By Lisa deRoy
Education Advocate, SMART Technologies

In my most recent post, Best practices for professional development in technology-enabled classrooms, I introduced the SMART Practitioner’s Continuum outlining five phases that an educator commonly moves through – from using classroom technology as an “event focused” experience, to using technology daily in meaningful and impactful ways. As the integration of classroom technology builds, the environment moves from teacher-directed learning to student-centered learning.

Change begins when the perception of using classroom technology is no longer an ‘event’.  The practitioner ceases creating activities for the sake of using the technology and refocuses on the best tool(s) for meeting student goals at the same time diving into curriculum and content.

A mind shift occurs when an individual stops using technology as supplementing the learner experience to recognizing technology as an essential tool for active learning.

Today I wanted to step away from theory and provide concrete examples of possible activities occurring in stages 1 through 4 of the practitioner’s continuum seen above.  While the examples attempt to jump start your imagination there are a myriad of scenarios that can potentially occur within the practitioner continuum.

SMART Notebook software for iPad application
Example of Phase 1 and 2: Little to no change
Students interact with file containing information, video and websites on their tablets.

Example of Phase 3 and 4: Promising, operational student outcomes
Individuals create files based on rubric with real-world examples of differential calculus including student explanation, analysis, open-ended questions for peers to answer and citations (if appropriate).

Bridgit conferencing software application
Example of Phase 1 and 2: Little to no change
Teacher shares tablet screen with multiple individual devices modeling an application that students will be interacting with after the whole group demonstration.

Example of Phase 3 and 4: Promising, operational student outcomes
Students use Bridgit on their tablets to share content creation for peer review. This can be done student to student within a classroom or virtually, as well as student to small group or student to whole group.

SMART Response interactive response system
Example of Phase 1 and 2: Little to no change

As a class, students review upcoming assessment using the SMART Response system. Students answer teacher- created questions projected on the SMART Board interactive whiteboard.

Example of Phase 3 and 4: Promising, operational student outcomes
Students write review questions for their peers embedding audio, video and graphics into questions. Learners take self-paced tests using a SMART Response system that matches their needs and learning styles. For example, SMART Response CE recognizes a joystick or large button keyboard for those using Assistive Technology. Another individual maybe be using SMART Response VE.

SMART Board interactive white board
Example of Phase 1 and 2: Little to no change
Teacher presents a slideshow on various types of mountain ranges.

Example of Phase 3 and 4: Promising, operational student outcomes
Use the SMART Board interactive whiteboard for a student-centered activity during a rotation providing online activities with an integrated assessment component throughout using SMART Response™ interactive response system. This provides immediate feedback for students, and saves data for the teacher to review later.

SMART Document Camera
Example of Phase 1 and 2: Little to no change
Teacher projects student writing during a lesson on descriptive statements.

Example of Phase 3 and 4: Promising, operational student outcomes
Capture segments of student writing and use the document camera as an editing tool. Students take turns making recommendations and changes and annotating on the sample. Model editing descriptive statements so students can follow up with peer editing and independent review of work.

How do you see the power and potential of interactive technology (such as interactive white boards, student response systems, document cameras, tablets and slates) when used in a flipped classroom?

Bridging the tablet experience from individual consumption and creation to collaborative learning to whole group share?

Where is interactive technologies’ place in project-based learning?

More importantly, how can it support positive student outcomes in terms of engagement, knowledge , analysis and synthesis of information?

And how can school and district leadership actively support their practitioners and learners in meeting achievable, identified goals?