WTS 4

Technology Integration
Beth Duellman
Saint Marys University of Minnesota
Schools of Graduate and Professional Programs
Portfolio Entry for Wisconsin Teacher Standard 4
Independent Study
Catherine Anderson, Advisor
March 26, 2016

page 1 of 24

WTS 4

page 2 of 24

Selected Wisconsin Teacher Standard Descriptors

Wisconsin Teacher Standard (WTS) 4: Teachers know how to teach.
The teacher understands and uses a variety of instructional strategies, including the use of
technology, to encourage students development of critical thinking, problem solving, and
performance skills.
Knowledge. The teacher knows how to enhance learning through the use of a wide
variety of materials as well as human and technological resources (e. g. computers, audio-visual
technologies, videotapes and discs, local experts, primary documents and artifacts, texts,
reference books, literature, and other print resources).
Dispositions. The teacher values flexibility and reciprocity in the teaching process as
necessary for adapting instruction to student responses, ideas, and needs.
Performances. The teacher uses multiple teaching and learning strategies to engage
students in active learning opportunities that promote the development of critical thinking,
problem solving, and performance capabilities and that help students assume responsibility for
identifying and using learning resources.

Danielson Domains
Domain 1: Planning and Preparation
Component 1e: Designing Coherent Instruction
Domain 3: Instruction
Component 3c: Engaging Students in Learning
Domain 4: Professional Responsibilities
Component 4d: Participating in a Professional Community
Component 4e: Growing and Developing Professionally

WTS 4

page 3 of 24

Pre-assessments
Self-assessment of Instruction Related to WTS and Targeted Student Learning Objective(s)
For Wisconsin Teacher Standard (WTS) 4, I wanted to focus on incorporating technology
into the curriculum to increase student engagement. This is my third year teaching 4th grade in a
one-to-one learning environment where all of my students have their own iPads. Currently, I
have 23 students. I was on the district iPad leadership team for the two years it was in place.
During my time on the iPad leadership team, I was able to work with other educators on how to
best implement the tools we had. We used the Substitution Augmentation Modification
Redefinition (SAMR) model as our guide to begin to transform learning. I have continued to
seek out learning opportunities to increase my knowledge in this area. I also spend time
supporting other teachers in my building and sharing my experiences integrating technology with
other educators. I will continue to work toward my objectives of incorporating technology into
the curriculum to increase student engagement by attending professional conferences,
collaborating with others, and implementing new ideas in the classroom.
I chose three WTS 4 descriptors to guide my learning process. The WTS 4 performance
descriptor that a teacher uses multiple teaching and learning strategies to engage students in
active learning opportunities that promote the development of critical thinking is supported by
multiple technology projects I have implemented this year including Genius Hour and Mystery
Skype. Understanding how to move beyond substitution and augmentation to modification and

WTS 4

page 4 of 24

redefinition in the SAMR model is crucial to improving students excitement for solving
problems and thinking on their own.
The disposition descriptor of the teacher values flexibility and reciprocity in the teaching
process from WTS 4 supports my work in the classroom. Based on student engagement surveys,
the elementary school where I work is focused on making students more excited about learning.
With the technology tools provided and student interest in technology high, this is the perfect
area to place my focus. Attending technology conferences has given me new ideas and helped me
continue to improve how I am implementing technology. This has allowed me to involve
students in the learning process by giving them ownership of their topics of study.
Implementing my plan for incorporating technology will support my growth in WTS 4
knowledge descriptor that the teacher knows how to enhance learning through the use of a wide
variety of materials as well as human and technological resources to engage student learners. As
I try new activities with my students, I feel nervous and excited because no one else in my
building has tried these things before. I work with other teachers in the building to implement
new ideas and share the positives and negatives of the activities. My technology use has grown
and each year looks a little different than previous years.
Assessment of Student Performance Related to Targeted Student Learning Objective(s)
The district I work in provides elementary students the opportunity to be one-to-one with
iPads in grades 3-5. There is a wide range of technology use and there is no set standard for how
teachers should use technology beyond keyboarding practice. The first two years we were oneto-one, the district had an iPad leadership team that consisted of two teachers from each building.
In this committee, I worked with other teachers to pilot new apps the district was considering
buying. We dug more deeply into the SAMR model and shared classroom experiences
integrating technology. SAMR is a model to guide teachers incorporation of technology into the
curriculum and it stands for substitution, augmentation, modification, and redefinition. The iPad

