Challenges in Integrating Technology in Education: Remedial Strategies Using the PICRAT Model

This article aims to provide insights for teachers, students and professionals in learning and human development. The increasing integration of technology into education is widely recognised and is often seen as a critical component of the evolving educational landscape. There was a time when using presentations in teaching was optional; now, however, it has become a standard practice in classrooms around the globe. Furthermore, a variety of technologies are currently being employed in educational settings. Today's relevant question is whether incorporating technology in education truly benefits teachers and students.

To address this question, it is essential to acknowledge that integrating technology into education does not automatically guarantee benefits. The assumption that educational technologies (EdTechs) inherently lead to positive outcomes is often based on superficial beliefs rather than comprehensive, research-backed evidence (National Education Technology Plan: US Department of Education, 20204). In many instances, the optimistic views regarding educational technology stem from confirmation bias, sometimes resulting in an abrupt shift to EdtEch. For example, consider the scenario where teachers at a rural school are suddenly instructed to begin using projectors for their lessons within a week. A significant number would probably encounter difficulties, not due to an inherent flaw in their capabilities but because they lack the specific skills required for this technology, a clear indication of a readiness gap. Similarly, introducing a learning management system in an institution where some students lack access to devices raises questions about equitable progress. Although technology implementation might seem successful on the surface, if it results in a scenario where only some students actively engage with the material while others merely coast along, it prompts us to consider the extent of actual advancement. These obstacles indicate that integrating educational technology can lead to a productivity paradox, where the output does not proportionately reflect the time and money invested in technology use.

Three critical considerations must be taken into account when integrating technology into education. Firstly, the issue of the access gap or digital divide is paramount. This gap refers to unequal access to technological resources, such as devices or the Internet (Dijk, 2019). It's not just a matter of having or not having access; the quality of access also plays a significant role (Dijk, 2019). For instance, disparities between individuals with high-quality devices or internet connections and those with inferior ones exemplify this access gap. Secondly, the variance in digital literacy among teachers and their differing workloads cannot be overlooked. In addition, when discussing the incorporation of technology into educational practices, the concept of digital pedagogy emerges as a vital consideration, deserving further exploration. The disparity in skills, time, and resources across educational settings further complicates matters. For example, the resources available to a teacher in a well-funded government school or a large public university are not the same as those accessible to a teacher in a rural school or a newly established university. These disparities give rise to what is known as the design divide (National Education Technology Plan: US Department of Education, 20204).

The third major challenge in educational technology is the usage divide. This refers to the difference between passive and active use of technology (National Education Technology Plan: US Department of Education, 20204). Passive use refers to merely watching a lecture recording or reading a PDF, contrasted with active use, where technology is employed for creating assignments, conducting experiments, or engaging in simulations. While passive use offers limited benefits, active engagement with technology can significantly enhance learning outcomes. Therefore, educators and those interested in educational technology must adopt formal standards, frameworks, or models. These tools are crucial for addressing the challenges above and advancing the efficacy of teaching and learning through technology.

Multiple standards, models, and frameworks exist to guide technology integration in education, including the ISTE standards, the TPACK (Technology, Pedagogy, and Content Knowledge) framework, the SAMR model, and the PICRAT model. The PICRAT model, as detailed by Kimmons et al. (2020), is notably practical for technology integration, presenting a straightforward matrix structure (See Figure 1). This matrix comprises three rows labelled PIC: P for Passive, I for Interactive, and C for Creative—from the bottom to the top. Correspondingly, the columns are denoted as RAT: R for Replace, A for Amplification, and T for Transformation. The PIC rows categorise the students' engagement with education technology, whereas the RAT columns reflect the pedagogical application of technology by the teacher.

The optimal application of educational technology is represented by the upper right quadrant, Creative+Transformation (CT), which maximises teacher and student benefits. In contrast, the lower left quadrant, Passive+Replacement (PR), signifies a minimal impact approach to technology use. To illustrate, transitioning from a traditional whiteboard to delivering lectures via text-only slides represents Passive Replacement, offering limited educational enhancement. On the other hand, assigning students home-based tasks such as problem-solving with a PDF or conducting a quiz exemplifies Interactive Replacement. Further, if a student engages with a PDF or PPT to craft a report or utilises Padlet for forum discussions, this demonstrates Creative Replacement. Incorporating a YouTube video or animation into slides for elucidating complex concepts or showcasing a Phet simulation constitutes Passive Amplification. When students are enabled to interact with simulations beyond passive observation, this is termed Interactive Amplification. Lastly, soliciting student reflections on content or opinions via Moodle, Mentimeter, or similar platforms is recognised as Creative Amplification, further enriching the educational experience.

The most advanced and effective method of employing educational technology is transformational EdTech use. Imagine a scenario where a teacher enriches the classroom experience by integrating real-life elements beyond mere slides, videos, or simulations. For instance, inviting an industry expert for a brief, insightful discussion via Zoom, conducting live demonstrations akin to those performed by renowned physics professors, or engagingly exploring concepts such as Newton's third law are examples of passive transformation.

In Interactive Transformation, a personal approach I adopt in programming classes involves soliciting real-time student feedback through various interactive tools and H5P content. This method significantly enhances engagement and learning outcomes.

The pinnacle of educational technology use, however, is Creative Transformation. An example would be instructing students to apply knowledge from a PowerPoint presentation or transformed lecture by undertaking research projects that culminate in creating videos or posters. Tools like Canva or other video editing software or presentation makers facilitate student collaboration, encouraging a deeper understanding and application of the subject matter. This Creative+Transformation approach not only leverages technology to enhance learning but also fosters creativity, teamwork, and practical application of knowledge, epitomising the optimal integration of educational technology in teaching and learning processes.

In conclusion, the market is flooded with myriad technologies that can be harnessed for educational purposes. However, the key to effectively leveraging these technologies lies in their application method and their tangible benefits to the educational process. It is essential to meticulously plan the integration of educational technology, guided by a robust model or framework. The PICRAT model stands out for its practicality, offering a structured approach to incorporating technology into teaching and learning. By adhering to such a model, educators and students alike can ensure that the deployment of educational technology is both strategic and impactful. I hope this article enlightens educators and students on the nuanced ways of employing educational technology to its highest potential, enhancing the academic experience through EdTEch.