SlideShare a Scribd company logo
1 of 96
Download to read offline
MEASURING TPACK
International symposium on TPACK


    Joke Voogt, Petra Fisser, Ayoub Kafyulilo, Douglas Agyei (University of Twente)
             Johan van Braak, Jo Tondeur, Natalie Pareja Roblin (Ghent University)
    Denise Schmidt-Crawford, Dale Niederhauser, Wei Wang (Iowa State University)


                                               SITE 2013, 27 March 2013, New Orleans
Invited international symposium on TPACK

 2010
  Strategies for teacher professional development on TPACK
 2011
  Teachers‟ assessment of TPACK: Where are we and what is
  needed?
 2012
  Developing TPACK around the world: Probing the framework even
  as we apply it


 2013: Measuring TPACK
Conceptualizing
          TPACK




 Strategies to
acquire TPACK




         Measuring
          effects
The Netherlands
                 Belgium

Iowa State


             Ghana      Tanzania
Part 1

 Introduction to the symposium – Joke Voogt


 Measuring TPACK: Further Validation of the Technological
  Pedagogical Content Knowledge Survey for Preservice
  (TPACK) Teachers - Denise Schmidt-Crawford, Wei Wang, Dale
  Niederhauser, Iowa State University


 Unraveling the TPACK model: finding TPACK-Core –
  Petra Fisser & Joke Voogt, University of Twente, The Netherlands,
  Johan van Braak & Jo Tondeur, Ghent University, Belgium


 Discussion with the Audience
MEASURING TPACK:
    Further Validation of the
          TPACK Survey
    for Preservice Teachers

      Denise A. Schmidt-Crawford
          Dale Niederhauser
              Wei Wang
Center for Technology in Learning and Teaching
              School of Education
             Iowa State University
Validation of TPACK Survey
Schmidt, D. A., Baran, E., Thompson, A. D., Mishra, P.,
Koehler, M. J., & Shin, T. S. (2009-10). Technological
Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK): The
Development and Validation of an Assessment Instrument for
Preservice Teachers. Journal of Research on Technology in
Education, 42, 123-149.

      Characteristics:
      • 47 likert-item survey
      • Seven constructs
      • Preservice teachers (elementary & early childhood education)
Sampling of Requests…
Sampling of Requests…
The Problem
• Other researchers using the survey were finding
  different patterns of results:
      • Factors were not stable
          • Items were loading on different factors
          • Factors were not aligning with the
            conceptual model
Further Analysis
• Research Context:
  • 3-credit, introduction to technology course (15 weeks)
  • Required for elementary education and early childhood education majors
  • Attend two, 1-hour lectures and one, 2-hour laboratory session every
    week

• Participants:
  • 534 preservice teachers
  • 82% elementary education majors, 16% early childhood education
    majors, 2% other
  • 88% female; 12% male
  • 23% freshmen, 40% sophomores, 30% juniors, 7% seniors
  • 72% had not yet completed a practicum experience

• Research Procedures:
  • Online survey administered at the end of the course (15-25 minutes to
    complete)
Data Analysis
      • Principle components
        factor analysis
        (Varimax with Kaiser
        Normalization)
      • Internal consistency
        (Cronbach‟s alpha)
TPACK as an Exploded Abstraction
                T




           P        C
Results

1. TK, PK, TPK, TCK factors remained the same.

       TPACK         Total      Eigen
      Construct     Items       Values
         TK            6            .877
         PK            7            .921
        TPK            9            .902
        TCK            5            .879
Results

                            2. CK is messy!
      TPACK                 Total         Combined              Eigen
     Construct             Items            Items               Value
        CK                   12                3                    .854
Comment:
I can use a ____________ way of thinking.
I have various ways and strategies for developing my understanding of __________.
I have sufficient knowledge about _____________.
Results

           3. PCK – Math item dropped out.

           TPACK                  Total              Eigen
          Construct              Items               Value
            PCK                     3                    .865
Comment:
Indicated the participants were not answering “math” question in ways that
aligned with the other content areas.
Results

4. TPACK – Two factors emerged (content, general).

         TPACK         Total     Eigen
        Construct     Items      Values
         Content         4           .885
         General         4           .917
Measuring TPACK
• Collecting information about preservice teachers‟ perception of what
  they know
     • Direct measure of self perception
     • Indirect measure of knowledge
• Start using direct measures for some TPACK constructs
     • e.g., CK – Content specific measures, PK – Praxis test
• Program evaluation – Provides metrics of key places in teacher
  education program
     • What is working? What is not? (Interventions)
• Start looking at TPACK as a dynamic model – What kinds of
  experiences can we provide to build “overlap?”
Returning to the Problem
• Using survey with „other‟ populations (i.e.,
  inservice teachers)
• Using survey with a focus on a specific
  content area (i.e., math, science)
• Using survey in different countries

• Validity & reliability are effected by
  population and content area
QUESTIONS?
      Denise A. Schmidt-Crawford
         dschmidt@iastate.edu

            Dale Niederhauser
             dsn@iastate.edu

               Wei Wang
          weiyui72@iastate.edu
Center for Technology in Learning and Teaching
              School of Education
             Iowa State University
Unraveling the TPACK model: finding TPACK-Core


                                    Joke Voogt, Petra Fisser
                                            University of Twente
                               Johan van Braak, Jo Tondeur
                                       Ghent University, Belgium

                             SITE, New Orleans, 27 March 2013
Aim of the study: Empirical exploration of the TPACK model

                             Can we reproduce the distinguished
                              constructs of the TPACK conceptual
                              framework as represented in the Venn
                              diagram with our data?
                             If not:
                               can we unravel the model?
                               can we find new constructs?
                               can we develop a new instrument that
                                measures the self-perception of
                                (pre-service) teachers?
Why this study?

 We became fascinated by
   the attractiveness of the model
   the acceptance of the model by teachers
   but also by the complexity of the model (and what‟s behind it)
 We worked on
   Survey for pre-service teachers
   Professional development for
    in-service teachers
   Literature review (JCAL, 2012)
   Discussions/debates/presentations
We all know the TPACK model:




      “At the heart of good teaching with technology
                are three core components:
            content, pedagogy, and technology,
                   plus the relationships
                among and between them.”
                      (Koehler & Mishra, 2006)
The context of the study

 The Netherlands                     Flanders, Belgium
 Pre-service teachers                Teacher educators
 Use of technology in the science    Use of technology in different
 domain                              domains

 Sample:                             Sample:
    - 287 pre-service teachers          - 146 teacher educators
    - age 16-24                         - age 26-61
    - 24% male, 76% female              - 29% male, 71% female
    - distributed over 4 years of       - 1-38 years experience as
    study                                  teacher educator
 Instrument: TPACK Survey            Instrument: TPACK Survey
 (Schmidt et al., 2009), all items   (Schmidt et al., 2009), T-related
                                     items
Results (NL), reliability

 Reliability all TPACK-items together: Cronbach‟s α = 0.92
 Reliability for all categories within
                                          Domain   Cronbach’s α
  the TPACK Survey:
                                          TK       .90

                                          PK       .75

                                          CK       .74

                                          PCK      .63

                                          TCK      .85

                                          TPK      .72

                                          TPCK     .83

                                          Models   .73
Results (NL), factor analysis

 Factor analysis
   Can we measure TPACK by asking questions for each of the
    7 TPACK domains?
   Are we measuring the 7 TPACK domains?
 Exploratory factor analysis (PC, Varimax) revealed 11 factors,
  68% of variance explained
 Further analysis of the factors lead to forcing to 7 factors, 58% of
  variance explained.


 But… are these 7 factors the same as the 7 TPACK-domains??
Results (NL), factor analysis

factor   Items in factor                 Name factor             Reliability
                                                                 Cronbach’s α
1        TK1 TK2 TK3 TK4 TK5 TK6 TK7     Technological           .90
                                         Knowledge
2        PK1 PK2 PK3 PK4 PK5 PK6 PK7     Pedagogical Knowledge   .75

3        CK1 CK2 CK3 PCK1 PCK2           Pedagogical Science     .80
                                         Content Knowledge
4        TCK1 TCK2 TCK3 TCK4 TCK5 TCK6   Technological &         .88
         TPK1 TPK2                       Pedagogical enhanced
         TPCK2 TPCK3 TPCK4 TPCK6         Science Content
                                         Knowledge
5        TPK3 TPK4 TPK5                  Critically applying     .73
         TPCK1 TPCK5                     learned TPACK
6        Model1 Model2 Model3 Model4     Role models of TPACK    .73

7        TPCK7 TPCK8 TPCK9 TPCK10        TPACK Leadership        .89
Results (NL), first findings

 Yes: TK and PK (and “role models”)
 No: CK, PCK, TCK, TPK and TPCK
   CK and PCK are combined
   TCK is combined with some of the TPK and some of the TPCK
    items and form a “Core TPACK” dimension
   The other TPK and TPCK items are combined and form a scale
    “critically thinking about what you learned in your study before
    applying it”
   Except for 4 TPCK items that form a “TPACK Leadership” scale
Results (NL), focusing on the T-related items

factor   Items in factor                 Name factor             Reliability
                                                                 Cronbach’s α
1        TK1 TK2 TK3 TK4 TK5 TK6 TK7     Technological           .90
                                         Knowledge
2        PK1 PK2 PK3 PK4 PK5 PK6 PK7     Pedagogical Knowledge   .75

3        CK1 CK2 CK3 PCK1 PCK2           Pedagogical Science     .80
                                         Content Knowledge
4        TCK1 TCK2 TCK3 TCK4 TCK5 TCK6   Technological &         .88
         TPK1 TPK2                       Pedagogical enhanced
         TPCK2 TPCK3 TPCK4 TPCK6         Science Content
                                         Knowledge
5        TPK3 TPK4 TPK5                  Critically applying     .73
         TPCK1 TPCK5                     learned TPACK
6        Model1 Model2 Model3 Model4     Role models of TPACK    .73

7        TPCK7 TPCK8 TPCK9 TPCK10        TPACK Leadership        .89
Using the NL-results in the Flanders study

 Survey for teacher educators
 Only the T-related items from the TPACK Survey
 Specific science-related items were left out, all items were transformed
  to “your content area”


 Reliability all TPACK-items together: Cronbach‟s α = 0.97
 Reliability for all categories within   Domain    Cronbach’s α
  the TPACK Survey:
                                          TK        .95

                                          TCK       .92

                                          TPK       .83

                                          TPCK      .96
Results (FL)

 Goal: Confirmatory Factor Analysis on the NL-data
 First: doing the Factor analysis again on the NL-data with only the
  TPACK Survey items that were included in the FL-survey:

  factor   Items in factor               Name factor          Reliability
                                                              Cronbach’s α
  1        TK1 TK2 TK3 TK4 TK5 TK6 TK7   TK                   .90

  2        TCK1 TCK2 TCK3 TCK4           TCK & TPK            .85
           TPK1 TPK2
           (TPCK1)
  3        TPCK1 TPCK2 TPCK3 TPCK4       TPCK                 .77
           TPCK5 TPCK6
           (TPCK1)
Results (FL)

 Next, the Confirmatory
  Factor Analysis:


 Yes, there is a good fit:
 But:
   the correlations
     between the factors
     are also very high,
   a 1- or 2-factor
     solution might be
     possible*
Unraveling the TPACK model

 When it comes to technology integration…
 Factors:
   TK, TPK/TCK, & TPCK
   or… TK & TPK/TCK/TPCK?
   or… TK/TPK/TCK/TPCK?
 The integration of the domains as described by Koehler & Mishra go
  beyond the 3 circles and the overlapping areas!