WTS 4

page 5 of 24

leadership team currently does not meet so I wanted to spend time growing as a technology rich
educator and moving projects into the higher level of the SAMR model.
Overall, students today are not fully engaged in learning. With the large amount of
testing, the enjoyment of learning has faded. Incorporating technology is a way to grab the
attention of my students in any subject and enhance learning. Creating projects that were once
inconceivable is the redefinition stage of the SAMR model and provides the greatest opportunity
for continuous student engagement. Technology rich projects are created to meet learning targets
in every subject but I have focused most of my attention to English Language Arts (ELA) and
social studies. My focus is on student engagement in the learning process rather than the specific
learning targets they are trying to meet. Engaged students in active learning opportunities will
score higher on assessments.
Assessment of Learning Environment While Learning Targeted Objective(s)
Being 1:1 with iPads is giving me the opportunity to transform my classroom into an
inquiry based, student driven environment. It has been some of the most engaging and exciting
times in my teaching career. With iPad implementation only in year three, we are still just
beginning to understand how to effectively infuse technology into teaching and learning. It
requires independent, action research to find new ideas. There are not as many experts in the
district because it is a relatively new and rapidly changing field.
During my first year of 1:1 iPad use, I substituted technology for paper and pencil tasks
and added some iMovie trailers at the end of the year. It was exciting to have iPads to practice
keyboarding, read books, and write papers. Even with the limited use my first year, students were
more engaged in their learning. It also provided relief for some of my special education students
because they could do talk to text or type responses if writing was a problem. The district I work
for wanted to make sure we focused on creativity applications (apps) versus skill and drill apps. I

WTS 4

page 6 of 24

was assigned an app to study which pushed me to try something new. It was overwhelmingly
successful and I was hooked on doing more.
In year two of 1:1 iPad implementation, I added many more activities using creativity
apps. I was using technology in all subjects and beginning to modify lessons to include more
student choice. I attended the TIES Technology Conference in Minnesota and left with so many
new ideas. I allowed students unlimited freedom by the end of the year on how they would use
technology to show mastery. For example, during our final social studies unit, students had to
create a presentation on an assigned project using technology. They were required to app-smash
in the process. App-smashing is when you use multiple creativity apps to create a project. No two
projects were alike. One group of students created a Prezi that included slides with iMovie,
Green Screen, Educreations, Chatterpics, Movenote, and Tellagami. It was up to students to
decide how to share the information.
As I started this school year, I wanted to continue my growth as a technology rich
educator. I witnessed the power of using technology with students and knew I still had so much
more room to grow. I began to support other teachers in my building to implement technology in
a meaningful way. I attended the TIES Technology Conference in Minnesota again, and this year,
I also presented with my co-worker. I plan to center my research around my learning from that
conference as well as my goals for implementation of more inquiry based learning with
technology. This summer, I am attending the ISTE National Technology Conference in Denver
where I plan to enrich my learning in technology in education even more.
Thats not to say technology integration didnt come with problems. It is almost always a
guarantee that there will be problems the first time you try something new with technology, and
that is OK. I use students as a resource regularly and accepted they could navigate technology
much easier than I could. Additionally, student work was sometimes deleted or lost and a few

WTS 4

page 7 of 24

iPads were broken. It was scary to try things outside of my comfort zone, but worth it. Despite a
few glitches with technology integration, it is the most powerful tool Ive been given in teaching.
Assessment Conclusion and Essential Question to Guide Research
The self-assessment, assessment of student performance, and learning environment
assessment show I need to continue my growth in technology implementation to redefine what is
possible in the classroom. Furthermore, I want my students be driven and engaged through
inquiry based, technology rich education. My essential question to research addresses WTS 4:
How can I use technology to encourage students development of critical thinking, problem
solving, and performance skills while being engaged in the classroom?
Research Summary
Technology is present everywhere in todays world. A classroom without technology does
not prepare students for their future in the 21st century. There has been a shift in focus of the
skills students need to be successful and they now center on creativity, communication,
collaboration, and critical thinking. Technology can store information so memorization of facts
and concepts is less important. Technology can enhance the learning in the classroom if teachers
plan to incorporate it meaningfully using the SAMR model (Romrell, Kidder, & Wood, 2014, p.
81).
With many school district adopting one-to-one technology programs, teachers need to
leverage that technology to create a powerful learning environment. Differentiation is possible in
many areas, but to achieve effective differentiation teachers need to feel comfortable and
confident planning for meaningful technology integration. Teachers can differentiate the content
students complete, the process by which students learn the content, or the products they produce
to show what they have learned (Milman, Carlson-Bancroft, & Boogart, 2014, p. 124-126).
According to Keppell, Suddaby, & Hard (2015), teachers need authentic training and
professional development opportunities to enhance teaching with technology (p. 10). Mobile
learning is more than just using technology. It is crucial for educators to design lessons that

