NOTES IN SCI 119 (TECHNOLOGY FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING 2 - SCIENCE)

Technology Propels Science Education

Technological and digital literacy are two of the most important subjects for students in
today’s schools. Students are already bombarded with digital information from the internet,
social media and countless apps on “smart” devices. And they are constantly using different
forms of technology, whether making a Skype video call, getting money out of an ATM or
playing the latest video game. Although this leads many educators to believe their students are
already “digital natives,” true technological and digital literacy encompasses far more.
The abilities to adequately use and do research through digital platforms, judge the validity (and
appropriateness) of the information encountered, and communicate and collaborate via digital
mediums are necessary for student success in school and in their future careers. They will
constantly encounter new technologies because innovation is rapid and exponential. In addition,
many technologies can help adapt the content in science classrooms for students with disabilities.
If all students understand how to use today’s technologies, both software and hardware, they will
be better prepared for success in the present as well as adapt more quickly to new technologies in
the future.

What Is Technology?
Simply put, technology is the science of making things. The word is literally derived
from the systematic study and treatment of an art or craft. As we think of it, technology is a
modern concept. But every invention or development of tools or devices is a technological
advancement, from the wheel to the blackboard to the automated oil rig to the automobile.

What Exactly Does Technology Have to Do With Science Education?

Beyond the fact that technology is both a process and a result of science, technological
developments provide the tools used in many forms of scientific study and experimentation, from
centrifuges used for the separation of fluids to computer programs used in the study of quantum
physics. In teaching students the scientific process of inquiry and problem-solving, it is
necessary to utilize current technologies. Students will need to use field-appropriate technologies
to research questions, construct and execute experiments, and analyze results.
Science teachers can use many modern technologies to great effect in the classroom. Computer
software and tablet apps have obvious applications in classroom activities, but the technologies
inherent in automated cameras, LCDs and experiment monitoring systems can also aid in science
education.

How Do Technological and Digital Literacy Help Students in School and Beyond?
The science classroom provides a perfect environment to help students develop the
technological knowledge and skills they will need for the rest of their lives. Learning how to
operate machines used for science experiments will help future mechanical engineers in their
pursuits. A communications major will rely on computer skills learned in the science classroom.
An architect will employ modeling software similar to modeling programs used to design
scientific experiments. And beyond future employment opportunities, these forms of literacy will
help students make informed decisions as both consumers and global citizens.

1mlba Notes in TTL 2 - Science

How Can Assistive Technologies Be Used in Science Education?
Many assistive technologies have been invented and are now used to help students with
disabilities in the inclusive classroom. A perfect example is the equipment students with physical
disabilities use to participate in activities that their disability would otherwise make difficult or
impossible. The most obvious example might be a student with paraplegia using a wheelchair to
move around the classroom. Or a student with visual impairment might use a text-to-speech
program or text enlargement screen readers to read materials.
Teachers can also use technology to engage and instruct students with learning or cognitive
disabilities. Tactile and visual learners can benefit from interactive computer- or tablet-based
lessons. Auditory learners can benefit from recorded materials or text-to-speech programs, and
inversely, voice dictation software.
Besides being essential to the science classroom, using current technologies can help all
students engage in learning, leading to motivation to study the sciences more in depth. Instilling
this love and deep knowledge of science and a fluency with technology is one of the most
important things today’s teachers can accomplish. Being competent, or better yet, excelling in
these areas will help students perform and succeed throughout school, their careers and their
personal lives.

Source: https://academicpartnerships.uta.edu/articles/education/technology-for-science-
education.aspx#:~:text=Science%20teachers%20can%20use%20many,also%20aid%20in
%20science%20education.

2mlba Notes in TTL 2 - Science

 SAMR MODEL: A PRACTICAL GUIDE FOR K-12 CLASSROOM TECHNOLOGY
INTEGRATION

The SAMR Model is a framework created by Dr. Ruben Puentedura that categorizes four
different degrees of classroom technology integration. The letters “SAMR” stand for
Substitution, Augmentation, Modification, and Redefinition. The SAMR model was created to
share a common language across disciplines as teachers strive to personalize learning and help
students visualize complex concepts. The SAMR Model can be especially powerful during
remote and blended learning when integrated classroom technology makes teaching and learning
a more seamless experience for educators and students.

\
Image Modified from Original by Lefflerd’s on Wikimedia Commons

While we often visualize the SAMR model as a ladder or staircase as above, this can be
misleading because Substitution (the bottom rung or step) is sometimes the best choice for a
particular lesson. This is why it’s better to think of the SAMR model more as a spectrum. On one
end, technology is used as a one-to-one replacement for traditional tools, and on the other end,
technology enables experiences that were previously impossible without it.
Regardless of how you visualize it, the SAMR framework can be a simple and effective
way to assess how you incorporate technology into your instruction.
The SAMR Model Explained (with Examples)

3mlba Notes in TTL 2 - Science

The SAMR model consists of four steps: Substitution, Augmentation, Modification, and
Redefinition. Substitution and Augmentation are considered “Enhancement” steps, while
Modification and Redefinition are “Transformation” steps. Think of the difference between
seasoning an old family recipe (Enhancement) and creating an entirely new, original dish
(Transformation).

