONTENT KNOWLEDGE =KNOWLEDGE ABOUT USING TECHNOLOGY P= PEDAGOGICAL KNOWLEDGE / PEDAGOGICAL CONTENT KNOWLEDGE = KNOWLEDGE ABOUT THE SCIENCE, THEORY AND ART OF TEACHING AND C = CONTENT KNOWLEDGE = CORE SUBJECTS, SKILLS AND STRATEGIES K = KNOWLEDGE 26
  • 27. • Technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) is a framework to understand and describe the kinds of knowledge needed by a teacher for effective pedagogical practice in a technology enhanced learning environment. • In this model there are seven components of teacher knowledge 1.Content 2.Pedagogy 3.PCK (Pedagogical Content Knowledge) 4.TPK (Technological Pedagogical Knowledge) 5.TPACK 27
  • 28. CONTENT KNOWLEDGE (CK) •Content knowledge (CK) is teachers’ knowledge about the subject matter to be learned or taught. Knowledge of content is of critical importance for teachers. It may also include knowledge of concepts, theories, conceptual frameworks as well as knowledge about accepted ways of developing knowledge. 28
  • 29. PEDAGOGICAL KNOWLEDGE (PK) • Pedagogical knowledge (PK) is teachers’ deep knowledge about the processes and practices or methods of teaching and learning. This generic form of knowledge about how students learn, general classroom management skills, lesson planning, and student assessment. 29
  • 30. CONTENT KNOWLEDGE (PCK) • Pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) is knowledge about how to combine pedagogy and content effectively. This is knowledge about how to make a subject understandable to learners' covers the core business of teaching, learning, curriculum, assessment and reporting, such as the conditions that promote learning and the links among curriculum, assessment, and pedagogy. 30
  • 31. TECHNOLOGY KNOWLEDGE (TK) • Technology knowledge (TK) refers to an understanding of the way that technologies are used in a specific content domain. TK does however go beyond digital literacy to having knowledge of how to change the purpose of existing technologies (e.g. wikis) so that they can be used in a technology enhanced classroom. 31
  • 32. TECHNOLOGICAL CONTENT KNOWLEDGE (TCK) • Technological Content Knowledge refers to knowledge about how technology may be used to provide new ways of teaching content. For example, Viewing the heart as a pump, or the brain as an information processing machine are just some of the ways in which technologies have provided new perspectives for understanding phenomena. 32
  • 33. TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL KNOWLEDGE (TPK) • Technological Pedagogical Knowledge is an understanding of how teaching and learning can change when particular technologies are used in particular ways. It refers to the affordances and constraints of technology as an enabler of different teaching approaches. For example online collaboration tools may facilitate social learning for geographically separated. 33
  • 34. TECHNOLOGY, PEDAGOGY, AND CONTENT KNOWLEDGE • TPACK is an emergent form of knowledge that goes beyond all three “core” components (content, pedagogy, and technology). Technological pedagogical content knowledge refers to the knowledge and understanding of the interplay between CK, PK and TK when using technology for teaching and learning. It includes an understanding of the complexity of relationships between students, teachers, content, practices and technologies. 34
  • 35. CONT.. • TPACK is the basis of effective teaching with technology, requiring an understanding of the representation of concepts using technologies; pedagogical techniques that use technologies in constructive ways to teach content; knowledge of what makes concepts difficult or easy to learn and how technology can help students’ prior knowledge and theories of epistemology; and knowledge of how technologies can be used to build on existing knowledge to develop new epistemologies or strengthen old ones. 35
  • 36. TRIPLE E FRAMEWORK MODEL DR. LIZ KOLB, 2011 36
  • 37. • The triple E is a practical framework that measure the degree to which the technology in a lesson is helping students meet the learning goals stop. The framework is based on three components 1. Engagement in learning goals Students participate in active social learning activities focused on learning goals 2. Enhancement of learning goals Students learn through technology and learn in a new way 3. Extension of learning goals Students experience a natural connection between school and every day life through technology use. 37
  • 38. TRIPLE E • A framework for personal and organizational development. The execution of this model is based on: 1.Want to Have to Need to 2.The triple model is used to purposefully change who you are, where you are going, and how you get there-Bjom Karlsson. 3.It is based on three pillars: • Essence • Evolution • Execution 38
  • 39. PILLARS OF TRIPLE E • Essence is about the three core elements we consist of. Survival strategy, Higher Purpose, and Legacy. • Evolution is about the three elements of change. Continuous Incremental Improvement, Error Correction, and Survival of the Fittest. • Execution is about the three underlying drivers that invoke action. Want to, Have to, Need to. 39
  • 40. Triple E framework is a five step process: 1.Define learning goals 2.Select an appropriate technology tool 3.Engage students with the tools by having them be active and social learners 4.Connect what students are learning with real world tasks and contexts. 5.Technology tools are used in class in way to connect with real work tasks and contexts. 40
  • 41. REFERENCES: Babiker, M. E. A. (2015a). For effective use of multimedia in education, teachers must develop their own educational multimedia applications. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology – TOJET, 14(4), 62-68. Retrieved From https://lopes.idm.oclc.org/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com.lop es.idm.oclc.org/login.aspx?direct=true&db=eric&AN=EJ1077625&site=eds- live&scope=site Common Sense Education. (2016, July 12). What is the SAMR Model? [Video File]. Retrieved from https://youtu.be/9b5yvgKQdqE Common Sense Education. (2016, July 12). What is the TPACK Model? [Video File]. Retrieved from https://youtu.be/yMQiHJsePOM 41
  • 42. REFERENCES Harris, Jo. (2014, February 21). A Brief Overview of 4 Learning Theories [Video File]. Retrieved from https://youtu.be/ACowHxGEAUg Himmelsbach, V. (2017). Education technology. Retrieved from https://tophat.com/blog/6-pros-cons- technology-classroom/ Kolb, L. (2017). Learning first, technology second. International Society for Technology in Education: Portland, OR. Kolb, L. ( 2017, April 19). Triple E Framework Introduction [Video File]. Retrieved from https://youtu.be/ySAhSuSQItE Dr. Ruben Puentedura, educational consultant Video: What is SAMR?https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=us0w823KY0g Rias, R. M., & Zaman, H. B. (2011). Designing multimedia learning application with learning theories: A case study on a computer science subject with 2-D and 3-D animated versions. Asia-Pacific Forum On Science Learning & Teaching, 12(2), 1-32. Retrieved from https://lopes.idm.oclc.org/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true& db=ehh&AN=73182463&site=eds-live&scope=site Triple E Framework. (n.d.). Triple E framework. Retrieved from http://www.tripleeframework.com/about.html 42