 But what does that mean?
TK, TPK/TCK, & TPCK

 TK items are very general:
  “I know how to solve my own technical problems”, “I can learn
  technology easily”, “I keep up with important new technologies”
 TPK and TCK items are much more related to (the preparation of)
  lessons:
  “I can choose technologies that enhance the teaching approaches for
  a lesson” and “I can choose technologies that enhance the content for
  a lesson”
 TPCK items are related to lessons and activities in the classroom:
  “I can teach lessons that appropriately combine science, technologies,
  and teaching approaches”, “I can select technologies to use in my
  classroom that enhance what I teach, how I teach, and what students
  learn”
Getting closer to TPACK Core
 Propositions:
  1. TK is conditional for TCK, TPK and TPCK
     (Voogt, Fisser, Gibson, Knezek & Tondeur, 2012)
     (& recent regression analysis)
  2. The combination of TPK, TCK and TPCK is the heart (or the core)
     of the model (TPACK Core)




   And if you take a close look..
It has been there the whole time!
                 
                                                            “At the heart of good teaching with technology
                                                                      are three core components:
                                                                 content, pedagogy, and technology,
                                                                         plus the relationships
                                                                      among and between them.”
                                                                               (Koehler & Mishra, 2006)
What does this mean for measuring TPACK?

 Can we keep the survey items for TK, TCK, TPK and TPCK?
 Or do we need to develop a new set of items that measures TPACK
  Core?


 We don‟t have the answer (yet)..
What does this mean for measuring TPACK?

 What we do know:
   Developing an instrument that is suitable for every situation is
    impossible
   It is the specific context that matters most, and T, P and C are
    always context-dependent!
   Measuring TPACK by a self-reporting survey is not enough
      More measurement moments are needed
      More instruments (observation, lesson plan rubric, etc) are
       needed
More information?

 Ideas about (measuring) TPACK Core? Please contact us!
   Petra Fisser: p.h.g.fisser@utwente.nl




           And for the Dutch & Flemish people  htpp://www.tpack.nl 
Part 2

 Welcome back!
 TPACK development in teacher design teams: assessing
  teachers’ perceived and observed knowledge - Ayoub Kafyulilo,
  Dar es salaam University College of Education, Tanzania; Petra
  Fisser & Joke Voogt, University of Twente, The Netherlands
 Long term impact of TPACK: From pre-service teacher learning
  to professional and teaching practices - Douglas Agyei,
  University of Cape Coast, Ghana; Joke Voogt, University of Twente,
  The Netherlands
 Discussant: Natalie Pareja Roblin – University of Ghent, Belgium
 Discussion with Audience
TPACK development in teacher design teams:
Assessing the teachers’ perceived and observed
                  knowledge

                                                Ayoub Kafyulilo,
                   Dar es salaam University College of Education


                                   Petra Fisser and Joke Voogt,
                                            University of Twente
Introduction

 This study was conducted with the in-service science teachers in
  Tanzania.
 It adopted design teams as professional development arrangement
  to develop teachers‟ technology integration knowledge and skills.
 TPACK was used as a framework for describing the teachers‟
  knowledge requirements for integrating technology in science
  teaching
The Intervention

 The study comprised of four intervention activities
   The workshop
   Lesson design in design teams
   Lesson implementation in the classroom
      Mostly a projector and a laptop were used in teaching
   Reflection with peers (peer appraisal)
Lesson design in design teams
An example of a classroom set up with a projector, laptop
and a projection screen
Research questions

  What is the in-service science teachers‟ perceived TPACK before and
   after intervention?


  What are the observed in-service science teachers‟ TPACK before and
   after intervention?
Participants

 The study adopted a case study design
   Design teams were study cases
   Individual teachers were the units of analysis.
 12 in-service science teachers participated in the study.
 The 12 teachers formed three design teams (each with 4 teachers)
Instrument

 Six data collection instrument were used in this study to collect self-
  reported and observed data.
 Self reported data were collected through;
   TPACK survey,
   Reflection survey,
   Focus group discussion and
   Interview
 Observation data were collected through;
   Classroom observation checklist,
   Researcher‟s logbook
TPACK Survey (pre and post-intervention)

 The TPACK survey was used before and after the intervention


 The instrument was adopted from Schmidt et al (2009) and Graham et al
  (2009) and used a 5 point Likert scale


 The reliability was 0.93 Cronbach‟s alpha
Observation checklist

 The observation checklist was administered before and during the
  intervention


 The items had a 3 point Likert scale: “No” = absence, “No/Yes” = partial
  existence, and “Yes” = presence of the behavior


 Two people rated the observation checklist and the inter-rater reliability
  was 0.87 Cohen Kappa.
The reflection survey

 The reflection survey was administered at the end of the intervention to
  assess the teachers‟ opinions about learning technology in design teams


 The overall reliability for items related to TPACK was 0.68 Cronbach‟s
  alpha.
Researcher’s logbook

 The researchers‟ logbook was used to maintain a record of activities and
  events occurring during the intervention process.


 The researcher‟s logbook was used during peer appraisal, TPACK
  training and lesson design.


 Data collected through the researchers logbook were important in
  describing the interventions processes.
Teachers’ interview

 The interview was administered at the end of the intervention to asses the
  effectiveness of design teams in teachers‟ development of TPACK
 An example of the interview question was:
   What technology integration knowledge and skills did you develop
    from design teams?
 Four randomly selected interviews out of12 interviewees were coded by a
  second person.
 The inter-coder reliability was 0.83 Cohen Kappa.
Focus group discussion

 A focus group discussion was administered at the end of the intervention
 An example of the question asked in FGD was:
   How do you evaluate the results of your discussion in design teams; in
    terms of the products you made, decisions in the team, new ideas and
    innovations
 Two randomly selected FGD were coded by a second person.
 The inter-coder reliability was 0.92 Cohen Kappa.
Results: Teachers’ perceived TPACK before and after the
intervention

 Before intervention, teachers perceived their CK, PK and PCK as high,
  and TK, TCK, TPK and TPCK were low.
 After intervention, all TPACK components were perceived high.
 A Wilcoxon signed ranks test for two related samples showed that TK,
  PK, TCK, TPK and TPACK were significant at p ≤ 0.01 whereas CK and
  PCK were significant at p ≤ 0.05
 Results from the reflection survey showed that teachers‟ developed
  TPACK through their participation in design teams.
Results (Teachers’ observed TPACK)

 Findings from teachers observation showed a significant difference
  between pre- and post-intervention results.


 Pre-intervention results showed a low teachers‟ TK, TCK, TPK, and
  TPACK (M < 1.5, SD ≤ 0.17) in a three points Likert scale


 However, in the post-intervention results, all TPACK components were
  high (P ≤ 0.05).
Conclusions

 The triangulation of the findings from self-reported and observed data
  showed;
   A limited teachers‟ TK, TPK, TCK and TPACK before intervention,
   After intervention all the TPACK components were high
 In this study, self-reported data comply with the observed data
 This differs from the findings of Alayyar (2011) and Kafyulilo et al (2011)
  which showed a difference between the observed and perceived TPACK
Conclusions

 Probably this has something to do with
   The instrument,
   The culture and
   The level of the teachers.
 Findings from both observed and self-reported data indicate that
  teachers‟ PK, CK and PCK were high before and after intervention.
 This may suggest that in the context of Tanzania, technology integration
  efforts need to focus more on technology related components of TPACK
  rather than the whole TPACK.
Thanks for your attention

  kafyulilo@duce.ac.tz
Long term impact of TPACK: From pre-service teacher
        learning to professional and teaching practices


                                            Douglas Agyei
                                                 &
                                             Joke Voogt




61
Motivation


 Poor student achievements (in mathematics)
  High failure rate (More than 86% of failures to enter Tertiary levels)
  TIMSS 2003 & 2007 (43rd out of 44 & 46th out of 48)
  Poor attitudes


 Mathematics Teaching
  Teacher-centred approach (Hardly any hands-on activities,Whole class teaching
                               Lots of notes being copied )
  Low cognitive learning (Concept formation at a more abstract level, Heavy
                         emphasis on assessment)
Intervention studies in the 2009 – 2011

   A Longitudinal study to integrate technology in teaching
    mathematics (Ghana)

 Two case studies of Professional Development (PD) in 2009 and 2010
 Integration of the PD arrangement into a regular mathematics–specific IT course
    (2011)


   TPACK Framework

 ICT (spreadsheet) to promote in-depth maths concept formation
 Activity-Based Learning (ABL) to make lesson less teacher-centred
TPACK Conceptualization (Intervention Studies 2)

1. Make use of existing ICT tools   TPACK Frame work - Interconnection
(Spreadsheet-specific)               of content pedagogy & technology
                                     (Mishra & Koehler,2006)
2. Active involvement of learners
(Activity Based Learning-ABL)

3. Explore connection between
spreadsheet, ABL pedagogy and
mathematical concept
Outcome of the Intervention Studies

 Developed TPACK of Participants
      Self- assessment TPACK
      Lesson artefacts
      Lesson Observations


 Three years into project :
      Mathematics teachers pursuing carriers in different institutions
      Various Senior High Schools/Junior High Schools in Ghana
Challenge and Data Collection
Measure the impact of the Intervention Studies
 Explore whether and how the beginning teachers integrate
  ICT (demonstrate TPACK) in their teaching practices
 Gain insight into factors promoting (or hindering) the
  teachers’ ICT integration (TPACK demonstration)
   − Questionnaire (100)
   − Interview ( 20)
   − Observation (8)
   − Researchers’ logbook
Results (1)- Self Report



       Table 1: Mean score of factors that influence teachers TPACK use (N=100).
         Conditions                             Mean             Std Dev
         Skills and knowledge                   4.57             .355
         Dissatisfaction with status quo        4.48             .283
         Commitment                             4.21             .287
         Availability of Time                   3.75             .562
         Rewards and Incentives                 3.17             .237
         Participation (Decision making         3.02             .503
         involvement)
         School Culture                         2.05             .292
         Resources ( ICT facilities)            1.71             .311
Results 2 : Lesson Observation

Table 2: Teacher lesson implementation (n=8)
 Teachers Subject    ICT Availability              Strategy
          Taught
 Two (2) Mathematics Personal Laptop and         Spreadsheet techniques
                     projector                   (interactive demonstration)
 Two (2) ICT         Personal Laptop and         Resources from Internet
                     projector                   (interactive demonstration)
 Two (2) Mathematics Personal laptop (Rotating   Spreadsheet techniques
                     groups of students )        /Resources from Internet
 Two (2) Mathematics No ICT Facility             Worksheet to support
                                                 teamwork
Snapshot of a lesson on Linear Equations

Linear functions in the slope intercept form



                             TPCKmaths




                          TKss
Snapshot of a lesson on Enlargement

  Consider the diagrams below.
                                eye

                                 water

                                Image of coin
                                      coin
Snapshot of a lesson on Enlargement (2)



