When Technology Works - A Case Study Using Instructional Rounds and the SAMR Model

Oct 15, 2026

A case study examines how individual computing devices (ICDs) influence learning for students in grades six through twelve, combining instructional rounds leadership practice with the SAMR model of technology integration (substitution, augmentation, modification, redefinition). Researchers observed 27 randomly sampled classrooms and surveyed over 500 students, then conducted interviews with 45 students across eight focus groups. Observational results showed 84% device use and 86% of that use at higher SAMR levels, alongside reported learning gains and recurring implementation concerns.

LanguageEnglish

CategoryResearch & Report

FormatPDF

Pages15

Reading Time38 min

AccessFree to download

Research Questions

Influence of ICDs

Technology Integration and SAMR

When Technology Works: A Case Study Using Instructional Rounds and the SAMR Model Gregory D. Warsen Grand Valley State University Richard M. Vandermolen Grand Valley State University Billions of dollars are spent each year in the United States on technology for schools, and researchers in this case study wanted to determine the degree to which individual computing devices (ICDs) enhance the learning experience of students in grades six to twelve. The leadership practice of instructional rounds (City, Elmore, Fiarmen & Teitel, 2011) combined with the SAMR model (substitution, augmentation, modification and redefinition) (Puentadura, 2014) of technology integration was utilized in this case study to capture how ICDs are being used and the impact this use is having on learning. This method detected use rates far above what had been documented in the literature. By observing 27 randomly sampled classrooms and over 500 students in the case study district, researchers observed how ICDs were being used at the middle and high school level. Observational data analyzed using the SAMR model revealed that 84% of students were using the ICDs and of those, 86% were using them at higher levels of the model (i.e. modification or redefinition). Researchers also interviewed 45 students across eight focus groups. Focus group responses were culled for common themes, some of which included student reports of several learning enhancements as well as some problematic issues. Keywords: one-to-one device, case study, focus groups, technology ICPEL Education Leadership Review, Vol. 21, No. 1– December, 2020 ISSN: 1532-0723 © 2020 International Council of Professors of Educational Leader With advances in technology, educators must ask how (or if) a given advancement can benefit teaching and learning. Schools and districts have considered the use of individual computing devices (ICDs) for their students. Responses to this technology range from not using ICDs at all, having students bring their own device, to districts purchasing an ICD for each student. Many districts have chosen this third strategy, and some estimated six years ago that the annual cost for that decision would rise to as much as $19 billion across the United States (Nagel, 2014) . That estimate was a bit high, the cost has probably approached $11 billion in 2019, and few are successfully measuring its impact (Sadwick, 2019) . That said, the use of ICDs is rising. In 2008, Abell (2008) and Borja (2006) found that 24% of districts in the US were implementing ICDs. By 2010, the implementation rate had increased to 37%(Nagel, 2010) and in 2015 the number of implementing districts had ballooned even further to more than 50%(Molnar, 2015). In 2019, 76% of district administrators report having ICD’s for at least some of grade levels they serve (Mouhana, 2019) . What is driving these decisions to implement technology through the use of ICDs? According to Towndrow and Vallance (2013), three factors have recently influenced educational decision makers and administrators to purchase technical infrastructure to support ICDs in their institutions and schools: ubiquity (technology is everywhere in society), utility (ICD’s are very useful for both teacher and student) and the prospect that technology can act as a change agent for the improvement of the organization (Towndrow & Vallance, 2013) . All three factors were relevant especially when viewed as interrelated. Despite districts’ large investment in ICDs, controversy exists regarding what value the technology brings to the learning environment (Koba, 2015). For example, one study characterized teachers who integrated technology as also having a high sense of self efficacy, but also identified barriers for others such as lack of training and lack of time to implement well (Pi-sui, 2016) . Another study cited the benefits of technology for students to research via the internet, access social media for learning purposes, and organi

FAQs

How did the study measure the impact of ICDs on student learning?

It used direct classroom observation aligned to the SAMR model and collected student reports through focus-group interviews.

What were the key findings about how students used ICDs?

Observed data indicated 84% of students used the ICDs, and 86% of that usage occurred at higher SAMR levels (modification or redefinition).

What types of benefits and concerns did students report?

Student responses included reported learning enhancements and also problematic issues related to technology use.

Oct 15, 2026

Uploaded by CatatanPagi