The 7 I’s of Classroom Technology Integration

---

---

Our new non-judgemental way to start the conversation about how devices are actually being used in your school

I do a lot of work in schools talking to senior leaders about their vision for integrating technology in the classroom. In my conversations, I tend to discover that they don’t usually lack devices — although some are long in the tooth – what they lack is a way of articulating what the devices are for and how they are being used. 

I was in a school recently doing a learning walk to investigate how devices were being used, and I asked one of my favourite questions: “Talk me through a typical day in the life of a device.” I mean a typical day, not one of those all-singing and dancing, quick do something cool because the iPad man is visiting today type days — a real day, a typical rainy Tuesday type of day. Starting from the first excited press of the on switch in the morning to the shutdown before the bell rings for home time. Think about who’s using it? What are they using it for?

I created the 7 I’s because schools tend to talk about devices in terms of who has what, how old things are, and how they are deployed, but rarely in terms of their intended purpose. What I want to do is to prevent that conversation collapsing into guilty looks or an inevitable but unfundable procurement wish list. The need to have a way to honestly discuss what devices are doing is what led me to develop the model. I tested it recently as a vehicle to honestly appraise what’s happening now. There’s no implied hierarchy in the ‘I’s, no expectation to get everything “to the top”. The aim is to quantify existing practices in preparation for an honest evaluation of where you are and now to pave the way for a proper, values-led conversation about whether you’ve got the balance right for your school, and what small changes might make the biggest difference moving forward.

---

What’s The big idea with the 7 I’s?

Most schools can describe their devices in terms of what they are (Chromebooks, iPads, laptops) and sometimes where they are (in trolleys, in classrooms, in cupboards quietly weeping).

Fewer schools can quickly describe them in terms of why they’re being used.

The 7 I’s gives you seven clear “why” buckets:

1) Instruction

Using devices to support direct instruction.

Examples: modelling, explanations, demonstrations, teacher-led delivery, learning how to use the device itself.

2) Information

Using devices to gather, present or access information to support learning.

Examples: research, digital textbooks/resources, reference materials, curated content.

3) Independence

Using devices for student-led practice of core skills.

Examples: using those third-party tools you buy into that support independent learning by drill and practice.

4) Invention

Using devices as a tool to support student creativity.

Examples: making, composing, designing, building, creating responses that didn’t exist before.

5) Inclusion / Intervention

Using devices to remove barriers and provide equitable access to the curriculum.

Examples: assistive tech, scaffolds, targeted interventions, accessibility features used as standard.

6) Interaction

Using devices to facilitate communication, collaboration, and peer-to-peer learning.

Examples: shared documents, peer critique, collaborative projects, working with others beyond the classroom.

7) Insight

Using devices to assess, track progress, and gather data to inform future planning and adaptive teaching.

Examples: formative assessment, feedback loops, digital portfolios, patterns that support planning.

---

What the 7 I’s model is (and what it isn’t)

It is:

• a shared language for purpose
• a reflective tool for leaders and teachers
• a way to spot imbalance and blind spots
• a way to connect devices to ethos and values

It isn’t:

• a judgement framework
• a “most schools should be here” ladder
• a checklist you complete once and file next to the last initiative you recently moved on from
• a replacement for subject-specific thinking

How you are using your devices very much depends on your context. Some schools will lean heavily into Independence because they value deliberate practice and fluency. Some will prioritise Inclusion because equity is front and centre. Some will push Invention and Interaction because they want learners making and collaborating more.

None of those are morally superior. They’re just choices. The model helps you see whether your current reality matches your stated intent.

---

How the 7 I’s complement other models like SAMR

I have been an enthusiastic user of the SAMR model for many years; in fact, it’s been my go-to tool for opening a discussion about instructional design for technology-supported learning.

The 7 I’s sits alongside SAMR nicely because, despite what you may read online, SAMR was never meant to be a ladder you climb so you can plant a flag at the top celebrating your success at “completing” technology. It’s a reflective tool: you use to reflect on the role tech is playing in a specific lesson. It helps you decide where that use currently sits, and if you can make small tweaks to the task design to move it up a level. The 7 I’s helps you zoom out and consider what your devices are doing or what your learner’s are picking up devices to do, while SAMR helps you zoom in and refine how they are being used one lesson at a time. If devices were like cars 7 I’s is your MOT and SAMR is fine-tuning the engine, and adding the go-faster stripes to make the journey more efficient. Use the 7 I’s to zoom out and ask:

• Across a week, what are our devices mostly used for?
• Across a learner’s journey through the curriculum, what are their experiences of using devices to support that journey?
• Across the curriculum, what purposes are under-served or over-valued?

