The Technology Integration Matrix

The Technology Integration Matrix (TIM) provides a framework for describing and targeting the use of technology to enhance learning. The TIM incorporates five interdependent characteristics of meaningful learning environments: active, collaborative, constructive, authentic, and goal-directed. These characteristics are associated with five levels of technology integration: entry, adoption, adaptation, infusion, and transformation. Together, the five characteristics of meaningful learning environments and five levels of technology integration create a matrix of 25 cells, as illustrated below. All TIM descriptors apply equally well to online and face-to-face instruction, Developed by the Florida Center for Instructional Technology (FCIT) in 2005, the TIM is now in its third edition (2019).

 
GO

ENTRY
Information passively received

GO

ADOPTION
Conventional, procedural use of technology tools

GO

ADAPTATION
Conventional independent use of tools; some student choice and exploration

GO

INFUSION
Choice of tools and regular, self-directed use

GO

TRANSFORMATION
Extensive and unconventional use of tools

 
GO

ENTRY
Individual student use of technology tools

GO

ADOPTION
Collaborative use of tools in conventional ways

GO

ADAPTATION
Collaborative use of tools; some student choice and exploration

GO

INFUSION
Choice of tools and regular use for collaboration

GO

TRANSFORMATION
Collaboration with peers, outside experts, and others in ways that may not be possible without technology

 
GO

ENTRY
Information delivered to students

GO

ADOPTION
Guided, conventional use for building knowledge

GO

ADAPTATION
Independent use for building knowledge; some student choice and exploration

GO

INFUSION
Choice and regular use for building knowledge

GO

TRANSFORMATION
Extensive and unconventional use of technology tools to build knowledge

 
GO

ENTRY
Technology use unrelated to the world outside of the instructional setting

GO

ADOPTION
Guided use in activities with some meaningful context

GO

ADAPTATION
Independent use in activities connected to students' lives; some student choice and exploration

GO

INFUSION
Choice of tools and regular use in meaningful activities

GO

TRANSFORMATION
Innovative use for higher-order learning activities connected to the world beyond the instructional setting

 
GO

ENTRY
Directions given; step-by-step task monitoring

GO

ADOPTION
Conventional and procedural use of tools to plan or monitor

GO

ADAPTATION
Purposeful use of tools to plan and monitor; some student choice and exploration

GO

INFUSION
Flexible and seamless use of technology tools to plan and monitor

GO

TRANSFORMATION
Extensive and higher-order use of tools to plan and monitor

 

 
GO

ENTRY
Information passively received

GO

ADOPTION
Conventional, procedural use of tools

GO

ADAPTATION
Conventional independent use of tools; some student choice and exploration

GO

INFUSION
Choice of tools and regular, self-directed use

GO

TRANSFORMATION
Extensive and unconventional use of tools

 
GO

ENTRY
Individual student use of technology tools

GO

ADOPTION
Collaborative use of tools in conventional ways

GO

ADAPTATION
Collaborative use of tools; some student choice and exploration

GO

INFUSION
Choice of tools and regular use for collaboration

GO

TRANSFORMATION
Collaboration with peers, outside experts, and others in ways that may not be possible without technology

 
GO

ENTRY
Information delivered to students

GO

ADOPTION
Guided, conventional use for building knowledge

GO

ADAPTATION
Independent use for building knowledge; some student choice and exploration

GO

INFUSION
Choice and regular use for building knowledge

GO

TRANSFORMATION
Extensive and unconventional use of technology tools to build knowledge

 
GO

ENTRY
Technology use unrelated to the world outside of the instructional setting

GO

ADOPTION
Guided use in activities with some meaningful context

GO

ADAPTATION
Independent use in activities connected to students' lives; some student choice and exploration

GO

INFUSION
Choice of tools and regular use in meaningful activities

GO

TRANSFORMATION
Innovative use for higher-order learning activities connected to the world beyond the instructional setting

 
GO

ENTRY
Directions given; step-by-step task monitoring

GO

ADOPTION
Conventional and procedural use of tools to plan or monitor

GO

ADAPTATION
Purposeful use of tools to plan and monitor; some student choice and exploration

GO

INFUSION
Flexible and seamless use of technology tools to plan and monitor

GO

TRANSFORMATION
Extensive and higher-order use of tools to plan and monitor

 

The Technology Integration Matrix

The Technology Integration Matrix (TIM) provides a framework for describing and targeting the use of technology to enhance learning. The TIM incorporates five interdependent characteristics of meaningful learning environments: active, collaborative, constructive, authentic, and goal-directed. These characteristics are associated with five levels of technology integration: entry, adoption, adaptation, infusion, and transformation. Together, the five characteristics of meaningful learning environments and five levels of technology integration create a matrix of 25 cells, as illustrated below. Developed by the Florida Center for Instructional Technology (FCIT) in 2005, the TIM is now in its third edition (2019).

Each month FCIT publishes a newsletter with short articles on teaching and learning with technology, using digital content in the classroom, and professional development for technology integration. Subscribe today for topics like The TIM and Assistive Technology or Active Learning: Engaging Students’ Minds.

You can also submit stories about how the TIM has been used in your classroom, school, or district.

For More Information....


Review these recent TIM posts from our Teaching and Learning with Technology blog.

ISTE Standards and the Technology Integration Matrix

We spend a great deal of time of each week speaking with school and district leaders who are considering adopting the Technology Integration Matrix (TIM) and TIM Evaluation Tools. Invariably, the conversation comes around to questions about how the TIM relates to....

Bloom’s Cognitive Taxonomy and the TIM

Bloom’s Cognitive Taxonomy is familiar to nearly every educator. The illustration at left shows the six categories of Anderson and Krathwohl’s 2001 revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy: remembering, understanding, applying, analyzing, evaluating, and...

TPACK and the TIM

TPACK is one of the best known frameworks for technology integration. It has its roots in work done in the 1980s by Lee Schulman who noted that is was not sufficient for teachers to know pedagogy and the content of their teaching area as two separate fields. To be...

Choosing Models and Modeling Choices

The Second Handbook of Information Technology in Primary and Secondary Education is out this year and it includes an article by Scott McLeod entitled, “Technology Integration, Leadership, and Organizational Support Frameworks for Instructional Improvement with...

What do we mean by “independent access”?

I was recently talking with a friend at a school district about their upcoming round of TIM observations and we went down an interesting path talking about independence as it is discussed in the Technology Integration Matrix. A lot turns on independence. At the first...

The Invisible Technology Integration Matrix

On the surface, the TIM looks pretty simple. There are five characteristics of effective learning environments: Active, Collaborative, Constructive, Authentic, and Goal-Directed. And there are five levels of technology integration ranging from the Entry to the...

Active Learning: Engaging Students’ Minds

The Technology Integration Matrix was not designed simply to promote the use of technology, but rather to encourage the use of whatever technology is available to promote effective, researched-based pedagogy. When constructing the TIM, we examined how technology could...

Collaborative Learning: Building Knowledge in Community

This is the second in a series on the characteristics of a meaningful learning environment. The first was Active Learning: Engaging Students’ Minds. The Collaborative characteristic describes the degree to which technology is used to facilitate, enable, or...