8
Issues and Trends in Educational Technology Volume 6, Number 2, Dec. 2018
level to higher-order thinking go as follows: Knowledge, Comprehension, Application,
Analysis, Synthesis, and Evaluation. In 2001, former Benjamin Bloom student Lorin
Anderson revised Bloom’s Taxonomy and published a new list of categories from lower
to higher-order thinking (Churches, 2008, p. 2). Anderson’s changes included eliminating
the noun form of each classication and replacing them with verbs. The revised lower
to higher-level order thinking goes as follows: Remembering, Understanding, Applying,
Analyzing, Evaluating, and Creating (Churches, 2008). Each revised level of Bloom’s
Taxonomy can be connected to SAMR benchmarks. For example, Substitution and
Augmentation in the SAMR Model enhance learning, suggesting they serve to utilize
technology to replace or improve upon traditional learning exercises with technology.
Puentedura (2014) recommended that Substitution and Augmentation be associated
with the “three lower levels of Bloom (Remember, Understand, and Apply)” (para. 3). The
tasks of Modication and Redenition transform learning, creating new opportunities
that were previously unattainable through traditional measures absent of technology
(Kirkland, 2014). Puentedura noted “Modication and Redenition are associated with
the upper levels of Bloom” including Analyze, Evaluate, and Create (Puentedura, 2014,
para. 3). Although the connection to Bloom can be used “it is important to realize the
association between SAMR and Bloom’s Taxonomy is not a necessary or even habitual
coupling…the simple structure described is well-suited to beginning practitioners’ needs
and even retains usefulness for more experienced faculty” (Puentedura, 2014, para. 5).
It is worth taking into consideration that using Bloom’s Taxonomy as a framework with
SAMR presents a familiarity to teachers, allowing for the likelihood of an uninterrupted
transition when integrating technology into learning tasks. Teachers must also consider
the rapid development of new technologies being considered for classroom integration.
Because of this, SAMR benchmarks and how they are achieved appear to be in constant
uctuation due technology enhancements and improvements. These improvements and
enhancements have a direct impact on decision making by beginning and advanced
technology educators and play a critical role when implementing SAMR. With this taken
into consideration, each SAMR Model benchmark related to Google Forms quizzes
integration will be presented in further detail, beginning with Substitution.
Substitution. Hockly (2013) stated that Substitution is the simplest way to implement
mobile learning, and when evaluating whether an activity is a part of the Substitution
phase, Puentedura (2015) posed the question, “What will be gained by replacing older
technology with the new technology?” (p.3). Hilton (2017) dened Substitution as the
“use of technology for a task that could be accomplished without technology” making
technology gains at this stage insignicant (p. 68). For example, during a traditional
quiz, when students are presented with multiple choice or written response questions,
they are required to use a writing tool, like a pencil or pen to record responses. The
assessment delivery method is tangible, including a test and answer document. As a
direct tool substitute, Google Forms quizzes can accomplish these objectives without
functional modications using mobile or laptop technology. For example, Google Forms
quizzes may include both multiple choice and short response questions. Instead of using
a traditional pen or pencil to record responses, students use a keyboard, mouse, and