I have many "Aha" moments in the shower crying out for documentation.  I will also use this blog to document my new startup, "Going One to One", an online course for schools who need help doing three big shifts at once: purchasing computers for each student, promoting student-centered learning, and adopting Google Apps for Education.

- Bram Moreinis

Rediscovering TIM

Listening to EdSurge's panel on professional development, I was reminded of the University of South Florida's Technology Integration Matrix, and on visit, I found SAMR there! 

I would put the TIM on the opposite side of the spectrum from SAMR as a graphic organizer of a technology integration taxonomy. SAMR is simple (four elements, two categories) but too abstract to apply by teachers learning integration.  My reconceptualization broke those elements into two axes, Technology and Pedagogy, simultaneously unpacking some of the density in each SAMR stage, but also limiting the scope of the technology attribute.

The TIM is too complex to take in at a glance, but very concrete compared to SAMR  It is more of a reference tool.  Neither of these are critiques, just an observation that we have different levels of abstraction at work.  

What I just noticed, which prompted this blog post, is that TIM is a recasting of SAMR along the horizontal axis. TIM moves from Entry to Adoption => Adaptation => Infusion = Transformation (AAIT) rather than SAMR's Substitution => Adaptation => Modification => Redefinition (SAMR) but both are functional progressions from traditional to transformed integration: 

Adoption

The teacher directs students in the conventional and procedural use of technology tools.

Adaptation

The teacher facilitates students exploring and independently using technology tools.

Infusion

The teacher provides the learning context and the students choose
the technology tools to achieve the outcome.

Transformation

The teacher encourages the
innovative use of technology
tools. Technology tools are
used to facilitate higher order
learning activities that may not have been possible without the use of technology.

TIM's Vertical (Y) Axis, like mine, is a pedagogic progression.  My Y axis moves from Teacher-Centered to Student-Centered as a continuum, while TIM's presents a set of elements, with each element a features of student-centered learning.   TIM articulates what student-centered learning means, rather than assumes it.  

Active

Students are actively engaged in using technology as a tool rather than passively receiving information from the technology.

Collaborative

Students use technology tools to collaborate with others rather than working individually at all times.

Constructive

Students use technology tools to connect new information to their prior knowledge rather than to passively receive information.

Authentic

Students use technology tools to link learning activities to the world beyond the instructional setting rather than working on decontextualized assignments.

Goal Directed

Students use technology tools to set goals, plan activities, monitor progress, and evaluate results rather than simply completing assignments without reflection.

So both the TIM and my Reconceptualizing SAMR graph explicitly bring pedagogy and technology together in a way SAMR suggests.  

I also noticed that TIM's Horizontal (X) Axis, like mine, featured both Collaborative and Constructive characteristics (rather than present these as separate, I viewed a progression from passive reception to active interaction, social collaboration and social construction). TIM also includes Active, so I've modified my X axis to include the first three of TIM's characteristics:

Rediscovering TIM, I see now that what TIM has done is incredibly more useful to a technology integration specialist or a teacher.  Instead of locating SAMR terms in the graph (as mine does), TIM join Pedagogy and Technology to generate activity models that can fit a teacher's readiness to adopt technology.   Each TIM example describes a pattern (in Christopher Alexander's way of speaking about patterns) as an example, a pattern which could then by applied to course content and grade levels, or aligned with Common Core standards. 

TIM, I am finally ready to appreciate you!