Image of the boy                          A boy




             Pin-hole camera
Snapshot of a lesson on Introduction to computer
networks (1)
Snapshot of a lesson on Introduction to computer
networks (2)
Summary of Results & Conclusions
   Developed and strong positive views about TPACK in the long term (result of the pre-
    service preparation intervention studies)

   Specific focus on ABL “P” and spreadsheets “T” in Mathematics “C” helped to
    develop deep connections between their subject matter, instructional strategy and the
    ICT application, fostering TPACK in the long term (closer to the original conception of
    Schulman’s (1986) ideas of Pedagogical Content Knowledge)

    Develop TPACK in similar initiatives using other ICT applications and/or different
    subject matter.
    Develop and extend pedagogical reasoning to support students learning

   Using multiple data sources is a good way to assess TPACK in the long run

   Teachers’ “knowledge and skill” acquired and “dissatisfaction with the status quo”
    are key in promoting long term TPACK

    Lack of access to ICT infrastructure and unenthusiastic school cultures hinder TPACK
    in the long run
Thank you

     Douglas D. Agyei
Email: ddagyei@yahoo.com

         Joke M. Voogt
Email: j.m.voogt@utwente.nl
Symposium: Measuring TPACK
    SITE Conference, New Orleans, 2013
              Natalie Pareja Roblin
                   discussant
TPACK: A growing concept
Main themes in these studies
  Review of studies about TPACK published between 2005-2011
                             (n=55)
                       (Voogt et al., 2012)


• Development of the TPACK concept (14 studies)
• Measuring (student-)teachers’ TPACK (14 studies)
• Development of TPACK in specific subject domains (7
  studies)
• Strategies to support the development of (student-)
  teachers’ TPACK (36 studies)
• TPACK and teacher beliefs (6 studies)
This symposium: Measuring TPACK


                                                     Integrative views

                               C           P
                                                   Transformative views
                                     T




      Pre-service teachers   In-service teachers
      Student teachers       Teacher trainers
Towards a comprehensive approach for
measuring TPACK
Integrating multiple instruments to
measure TPACK
1. Perceived TPACK
   • Self-assessment survey (from integrative to transformative
     views on TPACK)
   • Interviews
   • Teacher reflections
   • ....
2. Enacted TPACK
   •   Observation checklist
   •   Lesson plans
   •   Researcher logbook
   •   .....
TPACK as a complex and “fuzzy”
concept
• How can TPACK (and its constituting knowledge domains) be
  operationalized? Is it possible (and desirable) to pull apart the
  knowledge domains that constitute TPACK?

• If TPACK is considered as a “sliding framework”, as suggested by
  Cox and Graham (2009), is it possible to develop standardized
  instruments to measure it?

• How does qualitative data contribute to the understanding of
  (pre-service) teachers’ TPACK development? What does it add
  to survey data?

• How to best combine self-reported and observed TPACK
  measurements?
Examining the development of TPACK
across time

           In-service teachers




     Beginning teachers



Pre-service teachers
TPACK development as a dynamic and
context-bound process

• How does TPACK develop as student teachers step into the
  teaching profession and become experienced teachers?

• What factors (personal, institutional, systemic) facilitate and/or
  hinder TPACK development?

• How does the context (school characteristics, learner
  characteristics, access to technology, ICT policies, etc.) influence
  the ways in which teachers integrate technology (i.e., how
  TPACK is put into action)?
Towards a comprehensive approach for
measuring TPACK: Moving forward...
Integrating multiple instruments: Recent
               initiatives
   Assessing teachers’ pedagogical ICT competences
                  (The Netherlands)
Assessing teachers’ pedagogical ICT
competences




                      Self-perceived   +   Observed
Format of the video vignette
                         -   Subject
                         -   Goal
    Introduction         -   Nature of ICT use
    (+/- 2 minutes)      -   Perceived advantages/contributions of ICT

                         -   ICT applications
                         -   Goals of ICT use
      Practice           -   Attractive/efficient/effective uses
                         -   Pedagogical use of ICT (TPACK)
  (+/- 4 to 8 minutes)
                         -   Teacher role
                         -   Student role

                         -   Why this lesson?
                         -   Why this combination of T, P and C?
     Reflection          -   Would this lesson be different without ICT?
    (+/- 2 minutes)      -   How do you know your (ICT) goals have
                             been accomplished?
Examining TPACK development across
 time and contexts: Recent initiatives
From pre-service to practice: Understanding beginning
            teachers’ uses of technology
                 (Belgium, Flanders)
Understanding beginning teachers’ uses
 of technology
           Longitudinal qualitative study in Flanders
Focus on (institutional) factors supporting TPACK development
Study 1: Approaches to support TPACK
    development
     Moving from stand-alone technology courses to integrated
       approaches that aim to support TPACK development

TE1: From TK to...          TE2: From TK to TPK                           TE3: From TK to TCK




                      Tondeur, J., Pareja Roblin, N., van Braak, J., Fisser, P., Voogt, J. (2012). Technological
                     pedagogical content knowledge in teacher education: in search of a new curriculum.
                                                Educational Studies, DOI:10.1080/03055698.2012.713548
Study 2: Technology integration by BT
Pre-service education influences how BT integrqte technology in
their teaching practice. It contributes to:

- Developing TK
   “The basic skills we did learn them”

- Getting to know various technology tools that could be used
  with educational purposes
   “[To learn about things] such as Klascement or Hot Potatoes was useful”
   “If I had not learned it in my pre-service education, I think I would have
   never used it here”

- Learning how to teach with technology (!) little opportunities
   “[We should learn] not only the application itself, but [also] how to use it
   and how to integrate it [in your teaching]”
Study 2: Technology integration by BT
However, (the extent of) this influence depends on school
characteristics:
-   Access to technology
    “It is not possible to sit behind 1 computer with 19 children”

-   Clear ICT policies
    “Everybody has one hour in the computer room. It is not compulsory, but the
    school principal has strongly recommended it to us”

-   Workload
    “Making and trying out new things is difficult, especially at the start [of your
    career] because you are busy with preparing your lessons”

-   Support and mentoring systems
Measuring TPACK: Mission impossible?
                        How can TPACK (and its
                    constituting knowledge domains)
Integrative views          be operationalized?         Transformative
    on TPACK                                           views on TPACK

                         Is it possible to develop
                      standardized instruments to
    Generic                   measure TPACK?           Context & content
  instruments                                         specific instruments
                    How does the context influence
                      the ways in which teachers
                        integrate technology?


                       How to best combine self-
                     reported and observed TPACK
                           measurements?
 Self-perceived                                        Observed TPACK
TPACK measures                                            measures
Thank you!
natalie.parejaroblin@ugent.be

More Related Content

What's hot

Iceberg model for mathematics learning
Iceberg model for mathematics learningIceberg model for mathematics learning
Iceberg model for mathematics learningLaurado Sabatini
 
B.ed. 4th sem computational literacy
B.ed. 4th sem computational literacyB.ed. 4th sem computational literacy
B.ed. 4th sem computational literacyDammar Singh Saud
 
Tpack as a framework for technology driven teaching and
Tpack as a framework for technology driven teaching andTpack as a framework for technology driven teaching and
Tpack as a framework for technology driven teaching anderwin marlon sario
 
Technological, pedagogical, content knowledge unfolded.
Technological, pedagogical, content knowledge unfolded.Technological, pedagogical, content knowledge unfolded.
Technological, pedagogical, content knowledge unfolded.Mei Lick Cheok
 
Learning by TKF to promote computational participation in Japanese education.
Learning by TKF to promote computational participation in Japanese education. Learning by TKF to promote computational participation in Japanese education.
Learning by TKF to promote computational participation in Japanese education. Michael Vallance
 
TPACK + MATHEMATICS: A REVIEW OF CURRENT TPACK LITERATURE
TPACK + MATHEMATICS: A REVIEW OF CURRENT TPACK LITERATURETPACK + MATHEMATICS: A REVIEW OF CURRENT TPACK LITERATURE
TPACK + MATHEMATICS: A REVIEW OF CURRENT TPACK LITERATUREIJITE
 
TPACK + MATHEMATICS: A REVIEW OF CURRENT TPACK LITERATURE
TPACK + MATHEMATICS: A REVIEW OF CURRENT TPACK LITERATURE TPACK + MATHEMATICS: A REVIEW OF CURRENT TPACK LITERATURE
TPACK + MATHEMATICS: A REVIEW OF CURRENT TPACK LITERATURE IJITE
 
Technological pedagogical content knowledge BEd
Technological pedagogical content knowledge BEdTechnological pedagogical content knowledge BEd
Technological pedagogical content knowledge BEdSumesh SV
 
Integrating Technology & Marzano's Instructional Strategies
Integrating Technology & Marzano's Instructional StrategiesIntegrating Technology & Marzano's Instructional Strategies
Integrating Technology & Marzano's Instructional StrategiesJayme Linton
 
Best PracticesMZISTEVMsalem
Best PracticesMZISTEVMsalemBest PracticesMZISTEVMsalem
Best PracticesMZISTEVMsalemDr. N. Asokan
 
Goal-based Recommendation utilizing Latent Dirichlet Allocation
Goal-based Recommendation utilizing Latent Dirichlet AllocationGoal-based Recommendation utilizing Latent Dirichlet Allocation
Goal-based Recommendation utilizing Latent Dirichlet AllocationSebastien Louvigne
 
Ace Maths Unit Three: Teaching Through Problem Solving (word)
Ace Maths Unit Three: Teaching Through Problem Solving (word)Ace Maths Unit Three: Teaching Through Problem Solving (word)
Ace Maths Unit Three: Teaching Through Problem Solving (word)PiLNAfrica
 
Instructional Design Model Comparison Chart
Instructional Design Model Comparison ChartInstructional Design Model Comparison Chart
Instructional Design Model Comparison Chartcoloherzogs
 
Tbl, pbl, ebl, scale up, buzz, virtual or what?
Tbl, pbl, ebl, scale up, buzz, virtual or what?Tbl, pbl, ebl, scale up, buzz, virtual or what?
Tbl, pbl, ebl, scale up, buzz, virtual or what?SEDA
 
Teamwork seda may 2018
Teamwork seda may 2018Teamwork seda may 2018
Teamwork seda may 2018Peter Hartley
 
Importance of Instructional Design for Teachers
Importance of Instructional Design for TeachersImportance of Instructional Design for Teachers
Importance of Instructional Design for TeachersMoon Starr
 
665 Session11-data analysis-s13
665 Session11-data analysis-s13665 Session11-data analysis-s13
665 Session11-data analysis-s13Diane Nahl
 

What's hot (19)

Iceberg model for mathematics learning
Iceberg model for mathematics learningIceberg model for mathematics learning
Iceberg model for mathematics learning
 
B.ed. 4th sem computational literacy
B.ed. 4th sem computational literacyB.ed. 4th sem computational literacy
B.ed. 4th sem computational literacy
 
Tpack as a framework for technology driven teaching and
Tpack as a framework for technology driven teaching andTpack as a framework for technology driven teaching and
Tpack as a framework for technology driven teaching and
 
Technological, pedagogical, content knowledge unfolded.
Technological, pedagogical, content knowledge unfolded.Technological, pedagogical, content knowledge unfolded.
Technological, pedagogical, content knowledge unfolded.
 
