Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK) attempts to capture some of the essential qualities of knowledge required by teachers for technology integration in their teaching, while addressing the complex, multifaceted and situated nature of teacher knowledge . At the heart of the TPACK framework, is the complex interplay of three primary forms of knowledge: Content (CK) , Pedagogy (PK) , and Technology (TK) . See Figure above. As must be clear, the TPACK framework builds on Shulman's idea of Pedagogical Content Knowledge. *tpack.org.
True technology integration is understanding and negotiating the relationships between these three components of knowledge. A teacher capable of negotiating these relationships represents a form of expertise different from, and greater than, the knowledge of a disciplinary expert (say a mathematician or a historian), a technology expert (a computer scientist) and a pedagogical expert (an experienced educator). Effective technology integration for pedagogy around specific subject matter requires developing sensitivity to the dynamic, [transactional] relationship between all three components .*tpack.org
In a student-centered classroom, students are encouraged to participate actively in learning the material as it is presented rather than being passive and perhaps taking notes quietly. Students are involved throughout the class time in activities that help them construct their understanding of the material that is presented. The instructor no longer delivers a vast amount of information, but uses a variety of hands-on activities to promote learning. Students working in groups As I learned more about student-centered learning environments, I began to alter the way I taught my chemistry classes. I have now developed a group of learning strategies that I call LecturePLUS to promote P articipation , L earning, U nderstanding, and S uccess. *http://www.karentimberlake.com/student-centered_classoom.htm
Using the definition from Karen Timberlake, a Chemistry teacher from Los Angeles Valley College, please take what you have read, use her definition and write a small description on what you are doing now .
Are your thoughts similar to hers or do you think that SCALE looks different?
Remember that this version is from a “college” perspective, as most of the research for this is geared towards.
One of the topics to discuss: Identified subgroups (defined) Identified: recognize as being; establish the identity of someone or something; "She identified the man on the 'wanted' poster" Subgroup : A well-defined group of students. It is important in this context because the requirements of No Child Left Behind. No Child Left Behind identifies the following specific subgroups that must achieve Adequate Yearly Progress: students of racial or ethnic minority, students with disabilities, gender, limited-English-proficient (LEP) students, and economically disadvantaged students. In your own words, what does it mean as a teacher to work with an “identified subgroup?” Who “identified” the “subgroup?”
Enhancing the TPACK model with Assistive Technology
Assistive technology training has been traditionally viewed as an add-on specialization for special education teachers (Edyburn & Gardner, 1999). A representation of this in relation to the TPACK model is presented in Figure 1.
AT and IT should be taught as a symbiotic construct throughout the teacher education process, so that teachers can explicitly identify the beneficial features of the technology interface in a manner that informs their active participation in the assistive technology consideration process. A visual representation of our enhanced TPACK model with the inclusion of assistive technology is represented in Figure 2.
*Of critical note in Figure 2 is the notion that assistive technology does not fully eclipse technology in the model.
Assistive technology for students with learning disabilities are devices meant to scaffold students' cognitive processes in order to enhance each individual student's unique processing abilities and maximize learning outcomes. Examples include screen readers, speech-to-text software, and technology-based scaffolds, such as digital outlines of text or question prompts embedded in technology-based interfaces. Unfortunately, the goals associated with the appropriate selection, adoption, implementation, and assessment of assistive technology have not been realized (Anderson & Petch-Hogan, 2001; Jackson, 2003; West & Jones, 2007; Zorfass & Rivero, 2005).