Instructional technology can be leveraged in a number of ways in any class format, ranging from general classroom administration activities to learner-focused activities design to increase engagement. In thinking about when and how to implement instructional technology, we find the following models to be useful:
The SAMR model (Puentedura, 2014) was proposed to help educators explore purposes for adopting instructional technology along with potential impact:
- Two levels of adoption may
Substitution – Tech. is a substitute, with no functional change (e.g., writing on computer vs. writing on paper).
Augmentation – Tech. is a substitute, with functional enhancement (e.g., embedded spell check and thesaurus options while writing).
- Two levels of adoption may
Modification – Tech. allows for task redesign (e.g., collaborative features for peer editing/sharing while writing).
Redefinition – Tech. allows for new tasks, previously inconceivable (e.g., broad collaboration/sharing such as global classroom writing project).
TPACK (Mishra & Koehler, 2006) is often represented by a Venn diagram illustrating the multiple ways
content knowledge, pedagogy, and
technology can intersect. Mishra and Koehler describe the “sweet spot” of these intersections as TPACK, where educators have mastery of the affordances and constraints of technology, various teaching methods, and their content disciplines, understanding and applying the synergies between the models and tools that work well to maximize learning within those contexts.
Bloom’s Revised Taxonomy
Bloom’s Revised Taxonomy (Anderson et al., 2001) is often represented in a triangular hierarchy in which higher order thinking skills are nearer the top, suggesting that as learners proceed in learning, they should move from basic recall to original applications of knowledge. In the digital version of this taxonomy, lower order concepts like remembering are represented through tasks such as bookmarking or copying, while higher order concepts like creation are represented through tasks such as blogging or multimedia creation. Here are the Bloom’s levels:
Create – Produce new, original work.
Evaluate – Justify a stance/decision.
Analyze – Draw connections amongst ideas.
Apply – Use the information in new situations.
Understand – Explain ideas or concepts.
Remember – Recall facts and basic concepts.
There are a variety of instructional technologies already implemented and supported by Central Michigan University that may suit your needs. Some examples include:
Blackboard – A learning management system available for use with all courses.
Chipcast/Panopto – A user-friendly video recording, editing, and hosting platform available for use by educators and learners.
Office 365 – A Microsoft cloud suite of applications allowing for creation and storage of typical office suite creations such as documents, spreadsheets, presentations, etc. with the capacity for online sharing and collaborative editing of these items.
Respondus Lockdown Browser/Monitor - Blackboard features that can lock a learner's browser down and/or video/audio record a learner during an online test.
SafeAssign – A Blackboard feature that can compare a learner's submitted work to that in an institutional repository and other databases to flag originality of work.
TopHat – A class response system tool that is available for a small license fee to educators and learners. Though its primary function is for formative assessment polling or quizzing in real-time with learners, it does offer other features such as access to open educational resources.
WebEx – A synchronous collaboration platform with recording and options for hosting live, online sessions. Educators can configure this in a way where they can facilitate sessions or where they can create sessions that learners can facilitate for group work.
In addition to our events indicated above, here are some useful resources for learning more about instructional technology:
To see what events we may be offering related to instructional technologies, check out our CIS Events Page.
- Schedule a time with CIS staff to
discuss instructional technology solutions for your course.
Anderson, L. W. and Krathwohl, D. R., et al. (Eds.) (2001)
A Taxonomy for Learning, Teaching, and Assessing: A Revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. Allyn & Bacon. Boston, MA (Pearson Education Group)
Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006)
. Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge.
Teachers College Record
, 108(6), 1017-1054. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9620.2006.00684.x.