Substitution
At this stage, technology is directly substituted for a more traditional teaching tool or
method. It is a simple, bare-bones, direct replacement. For example, if you are teaching a
government lesson on the Constitution, you might use an electronic or web-based version of the
document instead of a hard copy. Students might also answer questions about the Constitution by
typing them in Microsoft Word instead of filling out a worksheet with a pencil.
Substitution might also include a student using Flipgrid, Keynote, PowerPoint, Prezi,
Slides, or a similar program to present information about an article or amendment to the class.
In this step, ask yourself what students stand to gain by replacing traditional tools with
technology. Invariably, some situations will be better served by pen and paper.

Augmentation
The technology is again directly substituted for a traditional tool or method, but with
significant enhancements to the student experience. Ask yourself if the technology increases or
augments a student’s productivity and potential in some way.
Returning to the Constitution example, a student might use classroom technology to
augment a presentation on the 14th Amendment with a video clip of how equal protection under
the law was enforced during school desegregation. It could also include interactive links to
relevant supreme court decisions, such as Plessy v. Ferguson or Brown v. Topeka Board of
Education.

Modification
In this stage, you are beginning to move from enhancement to transformation using the
SAMR Model. Instead of replacement or enhancement, this is an actual change to the lesson’s
design and its learning outcome. The critical question here is, “does the technology significantly
alter the learning task?”
A student presenting research on the 14th Amendment—to continue our example—might
create their own unique graphic organizer for the class that not only includes the usual
multimedia resources but represents a new product or synthesis of existing material. As another
example, a group of students might collaborate in the learning management system (LMS) to
propose a modern definition of equal protection under the law and solicit feedback on their
proposals from classmates in the discussion section.

Redefinition
The last stage of the SAMR model represents the pinnacle of how integrated classroom
technology can transform a student’s experience. In this case, you ask yourself if the technology
tools allow educators to redefine a traditional learning task in a way that would not be possible
without the tech, creating a novel experience.
For example, after completing their group work and soliciting feedback from classmates
(both tasks that could be completed “offline” although arguably not with the same experience as

4mlba Notes in TTL 2 - Science

in the modified format), students could use technology to network with students in another state
to see how regional differences impact how others think about the Constitution. Taking it a step
further, students could interact in real time with citizens in another country to examine key
differences in constitutional philosophy and law.

SAMR and Webb’s Depth of Knowledge

Many educators use the SAMR model and Webb’s Depth of Knowledge (DOK)[1] in
tandem to make their technology integration more purposeful. However, it’s a common mistake
to conflate the two models and think that deeper technology integration (the M and R in SAMR)
leads to higher-order thinking skills or increased rigor defined in Webb’s DOK. This is simply
not the case.
So, while it may be helpful to use SAMR and Webb’s Depth of Knowledge to better flesh out
your instructional strategy, keep in mind that they were designed for very different purposes.

Putting the SAMR Model into Context

A buzzword that’s been on everyone’s lips several years—even more so since the onset
of COVID-19—is “blended learning.” Educators talk about incorporating technology into
lessons on a regular basis, but are you doing it in a meaningful way?
Simply substituting an eBook for a textbook or streaming the same lessons over video
chat aren’t going to cut it. It’s essential to be purposeful in how you integrate technology into
your instruction.
Just don’t fall into that ever-present trap of thinking that Redefinition is the goal or the
best approach in all cases. Remember: SAMR is a spectrum. Substitution can be your best option
for a particular setting. But if your entire instructional approach consists of digitizing your
resources without enhancing them—that textbook to eBook transition—then it may be time to
evaluate why you’re using technology in the first place.
Layering technology into antiquated tasks isn’t going to improve the learning experience.
But purposefully altering the substance of these tasks to address the skills students need today—
and those they’ll need tomorrow—will enhance learning
(https://www.powerschool.com/blog/samr-model-a-practical-guide-for-k-12-classroom-
technology-integration/#:~:text=The%20SAMR%20model%20consists%20of,Redefinition
%20are%20%E2%80%9CTransformation%E2%80%9D%20steps).

5mlba Notes in TTL 2 - Science

Using Technology for Science Education
Published On:  August 10, 2017

6mlba Notes in TTL 2 - Science

 WEBB’S DEPTH OF KNOWLEDGE AND BLOOM’S TAXONOMY
Katherine Miller (01/05/2018)

Have you ever wondered about the difference between Webb’s Depth of Knowledge and
Bloom’s Taxonomy?

