This document discusses challenges with implementing the TPACK framework in teacher preparation programs. The TPACK framework conceptualizes the knowledge teachers need regarding technology, pedagogy, and content. While useful as a conceptual model, problems arise in moving from conceptual understanding to practical implementation and assessment. Specifically, implementations may not accurately reflect TPACK concepts, fail to consider its complexities, or focus only on the existence of relationships rather than quality. The author hypothesizes three approaches to help address these issues: focusing on technological pedagogical knowledge, technological content knowledge, and pedagogical content knowledge to provide clearer guidance for effective technology integration.
Tpck in pre-service_teacher_education_preparing_prACACIA
This document discusses the need to extend the concept of pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) to account for teaching with technology. It reviews existing conceptualizations of PCK and proposes that a new knowledge domain called technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPCK) is needed. TPCK is defined as a unique body of knowledge constructed from the dynamic interaction of content, pedagogy, technology, learners and context. The document proposes a methodology called "technology mapping" to promote and assess the development of TPCK in pre-service teachers.
The document introduces the Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK) framework, which describes the types of knowledge needed by teachers for effective technology-enhanced teaching. The TPACK framework involves the intersection of teachers' technology knowledge, pedagogical knowledge, and content knowledge. It consists of seven knowledge areas including technological content knowledge, technological pedagogical knowledge, and technological pedagogical content knowledge. The framework is used to define what teachers need to know to effectively integrate technology and is becoming popular for developing technology-focused professional development programs.
The document discusses the Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK) framework, which aims to capture the knowledge teachers need to effectively integrate technology in the classroom. TPACK emphasizes the complex interplay between technology, pedagogy, and content knowledge. It builds on Shulman's idea of pedagogical content knowledge by adding the technology component. The TPACK framework is important for K-6 educators because it helps them understand that developing good instruction requires thoughtfully combining these three knowledge domains, rather than treating them separately. It also has implications for the author's own teaching practice by motivating integrated approaches to challenge and engage students.
Milad saad presentation introduction of tpack xl2Effat Nashat
This document introduces TPACK-XL, an elaborated model of ICT-TPCK (Information and Communication Technology - Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge) to conceptualize preservice teachers' knowledge base for integrating technology into teaching. ICT-TPCK includes knowledge of technology, pedagogy, content, learners, and context. The author analyzes how these knowledge constructs overlap to form 31 constituent knowledge areas and proposes "TPACK-XL" to highlight the cross-disciplinary nature of preservice teachers' knowledge required for technology integration.
1) The document discusses pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) and technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK), which are frameworks for understanding the knowledge teachers need to effectively teach with technology.
2) TPACK consists of 7 areas of knowledge: technology knowledge, content knowledge, pedagogical knowledge, pedagogical content knowledge, technological content knowledge, technological pedagogical knowledge, and technological pedagogical content knowledge.
3) The document argues that the intersection of these three core components - content knowledge, technology knowledge, and pedagogical knowledge - is essential for developing effective lesson plans that incorporate technology and foster 21st century skills.
The document discusses TPACK (Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge), a framework for teacher knowledge. It introduces TPACK as the intersection of technology, pedagogy, and content knowledge. It describes Pedagogical Content Knowledge (PCK), which refers to the relationship between subject knowledge and teaching methods. PCK involves transforming content for teaching using multiple representations and adapting to student prior knowledge. The document then defines the three components of TPACK: technology knowledge, technology content knowledge, and technology pedagogical knowledge. It concludes by noting TPACK's implications for effectively integrating technology into teaching.
This document discusses technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK), a framework for teacher knowledge for effective technology integration. TPACK builds on Shulman's construct of pedagogical content knowledge to include technology knowledge. The framework describes the interaction between teachers' content knowledge, pedagogical knowledge, and technology knowledge. Effective teaching with technology requires understanding these three core components as well as the relationships between them.
The document introduces the TPCK (Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge) framework for integrating technology effectively in teaching. TPCK is based on the idea that effective technology use requires an understanding of the interaction between content, pedagogy, and technology. The framework aims to help teachers navigate the complex challenges of technology integration and view themselves as curriculum designers. TPCK emphasizes that developing technology skills alone is not enough - teachers must understand how specific technologies can be applied pedagogically to effectively teach different subject matter.