WTS 4

page 8 of 24

enhance student learning. The SAMR model gives teachers a framework for evaluating mobile
learning which supports a transformation of learning (Romrell et al., 2014, p. 79).
The first step of the SAMR model is substitution and it is when you substitute technology
for a task that could have been completed without technology. An example of substitution is
taking notes online versus taking notes in a notebook. There is no functional improvement,
although students may find it more convenient to take notes on their devices. Romrell et al.
(2014) reported that substituting mobile learning for other methods was a positive experience for
students and often students preferred it (p. 85).
The next step of the SAMR model is augmentation and it is when there is some
functional improvement over traditional methods. An example given was sending nursing
students text messages with additional information about medications. It provided students an
opportunity to connect to their learning beyond the traditional lecture. Students scored higher
after receiving the text messages compared with students that did not receive those messages
(Romrell et al., 2014, p. 85).
The step that comes after augmentation in the SAMR model is modification and this is
when learning can really begin to be transformed. Modification is when mobile learning is
utilized to modify and significantly redesign the learning task. Allowing students to work in
groups through using social applications like Facebook, Google Hangouts, and YouTube is an
example of modification. This learning task was significantly redesigned to allow students
flexibility in their learning. Completing the task in a traditional format does not personalize the
learning in the same way (Romrell et al., 2014, p. 86).
Finally, the last level of the SAMR model is redefinition. Learning activities at this level
would not even be possible without mobile learning. An example of redefinition given in the text
used augmented reality in different settings to enhance learning (Romrell et al., 2014, p. 87).

WTS 4

page 9 of 24

Redefining mobile learning provides students with a personalized, connected, and relevant
learning experience.
Technology captures students attention and engages them in the content. Teachers need
to embrace mobile learning and work to understand the best ways to implement technology.
Using the SAMR model as a guide, teachers can transform student learning within the classroom
and incorporate technology in a transformative way. Professional development is key for creating
conditions for teachers to feel empowered and confident to use technology to its fullest. With a
depth of knowledge of the SAMR model for planning lessons with mobile learning, teachers will
be successful in their implementation of technology.
Research Implications
My research was centered around the question How can I use technology to encourage
students development of critical thinking, problem solving, and performance skills while being
engaged in the classroom? All of the case studies and research findings showed increased
student engagement and improved academic performance with mobile learning. The SAMR
model provided the framework for my action plan. I learned more about how other teachers were
integrating technology, I tried new ways of differentiation, and I collaborated with co-workers to
strengthen our mobile learning. I look for ways to engage students through learning tasks that
have been modified or redefined to really have an impact on student learning.
With technology changing rapidly and being a relatively new school for one-to-one iPad
usage, I tried new strategies even though I did not know what the outcome might be. Integrating
technology and planning with the SAMR model has been very rewarding for not only the
students, but also for myself. Moving forward, I plan to continue to use the SAMR model when
planning for mobile learning. I also plan to attend more professional development opportunities
and be a leader within my building. Student response to increased mobile learning has been
positive so I will continue to focus on this area.
Research-based Action Plan