Learning by TKF to promote computational participation in Japanese education.
Learning by TKF to promote computational participation in Japanese education. Learning by TKF to promote computational participation in Japanese education.
Learning by TKF to promote computational participation in Japanese education.
 
TPACK + MATHEMATICS: A REVIEW OF CURRENT TPACK LITERATURE
TPACK + MATHEMATICS: A REVIEW OF CURRENT TPACK LITERATURETPACK + MATHEMATICS: A REVIEW OF CURRENT TPACK LITERATURE
TPACK + MATHEMATICS: A REVIEW OF CURRENT TPACK LITERATURE
 
TPACK + MATHEMATICS: A REVIEW OF CURRENT TPACK LITERATURE
TPACK + MATHEMATICS: A REVIEW OF CURRENT TPACK LITERATURE TPACK + MATHEMATICS: A REVIEW OF CURRENT TPACK LITERATURE
TPACK + MATHEMATICS: A REVIEW OF CURRENT TPACK LITERATURE
 
Technological pedagogical content knowledge BEd
Technological pedagogical content knowledge BEdTechnological pedagogical content knowledge BEd
Technological pedagogical content knowledge BEd
 
Integrating Technology & Marzano's Instructional Strategies
Integrating Technology & Marzano's Instructional StrategiesIntegrating Technology & Marzano's Instructional Strategies
Integrating Technology & Marzano's Instructional Strategies
 
Best PracticesMZISTEVMsalem
Best PracticesMZISTEVMsalemBest PracticesMZISTEVMsalem
Best PracticesMZISTEVMsalem
 
Goal-based Recommendation utilizing Latent Dirichlet Allocation
Goal-based Recommendation utilizing Latent Dirichlet AllocationGoal-based Recommendation utilizing Latent Dirichlet Allocation
Goal-based Recommendation utilizing Latent Dirichlet Allocation
 
Ace Maths Unit Three: Teaching Through Problem Solving (word)
Ace Maths Unit Three: Teaching Through Problem Solving (word)Ace Maths Unit Three: Teaching Through Problem Solving (word)
Ace Maths Unit Three: Teaching Through Problem Solving (word)
 
Usyd.tbl.dalziel.sep17
Usyd.tbl.dalziel.sep17Usyd.tbl.dalziel.sep17
Usyd.tbl.dalziel.sep17
 
Instructional Design Model Comparison Chart
Instructional Design Model Comparison ChartInstructional Design Model Comparison Chart
Instructional Design Model Comparison Chart
 
Tbl, pbl, ebl, scale up, buzz, virtual or what?
Tbl, pbl, ebl, scale up, buzz, virtual or what?Tbl, pbl, ebl, scale up, buzz, virtual or what?
Tbl, pbl, ebl, scale up, buzz, virtual or what?
 
Teamwork seda may 2018
Teamwork seda may 2018Teamwork seda may 2018
Teamwork seda may 2018
 
Tma 01 Task sheet
Tma 01 Task sheetTma 01 Task sheet
Tma 01 Task sheet
 
Importance of Instructional Design for Teachers
Importance of Instructional Design for TeachersImportance of Instructional Design for Teachers
Importance of Instructional Design for Teachers
 
665 Session11-data analysis-s13
665 Session11-data analysis-s13665 Session11-data analysis-s13
665 Session11-data analysis-s13
 

Similar to 2013-03-27 SITE TPACK symposium

Prospective teachers’ self-efficacy of TPACK in the science domain
Prospective teachers’ self-efficacy of TPACK in the science domain Prospective teachers’ self-efficacy of TPACK in the science domain
Prospective teachers’ self-efficacy of TPACK in the science domain Vrije Universiteit Brussel
 
TPACK development in teacher design teams: assessing the perceived and observ...
TPACK development in teacher design teams: assessing the perceived and observ...TPACK development in teacher design teams: assessing the perceived and observ...
TPACK development in teacher design teams: assessing the perceived and observ...Ayoub Kafyulilo
 
2011 03-10 fisser voogt ormel velthuis tondeur tpack-stebi
2011 03-10 fisser voogt ormel velthuis tondeur tpack-stebi2011 03-10 fisser voogt ormel velthuis tondeur tpack-stebi
2011 03-10 fisser voogt ormel velthuis tondeur tpack-stebiPetra Fisser
 
Employing the tpack framework for researcher teacher co-design of a mobile-as...
Employing the tpack framework for researcher teacher co-design of a mobile-as...Employing the tpack framework for researcher teacher co-design of a mobile-as...
Employing the tpack framework for researcher teacher co-design of a mobile-as...ieeepondy
 
Tpack ICITS Thompson, Baran, Chuang
Tpack ICITS Thompson, Baran, ChuangTpack ICITS Thompson, Baran, Chuang
Tpack ICITS Thompson, Baran, ChuangEvrim Baran
 
Tpack and technology integration
Tpack and technology integrationTpack and technology integration
Tpack and technology integrationCarla Piper
 
Practical use of ict in teachers training at
Practical use of ict in teachers training atPractical use of ict in teachers training at
Practical use of ict in teachers training atAyoub Kafyulilo
 
ms_spiral_in_itl8_august_2011_section_less
ms_spiral_in_itl8_august_2011_section_lessms_spiral_in_itl8_august_2011_section_less
ms_spiral_in_itl8_august_2011_section_lessUniversity of Canberra
 
National ICT-e competence standards for initial teacher education.
National ICT-e competence standards for initial teacher education. National ICT-e competence standards for initial teacher education.
National ICT-e competence standards for initial teacher education. Ton Koenraad
 
Tpack best practice with a 21st century makeover
Tpack  best practice with a 21st century makeoverTpack  best practice with a 21st century makeover
Tpack best practice with a 21st century makeoverSheryl Nussbaum-Beach
 

Similar to 2013-03-27 SITE TPACK symposium (20)

Prospective teachers’ self-efficacy of TPACK in the science domain
Prospective teachers’ self-efficacy of TPACK in the science domain Prospective teachers’ self-efficacy of TPACK in the science domain
Prospective teachers’ self-efficacy of TPACK in the science domain
 
TPACK development in teacher design teams: assessing the perceived and observ...
TPACK development in teacher design teams: assessing the perceived and observ...TPACK development in teacher design teams: assessing the perceived and observ...
TPACK development in teacher design teams: assessing the perceived and observ...
 
T pack 2013
T pack 2013T pack 2013
T pack 2013
 
2011 03-10 fisser voogt ormel velthuis tondeur tpack-stebi
2011 03-10 fisser voogt ormel velthuis tondeur tpack-stebi2011 03-10 fisser voogt ormel velthuis tondeur tpack-stebi
2011 03-10 fisser voogt ormel velthuis tondeur tpack-stebi
 
Sustainability 11-01870
Sustainability 11-01870Sustainability 11-01870
Sustainability 11-01870
 
Employing the tpack framework for researcher teacher co-design of a mobile-as...
Employing the tpack framework for researcher teacher co-design of a mobile-as...Employing the tpack framework for researcher teacher co-design of a mobile-as...
Employing the tpack framework for researcher teacher co-design of a mobile-as...
 
T pack fh
T pack fhT pack fh
T pack fh
 
Tpack intro
Tpack introTpack intro
Tpack intro
 
Strategically Integrating Technology into your Instruction (2014)
Strategically Integrating Technology into your Instruction (2014)Strategically Integrating Technology into your Instruction (2014)
Strategically Integrating Technology into your Instruction (2014)
 
Tpack ICITS Thompson, Baran, Chuang
Tpack ICITS Thompson, Baran, ChuangTpack ICITS Thompson, Baran, Chuang
Tpack ICITS Thompson, Baran, Chuang
 
Tpack and technology integration
Tpack and technology integrationTpack and technology integration
Tpack and technology integration
 
Integrating Technology into Your Instruction with TPACK (2014)
Integrating Technology into Your Instruction with TPACK (2014)Integrating Technology into Your Instruction with TPACK (2014)
Integrating Technology into Your Instruction with TPACK (2014)
 
Practical use of ict in teachers training at
Practical use of ict in teachers training atPractical use of ict in teachers training at
Practical use of ict in teachers training at
 
ms_spiral_in_tpack_itl8_august_2011
ms_spiral_in_tpack_itl8_august_2011ms_spiral_in_tpack_itl8_august_2011
ms_spiral_in_tpack_itl8_august_2011
 
706 alqurashi tpck
706 alqurashi tpck706 alqurashi tpck
706 alqurashi tpck
 
ms_spiral_in_itl8_august_2011_section_less
ms_spiral_in_itl8_august_2011_section_lessms_spiral_in_itl8_august_2011_section_less
ms_spiral_in_itl8_august_2011_section_less
 
National ICT-e competence standards for initial teacher education.
National ICT-e competence standards for initial teacher education. National ICT-e competence standards for initial teacher education.
National ICT-e competence standards for initial teacher education.
 
Tpack
TpackTpack
Tpack
 
Tpack best practice with a 21st century makeover
Tpack  best practice with a 21st century makeoverTpack  best practice with a 21st century makeover
Tpack best practice with a 21st century makeover
 
Presentation MaSE 18-102012
Presentation MaSE 18-102012Presentation MaSE 18-102012
Presentation MaSE 18-102012
 

More from Petra Fisser

Digitale Geletterdheid - Workshop
Digitale Geletterdheid - WorkshopDigitale Geletterdheid - Workshop
Digitale Geletterdheid - WorkshopPetra Fisser
 
Computational Thinking - Symposium
Computational Thinking - SymposiumComputational Thinking - Symposium
Computational Thinking - SymposiumPetra Fisser
 
2015-01-20 21st century skills in the Netherlands
2015-01-20 21st century skills in the Netherlands2015-01-20 21st century skills in the Netherlands
2015-01-20 21st century skills in the NetherlandsPetra Fisser
 
2014-03-20 Fisser Strijker Muller SITE PLD3
2014-03-20 Fisser Strijker Muller SITE PLD32014-03-20 Fisser Strijker Muller SITE PLD3
2014-03-20 Fisser Strijker Muller SITE PLD3Petra Fisser
 
2014-03-19 SITE TPACK Symposium
2014-03-19 SITE TPACK Symposium2014-03-19 SITE TPACK Symposium
2014-03-19 SITE TPACK SymposiumPetra Fisser
 
Workshop Integratie van ICT in natuur- en techniekonderwijs
Workshop Integratie van ICT in natuur- en techniekonderwijsWorkshop Integratie van ICT in natuur- en techniekonderwijs
Workshop Integratie van ICT in natuur- en techniekonderwijsPetra Fisser
 
Capacity building for 21st century learning in secondary schools in Africa
Capacity building for 21st century learning in secondary schools in AfricaCapacity building for 21st century learning in secondary schools in Africa
Capacity building for 21st century learning in secondary schools in AfricaPetra Fisser
 
2013-03-26 Learning vocabulary through a serious game
2013-03-26 Learning vocabulary through a serious game2013-03-26 Learning vocabulary through a serious game
2013-03-26 Learning vocabulary through a serious gamePetra Fisser
 
2012-07-03 Fisser Voogt Bom IFIP Taaltreffers
2012-07-03 Fisser Voogt Bom IFIP Taaltreffers2012-07-03 Fisser Voogt Bom IFIP Taaltreffers
2012-07-03 Fisser Voogt Bom IFIP TaaltreffersPetra Fisser
 
