SAMR vs Bloom's Taxonomy

The job we have as up and coming teachers is the task of integrating educational technology into our practice. The choices available in the market are overwhelming. For some teachers, the idea of using instructional technology in their pedagogy may be daunting and sometimes avoided.  

Frequently, teachers use ICTs as substitutive uses that limit the potential for more ambitious transformative goals. ICTs should be approached as a transformative tool, rather than merely used for enhancement and replacement of normal learning tasks.

The SAMR and Bloom’s Taxonomy provide a framework in which teachers can use to overcome these barriers. Both frameworks work in a similar fashion which moves from lower levels to upper levels.

The transitional levels of the SAMR model (Substitution, Augmentation) are associated with the three lower levels of Bloom’s Taxonomy (Remember, Understand, Apply). The transformational levels of SAMR (Modification, Redefinition) are associated with the upper levels of Bloom’s Taxonomy (Analyze, Evaluate, Create).  A similar odering occurs within each grouping. 

The following diagram illustrates this association and demonstrates the similarities of each level between to the two models (Puentedura, 2014).

Source: After Puentedura (2014)

According to Puentedura (2014), the simple structures outlined above are well suited to beginning practitioner’s needs; however, the integration of SAMR and Bloom can provide far more powerful results “involving convergent/divergent branchings, oscillations between levels.”

Schrock (2015) also believes that teachers need to use both models in order to create tasks that target the higher-order cognitive skills (Bloom's), as well as design tasks that have a significant impact on student outcomes (SAMR).

To begin, it is normal to start with the lower levels by using simple substitutions of technology and minor enhancements in order to gain confidence with using technological tools in the classroom. This enables you to then progress towards the transitional steps of the models. Reaching these stages of the model enables higher order thinking for students as this is the ultimate goal of learning.

Examples of intergrating SAMR model in the classrom

SAMR is a model designed to help educators infuse technology into teaching and learning. 

Below are some pedagogical examples of how you can integrate the different levels of the SAMR model into classroom practice.

Source: Schrock (2015)

Examples of intergrating Bloom's Taxonomy in the classroom

The Bloom’s taxonomy model does indicate how technology should be implemented; however, the verbs in the model suggest active ways that technology can be utilised. Students can create, analyse, synthesise and discover new knowledge with technology.

The example below shows some of the great online tools that support higher-order thinking. 

Source: Hollis (2015)

References

Hollis, K. (2015, May 1). What makes a great learning object? [Web log post]. Retrieved July 28, 2015, from https://kristinahollis.wordpress.com/tag/blooms-taxonomy/

Puentedura, R. (2014, September 24). SAMR and Bloom's Taxonomy: Assembling the Puzzle [Web log post]. Retrieved July 28, 2015, from https://www.graphite.org/blog/samr-and-blooms-taxonomy-assembling-the-puzzle

Schrock, K. (2015). Kathy Schrock’s guide to everything. Retrieved from http://www.schrockguide.net/samr.html