WTS 4

page 10 of 24

Action Plan Summary Outline

1. Design lessons using the SAMR model. Begin with 4th grade geography lessons.
Participate in Mystery Skypes to learn and understand the geography of the United States.
2. Implement Genius Hour to engage students in self-directed research.
3. Attend professional learning opportunities related to mobile learning including ISTE,
TIES, and code.org trainings.
Targeted Student Learning Objective(s)
1. Standardized goal: 2016 ISTE (International Society for Technology in Education)
Standards for Students: 1. Empowered Learner and 7. Global Collaborator. Empowered Learner
Students leverage technology to take an active role in choosing, achieving, and demonstrating
competency in their learning goals, informed by the learning sciences. Global Collaborator
Students use digital tools to broaden their perspectives and enrich their learning by collaborating
with others and working effectively in teams locally and globally.
2. Targeted learning objective: 2016 ISTE Student Standards - Empowered Learner 1c:
Students use technology to seek feedback that informs and improves their practice and to
demonstrate their learning in a variety of ways. Global Collaborator 7a: Students use digital tools
to connect with learners from a variety of backgrounds and cultures, engaging with them in ways
that broaden mutual understanding and learning.
Task(s) and Essential Proficiency Criteria for Targeted Learning Objective(s)
1. Task 1: Students will use technology to demonstrate their learning in a variety
of ways as measured by Genius Hour projects.
2. Task 2: Students will connect with learners from a variety of backgrounds as
measured by Mystery Skype participation.
2. Criteria that Prove Proficiency in Meeting Targeted Learning Objective(s)
a. Students will demonstrate their learning on a self-selected topic using
technology staying engaged 80% of the time.

WTS 4

page 11 of 24

b. 80% of students will participate in Mystery Skype where we connect

with classrooms from around the world to learn more about geography and
learners from a variety of backgrounds.
Method(s) to Assess Progress of Proficiency for Targeted Learning Objective(s)
1. Students will complete a self-directed research project through an activity
called Genius Hour. Student engagement will increase as measured by time on
task compared with independent Daily 5 work. Students will personalize their
learning by choosing how to demonstrate their learning.
2. Students will participate in Mystery Skype to gain an understanding of a
variety of learners and demonstrate their understanding of geography in a real
time, connected activity.
Post-assessments
Instructional Insights Related to WTS and Targeted Student Learning Objective(s)
Mobile learning is relatively new where I work. We have been one-to-one with iPads for
the past three years. There is little guidance in this area so teachers are seeking out professional
development in this area and trying to implement new ideas. Two of the most powerful
professional development conferences I have ever attended are TIES in Minnesota and ISTE in
Colorado. There are so many educators integrating technology and transforming education.
Genius Hour and Mystery Skype were two activities I learned about that I wanted to implement
in my classroom to engage students to improve their critical thinking, problem solving skills, and
performance skills and connect them to the world.
There was no model for these programs so I had to research ideas and jump right into
these activities in my classroom. I learned about what worked and what did not work right along
with my students. I was able to make modifications and try again. I used the SAMR model as a
guide to plan for instruction. I wanted a transformational classroom that prepared students on 21st

WTS 4

page 12 of 24

century skills so I looked to find activities that would be in the modification or redefinition levels
of the SAMR model.
In the first round of Genius Hour, students were required to do research and present the
information in almost any format. This was time when students were learning about topics of
their choice. The content was differentiated and the method to demonstrate learning was
differentiated. Students were engaged and enjoyed completing Genius Hour but we found there
needed to be more structure to that time in fourth grade. I worked with my grade level
professional learning community to create a guiding packet for students to use during Genius
Hour. The content and method to demonstrate learning were still differentiated to give students
choice and control.
It took many months to prepare for Mystery Skype. It was definitely something I wanted
to do but involves much more planning and preparation than you might think. I researched
teacher blogs for ideas on how to complete a successful Mystery Skype. It involved creating
several jobs for students. Each student had to understand the different jobs and how they would
work together to play the game. I was nervous the first time we did it because the control was all
in the students hands. It was in real time with another classroom so they had to work as a team
to make it a success. In Mystery Skype, our class would connect with another class from around
the world. We would then play 20 questions with the class to guess their location. We had to use
our geography skills to narrow down the search. We would learn from each Skype session and
work together to make the next one better.
Student engagement skyrocketed when we did these activities. The excitement was like
nothing else we did especially when compared with traditional learning tasks. With students
leading the way and determining the topics and methods of demonstrating understanding, I was
able to meet their needs and prepare them for their future. Students needed to problem solve and
collaborate with others to complete their tasks. Globalization of the classroom was another

