Using the SAMR model to innovate assessment design

Editor's Notes

• #2: (Gem) Welcome to our presentation where we will be sharing with you how we used SAMR to innovate student group oral presentations in a way that has significantly improved the student learning experience to such an extent that approximately 60% of students have identified this assessment model as being the one that provides better learning outcomes.
• #3: (Gem) Dr. Ruben Puentedura’s S.A.M.R model informed our change in practice. The SAMR Model is a framework that categorizes four different degrees of technology integration into classroom practice. The letters "SAMR" stand for Substitution, Augmentation, Modification, and Redefinition. The model should not be viewed as a hierarchy where levels have higher value over each other, but rather as a spectrum of options for technology integration into teaching practice for improved learning outcomes for students. The use of technology in our project resulted in significant transformation of the assessment process, it redefined our assessment and enabled new learning and teaching experiences that were inconceivable previously. However, we must admit up front that the extent of the redefinition of the student learning was a surprise even to us and it was not what we set out to achieve when we looked at using to technology to innovate our group oral presentations.
• #4: (Gem)To provide some context, we used to assess student oral presentations in week 12 of the trimester. Our classes are 4 hours in length, so every student attended class in week 12 and had to sit through all their classmates presentations. The teacher graded the presentations in real time, completed the marking rubric for each team and individually for each student and then in the last 45 minutes provided whole of class feedback and the formal completed rubrics. We used this model because we wanted to ensure that students benefitted from hearing the whole of class feedback and to ensure they had a chance to engage with teacher and their team in reviewing and discussing their feedback so that it was a learning process. However, in reality it was a terrible way to end the trimester. Every one was tired by week 12 including the teachers! The students are not really interested in listening to their peers, their minds on their upcoming exams or they are rehearsing their own speech in their heads. Teachers are trying to multi-task under serious time constraints to provide meaningful feedback by the end of the class and by the time the class ends everyone is running for the door to escape! It’s not the ideal way to end the trimester. In terms of a positive student experience this was not working!
• #5: (Bron)In trying to improve this assessment that we realised was flawed in design and delivery, we looked to technology. But, we wanted the technology to be something that was already familiar to students, something they knew how to use intuitively. We did not want the technology being an additional barrier or another hurdle that students had to learn in order to complete the assessment. The focus was still very much on learning to deliver a proficient group presentation not how to use technology. The assessment outcomes remained the same - we looked to technology to help us achieve them in a more student and teaching friendly manner. We were not interested in changing our assessment outcomes to fit the technology. The technology needed to be the enabler. We chose mobile phones as the technology that students would use to film their presentations because every single student has a mobile phone and most of them are already well versed in using the filming tool on it. And because students were working in groups, even if one student did not have a phone we could reasonably assume that someone else in the group would have one.
• #6: (Bron) In redefining the assessment the students would film their group presentation in one continuous stream. Originally we had them save the file to a USB and submit the USB – however, there were often issues with corrupt files and USBs not working. So we changed this to use another form of technology that has real world application – Google Drive. Students now post their video file to their Google drive accounts (all College students have Google accounts because their College email is a Google enabled account). One member of the group would then get the shareable link from their Google drive and post it into the assignment submission link in Moodle for the unit. Instructions on how to do this is included in the unit outline/assessment guide which is provided to every student via Moodle in week 1. The image here shows you the instructions and assignment requirements that are provided to students. In 2018, we decided to survey all the students in the unit to get a sense of how they felt about this innovation to the assessment. We had already collected very favorable feedback from all teachers, our in class student feedback was positive and the quality of the presentations students were submitting were much better quality. We therefore felt positive that this innovation was working well. However, we wanted to ensure that we formally captured the student perspective to ensure we were keeping the student learning at the center of our assessment approach. Therefore, we asked students for two consecutive trimesters to complete a quick survey to find out what they thought of the assessment and also whether they felt this format improved their learning.
• #7: (Gem) We surveyed a total of 205 students over two consecutive trimesters, we gathered 101 student responses, meaning 49% of our student engaged with the survey. We asked 6 questions in our survey. The results from the survey that were most significant were answers to question 4 and 6. ___________________________________________________ Additional data, in case you get any questions about numbers: Tri 3, 2018 - there were 86 students enrolled in ACS. (39 student responses out of cohort total of 86= 45%) Tri 2, 2018 - there were 119. (We got 62 responses out of the cohort total=52% participated in the survey) Total = 205 possible students, 101 responses= 49% participation
• #8: (Gem) What is important to note here is that over 50% of students said that they viewed and then reshot their entire presentation more than 2 times. With a third of respondents saying they did more than 3 complete deliveries before they submitted. This was a significant amount more practice and reflection than we as teachers saw evidenced in live class presentations, where we often heard from student groups afterwards that in truth they had not managed to get together to practice their presentation other than on the day of delivery. By changing the assessment format so that students were able to record and view their presentations, it enabled them to self reflect. It also enabled them to provide feedback to their peers in a way that was not possible with a live class presentation. It also enabled them to see and hear for the first time what they really sounded and looked like to the audience listening to their presentations. Students then used this feedback information to redo their presentations. This kind of self reflection and ownership for learning was something that was not happening in the traditional live presentation delivery format.
• #9: (Gem) What we can see here is that students overwhelmingly support the filmed approach, with three quarters of the student cohort favoring it by trimester 3. Keeping in mind that students ended up doing a lot more work in terms of practicing their presentations, having to provide peer to peer feedback and having to take on board their own self reflection with very little input from teachers in order to be able to deliver their assessment.
• #10: (Bron) This change in assessment format has had significant positive benefits for student learning. (listed on the slide) It has also resulted in students improving their language proficiency because they are practicing their presentations significantly more than they would with normal live in class presentations. This is particularly important at the College where between 50-70% of our cohort are EAL speakers. Students are engaged in authentic peer feedback and genuine self reflection because they can now replay their presentation and really hear what they sound like and what they look like in their delivery. Something that was never possible before. And, all this learning is student driven, student centered and student focused. In terms of work place skills, being able to deliver a presentation via video is a valuable current skill where companies are working in a globally connected world where being able to present professionally via live stream is essential. Also, in reality in most work situations you have some time to prepare key presentations, and so allowing our students to record and play back and review and re-record their presentations is an authentic experience. We are also aware that once these students move into the second part of their diploma they will all be involved in traditional face to face presentations so will all have had the opportunity to engage in both before starting second year at Curtin university.
• #11: Bron
• #12: (Bron)
• #13: Bron
• #14: Bron
• #15: (Bron)
• #16: (Gem)