Selecting the best tool for the job

“If all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail” — Abraham Maslow

Having a toolbox full of tools can make it easier to fix problems. But how do you know which tool to use? Below is a quick overview of different theoretical frameworks that can be used to select the right technology tool for creating a digital learning resource:

• SECTIONS – considers the following factors: students, ease of use, cost, teaching, interaction, organizational issues, networking, security and privacy
• RAT – assesses the value of the tool based on whether it replaces, amplifies, or transforms instruction and learning goals
• SAMR – assesses technology similar to RAT: substitution (replaces existing tech), augmentation (replaces existing tech and has improvements), modification (redesigns learning tasks), redefinition (allows for brand new learning tasks)
• TPACK – explains three levels of knowledge needed for instruction: technological (mostly digital), pedagogical (learning strategies), and content (subject matter expertise)

After reading articles on SECTIONS and RAT in depth and skimming articles on SMAR and TPACK, the theoretical framework I’ve chosen to use is SECTIONS.

• What are the affordances and limitations of the framework?
  • The framework can be used for both in person and digital learning environments.
  • The framework provides a macro versus micro perspective, which is useful at the outset of media selection.
  • The recommendations contained within the framework are practical in a variety of contexts.
• What are the limitations of the framework?
  • The framework does not consider social, cultural, or political factors external to an organization, which is particularly important for international contexts.
  • The framework does not consider the internal factors of learners (e.g., motivation, satisfaction) that could affect a successful outcome.
  • The framework does not address how to use media once it has been selected.
  • The framework does not consider which content might lend itself to certain media more than others.
• How well does the framework align to your existing educational and pedagogical practices?
  • I like the SECTIONS framework because it has clearly defined criteria and guidelines that can be applied. The framework provides a clear structure that can guide my thinking and conversations with clients. The other frameworks seemed more theoretical and abstract, which would be harder to explain to people without a background in learning and technology.
  • My preference is to let content (second only to learners) drive media selection, and this framework does not allow for that.
• How did the application of the framework impact your decision-making process?
  • I have not yet applied the framework because I am still assessing the existing materials to see how the content can be improved. Once I have a solid grasp on what content needs to be created, I will be in a better position to select the appropriate media and tool. However, after reviewing the top tools for learning, I have identified the following categories that I will assess against the framework:
    • Writing tools
    • Language tools
    • Video tools
    • Graphic design tools
    • Presentation tools
    • Content sharing platforms
    • Audio tools
    • Animation tools
    • Internet tools
    • Learner response tools
• Which components of the framework did you find most valuable to your decision-making process? Why?
  • It would be difficult to call out any one component of the framework as more useful than another, but I would have appreciated a greater level of detail regarding organizational issues, networking, and security and privacy, as those components were not as robust as the other components.