10-12 page paper proposing the implementation of a school-wide framework for enhancing digital literacy in a specific educational setting. Submit a 10–12-page scholarly, APA-formatted paper in which you: Develop SAMR objectives for the implementation of the framework.Evaluate the alignment of your objectives with the overall goal.Evaluate the alignment of your objectives with the unique characteristics of the specific educational setting.Evaluate the alignment of your objectives with the professional literature.Determine a curricular focus. Will your framework address gaps in proficiency through:The addition of ICT classes to the curriculum?The integration of technology within existing classes?Extra-curricular classes?Some other approach?Discuss the role of stakeholders in the school community.Explain the actions that need to be taken to implement the framework, including an explanation of why these actions need to happen.What challenges do you anticipate when implementing this framework? What proactive strategies could stakeholders use for addressing the potential challenges you identified?Propose a plan for promoting and sustaining consensus among all relevant stakeholders, such as students, administrators, teachers, and parents.List resources needed to carry out the implementation of the framework. Consider the resources that may be needed within the target school or district as well as resources that may be needed from the community.Develop a comprehensive framework to enhance digital literacy in all students.Your framework should:Impact all students in the specific educational setting.Be specific, logically presented, and ready for implementation. Digital Literacy Fluck, A., Webb, M., Cox, M., Angeli, C., Malyn-Smith, J., Voogt, J., & Zagami, J. (2016). Arguing for computer science in the school curriculum. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 19(3), 38–46.Hatlevik, O. E., Guðmundsdóttir, G. B., & Loi, M. (2015). Digital diversity among upper secondary students: A multilevel analysis of the relationship between cultural capital, self-efficacy, strategic use of information and digital competence. Computers & Education, 81, 345–353.This article explores “digital diversity among upper secondary students… analysis showed differences in students’ digital competence and indication of digital diversity on both student and school level.”Hicks, T., & Turner, K. H. (2013). No longer a luxury: Digital literacy can’t wait. The English Journal,102(6), 58–65.This article explores practices that are not conducive to digital literacy and suggests practices for instructors.Howard, S. K., Ma, J., & Yang, J. (2016). Student rules: Exploring patterns of students’ computer-efficacy and engagement with digital technologies in learning. Computers & Education, 101, 29–42.This article explores the misconception that all students are experienced in the use of technology. A study was conducted to examine “unique patterns among key factors of students’ technology use and experiences related to learning as a way to inform teachers’ practice and learning design.”Hull, G., Scott, J., & Higgs, J. (2014). The nerdy teacher: Pedagogical identities for a digital age. The Phi Delta Kappan, 95(7), 55–60.This article explains “pedagogical implications of this new digital world that are important for classroom teachers and for those who prepare teachers-to-be.”Ng, W. (2012). Can we teach digital natives digital literacy? Computers & Education, 59(3), 1065–1078.This article studied undergraduate students and “their degree of digital literacy and the ease with which they learn to make use of unfamiliar technologies.” ISTE Standards International Society of Technology in Education. (1998). National educational technology standards for students. Retrieved from http://www.orlandodiocese.org/images/stories/schoo…International Society of Technology in Education. (n.d.). ISTE standards for students. Retrieved from https://www.iste.org/standards/standards/standards… Green, L. S. (2014). Through the looking glass. Knowledge Quest, 43(1), 36–43.This article compares the SAMR model to TPACK.Green, L., Inan, F., & Maushak, N. (2014). A case study: The role of student-generated vidcasts in K–12 language learner academic language and content acquisition. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 46(3), 297–324.Herold, B. (2016). What it takes to move from ‘passive’ to ‘active’ tech use in K–12 schools. The Education Digest, 82(2), 33–38.Kingsley, T., & Tancock, S. (2014). Internet inquiry. Reading Teacher, 67(5), 389–399.This article explains “the online research and comprehension competencies students will need to successfully engage with Internet inquiry.”Williams, L. (2015). Flipped classrooms 2.0. University Business, 18(5), 47–48.View the following Capella media piece about Digital Bloom’s Taxonomy.Digital Bloom’s Taxonomy | Transcript. Use the Internet to research the SAMR framework, especially how it aligns with Bloom’s Digital Taxonomy. The SAMR model supports and enables teachers to design, develop, and implement learning experiences that utilize technology (2014). The levels of SAMR coincide with Bloom’s Taxonomy, and hence promote different types of learning. The first two levels, Substitute and Augment, are considered to be teacher directed, in that the teacher redesigns learning tasks to incorporate technology. The higher levels, Modify and Redefine, are considered to be student directed, in that the availability of technology allows students to drive their own learning by modifying or redefining the learning tasks. The SAMR model supports and enables teachers to design, develop, and implement learning experiences that utilize technology (2014). The levels of SAMR coincide with Bloom’s Taxonomy, and hence promote different types of learning. The first two levels, Substitute and Augment, are considered to be teacher directed, in that the teacher redesigns learning tasks to incorporate technology. The higher levels, Modify and Redefine, are considered to be student directed, in that the availability of technology allows students to drive their own learning by modifying or redefining the learning tasks. Reference Puentedura, R. (2014, June 29). Learning, technology and the SAMR model: Goals, processes and practice [Blog post]. Retrieved from http://hippasus.com/blog/archives/date/2014/06 Part of your summative assessment involves the role of stakeholders. If you would like to deepen your knowledge about stakeholder perceptions on improving technology proficiency, consider: Meeting with students, teachers, administrators, and members of the wider educational community.Collecting data on stakeholder perceptions of digital proficiency among students in the specific educational setting.Stakeholder perspectives on how to improve digital proficiency in that educational setting. You would seek ideas that explicitly align with that setting about which these stakeholders may know more than you do.Stakeholder willingness to engage proactively with an initiative to improve the digital proficiency of students in that educational setting.