You could use:

• SAMR in planning meetings to refine task design.
• The 7 I’s in leadership and curriculum conversations to check alignment, balance, and intent.

If SAMR is your microscope, the 7 I’s are your wide-angle lens.

---

How to use it in a school to gain valuable insights into how devices are used in school

Here are two practical activities that have worked well in my initial pilot using the model in schools. You can download a printable PDF version to use here

Activity 1: A day in the life of a device

Bring a small mixed group together (SLT, a few teachers, someone pastoral/SEND, someone IT if possible). Put the 7 I’s image in front of everyone.

Then ask:

1. Pick a device type (or a year group set).
2. Walk through yesterday, lesson by lesson.
3. For each touchpoint, decide which “I” best describes its main purpose in that lesson.

Two important rules:

• No judgement or discussion at this point. Just describe reality.
• If you feel you touched more than one I choose the dominant purpose.
• Don’t try to force a single activity into multiple categories.

What you get at the end is a story: “Most of our device use is Information + Instruction, with some Insight, but we have very little Interaction or Invention.” Or whatever your version is.

That story is highly valuable, because it’s the opening chapter of the opportunity to ask better questions.

Activity 2: A learner’s journey through your curriculum

This one is often more revealing.

Choose a “typical learner” and trace their experience across a week in a few subjects or a series of lessons in a subject:

• Where do devices show up to support them?
• What is their purpose each time?
• What kind of learner behaviours are being cultivated?
• What’s missing?

You’ll often spot patterns like:

• devices mainly appear when adults need efficiency (Insight, Instruction)
• creativity is present in isolated “special lessons” where Invention is an occasional visitor
• accessibility is treated as something extra rather than baked in (Inclusion as an afterthought)

Again: the aim is not judgement. Just intelligence.

---

The questions that matter once you can see the pattern for classroom technology integration

Once a school has mapped a day and/or learner’s journey, use these questions to steer the conversation from “devices” to values:

• Which of the 7 I’s best reflects what we say we value most as a school in our ethos and values?
• Which I’s currently dominate the learner experience? What do we think about that?
• Which I’s do we want to strengthen, and why?
• Which are we neglecting, and what’s the cost of that?
• Where are we missing opportunities to remove barriers (Inclusion) because staff aren’t confident with the tools?
• Where could we redesign one task per year group to strengthen Interaction or Invention?
• Where are we generating Insight? Are we adapting teaching as a result?

That last one is a classic: collecting data like it’s Pokémon is pointless if it never evolves into anything.

Set up some quick wins

• Pick one I to strengthen over a half-term.
• Pick one lesson per subject to adjust.
• Review impact on learning, workload and inclusion.

---

People will ask: “So what’s the ideal distribution?”

Sorry, but there isn’t one, just like you can’t say with SAMR that your lessons are all 100% Redefinition. If you want a simple answer, I’m afraid there isn’t an infographic shaped like a latte where the I’s are compared to variations on how you like your espresso.

A school with a strong knowledge-rich approach might legitimately lean into Instruction + Independence + Insight. A project-based curriculum might lean into Invention + Interaction. A school doing exceptional SEND work might see Inclusion featuring far more prominently than elsewhere — and rightly so.

The point is not to chase someone else’s pie chart.

The point is to ask: does our current mix match our ethos and values? And if not, what one or two changes would make the biggest difference?

---

So having done that you have some data – Where do you go next?

If you’re using this as a staff discussion tool, finish with some tangible next steps:

• Pick one subject, one year group, one half-term.
• Identify one “I” you want to strengthen.
• Make one small change to task design (that’s where SAMR comes back in).
• Review impact: learner experience, teacher workload, inclusion, quality of work.

Keep it deliberately small. Schools don’t need another giant hoop to try and vault through. We have enough of those in education. Instead focus on a few well-chosen, well-supported adjustments that might actually stick.

---

Final thought

The most useful thing this model does is change the conversation from:

“Are we using devices enough?”
to
“Are we using devices on purpose?”

Once you can answer that, everything gets easier: CPD becomes sharper, investment decisions become calmer, and the technology starts serving learning rather than demanding attention like an overexcited puppy.

If you try the 7 I’s in your school, I’d genuinely love to hear what patterns you notice — and which “I” you think you’re accidentally over-feeding.

---

FAQ