2012-03-15 Fisser TPACK VVOB
2012-03-15 Fisser TPACK VVOB2012-03-15 Fisser TPACK VVOB
2012-03-15 Fisser TPACK VVOBPetra Fisser
 
201203-07 SITE Roundtable Word Score
201203-07 SITE Roundtable Word Score201203-07 SITE Roundtable Word Score
201203-07 SITE Roundtable Word ScorePetra Fisser
 
2011-10-03 fisser marchet tpack
2011-10-03 fisser marchet tpack2011-10-03 fisser marchet tpack
2011-10-03 fisser marchet tpackPetra Fisser
 
2011-06-29 Fisser Geocaching and Educaching
2011-06-29 Fisser Geocaching and Educaching2011-06-29 Fisser Geocaching and Educaching
2011-06-29 Fisser Geocaching and EducachingPetra Fisser
 
2011-06-09 Fisser TPACK ORD
2011-06-09 Fisser TPACK ORD2011-06-09 Fisser TPACK ORD
2011-06-09 Fisser TPACK ORDPetra Fisser
 
2011 04-21 fisser tpack kennisnet vlootschouw
2011 04-21 fisser tpack kennisnet vlootschouw2011 04-21 fisser tpack kennisnet vlootschouw
2011 04-21 fisser tpack kennisnet vlootschouwPetra Fisser
 
2011 03-10 alayyar fisser voogt measuring tpack site
2011 03-10 alayyar fisser voogt measuring tpack site2011 03-10 alayyar fisser voogt measuring tpack site
2011 03-10 alayyar fisser voogt measuring tpack sitePetra Fisser
 
2010-03-06 Fisser Voogt Taaltreffers IFIP
2010-03-06 Fisser Voogt Taaltreffers IFIP2010-03-06 Fisser Voogt Taaltreffers IFIP
2010-03-06 Fisser Voogt Taaltreffers IFIPPetra Fisser
 
21st Century Skills & TPACK (Workshop)
21st Century Skills & TPACK (Workshop)21st Century Skills & TPACK (Workshop)
21st Century Skills & TPACK (Workshop)Petra Fisser
 
TPACK workshop ADEF ICT Conferentie
TPACK workshop ADEF ICT ConferentieTPACK workshop ADEF ICT Conferentie
TPACK workshop ADEF ICT ConferentiePetra Fisser
 
Workshop TPACK I&I Conferentie
Workshop TPACK I&I ConferentieWorkshop TPACK I&I Conferentie
Workshop TPACK I&I ConferentiePetra Fisser
 

More from Petra Fisser (20)

Digitale Geletterdheid - Workshop
Digitale Geletterdheid - WorkshopDigitale Geletterdheid - Workshop
Digitale Geletterdheid - Workshop
 
Computational Thinking - Symposium
Computational Thinking - SymposiumComputational Thinking - Symposium
Computational Thinking - Symposium
 
2015-01-20 21st century skills in the Netherlands
2015-01-20 21st century skills in the Netherlands2015-01-20 21st century skills in the Netherlands
2015-01-20 21st century skills in the Netherlands
 
2014-03-20 Fisser Strijker Muller SITE PLD3
2014-03-20 Fisser Strijker Muller SITE PLD32014-03-20 Fisser Strijker Muller SITE PLD3
2014-03-20 Fisser Strijker Muller SITE PLD3
 
2014-03-19 SITE TPACK Symposium
2014-03-19 SITE TPACK Symposium2014-03-19 SITE TPACK Symposium
2014-03-19 SITE TPACK Symposium
 
Workshop Integratie van ICT in natuur- en techniekonderwijs
Workshop Integratie van ICT in natuur- en techniekonderwijsWorkshop Integratie van ICT in natuur- en techniekonderwijs
Workshop Integratie van ICT in natuur- en techniekonderwijs
 
Capacity building for 21st century learning in secondary schools in Africa
Capacity building for 21st century learning in secondary schools in AfricaCapacity building for 21st century learning in secondary schools in Africa
Capacity building for 21st century learning in secondary schools in Africa
 
2013-03-26 Learning vocabulary through a serious game
2013-03-26 Learning vocabulary through a serious game2013-03-26 Learning vocabulary through a serious game
2013-03-26 Learning vocabulary through a serious game
 
2012-07-03 Fisser Voogt Bom IFIP Taaltreffers
2012-07-03 Fisser Voogt Bom IFIP Taaltreffers2012-07-03 Fisser Voogt Bom IFIP Taaltreffers
2012-07-03 Fisser Voogt Bom IFIP Taaltreffers
 
2012-03-15 Fisser TPACK VVOB
2012-03-15 Fisser TPACK VVOB2012-03-15 Fisser TPACK VVOB
2012-03-15 Fisser TPACK VVOB
 
201203-07 SITE Roundtable Word Score
201203-07 SITE Roundtable Word Score201203-07 SITE Roundtable Word Score
201203-07 SITE Roundtable Word Score
 
2011-10-03 fisser marchet tpack
2011-10-03 fisser marchet tpack2011-10-03 fisser marchet tpack
2011-10-03 fisser marchet tpack
 
2011-06-29 Fisser Geocaching and Educaching
2011-06-29 Fisser Geocaching and Educaching2011-06-29 Fisser Geocaching and Educaching
2011-06-29 Fisser Geocaching and Educaching
 
2011-06-09 Fisser TPACK ORD
2011-06-09 Fisser TPACK ORD2011-06-09 Fisser TPACK ORD
2011-06-09 Fisser TPACK ORD
 
2011 04-21 fisser tpack kennisnet vlootschouw
2011 04-21 fisser tpack kennisnet vlootschouw2011 04-21 fisser tpack kennisnet vlootschouw
2011 04-21 fisser tpack kennisnet vlootschouw
 
2011 03-10 alayyar fisser voogt measuring tpack site
2011 03-10 alayyar fisser voogt measuring tpack site2011 03-10 alayyar fisser voogt measuring tpack site
2011 03-10 alayyar fisser voogt measuring tpack site
 
2010-03-06 Fisser Voogt Taaltreffers IFIP
2010-03-06 Fisser Voogt Taaltreffers IFIP2010-03-06 Fisser Voogt Taaltreffers IFIP
2010-03-06 Fisser Voogt Taaltreffers IFIP
 
21st Century Skills & TPACK (Workshop)
21st Century Skills & TPACK (Workshop)21st Century Skills & TPACK (Workshop)
21st Century Skills & TPACK (Workshop)
 
TPACK workshop ADEF ICT Conferentie
TPACK workshop ADEF ICT ConferentieTPACK workshop ADEF ICT Conferentie
TPACK workshop ADEF ICT Conferentie
 
Workshop TPACK I&I Conferentie
Workshop TPACK I&I ConferentieWorkshop TPACK I&I Conferentie
Workshop TPACK I&I Conferentie
 

Recently uploaded

AUDIENCE THEORY -CULTIVATION THEORY - GERBNER.pptx
AUDIENCE THEORY -CULTIVATION THEORY -  GERBNER.pptxAUDIENCE THEORY -CULTIVATION THEORY -  GERBNER.pptx
AUDIENCE THEORY -CULTIVATION THEORY - GERBNER.pptxiammrhaywood
 
ClimART Action | eTwinning Project
ClimART Action    |    eTwinning ProjectClimART Action    |    eTwinning Project
ClimART Action | eTwinning Projectjordimapav
 
How to do quick user assign in kanban in Odoo 17 ERP
How to do quick user assign in kanban in Odoo 17 ERPHow to do quick user assign in kanban in Odoo 17 ERP
How to do quick user assign in kanban in Odoo 17 ERPCeline George
 
Student Profile Sample - We help schools to connect the data they have, with ...
Student Profile Sample - We help schools to connect the data they have, with ...Student Profile Sample - We help schools to connect the data they have, with ...
Student Profile Sample - We help schools to connect the data they have, with ...Seán Kennedy
 
Integumentary System SMP B. Pharm Sem I.ppt
Integumentary System SMP B. Pharm Sem I.pptIntegumentary System SMP B. Pharm Sem I.ppt
Integumentary System SMP B. Pharm Sem I.pptshraddhaparab530
 
4.16.24 Poverty and Precarity--Desmond.pptx
4.16.24 Poverty and Precarity--Desmond.pptx4.16.24 Poverty and Precarity--Desmond.pptx
4.16.24 Poverty and Precarity--Desmond.pptxmary850239
 
Concurrency Control in Database Management system
Concurrency Control in Database Management systemConcurrency Control in Database Management system
Concurrency Control in Database Management systemChristalin Nelson
 
HỌC TỐT TIẾNG ANH 11 THEO CHƯƠNG TRÌNH GLOBAL SUCCESS ĐÁP ÁN CHI TIẾT - CẢ NĂ...
HỌC TỐT TIẾNG ANH 11 THEO CHƯƠNG TRÌNH GLOBAL SUCCESS ĐÁP ÁN CHI TIẾT - CẢ NĂ...HỌC TỐT TIẾNG ANH 11 THEO CHƯƠNG TRÌNH GLOBAL SUCCESS ĐÁP ÁN CHI TIẾT - CẢ NĂ...
HỌC TỐT TIẾNG ANH 11 THEO CHƯƠNG TRÌNH GLOBAL SUCCESS ĐÁP ÁN CHI TIẾT - CẢ NĂ...Nguyen Thanh Tu Collection
 
Dust Of Snow By Robert Frost Class-X English CBSE
Dust Of Snow By Robert Frost Class-X English CBSEDust Of Snow By Robert Frost Class-X English CBSE
Dust Of Snow By Robert Frost Class-X English CBSEaurabinda banchhor
 
Daily Lesson Plan in Mathematics Quarter 4
Daily Lesson Plan in Mathematics Quarter 4Daily Lesson Plan in Mathematics Quarter 4
Daily Lesson Plan in Mathematics Quarter 4JOYLYNSAMANIEGO
 
Grade 9 Quarter 4 Dll Grade 9 Quarter 4 DLL.pdf
Grade 9 Quarter 4 Dll Grade 9 Quarter 4 DLL.pdfGrade 9 Quarter 4 Dll Grade 9 Quarter 4 DLL.pdf
Grade 9 Quarter 4 Dll Grade 9 Quarter 4 DLL.pdfJemuel Francisco
 
Active Learning Strategies (in short ALS).pdf
Active Learning Strategies (in short ALS).pdfActive Learning Strategies (in short ALS).pdf
Active Learning Strategies (in short ALS).pdfPatidar M
 
Measures of Position DECILES for ungrouped data
Measures of Position DECILES for ungrouped dataMeasures of Position DECILES for ungrouped data
Measures of Position DECILES for ungrouped dataBabyAnnMotar
 
GRADE 4 - SUMMATIVE TEST QUARTER 4 ALL SUBJECTS
GRADE 4 - SUMMATIVE TEST QUARTER 4 ALL SUBJECTSGRADE 4 - SUMMATIVE TEST QUARTER 4 ALL SUBJECTS
GRADE 4 - SUMMATIVE TEST QUARTER 4 ALL SUBJECTSJoshuaGantuangco2
 
