PICRAT helps teachers assess their technology use in the classroom by classifying student learning as Passive (student learns through passive activities), Interactive (student learns through interactive activities), or Creative (student learns through creative activities), and use of technology as Replacement (of traditional task), Amplifying (improving efficiency or adding new functionality to traditional task using technology, or Transformative (new technology creates a previously impossible learning activity/learning is dependent on having that technology). While I think that PICRAT is a useful model to help teachers evaluate their technology integration in the classroom, it is somewhat complicated, and could be more difficult for the teacher librarian to explain to teachers than, for example, the SAMR model. Some technology-based activities may also overlap within the PICRAT matrix, especially if there are multiple steps involved. I think the PICRAT grid is most valuable when considering how to teach a specific task, skill, or learning outcome. For example, if a teacher comes to the teacher librarian for support with an area of weakness in their curriculum or a specific skill they want the students to learn, the TL could help them consider it through various points on the PICRAT grid, which could help the teacher pinpoint exactly what they want the students to learn or match curricular outcomes and content with relevant technology skills. There are times when a teacher will need students to use technology passively and times where they will need it for creative tasks. I think it is worth highlighting that in the video, “PICRAT for Effective Technology Integration in Teaching,” Royce Kimmons states, “None of the squares on the matrix is necessarily a bad way to teach [...] but a good teacher will continuously re-evaluate their practice and think about ways to improve” (3:33). This seems to be a different view than presented in the image below, from EdTechnica, which labels areas of the matrix “worse” and “better.” This may be an over generalization- many teachers may introduce a learning activity that would fit in the more passive replacement side, but use it to scaffold towards the more creative and transformative side. For me, the key for the teacher librarian to effectively support is to help the teacher be intentional about why they want students to use technology, identify what they want the students to learn, and determine what skills the students will gain with implementing a specific technology-based learning activity.
“Figure 1: The PICRAT Matrix,” EdTechnica, EdTechnica, https://edtechbooks.org/encyclopedia/picrat. Accessed 14 April 2022.
Kimmons, Royce. “PICRAT Matrix.” Royce Kimmons: Understanding the Digital Divide, Royce Kimmons, 2012, http://roycekimmons.com/tools/picrat. Accessed 14 April 2022.
Kimmons, Royce. “PICRAT for effective technology integration in teaching.” Youtube, YouTube, 29 April 2016, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bfvuG620Bto. Accessed 14 April 2022.
“PICRAT,” EdTechnica, EdTechnica, https://edtechbooks.org/encyclopedia/picrat.
Accessed 14 April 2022.
You've included a good analysis of some of the literature. I like that you've brought to light the undertone that bottom left teaching, while not directly stated is looked down upon. I also think that with many learning opportunities, scaffolding is necessary, so often we need to start at the bottom left and by the end students are working in the top right quadrant. It's like the steps with coaching: 1) I do, you watch 2) You do, I watch 3) You do.
ReplyDeleteI'm wondering how effective teacher librarians will be in determining the why and the what in subject areas where they are less familiar?
Hi Becky! That's an interesting question. I think it's unrealistic to expect the TL to be deeply familiar with every subject area, which is where collaboration and co-planning with the departments would come in. I think this way, the technology activities can be built from the ground up with input from all the "stakeholders" in the school.
ReplyDelete