Technology in the Collegiate Biology Lecture: TPACK or SAMR?

TPACK / SAMR Word Cloud created on Wordle

One of the amazing things about the biological and chemical sciences, especially in a collegiate setting, is that the field is inherently structured around technology. While this is a personal opinion, it seems that the sciences has been the leader in a lot of these pushes in education to include more technology. The structure of science courses have always been hands-on, discovery-based learning. Our laboratories serve as a technology heavy haven where critical thinking and hands-on experience is central and key to the learning experience. In fact, many other fields have taken this collegiate scientific approach and tried to model the diverse teaching style of science in their own courses. You can see this in frameworks such as the flipped classroom model, as well as many others. Science laboratories have always been the leader in creating a diverse learning environment where many different andragogical (the practice of how adults learn) approaches are used and embraced.

One area where I feel the collegiate sciences can improve is in the lecture portion of the course. In the sciences, we tend to focus on the lab being the biggest aspect of learning that separates itself from the traditional, everyday lecture. Sometimes I wonder if we fall into a rut (so to speak) with the lecture because we know that the students will get all the technology and hands-on learning in the lab. I wonder if there is something else we can do to prepare our students for the technology in the laboratory before we step into the lab.

I have been lucky enough to start in a program and take some classes where I can address this very question. Recently, I have been introduced to a couple of educational frameworks that address the usage of technology in the classroom in order to reinforce learning and critical thinking. These frameworks are TPACK (Technological, Pedagogical, and Content Knowledge) and SAMR (Substitution, Augmentation, Modification, and Redefinition Model). Both models focus on how to integrate technology in the classroom in order to improve or enhance learning.

TPACK Framework.
Reproduced by permission of the publisher, © 2012 by tpack.org.

TPACK is essentially a model that allows the instructor to integrate technology into the classroom while promoting learning of a specific topic. I like to think of it as a collaboration of technology, content, and pedagogy. According to Mishra and Koehler (2009), TPACK is the basis of effective teaching with technology that requires the instructor to know and understand the relationship between technology and content.

 While the SAMR model is similar, it uses a different approach to still allow for learning while integrating technology. The SAMR model uses a step-wise progression for technology integration to achieve the desired level of technology use with content learning. This model uses various forms of substitution (with no functional change of the content), Augmentation (which helps to functionally improve the content), modification (which allow for some redesign), and redefinition (creation of a new task not used before). The goal in this model is to be able to redefine a task in the classroom and move beyond the everyday and allow students to learn content with technology they may have not used in that way in previous situations. It is the use to technology (that they may or may not know) to help them learn the content knowledge in order to be successful in the subject or topic.

SAMR Model
Image Credit: Dr. Ruben Puentedura, Ph.D.
 http://www.hippasus.com/rrpweblog/ 

While both of these frameworks seems very appropriate to use in the science classroom, I seem to gravitate toward the TPACK framework. For my biology lectures in the classroom, I can see myself integrating technology with content, knowledge, and pedagogy in a way that is similar to the TPACK framework. I feel like this framework allows a person to break down their integration of technology in the classroom in several different ways in order to best help the student learn. I could use a virtual demonstration of a scientific concept (ex. how gel electrophoresis works) in the lecture portion to help a student understand the content (what it is, why we do it, how we do it, etc.) and then take the students into the laboratory and use the equipment hands-on. In this case, the students were able to get the concepts in the classroom while learning how the technology works before they stepped into the lab. So, I can see this framework integrating into my biology lectures rather seamlessly.

One hesitation I have with the framework is its design and intended audience. As I continue to read and learn about different approaches to learning, I find that these frameworks are designed for primary and secondary education. I am, and will only ever be, a post-secondary instructor. The ways adults learn in a collegiate setting is very different from the way children and young adults learn. Our approaches are extremely different. Pedagogy and pedagogical techniques are outside my teaching responsibilities and I must educate my students in a method that is suitable for them. In general, adults learn in very different ways from our younger counterparts. Many of these frameworks are designed with pedagogical ideas in mind. I must focus on a more andragogical approach. While this is not impossible, it does mean that these frameworks must be tweaked in order to allow for adults to learn in a manner more suited to their needs. Perhaps I will tweak the TPACK method in a future blog post, but for now, I will leave it here. I have a lot of information to process with just the basic ideas.

Fill free to comment or give ideas on how you would use these frameworks in the collegiate classroom. I am up for some awesome ideas.


Resources:
Koehler, M. J., & Mishra, P. (2009). What is technological pedagogical content knowledge? Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 9(1), 60-70.