Tpck in pre-service_teacher_education_preparing_prACACIA
This document discusses the need to extend the concept of pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) to account for teaching with technology. It reviews existing conceptualizations of PCK and proposes that a new knowledge domain called technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPCK) is needed. TPCK is defined as a unique body of knowledge constructed from the dynamic interaction of content, pedagogy, technology, learners and context. The document proposes a methodology called "technology mapping" to promote and assess the development of TPCK in pre-service teachers.
The document introduces the Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK) framework, which describes the types of knowledge needed by teachers for effective technology-enhanced teaching. The TPACK framework involves the intersection of teachers' technology knowledge, pedagogical knowledge, and content knowledge. It consists of seven knowledge areas including technological content knowledge, technological pedagogical knowledge, and technological pedagogical content knowledge. The framework is used to define what teachers need to know to effectively integrate technology and is becoming popular for developing technology-focused professional development programs.
The document discusses the Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK) framework, which aims to capture the knowledge teachers need to effectively integrate technology in the classroom. TPACK emphasizes the complex interplay between technology, pedagogy, and content knowledge. It builds on Shulman's idea of pedagogical content knowledge by adding the technology component. The TPACK framework is important for K-6 educators because it helps them understand that developing good instruction requires thoughtfully combining these three knowledge domains, rather than treating them separately. It also has implications for the author's own teaching practice by motivating integrated approaches to challenge and engage students.
Milad saad presentation introduction of tpack xl2Effat Nashat
This document introduces TPACK-XL, an elaborated model of ICT-TPCK (Information and Communication Technology - Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge) to conceptualize preservice teachers' knowledge base for integrating technology into teaching. ICT-TPCK includes knowledge of technology, pedagogy, content, learners, and context. The author analyzes how these knowledge constructs overlap to form 31 constituent knowledge areas and proposes "TPACK-XL" to highlight the cross-disciplinary nature of preservice teachers' knowledge required for technology integration.
1) The document discusses pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) and technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK), which are frameworks for understanding the knowledge teachers need to effectively teach with technology.
2) TPACK consists of 7 areas of knowledge: technology knowledge, content knowledge, pedagogical knowledge, pedagogical content knowledge, technological content knowledge, technological pedagogical knowledge, and technological pedagogical content knowledge.
3) The document argues that the intersection of these three core components - content knowledge, technology knowledge, and pedagogical knowledge - is essential for developing effective lesson plans that incorporate technology and foster 21st century skills.
The document discusses TPACK (Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge), a framework for teacher knowledge. It introduces TPACK as the intersection of technology, pedagogy, and content knowledge. It describes Pedagogical Content Knowledge (PCK), which refers to the relationship between subject knowledge and teaching methods. PCK involves transforming content for teaching using multiple representations and adapting to student prior knowledge. The document then defines the three components of TPACK: technology knowledge, technology content knowledge, and technology pedagogical knowledge. It concludes by noting TPACK's implications for effectively integrating technology into teaching.
This document discusses technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK), a framework for teacher knowledge for effective technology integration. TPACK builds on Shulman's construct of pedagogical content knowledge to include technology knowledge. The framework describes the interaction between teachers' content knowledge, pedagogical knowledge, and technology knowledge. Effective teaching with technology requires understanding these three core components as well as the relationships between them.
The document introduces the TPCK (Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge) framework for integrating technology effectively in teaching. TPCK is based on the idea that effective technology use requires an understanding of the interaction between content, pedagogy, and technology. The framework aims to help teachers navigate the complex challenges of technology integration and view themselves as curriculum designers. TPCK emphasizes that developing technology skills alone is not enough - teachers must understand how specific technologies can be applied pedagogically to effectively teach different subject matter.
TPACK-XL Framework for Educators and Scholars: A Theoretical Grounding for Bu...Dr. Milad M. SAAD
What is the nature of preservice teachers knowledge base that would enable them teach with technology? How preservice teacher education programs should be structured to build this knowledge base? In an effort to respond to these questions, this study examines the mostly recognized relevant theoretical grounding of the nature of the teacher knowledge base. As a result, it introduces TPACK-XL as a transformative view of a strand of Mishra and Koehler (2005) TPACK (Technological Pedagogical And Content Knowledge) theoretical framework, named ICT-TPCK as proposed by Angeli and Valanides (2009).
This document provides an introduction to the Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK) framework. It discusses the history and components of TPACK, which integrates knowledge of technology, pedagogy and content. Key aspects of TPACK include understanding how these three bodies of knowledge overlap and influence each other. The document also summarizes findings from research studies that show effective technology integration depends on the pedagogical approaches used, not just the technologies themselves.