If you are in the educational field, this is something you most likely have been exposed to and
are familiar with; if not, this article provides a bit of insight into the concepts. Let’s look further
into the differences between these concepts and their relation to course rigor and academic
standards alignment.

Bloom’s Taxonomy

Figure 1: Bloom’s Taxonomy, Original Framework

Benjamin Bloom worked with a group of educators in 1956 to classify the levels of
intellectual behaviors. The original framework (Figure 1) involves the levels of cognitive
taxonomy starting with knowledge (simplest tasks) and moving up the levels through
comprehension, application, analysis, synthesis, and finally to the top level of evaluation (most
complex tasks).

Figure 2: Bloom’s Taxonomy, Updated Framework

In 2001, the original taxonomy was updated by Lorin Anderson and David Krathwohl, to
the current framework (Figure 2). The terms changed from nouns to verbs, such as knowledge
to remember and comprehension to understand. However, the essential meaning of the concepts
did not change. One of the biggest change is switching the order of Evaluation/Evaluate to
come after Synthesis/Create (Armstrong, 2017). As before, these six categories start from the
simplest (remember), to the most complex (create).

7mlba Notes in TTL 2 - Science

 As you move through the categories, you have a better picture for the level of cognitive
rigor involved in a learning. The breakdown of each category is shown below:
Remember involves being able to recall, defining, or labelling.
Understand is to summarize or classify.
Apply requires some level of implementation or to follow a procedure.
Analyze, breaks down parts of a concept for deeper analysis.
Evaluate is critiquing or making a judgement based on research.
Create is to develop something new based on all the learning.

One thing to keep in mind is that Bloom’s Taxonomy builds on each other. In other
words, a learner must master the lower levels before moving on to the next. Bloom’s Taxonomy
is a framework to assist in instruction and when measuring the cognitive rigor of a lesson.

WEBB’S DEPTH OF KNOWLEDGE (DOK)

Depth of Knowledge or DoK is another type of framework used to identify the level of
rigor for an assessment. In 1997, Dr. Norman Webb developed the DoK to categorize activities
according to the level of complexity in thinking. The creation of the DoK stemmed from the
alignment of standards to assessments. Standardized assessments measured how students think
about a content and the procedures learned but did not measure how deeply students must
understand and be aware of a learning so they can explain answers and provide solutions, as well
as transfer what was learned in real world contexts (Francis, 2017).
Essentially, the goal of DoK is to establish the context—the scenario, the setting, or the
situation—in which students express the depth and extent of the learning (Francis, 2017).
This framework consists of 4 levels, level 1 being the simplest and level 4 being the most
complex.

8mlba Notes in TTL 2 - Science

Figure 3: Webb’s Depth of Knowledge

Level 1 (Acquired knowledge) involves recall and reproduction. Remembering facts or

defining a procedure.
Level 2 (Knowledge Application) are skills and concepts. Students use learned concepts
to answer questions.
Level 3 (Analysis) involves strategic thinking. Complexity increases here and involves
planning, justification, and complex reasoning. Explains how concepts and procedures can be
used to provide results.
Level 4 (Augmentation) is extended thinking. This requires going beyond the standard
learning and asking, how else can the learning be used in real world contexts.

Differences and Application?

The major difference between these two conceptual frameworks is what is being
measured. Bloom’s Taxonomy measures the cognitive level students are expected to show in
order to prove a learning experience occurred. While the DoK is focused more on the context—
the scenario, the setting, or the situation—in which students are expected to express the learning.
Bloom’s is better used in measuring the instruction, objective, or cognitive rigor; while DoK is
better used in measuring the actual assessment itself. In other words, Bloom’s provides the
instructional framework, while DoK analyzes the specifics of the assignments. Also, Bloom’s
Taxonomy requires that students master the lower levels of cognition before moving onto the
next. So, if the objective is to use a mathematical formula (Application), they first must be able
to identify that formula and its basic purpose (Remember and Understand). This might mean that
the objectives are given in incremental steps to show the progression of learning. In DoK, when

9mlba Notes in TTL 2 - Science

measuring the assessments, students are moving fluidly through all the levels. In the same
example, while using a mathematical formula to solve a problem, students are recalling the
information or formula (DoK 1) in order to solve the problem (DoK 2 & DoK 3). Depending on
the complexity of the problem to be solved, the learning might transition into DoK 4.

References
Armstrong, P. (2017). Blooms taxonomy. Retrieved from https://cft.vanderbilt.edu/guides-sub-
pages/blooms-taxonomy/
Francis, E. (2016). What exactly is depth of knowledge. Retrieved
from http://edge.ascd.org/blogpost/what-exactly-is-depth-of-knowledge-hint-its-not-a-wheel

Source: https://www.synergiseducation.com/blooms-taxonomy-and-webbs-depth-of-
knowledge/#:~:text=Webb's%20Depth%20of%20Knowledge%20(DoK,level%20of
%20complexity%20in%20thinking.

10mlba Notes in TTL 2 - Science