THE SAMR MODEL

Examples of learning technologies through the lense of the SAMR framework.

Dr. Ruben Puentedura has developed what he calls the SAMR model, which provides a
framework to show the impact of technology on teaching and learning.  The model
moves through various stages, beginning at a basic level of learning in the substitution
phase through to a level where learning is transformational at the redefinition level.

The SAMR model is powerful because it enables us to think about how learning can be
extended through the use of technology.  I have summarised the four stages of the
SAMR model here:

SUBSTITUTION – Technology acts as a direct tool substitute, with no functional change.

For example, students may type up notes on a word processor instead of writing by hand
in an exercise book.

AUGMENTATION –  Technology still acts as a direct tool substitute, but with functional
improvements.  Taking the example of typing on a word processor, augmentation means
that the learning process can become more efficient and engaging.  Images can be added,
text can be hyperlinked and changes to the text itself can be made quickly.

These first two stages of the SAMR model represent enhancements of existing ways of
working.  Digital technology is not necessary in order to carry out the learning task.  The
technology simply  provides a digital medium for learning to take place, which may enhance
learning.

MODIFICATION – By this stage technology not only enhances the learning activity, it
also significanly transforms it.  An example might be students setting up a blog in which
they open up their work to a worldwide audience.  The blog means that students are
much more accountable for the work they present, so will tend to spend more time
refining their written work.  In this way, both student learning and literacy improve.

REDEFINITION – This level requires the teacher to think about learning activities that
were previously inconceivable without the use of technology.  This could be for instance,
a Google Hangout session that takes place between students from different countries in
order for students to swap information about their home countries in real-time.
Likewise, the use of Google Docs for students in different parts of the world to
collaborate on a shared assignment facilitates learning opportunities that would be
impossible without such technology.

The modification and redefinition levels represent transformational stages in terms of student
learning, as the technology is actively helping to transform the way in which learning can
occur.  
Concluding thoughts…

The SAMR model is essentially a planning tool that helps to design better learning
activities for students.  The framework provides pedagogical insight into how technology
can and should be used in the classroom.  I would make the following recommendations
in light of the model:

1. Always consider whether or not the technology improves the learning process.  I
have already written about what makes technology ‘appropriate‘ in a learning
context.  If the learning process is enhanced through the use of technology, then
it’s appropriate to use – if not, more traditional (analogue) methods can work just
as well (if not better).

2. Collaboration is extremely important, particularly if you’re looking at learning

from a social constructivist perspective.  Consider how you can use technology to
facilitate collaboration.

3. Ensure that you use technology to expose students to the outside world.  This not
only helps to improve their cultural understanding and international-mindedness,
it can be great for building key literacy skills.

Upcoming Conferences
Top Conferences
Top Journals
Top Universities
How to Use SAMR Model in Designing
Instruction (An EdTech Integration
Guide)

Share

by Imed Bouchrika, Phd

Chief Data Scientist & Head of Content

A 2019 survey that focused on the 21st-century classroom showed that 75% of
educators see educational technology (EdTech) as an integral and useful part of
their pedagogical toolkits (Vega and Robb, 2019). Schools cannot always provide in-
person education as COVID-19 laid bare before the world at its onset in early 2020.
While the pandemic brought enormous challenges to teachers as classes migrated
online, it also presented an opportunity to improve their craft in terms of
integrating technologies, such as learning management systems (LMS) in
education. One of the tools used by educators is the SAMR model, a practical guide
for EdTech integration that can significantly improve teaching and learning.

It has been established that interactive EdTech tools help drive student

engagement. As a planning and reflection tool, the SAMR model encourages
educators to think of ways to promote student engagement. The various stages of
the SAMR model allow each lesson to pass through a spectrum where learning and
teaching are transformed while enhancing the teacher’s knowledge and skills
(Hamilton, Rosenberg,& Akcaoglu, 2016).

This article will discuss the SAMR model as an EdTech integration tool. The utility of
the SAMR model in EdTech, the framework’s benefits and drawbacks, as well as
SAMR model examples are included in the discussion.