TPACK + Mathematics: A Review of Current TPACK LiteratureIJITE
This paper will summarize a review of current literature on the Technology, Pedagogy and Content
Knowledge (TPACK) framework, discuss innovative technology integration in teacher preparation and
mathematics methods courses for teacher candidates studying elementary education. Themes that emerged
in the review of current TPaCKliterature included the importance of understanding the TPACK framework,
developing self efficacy, the vital role that modeling plays, how collaboration impacts and finally, just how
powerful reflection can be in the application of TPACK. This paper will examine and explain these
different themes and summarize the current literature as well as highlight trends on technology integration
and TPACK.
TPACK + MATHEMATICS: A REVIEW OF CURRENT TPACK LITERATURE IJITE
This paper will summarize a review of current literature on the Technology, Pedagogy and Content Knowledge (TPACK) framework, discuss innovative technology integration in teacher preparation and mathematics methods courses for teacher candidates studying elementary education. Themes that emerged in the review of current TPaCKliterature included the importance of understanding the TPACK framework, developing self efficacy, the vital role that modeling plays, how collaboration impacts and finally, just how powerful reflection can be in the application of TPACK. This paper will examine and explain these different themes and summarize the current literature as well as highlight trends on technology integration and TPACK.
TPACK + MATHEMATICS: A REVIEW OF CURRENT TPACK LITERATUREIJITE
This paper will summarize a review of current literature on the Technology, Pedagogy and Content Knowledge (TPACK) framework, discuss innovative technology integration in teacher preparation and mathematics methods courses for teacher candidates studying elementary education. Themes that emerged in the review of current TPaCKliterature included the importance of understanding the TPACK framework, developing self efficacy, the vital role that modeling plays, how collaboration impacts and finally, just how powerful reflection can be in the application of TPACK. This paper will examine and explain these different themes and summarize the current literature as well as highlight trends on technology integration and TPACK.
1) The document presents a framework called technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) for teacher knowledge by Punya Mishra and Matthew Koehler of Michigan University.
2) TPACK emphasizes the importance of integrating teachers' knowledge of technology, pedagogy, and content. It posits that effective teaching with technology requires understanding the relationships between all three components.
3) The framework is intended to inform and guide teachers on how to teach using technology tools. It also provides a structure to analyze observations of teachers and develop teacher understanding of integrating technology in the classroom.
The document discusses technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) and its importance for effective technology integration in teaching. TPACK is a framework that describes the different types of knowledge teachers need, including content knowledge, pedagogical knowledge, technology knowledge, pedagogical content knowledge, technological content knowledge, and technological pedagogical content knowledge. The purpose of TPACK is to understand how to combine content, pedagogy and technology effectively in technology-enhanced learning environments.
This document discusses the Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK) framework for teacher knowledge. TPACK builds on Shulman's construct of pedagogical content knowledge to include technology knowledge. The TPACK framework argues that effective technology integration requires understanding the relationships between technology, pedagogy, and content. TPACK consists of seven knowledge areas and describes the complex interaction between content, pedagogy, and technology that produces flexible knowledge for technology integration in teaching. Measuring teacher TPACK is challenging and an area of ongoing research.
This document discusses the TPACK framework for integrating technology into teaching. It begins by explaining the PCK framework developed by Shulman and the addition of technological knowledge by Koehler and Mishra to create TPACK. TPACK consists of technological, pedagogical, and content knowledge, as well as their intersections. The document then discusses applying TPACK to teaching English as a second language and reviews related literature on measuring teachers' TPACK. It proposes using a survey to measure ESL teachers' knowledge and address research questions about the model.
The document discusses the importance of techno-pedagogic analysis in commerce education. It argues that techno-pedagogy, which refers to weaving technological skills into the learning process, is now a key factor in educational success. It presents a framework for technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) that recognizes the interplay between content, pedagogy, and technology. The challenges of teaching with newer digital technologies are also addressed. The conclusion emphasizes that techno-pedagogic analysis, while complex, can dramatically improve student learning and teacher effectiveness in commerce and other disciplines.
This document presents the Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPCK) framework. It discusses that effective teaching requires an understanding of how technology, pedagogy and content interact. The TPCK framework builds on Shulman's notion of Pedagogical Content Knowledge by emphasizing the connections between content, pedagogy and technology. It identifies seven domains of teacher knowledge: content knowledge, pedagogical knowledge, pedagogical content knowledge, technological knowledge, technological content knowledge, technological pedagogical knowledge, and technological pedagogical content knowledge. The framework supports constructivist teaching and inquiry-based learning.