WTS 4

page 13 of 24

positive of adding these activities. One of my favorite memories was when we were doing a
Mystery Skype with a classroom in New Zealand. It was Wednesday afternoon in Wisconsin and
Thursday morning in New Zealand. The squeals of excitement and wide eyes of amazement
when the students found out the class we were working with was a day ahead of us was
unforgettable. I look forward to continue to add more mobile learning activities in the
modification and redefinition stage of the SAMR model.
Comparison of Student Performance Related to Targeted Student Learning Objective(s)
Most of the activities I plan that integrate technology and meet the ISTE Student
Standards have not been done before in my room or my school. I often do not have anything
similar to compare it to. As we use iPads more and more, I find myself pushing the activities to
the modification and redefinition levels of the SAMR model.
One way I measured student success was based on time on task. Students were monitored
during a traditional Daily 5 and during Genius Hour. Data was collected on three students that
included one that struggled with attention, one that was average with attention, and one that had
a long attention span. In comparison, all students were on task more during Genius Hour
contrary to time on task during traditional learning. There are two reasons I hypothesize to
explain that. One reason may be that Genius Hour is new and students are more excited to stay
focused and the second reason may be that empowering students to guide their learning is more
engaging.
Students were able to successfully complete Mystery Skype with several classrooms from
around the world. Jobs included mappers, researchers, official eliminator, photographer, live
blogger, questioners, data entry, signers, greeters, sound technician, and questioners assistant.
My goal was for students to successfully complete a Mystery Skype with at least 80% of students
participating. I had not done anything like this to have before and after assessment data. 0% of
students had completed a Mystery Skype before and 100% of students had completed a Mystery

WTS 4

page 14 of 24

Skype after. All of the students had to work together to stay organized and find the location of the
other class. Mystery Skype meets several of the seven ISTE Student Standards including being a
Global Collaborator.
Comparison of Learning Environment While Learning Targeted Objective(s)
Mobile learning has only been around for three years at Sam Davey. As I try new things
with my students, they rarely have had any experience with it. I cannot compare a similar
situation but I can compare student engagement during traditional learning compared to mobile
learning. As I introduce new technology applications, students are engaged and excited.
Traditional learning does not keep students consistently interested. They are mobile consumers
and need instant access. When using traditional methods, students are often unenthusiastic and
off task. Integrating technology with activities like Genius Hour and Mystery Skype has
transformed my room into a collaborative and creative space that encourages critical thinking
and communication.
Reflection of Entire Learning Process
During the 2015-16 school year, I focused on how I could use technology to encourage
students development of critical thinking, problem solving, and performance skills while being
engaged in the classroom. During Genius Hour, students completed research on a topic of choice
and shared their learning in a variety of ways using technology. Students used Skype to connect
with classrooms from around the world to broaden their understanding of a variety of cultures
compared to their own. I use the SAMR model as a framework to evaluate the learning activities.
I have come to find that trying new activities with technology can be overwhelming and scary
because of the unknown. However, integrating technology is rewarding and engaging so it is
worth it. I am lucky to be teaching during a time of transformation in the classroom. I get to see
curiosity, creativity, and excitement in my classroom every day. It was something that was

WTS 4

page 15 of 24

missing during the years I was teaching without technology. I look forward to using the 2016
ISTE Student Standards to continue to improve my teaching with technology.
What Worked and Why
1. Students were engaged in their learning. They had to guide their learning by choosing
the topic and how to demonstrate their learning. Student ownership provided the purpose for
higher levels of engagement.
2. Students were global collaborators and connected with classrooms as close as Iowa and
as far as New Zealand. They compared and contrasted the different students we met with
themselves and gained an understanding of others.
What Did Not Work and Why
1. At times, students had too much freedom and did not know what to do. There are times
when they needed guidance and times when they could handle total control.
2. In a day that is packed from beginning to end, it can be hard to find the time to add to
provide alternate methods while still honoring the districts curriculum.
My Next Steps
1. I will work with grade level leaders to understand the SAMR model. I will participate
in the Verizon Mobile Learning Academy.
2. I will develop a classroom Twitter page to make connections to other classrooms
around the world. I will attempt to find an authentic audience for student work.