Q4-PPT-Music9_Lesson-1-Romantic-Opera.pptx
Q4-PPT-Music9_Lesson-1-Romantic-Opera.pptxQ4-PPT-Music9_Lesson-1-Romantic-Opera.pptx
Q4-PPT-Music9_Lesson-1-Romantic-Opera.pptxlancelewisportillo
 
Karra SKD Conference Presentation Revised.pptx
Karra SKD Conference Presentation Revised.pptxKarra SKD Conference Presentation Revised.pptx
Karra SKD Conference Presentation Revised.pptxAshokKarra1
 
4.18.24 Movement Legacies, Reflection, and Review.pptx
4.18.24 Movement Legacies, Reflection, and Review.pptx4.18.24 Movement Legacies, Reflection, and Review.pptx
4.18.24 Movement Legacies, Reflection, and Review.pptxmary850239
 
ANG SEKTOR NG agrikultura.pptx QUARTER 4
ANG SEKTOR NG agrikultura.pptx QUARTER 4ANG SEKTOR NG agrikultura.pptx QUARTER 4
ANG SEKTOR NG agrikultura.pptx QUARTER 4MiaBumagat1
 

Recently uploaded (20)

AUDIENCE THEORY -CULTIVATION THEORY - GERBNER.pptx
AUDIENCE THEORY -CULTIVATION THEORY -  GERBNER.pptxAUDIENCE THEORY -CULTIVATION THEORY -  GERBNER.pptx
AUDIENCE THEORY -CULTIVATION THEORY - GERBNER.pptx
 
ClimART Action | eTwinning Project
ClimART Action    |    eTwinning ProjectClimART Action    |    eTwinning Project
ClimART Action | eTwinning Project
 
How to do quick user assign in kanban in Odoo 17 ERP
How to do quick user assign in kanban in Odoo 17 ERPHow to do quick user assign in kanban in Odoo 17 ERP
How to do quick user assign in kanban in Odoo 17 ERP
 
Student Profile Sample - We help schools to connect the data they have, with ...
Student Profile Sample - We help schools to connect the data they have, with ...Student Profile Sample - We help schools to connect the data they have, with ...
Student Profile Sample - We help schools to connect the data they have, with ...
 
Integumentary System SMP B. Pharm Sem I.ppt
Integumentary System SMP B. Pharm Sem I.pptIntegumentary System SMP B. Pharm Sem I.ppt
Integumentary System SMP B. Pharm Sem I.ppt
 
4.16.24 Poverty and Precarity--Desmond.pptx
4.16.24 Poverty and Precarity--Desmond.pptx4.16.24 Poverty and Precarity--Desmond.pptx
4.16.24 Poverty and Precarity--Desmond.pptx
 
FINALS_OF_LEFT_ON_C'N_EL_DORADO_2024.pptx
FINALS_OF_LEFT_ON_C'N_EL_DORADO_2024.pptxFINALS_OF_LEFT_ON_C'N_EL_DORADO_2024.pptx
FINALS_OF_LEFT_ON_C'N_EL_DORADO_2024.pptx
 
INCLUSIVE EDUCATION PRACTICES FOR TEACHERS AND TRAINERS.pptx
INCLUSIVE EDUCATION PRACTICES FOR TEACHERS AND TRAINERS.pptxINCLUSIVE EDUCATION PRACTICES FOR TEACHERS AND TRAINERS.pptx
INCLUSIVE EDUCATION PRACTICES FOR TEACHERS AND TRAINERS.pptx
 
Concurrency Control in Database Management system
Concurrency Control in Database Management systemConcurrency Control in Database Management system
Concurrency Control in Database Management system
 
HỌC TỐT TIẾNG ANH 11 THEO CHƯƠNG TRÌNH GLOBAL SUCCESS ĐÁP ÁN CHI TIẾT - CẢ NĂ...
HỌC TỐT TIẾNG ANH 11 THEO CHƯƠNG TRÌNH GLOBAL SUCCESS ĐÁP ÁN CHI TIẾT - CẢ NĂ...HỌC TỐT TIẾNG ANH 11 THEO CHƯƠNG TRÌNH GLOBAL SUCCESS ĐÁP ÁN CHI TIẾT - CẢ NĂ...
HỌC TỐT TIẾNG ANH 11 THEO CHƯƠNG TRÌNH GLOBAL SUCCESS ĐÁP ÁN CHI TIẾT - CẢ NĂ...
 
Dust Of Snow By Robert Frost Class-X English CBSE
Dust Of Snow By Robert Frost Class-X English CBSEDust Of Snow By Robert Frost Class-X English CBSE
Dust Of Snow By Robert Frost Class-X English CBSE
 
Daily Lesson Plan in Mathematics Quarter 4
Daily Lesson Plan in Mathematics Quarter 4Daily Lesson Plan in Mathematics Quarter 4
Daily Lesson Plan in Mathematics Quarter 4
 
Grade 9 Quarter 4 Dll Grade 9 Quarter 4 DLL.pdf
Grade 9 Quarter 4 Dll Grade 9 Quarter 4 DLL.pdfGrade 9 Quarter 4 Dll Grade 9 Quarter 4 DLL.pdf
Grade 9 Quarter 4 Dll Grade 9 Quarter 4 DLL.pdf
 
Active Learning Strategies (in short ALS).pdf
Active Learning Strategies (in short ALS).pdfActive Learning Strategies (in short ALS).pdf
Active Learning Strategies (in short ALS).pdf
 
Measures of Position DECILES for ungrouped data
Measures of Position DECILES for ungrouped dataMeasures of Position DECILES for ungrouped data
Measures of Position DECILES for ungrouped data
 
GRADE 4 - SUMMATIVE TEST QUARTER 4 ALL SUBJECTS
GRADE 4 - SUMMATIVE TEST QUARTER 4 ALL SUBJECTSGRADE 4 - SUMMATIVE TEST QUARTER 4 ALL SUBJECTS
GRADE 4 - SUMMATIVE TEST QUARTER 4 ALL SUBJECTS
 
Q4-PPT-Music9_Lesson-1-Romantic-Opera.pptx
Q4-PPT-Music9_Lesson-1-Romantic-Opera.pptxQ4-PPT-Music9_Lesson-1-Romantic-Opera.pptx
Q4-PPT-Music9_Lesson-1-Romantic-Opera.pptx
 
Karra SKD Conference Presentation Revised.pptx
Karra SKD Conference Presentation Revised.pptxKarra SKD Conference Presentation Revised.pptx
Karra SKD Conference Presentation Revised.pptx
 
4.18.24 Movement Legacies, Reflection, and Review.pptx
4.18.24 Movement Legacies, Reflection, and Review.pptx4.18.24 Movement Legacies, Reflection, and Review.pptx
4.18.24 Movement Legacies, Reflection, and Review.pptx
 
ANG SEKTOR NG agrikultura.pptx QUARTER 4
ANG SEKTOR NG agrikultura.pptx QUARTER 4ANG SEKTOR NG agrikultura.pptx QUARTER 4
ANG SEKTOR NG agrikultura.pptx QUARTER 4
 