SAMR Model: A Practical Guide for EdTech Integration Table of Contents

1. What is the SAMR model?

2. Why use the SAMR model for EdTech integration?
3. How to use SAMR in Designing Instruction
4. SAMR Model Benefits and Drawbacks

What is the SAMR model?

As defined by its proponent Dr. Reuben Puentedura (2014), the SAMR model is a
tool that helps teachers think about how and why they use technology in teaching,
and how technology can help them evolve pedagogically. The SAMR model stands
for substitution (S), augmentation (A), modification (M), and redefinition (R). The
framework presents four ways in which technology can be integrated into teaching.

With substitution, technology acts as a simple substitute to classroom tools

delivering no functional change. With augmentation, technology is used to improve
learning activities. With modification, the use of technology brings significant
redesign to instruction, while with redefinition, the use of technology completely
alters the traditional way of instruction.
Substitution and augmentation are grouped as ‘enhancement’ tools, while
modification and redefinition are considered as ‘transformation’ tools. Puentedura’s
framework has substitution at the lowest level and redefinition at the highest level.
For educators that are more familiar with Bloom’s Taxonomy, the substitution and
augmentation methods are typically equated with the first three levels of Bloom’s
framework (knowledge, comprehension, and application), while modification and
redefinition are perceived as on the same level as the upper three of Bloom’s
learning stages (analysis, synthesis, and evaluation).

With the SAMR model, Puentedura suggests that as teachers reflect on integrating
technology with the learning experience, they often have questions on how they
can effectively use technology. Again, Puentedura pictures these questions in levels
like that of the SAMR framework.

The question at each level is typically presented as follows:

Substitution: “What will I gain by replacing the task with technology?”
Augmentation: “Does the technology add new features that improve the task?”
Modification: “Does the task significantly change with the use of technology?”
Redefinition: “Does the technology allow for the creation of a new task previously
inconceivable?”

In asking these questions, the educator is able to determine how technology can
enhance instructional design to increase student engagement in the teaching and
learning process.

Why use the SAMR model for EdTech integration?

Advanced technology is continually transforming the future of education. EdTech

tools help drive student engagement and improve the dynamics between teachers
and students. EdTech also enables students to adjust their own pace of learning,
and through collaboration, students are able to reflect on learning with their peers,
which often leads to the creation of new knowledge.

Technological literacy is a required 21st-century skill (Hilton, 2016). The SAMR

model can be easily adapted and interpreted in multiple ways, helping teachers
reflect as technology is used to achieve specific outcomes. As a planning tool, it
enables teachers to design, develop, and infuse digital learning experiences that
use technology.

Using the SAMR model, however, does not guarantee effective learning. Effective
instruction depends on the instructional design. The skills of the teacher will
determine if technology is used in the most efficient way that maximizes its
potential to contribute to deeper learning. Moreover, the SAMR model cannot be
used in isolation of pedagogical theory.

58%58%54%54%25%25%25%25%13%13%Video streaming devicesProductivity and

presentation toolsTools for well-being and healthDigital creation toolsSocial
media05101520253035404550556065

Ed Tech Tools in the Classroom

U.S. Schools, 2019
Designed by
Source: Common Sense Media

How to Use SAMR in Designing Instruction

Designing instruction requires a lot of reflection. In making lesson plans, teachers

first define the specific learning outcomes, from which the design of instruction will
be based. The concept of instructional core posits that change in learning will only
occur if there are improvements in three critical, independent realms—the level of
content, the teacher’s knowledge and skill, and student engagement (City et al.,
2011). The following SAMR lesson plan examples make use of the SAMR model
template by using the guide questions as transition ladders.

Substitution
Start by asking the benefits of the technology to be adopted:

 What will my students gain by replacing the older technology with the new
technology?

Activity 1: Working in groups, students will be asked to analyze the character in a

text. The students will be given the option to do the analysis on paper, or
use StoryboardThat, an app for making storyboards.