WTS 4

page 16 of 24

References
Keppell, M., Suddaby, G., & Hard, N. (2015). Assuring best practice in technology-enhanced
learning environments. Research In Learning Technology, 23.
Milman, N. B., Carlson-Bancroft, A., & Boogart, A. V. (2014). Examining differentiation and
utilization of iPads across content areas in an independent, PreK4th grade elementary
school. Computers In The Schools, 31(3), 119-133. doi:10.1080/07380569.2014.931776
Romrell, D., Kidder, L. C., & Wood, E. (2014). The SAMR model as a framework for evaluating
mLearning. Journal Of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 18(2).

WTS 4

page 17 of 24

Artifact A: Genius Hour Student Example and Guiding Packet

Below are some examples of students presenting their research from Genius Hour.
Students chose to present their information through iMovies, Prezis, Google Slides, and
blogging. I included the packet I created with my grade level team for students to use during
Genius Hour.

Name:
Genius Hour Project
Guiding Question
(Student creates the guiding question based on interest.)

Genius Hour Checklist

1. Write a guiding question about a topic youre passionate about
2. Start KWL graphic organizer
3. Take notes on each resource
a. Cite your source on the top of the page before you take notes
i. 2 books (minimum)
ii. 1 website (minimum)
b. Put information into your own words
4. Write an outline to prepare for your report

WTS 4

page 18 of 24

5. Write a three to five-page essay on what you learned

a. 12-point font
b. Double Spaced
6. Fill out weekly sheet
7. Create sharing project

K What I already Know

Source:

Notes from this source:

Top 3 Things you learned in your own words:

1.

2.

W What I want to know

WTS 4

3.

Source:

Notes from this source:

Top 3 Things you learned in your own words:

1.

2.

3.

Outline for Your Report

Guiding Question:
Introduction to create interest in your topic for the reader (1-2 sentences):

page 19 of 24

WTS 4

I. First Main Idea:

A. Supporting Detail 1:

B. Supporting Detail 2:

C. Supporting Detail 3:

II. Second Main Idea:

A. Supporting Detail 1:

B. Supporting Detail 2:
C. Supporting Detail 3:

III. Third Main Idea:

A. Supporting Detail 1:

B. Supporting Detail 2:

C. Supporting Detail 3:

page 20 of 24

WTS 4

page 21 of 24

Conclusion to restate the main ideas of your report. (1-2 sentences):

Use your outline as a guide to type or write a three to five-page essay on what you learned. If
you choose to type, your report should be in 12-point font and double spaced.
What is your plan of action to share what you learned? Circle which one you would like
to do.
a demonstration
a slide show
a poster
an oral presentation
a performance
a video
a web site
a blog
Other:
Write 2-3 sentences explaining how you will present your information to the class.

WTS 4

page 22 of 24

Artifact B: Skype in Action Example

I have short video clip of how I used Skype to help students become Global Collaborators
including using Mystery Skype. Students stayed engaged by working together to solve the
mystery.

WTS 4

page 23 of 24

Artifact C: Student Time on Task Comparison

Select students were monitored for time on task for traditional learning versus mobile
learning including Genius Hour. In all cases, students stayed on task longer when doing mobile
learning. During traditional learning, students would look around the room, dig in their desks,
play with school supplies, or talk with neighbors when off task. During mobile learning, students
would be distracted by something online that interested them or would share something they
found on the Internet with their neighbor. So, while most of the off task time was unproductive
during traditional learning, some of the off task time during mobile learning was still
academically productive.
Student
1
2
3

Traditional Learning
7
17
28

Mobile Learning
21
24
30

WTS 4

page 24 of 24

Artifact D: Student Survey

I surveyed the students about Genius Hour and Mystery Skype. I asked the
students the following questions before we began these activities and at the end of the school
year.
1. Do you know what Genius Hour is?
2. Do you know what Mystery Skype is?
3. Do you enjoy using your iPad for learning?
4. Will you work harder and longer during Genius Hour than Daily 5?
5. Can we communicate with students from around the world right at Sam Davey?
The results are summarized in the graph below. As you can see, students did not have any
background knowledge of Genius Hour or Mystery Slype. Nearly all of the students enjoy using
their iPads for learning. Most students say they will work harder on Genius Hour than Daily 5.
Students originally did not think we could communicate with others around the world.