2013-03-27 SITE TPACK symposium

  • 1. MEASURING TPACK International symposium on TPACK Joke Voogt, Petra Fisser, Ayoub Kafyulilo, Douglas Agyei (University of Twente) Johan van Braak, Jo Tondeur, Natalie Pareja Roblin (Ghent University) Denise Schmidt-Crawford, Dale Niederhauser, Wei Wang (Iowa State University) SITE 2013, 27 March 2013, New Orleans
  • 2. Invited international symposium on TPACK  2010 Strategies for teacher professional development on TPACK  2011 Teachers‟ assessment of TPACK: Where are we and what is needed?  2012 Developing TPACK around the world: Probing the framework even as we apply it  2013: Measuring TPACK
  • 3. Conceptualizing TPACK Strategies to acquire TPACK Measuring effects
  • 4. The Netherlands Belgium Iowa State Ghana Tanzania
  • 5. Part 1  Introduction to the symposium – Joke Voogt  Measuring TPACK: Further Validation of the Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge Survey for Preservice (TPACK) Teachers - Denise Schmidt-Crawford, Wei Wang, Dale Niederhauser, Iowa State University  Unraveling the TPACK model: finding TPACK-Core – Petra Fisser & Joke Voogt, University of Twente, The Netherlands, Johan van Braak & Jo Tondeur, Ghent University, Belgium  Discussion with the Audience
  • 6. MEASURING TPACK: Further Validation of the TPACK Survey for Preservice Teachers Denise A. Schmidt-Crawford Dale Niederhauser Wei Wang Center for Technology in Learning and Teaching School of Education Iowa State University
  • 7. Validation of TPACK Survey Schmidt, D. A., Baran, E., Thompson, A. D., Mishra, P., Koehler, M. J., & Shin, T. S. (2009-10). Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK): The Development and Validation of an Assessment Instrument for Preservice Teachers. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 42, 123-149. Characteristics: • 47 likert-item survey • Seven constructs • Preservice teachers (elementary & early childhood education)
  • 10. The Problem • Other researchers using the survey were finding different patterns of results: • Factors were not stable • Items were loading on different factors • Factors were not aligning with the conceptual model
  • 11. Further Analysis • Research Context: • 3-credit, introduction to technology course (15 weeks) • Required for elementary education and early childhood education majors • Attend two, 1-hour lectures and one, 2-hour laboratory session every week • Participants: • 534 preservice teachers • 82% elementary education majors, 16% early childhood education majors, 2% other • 88% female; 12% male • 23% freshmen, 40% sophomores, 30% juniors, 7% seniors • 72% had not yet completed a practicum experience • Research Procedures: • Online survey administered at the end of the course (15-25 minutes to complete)
  • 12. Data Analysis • Principle components factor analysis (Varimax with Kaiser Normalization) • Internal consistency (Cronbach‟s alpha)
  • 13. TPACK as an Exploded Abstraction T P C
  • 14. Results 1. TK, PK, TPK, TCK factors remained the same. TPACK Total Eigen Construct Items Values TK 6 .877 PK 7 .921 TPK 9 .902 TCK 5 .879
  • 15. Results 2. CK is messy! TPACK Total Combined Eigen Construct Items Items Value CK 12 3 .854 Comment: I can use a ____________ way of thinking. I have various ways and strategies for developing my understanding of __________. I have sufficient knowledge about _____________.
  • 16. Results 3. PCK – Math item dropped out. TPACK Total Eigen Construct Items Value PCK 3 .865 Comment: Indicated the participants were not answering “math” question in ways that aligned with the other content areas.
  • 17. Results 4. TPACK – Two factors emerged (content, general). TPACK Total Eigen Construct Items Values Content 4 .885 General 4 .917
  • 18. Measuring TPACK • Collecting information about preservice teachers‟ perception of what they know • Direct measure of self perception • Indirect measure of knowledge • Start using direct measures for some TPACK constructs • e.g., CK – Content specific measures, PK – Praxis test • Program evaluation – Provides metrics of key places in teacher education program • What is working? What is not? (Interventions) • Start looking at TPACK as a dynamic model – What kinds of experiences can we provide to build “overlap?”
  • 19. Returning to the Problem • Using survey with „other‟ populations (i.e., inservice teachers) • Using survey with a focus on a specific content area (i.e., math, science) • Using survey in different countries • Validity & reliability are effected by population and content area
  • 20. QUESTIONS? Denise A. Schmidt-Crawford dschmidt@iastate.edu Dale Niederhauser dsn@iastate.edu Wei Wang weiyui72@iastate.edu Center for Technology in Learning and Teaching School of Education Iowa State University
  • 21. Unraveling the TPACK model: finding TPACK-Core Joke Voogt, Petra Fisser University of Twente Johan van Braak, Jo Tondeur Ghent University, Belgium SITE, New Orleans, 27 March 2013
  • 22. Aim of the study: Empirical exploration of the TPACK model  Can we reproduce the distinguished constructs of the TPACK conceptual framework as represented in the Venn diagram with our data?  If not:  can we unravel the model?  can we find new constructs?  can we develop a new instrument that measures the self-perception of (pre-service) teachers?
  • 23. Why this study?  We became fascinated by  the attractiveness of the model  the acceptance of the model by teachers  but also by the complexity of the model (and what‟s behind it)  We worked on  Survey for pre-service teachers  Professional development for in-service teachers  Literature review (JCAL, 2012)  Discussions/debates/presentations
  • 24. We all know the TPACK model: “At the heart of good teaching with technology are three core components: content, pedagogy, and technology, plus the relationships among and between them.” (Koehler & Mishra, 2006)
  • 25. The context of the study The Netherlands Flanders, Belgium Pre-service teachers Teacher educators Use of technology in the science Use of technology in different domain domains Sample: Sample: - 287 pre-service teachers - 146 teacher educators - age 16-24 - age 26-61 - 24% male, 76% female - 29% male, 71% female - distributed over 4 years of - 1-38 years experience as study teacher educator Instrument: TPACK Survey Instrument: TPACK Survey (Schmidt et al., 2009), all items (Schmidt et al., 2009), T-related items
  • 26. Results (NL), reliability  Reliability all TPACK-items together: Cronbach‟s α = 0.92  Reliability for all categories within Domain Cronbach’s α the TPACK Survey: TK .90 PK .75 CK .74 PCK .63 TCK .85 TPK .72 TPCK .83 Models .73
  • 27. Results (NL), factor analysis  Factor analysis  Can we measure TPACK by asking questions for each of the 7 TPACK domains?  Are we measuring the 7 TPACK domains?  Exploratory factor analysis (PC, Varimax) revealed 11 factors, 68% of variance explained  Further analysis of the factors lead to forcing to 7 factors, 58% of variance explained.  But… are these 7 factors the same as the 7 TPACK-domains??
  • 28. Results (NL), factor analysis factor Items in factor Name factor Reliability Cronbach’s α 1 TK1 TK2 TK3 TK4 TK5 TK6 TK7 Technological .90 Knowledge 2 PK1 PK2 PK3 PK4 PK5 PK6 PK7 Pedagogical Knowledge .75 3 CK1 CK2 CK3 PCK1 PCK2 Pedagogical Science .80 Content Knowledge 4 TCK1 TCK2 TCK3 TCK4 TCK5 TCK6 Technological & .88 TPK1 TPK2 Pedagogical enhanced TPCK2 TPCK3 TPCK4 TPCK6 Science Content Knowledge 5 TPK3 TPK4 TPK5 Critically applying .73 TPCK1 TPCK5 learned TPACK 6 Model1 Model2 Model3 Model4 Role models of TPACK .73 7 TPCK7 TPCK8 TPCK9 TPCK10 TPACK Leadership .89
  • 29. Results (NL), first findings  Yes: TK and PK (and “role models”)  No: CK, PCK, TCK, TPK and TPCK  CK and PCK are combined  TCK is combined with some of the TPK and some of the TPCK items and form a “Core TPACK” dimension  The other TPK and TPCK items are combined and form a scale “critically thinking about what you learned in your study before applying it”  Except for 4 TPCK items that form a “TPACK Leadership” scale
  • 30. Results (NL), focusing on the T-related items factor Items in factor Name factor Reliability Cronbach’s α 1 TK1 TK2 TK3 TK4 TK5 TK6 TK7 Technological .90 Knowledge 2 PK1 PK2 PK3 PK4 PK5 PK6 PK7 Pedagogical Knowledge .75 3 CK1 CK2 CK3 PCK1 PCK2 Pedagogical Science .80 Content Knowledge 4 TCK1 TCK2 TCK3 TCK4 TCK5 TCK6 Technological & .88 TPK1 TPK2 Pedagogical enhanced TPCK2 TPCK3 TPCK4 TPCK6 Science Content Knowledge 5 TPK3 TPK4 TPK5 Critically applying .73 TPCK1 TPCK5 learned TPACK 6 Model1 Model2 Model3 Model4 Role models of TPACK .73 7 TPCK7 TPCK8 TPCK9 TPCK10 TPACK Leadership .89
  • 31. Using the NL-results in the Flanders study  Survey for teacher educators  Only the T-related items from the TPACK Survey  Specific science-related items were left out, all items were transformed to “your content area”  Reliability all TPACK-items together: Cronbach‟s α = 0.97  Reliability for all categories within Domain Cronbach’s α the TPACK Survey: TK .95 TCK .92 TPK .83 TPCK .96
  • 32. Results (FL)  Goal: Confirmatory Factor Analysis on the NL-data  First: doing the Factor analysis again on the NL-data with only the TPACK Survey items that were included in the FL-survey: factor Items in factor Name factor Reliability Cronbach’s α 1 TK1 TK2 TK3 TK4 TK5 TK6 TK7 TK .90 2 TCK1 TCK2 TCK3 TCK4 TCK & TPK .85 TPK1 TPK2 (TPCK1) 3 TPCK1 TPCK2 TPCK3 TPCK4 TPCK .77 TPCK5 TPCK6 (TPCK1)
  • 33. Results (FL)  Next, the Confirmatory Factor Analysis:  Yes, there is a good fit:  But:  the correlations between the factors are also very high,  a 1- or 2-factor solution might be possible*
  • 34. Unraveling the TPACK model  When it comes to technology integration…  Factors:  TK, TPK/TCK, & TPCK  or… TK & TPK/TCK/TPCK?  or… TK/TPK/TCK/TPCK?  The integration of the domains as described by Koehler & Mishra go beyond the 3 circles and the overlapping areas!  But what does that mean?
  • 35. TK, TPK/TCK, & TPCK  TK items are very general: “I know how to solve my own technical problems”, “I can learn technology easily”, “I keep up with important new technologies”  TPK and TCK items are much more related to (the preparation of) lessons: “I can choose technologies that enhance the teaching approaches for a lesson” and “I can choose technologies that enhance the content for a lesson”  TPCK items are related to lessons and activities in the classroom: “I can teach lessons that appropriately combine science, technologies, and teaching approaches”, “I can select technologies to use in my classroom that enhance what I teach, how I teach, and what students learn”
  • 36. Getting closer to TPACK Core  Propositions: 1. TK is conditional for TCK, TPK and TPCK (Voogt, Fisser, Gibson, Knezek & Tondeur, 2012) (& recent regression analysis) 2. The combination of TPK, TCK and TPCK is the heart (or the core) of the model (TPACK Core) And if you take a close look.. It has been there the whole time!  “At the heart of good teaching with technology are three core components: content, pedagogy, and technology, plus the relationships among and between them.” (Koehler & Mishra, 2006)
  • 37. What does this mean for measuring TPACK?  Can we keep the survey items for TK, TCK, TPK and TPCK?  Or do we need to develop a new set of items that measures TPACK Core?  We don‟t have the answer (yet)..
  • 38. What does this mean for measuring TPACK?  What we do know:  Developing an instrument that is suitable for every situation is impossible  It is the specific context that matters most, and T, P and C are always context-dependent!  Measuring TPACK by a self-reporting survey is not enough  More measurement moments are needed  More instruments (observation, lesson plan rubric, etc) are needed
  • 39.
  • 40. More information?  Ideas about (measuring) TPACK Core? Please contact us!  Petra Fisser: p.h.g.fisser@utwente.nl And for the Dutch & Flemish people  htpp://www.tpack.nl 
  • 41. Part 2  Welcome back!  TPACK development in teacher design teams: assessing teachers’ perceived and observed knowledge - Ayoub Kafyulilo, Dar es salaam University College of Education, Tanzania; Petra Fisser & Joke Voogt, University of Twente, The Netherlands  Long term impact of TPACK: From pre-service teacher learning to professional and teaching practices - Douglas Agyei, University of Cape Coast, Ghana; Joke Voogt, University of Twente, The Netherlands  Discussant: Natalie Pareja Roblin – University of Ghent, Belgium  Discussion with Audience
  • 42. TPACK development in teacher design teams: Assessing the teachers’ perceived and observed knowledge Ayoub Kafyulilo, Dar es salaam University College of Education Petra Fisser and Joke Voogt, University of Twente
  • 43. Introduction  This study was conducted with the in-service science teachers in Tanzania.  It adopted design teams as professional development arrangement to develop teachers‟ technology integration knowledge and skills.  TPACK was used as a framework for describing the teachers‟ knowledge requirements for integrating technology in science teaching
  • 44. The Intervention  The study comprised of four intervention activities  The workshop  Lesson design in design teams  Lesson implementation in the classroom  Mostly a projector and a laptop were used in teaching  Reflection with peers (peer appraisal)
  • 45. Lesson design in design teams
  • 46. An example of a classroom set up with a projector, laptop and a projection screen
  • 47. Research questions  What is the in-service science teachers‟ perceived TPACK before and after intervention?  What are the observed in-service science teachers‟ TPACK before and after intervention?
  • 48. Participants  The study adopted a case study design  Design teams were study cases  Individual teachers were the units of analysis.  12 in-service science teachers participated in the study.  The 12 teachers formed three design teams (each with 4 teachers)