Activity 2: Students will be asked to write an essay on climate change. Students

have the option to write the essay on paper or type it using the computer. Teachers
may also ask students to submit tasks online rather than turn in a hard copy.

These examples do not change the nature of teaching or learning. The use of
technology, however, facilitated differentiated instruction by enabling students to
perform tasks in their preferred method. The use of technology also made it
possible for students to submit their tasks online, which also provided the teacher
with a faster and more efficient way of providing timely feedback.

Augmentation
The following guide questions can be used to transition from substitution to
augmentation:
  Does this new technology add an improvement to the task process that could not
have been accomplished with the older technology at a basic level?
 How does this feature contribute to the task goals/outcomes?

Activity 1: Students will be asked to illustrate a mind map of their lesson by

capturing images that will represent their learnings. Applications such
as Skitch or Seesaw can be used for the task. Using online tools, students will be
asked to record, annotate, draw and caption anything that will represent the
student’s learning experience.

By giving the students a variety of ways to respond to a single question, the teacher
is empowering the students and, at the same time, the teacher is also able to
monitor the learning progress of each student on one platform. This method also
gives the teacher an entirely different picture of each student’s learning.

Activity 2: Students will be asked to submit exit tickets

using Mentimeter or Kahoot. The teacher will ask a parting question, and students
turn in tickets before leaving the classroom. Instead of writing their answer on a
piece of paper, students can submit their exit tickets through the app.

In the Augmentation examples mentioned, technology improved the task by

enabling the students to use different types of media to document their learning.
This enables the teacher to assess the extent of learning, while at the same time
having the ability to respond to each student and identify the particular areas that
they are having difficulty. In these examples, technology offered functional
improvement because the teacher is able to view learning in a different way
through the use of apps and tools. Technology added new features and improved
the task.
Modification
The following guide questions can be used to transition from augmentation to
modification:

 How is the original task being modified?

 Is the technology essential to the modification of the task?
 How does this modification contribute to the task goals/outcomes?

Activity 1: Using Google Workspace or Office 365, each group of students will be

asked to perform research on a particular topic during class hours. The final output
should include a research write-up, a presentation using slides, and an infographic.
The objective is to facilitate real-time collaboration within the group, while at the
same time making each member responsible for specific requirements.

This task involves significant redesign because instead of working on tasks

individually, students learn to collaborate in real-time using technology. Without
technology, the task would require more time. The technology significantly changed
the task by providing new features of creation.
Activity 2: Using Flipgrid, each group of students will be given topics for
discussion. Students will be required to share their thoughts on the topic, and
respond as well to the thoughts or ideas of their peers.

Since this app allows teachers to facilitate video discussions, facilitating this activity
can improve the discourse skills of students, while at the same time teaching them
to respond or give reactions in a polite and constructive manner. This practice also
teaches critical thinking as students reflect on the topics and think of ways on how
to respond to points raised by their peers. In the activities presented, it would be
difficult to achieve the learning objectives without the use of technology.

Redefinition
The following guide questions can be used to transition from modification to
redefinition:

 What is the new task?

 Will any portion of the original task be retained?
 How is the new task uniquely made possible by the new technology?
 How does it contribute to the task goals/outcomes?

Activity 1: Using music production apps such as Bandlab and video creation tools
like Quik, students will be asked to create a multimedia presentation or a short film
about the lesson by integrating video and music.

Activity 2: Using Skype, the class will have a virtual field trip to a museum in Egypt.
The museum curator will give the students a tour of the museum as an
enhancement of the current lesson on ancient Egypt. After the tour, the students
will be required to share insights on the topic.

Both examples are learning experiences that can only happen with the integration
of technology. Both activities are previously inconceivable in the confines of the
classroom. In using different EdTech tools, students are empowered to apply
concepts learned and create something as a result of the learning experience.

