Both the SAMR and TPACK models were new to me, and one thing that was emphasized in the videos about both of them was the importance of focusing technology use on improving learning outcomes. Dr. Puentedura discusses this in the video and talks about a couple misunderstandings of the SAMR model, one being that cutting edge technology in and of itself should not be assumed to be valuable, when it could even be hurtful to the learning process, his point being that it depends on the extent to which it supports the outcome. This brings me to the second point that stuck with me, the assumption that the “substitution” and “augmentation” forms of technology integration are not as good as the “modification” and redefinition” forms; again, Puentedura points to this misconception, saying that sometimes “substitution” or “augmentation” are more effective technology simply because it more effectively supports the learning outcome. This model helps me think more deeply about the functionality of technologies and how they directly connect to specific learning goals. The TPACK model compliments the SAMR module in that it too helps us think about how technology can best support the what (content) the how (pedagogy) of our craft. I think it goes a bit beyond the SAMR model in that it not only emphasizes selecting the most effective technologies for the goal at hand but also how those technologies integrate with the pedagogy; for me, the connections seem implicit, but laying them out and reflecting on paper does force me to be a lot more metacognitive; the pedagogy part in and of itself can get quite extensive. One example that I can point out is from “reading apprenticeship” (RA), which is a pretty popular training program that focuses on metacognitive activities in a social environment as a key component of teaching reading. The pedagogy links up four elements of learning, which RA frames as the social, cognitive, personal, and knowledge-building dimensions, to the role of metacognitive conversation. The technologies that pair up well with this framework are the social annotation platforms; I view it as a technology that modifies the learning environment; in my experience sharing annotations f2f in the classroom has been a bit painstaking and awkward; using technology to annotate texts that all students can see makes for a much more fluid and productive interaction between students and the text. (I think I mentioned the social annotation tool Hypothesis in one of my earlier posts.)