  • 49. Instrument  Six data collection instrument were used in this study to collect self- reported and observed data.  Self reported data were collected through;  TPACK survey,  Reflection survey,  Focus group discussion and  Interview  Observation data were collected through;  Classroom observation checklist,  Researcher‟s logbook
  • 50. TPACK Survey (pre and post-intervention)  The TPACK survey was used before and after the intervention  The instrument was adopted from Schmidt et al (2009) and Graham et al (2009) and used a 5 point Likert scale  The reliability was 0.93 Cronbach‟s alpha
  • 51. Observation checklist  The observation checklist was administered before and during the intervention  The items had a 3 point Likert scale: “No” = absence, “No/Yes” = partial existence, and “Yes” = presence of the behavior  Two people rated the observation checklist and the inter-rater reliability was 0.87 Cohen Kappa.
  • 52. The reflection survey  The reflection survey was administered at the end of the intervention to assess the teachers‟ opinions about learning technology in design teams  The overall reliability for items related to TPACK was 0.68 Cronbach‟s alpha.
  • 53. Researcher’s logbook  The researchers‟ logbook was used to maintain a record of activities and events occurring during the intervention process.  The researcher‟s logbook was used during peer appraisal, TPACK training and lesson design.  Data collected through the researchers logbook were important in describing the interventions processes.
  • 54. Teachers’ interview  The interview was administered at the end of the intervention to asses the effectiveness of design teams in teachers‟ development of TPACK  An example of the interview question was:  What technology integration knowledge and skills did you develop from design teams?  Four randomly selected interviews out of12 interviewees were coded by a second person.  The inter-coder reliability was 0.83 Cohen Kappa.
  • 55. Focus group discussion  A focus group discussion was administered at the end of the intervention  An example of the question asked in FGD was:  How do you evaluate the results of your discussion in design teams; in terms of the products you made, decisions in the team, new ideas and innovations  Two randomly selected FGD were coded by a second person.  The inter-coder reliability was 0.92 Cohen Kappa.
  • 56. Results: Teachers’ perceived TPACK before and after the intervention  Before intervention, teachers perceived their CK, PK and PCK as high, and TK, TCK, TPK and TPCK were low.  After intervention, all TPACK components were perceived high.  A Wilcoxon signed ranks test for two related samples showed that TK, PK, TCK, TPK and TPACK were significant at p ≤ 0.01 whereas CK and PCK were significant at p ≤ 0.05  Results from the reflection survey showed that teachers‟ developed TPACK through their participation in design teams.
  • 57. Results (Teachers’ observed TPACK)  Findings from teachers observation showed a significant difference between pre- and post-intervention results.  Pre-intervention results showed a low teachers‟ TK, TCK, TPK, and TPACK (M < 1.5, SD ≤ 0.17) in a three points Likert scale  However, in the post-intervention results, all TPACK components were high (P ≤ 0.05).
  • 58. Conclusions  The triangulation of the findings from self-reported and observed data showed;  A limited teachers‟ TK, TPK, TCK and TPACK before intervention,  After intervention all the TPACK components were high  In this study, self-reported data comply with the observed data  This differs from the findings of Alayyar (2011) and Kafyulilo et al (2011) which showed a difference between the observed and perceived TPACK
  • 59. Conclusions  Probably this has something to do with  The instrument,  The culture and  The level of the teachers.  Findings from both observed and self-reported data indicate that teachers‟ PK, CK and PCK were high before and after intervention.  This may suggest that in the context of Tanzania, technology integration efforts need to focus more on technology related components of TPACK rather than the whole TPACK.
  • 60. Thanks for your attention kafyulilo@duce.ac.tz
  • 61. Long term impact of TPACK: From pre-service teacher learning to professional and teaching practices Douglas Agyei & Joke Voogt 61
  • 62. Motivation  Poor student achievements (in mathematics) High failure rate (More than 86% of failures to enter Tertiary levels) TIMSS 2003 & 2007 (43rd out of 44 & 46th out of 48) Poor attitudes  Mathematics Teaching Teacher-centred approach (Hardly any hands-on activities,Whole class teaching Lots of notes being copied ) Low cognitive learning (Concept formation at a more abstract level, Heavy emphasis on assessment)
  • 63. Intervention studies in the 2009 – 2011  A Longitudinal study to integrate technology in teaching mathematics (Ghana)  Two case studies of Professional Development (PD) in 2009 and 2010  Integration of the PD arrangement into a regular mathematics–specific IT course (2011)  TPACK Framework  ICT (spreadsheet) to promote in-depth maths concept formation  Activity-Based Learning (ABL) to make lesson less teacher-centred
  • 64. TPACK Conceptualization (Intervention Studies 2) 1. Make use of existing ICT tools TPACK Frame work - Interconnection (Spreadsheet-specific) of content pedagogy & technology (Mishra & Koehler,2006) 2. Active involvement of learners (Activity Based Learning-ABL) 3. Explore connection between spreadsheet, ABL pedagogy and mathematical concept
  • 65. Outcome of the Intervention Studies  Developed TPACK of Participants  Self- assessment TPACK  Lesson artefacts  Lesson Observations  Three years into project :  Mathematics teachers pursuing carriers in different institutions  Various Senior High Schools/Junior High Schools in Ghana
  • 66. Challenge and Data Collection Measure the impact of the Intervention Studies  Explore whether and how the beginning teachers integrate ICT (demonstrate TPACK) in their teaching practices  Gain insight into factors promoting (or hindering) the teachers’ ICT integration (TPACK demonstration) − Questionnaire (100) − Interview ( 20) − Observation (8) − Researchers’ logbook
  • 67. Results (1)- Self Report Table 1: Mean score of factors that influence teachers TPACK use (N=100). Conditions Mean Std Dev Skills and knowledge 4.57 .355 Dissatisfaction with status quo 4.48 .283 Commitment 4.21 .287 Availability of Time 3.75 .562 Rewards and Incentives 3.17 .237 Participation (Decision making 3.02 .503 involvement) School Culture 2.05 .292 Resources ( ICT facilities) 1.71 .311
  • 68. Results 2 : Lesson Observation Table 2: Teacher lesson implementation (n=8) Teachers Subject ICT Availability Strategy Taught Two (2) Mathematics Personal Laptop and Spreadsheet techniques projector (interactive demonstration) Two (2) ICT Personal Laptop and Resources from Internet projector (interactive demonstration) Two (2) Mathematics Personal laptop (Rotating Spreadsheet techniques groups of students ) /Resources from Internet Two (2) Mathematics No ICT Facility Worksheet to support teamwork
  • 69.
  • 70. Snapshot of a lesson on Linear Equations Linear functions in the slope intercept form TPCKmaths TKss
  • 71. Snapshot of a lesson on Enlargement Consider the diagrams below. eye water Image of coin coin
  • 72. Snapshot of a lesson on Enlargement (2) Image of the boy A boy Pin-hole camera
  • 73. Snapshot of a lesson on Introduction to computer networks (1)
  • 74. Snapshot of a lesson on Introduction to computer networks (2)
  • 75. Summary of Results & Conclusions  Developed and strong positive views about TPACK in the long term (result of the pre- service preparation intervention studies)  Specific focus on ABL “P” and spreadsheets “T” in Mathematics “C” helped to develop deep connections between their subject matter, instructional strategy and the ICT application, fostering TPACK in the long term (closer to the original conception of Schulman’s (1986) ideas of Pedagogical Content Knowledge)  Develop TPACK in similar initiatives using other ICT applications and/or different subject matter.  Develop and extend pedagogical reasoning to support students learning  Using multiple data sources is a good way to assess TPACK in the long run  Teachers’ “knowledge and skill” acquired and “dissatisfaction with the status quo” are key in promoting long term TPACK  Lack of access to ICT infrastructure and unenthusiastic school cultures hinder TPACK in the long run
  • 76. Thank you  Douglas D. Agyei Email: ddagyei@yahoo.com  Joke M. Voogt Email: j.m.voogt@utwente.nl
  • 77. Symposium: Measuring TPACK SITE Conference, New Orleans, 2013 Natalie Pareja Roblin discussant
  • 78. TPACK: A growing concept
  • 79. Main themes in these studies Review of studies about TPACK published between 2005-2011 (n=55) (Voogt et al., 2012) • Development of the TPACK concept (14 studies) • Measuring (student-)teachers’ TPACK (14 studies) • Development of TPACK in specific subject domains (7 studies) • Strategies to support the development of (student-) teachers’ TPACK (36 studies) • TPACK and teacher beliefs (6 studies)
  • 80. This symposium: Measuring TPACK Integrative views C P Transformative views T Pre-service teachers In-service teachers Student teachers Teacher trainers
  • 81. Towards a comprehensive approach for measuring TPACK
  • 82. Integrating multiple instruments to measure TPACK 1. Perceived TPACK • Self-assessment survey (from integrative to transformative views on TPACK) • Interviews • Teacher reflections • .... 2. Enacted TPACK • Observation checklist • Lesson plans • Researcher logbook • .....
  • 83. TPACK as a complex and “fuzzy” concept • How can TPACK (and its constituting knowledge domains) be operationalized? Is it possible (and desirable) to pull apart the knowledge domains that constitute TPACK? • If TPACK is considered as a “sliding framework”, as suggested by Cox and Graham (2009), is it possible to develop standardized instruments to measure it? • How does qualitative data contribute to the understanding of (pre-service) teachers’ TPACK development? What does it add to survey data? • How to best combine self-reported and observed TPACK measurements?
  • 84. Examining the development of TPACK across time In-service teachers Beginning teachers Pre-service teachers
  • 85. TPACK development as a dynamic and context-bound process • How does TPACK develop as student teachers step into the teaching profession and become experienced teachers? • What factors (personal, institutional, systemic) facilitate and/or hinder TPACK development? • How does the context (school characteristics, learner characteristics, access to technology, ICT policies, etc.) influence the ways in which teachers integrate technology (i.e., how TPACK is put into action)?
  • 86. Towards a comprehensive approach for measuring TPACK: Moving forward...
  • 87. Integrating multiple instruments: Recent initiatives Assessing teachers’ pedagogical ICT competences (The Netherlands)
  • 88. Assessing teachers’ pedagogical ICT competences Self-perceived + Observed
  • 89. Format of the video vignette - Subject - Goal Introduction - Nature of ICT use (+/- 2 minutes) - Perceived advantages/contributions of ICT - ICT applications - Goals of ICT use Practice - Attractive/efficient/effective uses - Pedagogical use of ICT (TPACK) (+/- 4 to 8 minutes) - Teacher role - Student role - Why this lesson? - Why this combination of T, P and C? Reflection - Would this lesson be different without ICT? (+/- 2 minutes) - How do you know your (ICT) goals have been accomplished?
  • 90. Examining TPACK development across time and contexts: Recent initiatives From pre-service to practice: Understanding beginning teachers’ uses of technology (Belgium, Flanders)
  • 91. Understanding beginning teachers’ uses of technology Longitudinal qualitative study in Flanders Focus on (institutional) factors supporting TPACK development
  • 92. Study 1: Approaches to support TPACK development Moving from stand-alone technology courses to integrated approaches that aim to support TPACK development TE1: From TK to... TE2: From TK to TPK TE3: From TK to TCK Tondeur, J., Pareja Roblin, N., van Braak, J., Fisser, P., Voogt, J. (2012). Technological pedagogical content knowledge in teacher education: in search of a new curriculum. Educational Studies, DOI:10.1080/03055698.2012.713548
  • 93. Study 2: Technology integration by BT Pre-service education influences how BT integrqte technology in their teaching practice. It contributes to: - Developing TK “The basic skills we did learn them” - Getting to know various technology tools that could be used with educational purposes “[To learn about things] such as Klascement or Hot Potatoes was useful” “If I had not learned it in my pre-service education, I think I would have never used it here” - Learning how to teach with technology (!) little opportunities “[We should learn] not only the application itself, but [also] how to use it and how to integrate it [in your teaching]”
  • 94. Study 2: Technology integration by BT However, (the extent of) this influence depends on school characteristics: - Access to technology “It is not possible to sit behind 1 computer with 19 children” - Clear ICT policies “Everybody has one hour in the computer room. It is not compulsory, but the school principal has strongly recommended it to us” - Workload “Making and trying out new things is difficult, especially at the start [of your career] because you are busy with preparing your lessons” - Support and mentoring systems
  • 95. Measuring TPACK: Mission impossible? How can TPACK (and its constituting knowledge domains) Integrative views be operationalized? Transformative on TPACK views on TPACK Is it possible to develop standardized instruments to Generic measure TPACK? Context & content instruments specific instruments How does the context influence the ways in which teachers integrate technology? How to best combine self- reported and observed TPACK measurements? Self-perceived Observed TPACK TPACK measures measures