Grade Level20%20%23%23%34%34%41%41%K-23-56-89-1201020304050

Share of Teachers Assigning Homework That Use Technology

U.S. Schools, 2019
Designed by
Souce: Common Sense Media

SAMR Model Benefits and Drawbacks

In designing instruction, it is important to carefully consider the affordances and

limitations of various technologies.  The SAMR model, a practical guide for EdTech
integration, is both a planning tool and a reflection tool. It benefits teachers by
providing a framework from which they can assess how they are using technology
in teaching, and how technology can enhance instruction.

The SAMR model also benefits students because technology drives engagement. In
using technology, students are given control of their learning process while at the
same time giving them the freedom to express their understanding of particular
topics through creative channels. This empowerment also benefits the teacher
because an entirely different perspective of learning is often presented by students
that teachers might not be able to discover had it not been for the use of
technology.

On the other hand, scholars in the field of education have identified three
challenges of the SAMR model—the absence of context, rigid structure, and the
model’s focus on product over process. Context includes social economics of the
school or the community, the teacher’s technological knowledge, administrative
support, as well as other factors that have a direct effect on technology integration
in the classroom. The SAMR model is also perceived as rigid, as it does not reflect
higher levels of learning outcomes as presented by Bloom’s Taxonomy. Some
educators also observed that the SAMR model is too focused on technological
adoption.

Hamilton et al. (2016) in their work “The Substitution Augmentation Modification

Redefinition (SAMR) Model: A Critical Review and Suggestions for its Use” provided a
critical review of the SAMR model using theory and prior research. Published
in Tech Trends, the authors concluded that “the SAMR model may underemphasize
the multi-faceted and complex nature of teaching and learning with technology.
Instead, it emphasizes the types of technology teachers should use to move
themselves up the hierarchical continuum of SAMR, giving primacy to technology
rather than good teaching.”
Design Effective Instruction Through EdTech Tools

The use of technology in teaching and learning has undoubtedly delivered many
benefits, as with the case of the SAMR model. This framework helps teachers assess
the usefulness of technology in different learning contexts. As emphasized, EdTech
is used to enhance the process of instruction with the objective of promoting
engagement and deeper learning.

The use of EdTech, however, is not a one-size-fits-all solution. The concept of the
instructional core remains, and the pedagogical skills of the teacher, as
enhanced by further training on EdTech, remain the most crucial if learning is to
become effective. EdTech tools, such as the SAMR model, are part of the teacher’s
toolbox. As every technology has affordances and limitations, it is the teacher who
will decide how to use each tool to design the best learning experience.
enefits of the SAMR Model include: 1)  the promotion of digital literacy throughout the transformation of
assignments and learning activities; 2) the gradual inclusion of technology into a class assignment over
time, giving the educator the opportunity to pilot test new technology tools and to experiment with an
assignment from semester to semester; and 3) allows the educator to scaffold their assignment, a process
where the instructor includes guidance, support, and advice early on during an assignment or activity, and
then slowly removes the supports so that students can practice and learn on their own.

Enhance and Transform

Your Lessons
Through Using SAMR

The SAMR Model  was developed by

Dr. Ruben Puentedura to help teachers infuse technology into teaching. The
model allows teachers to evaluate how they are using technology in their
instructional practices. “SAMR” is an acronym that stands for four levels in the
technology integration process: Substitution, Augmentation, Modification, and
Redefinition.
What does each SAMR level look like in the classroom?
Below are various classroom examples of SAMR. As one moves through the
levels, the technology becomes seamlessly woven into teaching and learning
to encourage higher order thinking.

Original Project/Lesson: Book Reviews, handwritten and turned

in to the teacher.
Substitution: Students create book reviews using Google Docs, and share
them with the teacher.

Augmentation: Students use various add-ons for their book reviews, such as

speech recognition, Read&Write for Google  for voice notes and word
prediction.
Modification: Students use Google Classroom  to post their book reviews,
receive peer feedback, and participate in ongoing discussions about their
book.

Redefinition: Students use Animoto  to create a 30-60 second book trailer.

Working with the library media specialist in the school, the students turn the
URL of their book trailer into a QR code, and then put their QR code into the
book jacket for any student to scan and access the trailer.