The document discusses the Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPCK) framework for teacher knowledge regarding technology integration. [1] It explains the framework builds on Shulman's Pedagogical Content Knowledge by adding Technological Knowledge and its interactions. [2] TPCK represents the complex relationship between teachers applying technology to subject matter teaching and is key knowledge for effective technology-enhanced teaching. [3] The framework provides conceptual lenses to understand this relationship and guide curriculum design.
TPACK -skills of Classroom Teachers in CraftsMari Kyllönen
This document summarizes a study on Finnish classroom teachers' self-assessed skills in integrating technology into their pedagogical practices for crafts, as measured by the TPACK framework. The study used a survey of 97 teachers and interviews of 5 teachers. The survey found 6 factors of TPACK skills and differences between teacher groups. Interviews found that teachers use technology for ideas/planning but pedagogy dominates, and they desire more training. The study concludes the TPACK model can assess Finnish teachers' skills but more research is needed on training and students' experiences.
This article proposes a framework called technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPCK) for understanding the knowledge teachers need to effectively integrate technology into their teaching. The framework builds on Shulman's idea of pedagogical content knowledge by adding an additional component of how content, pedagogy, and technology interrelate and influence each other. The authors argue that developing TPCK is important for transforming teacher education, training, and professional development related to educational technology integration. Over five years of research, the authors have studied how teachers develop TPCK and how this framework can guide research on technology integration.
This article proposes a framework called technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPCK) for understanding the knowledge teachers need to effectively integrate technology into their teaching. The framework builds on Shulman's idea of pedagogical content knowledge by adding an additional component of how content, pedagogy, and technology interrelate and influence each other. The authors argue that developing TPCK is important for teacher training programs, professional development, and educational research on technology integration. They have studied the development of TPCK through a design-based research project working with teachers.
Technology Integration and Teacher Education: Learning with Technologye_lomax
This presentation took place at the 2016 PeDTICE Colloquium at the University of Sherbrooke in Montreal, Canada. This presentation discusses the Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK) model, explores the affordances and constraints that are commonly associated with the integration educational technology into teacher education curricula in general, and highlights the relationship of relevant aspects of the TPACK model and technology integration debate that are likely to affect the future design goals and instructional objectives guiding the further development of pre-service teacher educational technology courses similar to EDM 310; a required undergraduate course in the teacher education program in the College of Education at the University of South Alabama that explores the use and integration of educational technology to support K-12 classroom instruction and student learning.
(PeDTICE: http://www.usherbrooke.ca/pedtice/)
(Colloquium program (in French): http://www.usherbrooke.ca/pedtice/fr/les-activites-de-pedtice/evenements-speciaux/colloquereleve/#c74326-1)
This symposium discusses strategies for developing teachers' TPACK (Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge) through professional development programs. Four contributions will be presented that use design-based approaches to prepare pre-service teachers in various countries to integrate technology. The first discusses a program in Kuwait using design teams, the second a US master's program, the third design teams for math teachers in Ghana, and the fourth the development of a TPACK assessment instrument. The goal is to identify characteristics of effective professional development for technology integration.
The document discusses the TPACK (Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge) framework, which describes the types of knowledge teachers need to effectively teach with technology. It introduces TPACK as an extension of Shulman's PCK (Pedagogical Content Knowledge) framework to include technology knowledge. The document then provides an overview of the TPACK framework and its components - technological knowledge, content knowledge, pedagogical knowledge, technological content knowledge, technological pedagogical knowledge, and pedagogical content knowledge. It discusses the interactions between these knowledge domains and challenges to implementing TPACK in teaching.
This document discusses the TPACK framework, which analyzes the combination of technological knowledge, pedagogical knowledge, and content knowledge that teachers should possess. It provides background on the development of the TPACK framework since 1986. It then explains the three core domains - technological knowledge, pedagogical knowledge, and content knowledge. It also describes the overlapping domains that are created by the intersection of the three core domains: technological content knowledge, pedagogical content knowledge, technological pedagogical knowledge, and technological pedagogical content knowledge. The document aims to provide a closer look at each of the domains within the TPACK framework.
Essay On Teachers Day (2023) In English Short, Simple BestSandra Long
The document provides instructions for submitting a request to an online writing service called HelpWriting.net. It outlines a 5-step process: 1) Create an account with a password and email. 2) Complete an order form with instructions, sources, and deadline. 3) Review bids from writers and select one. 4) Review the completed paper and authorize payment. 5) Request revisions until satisfied with the work. The service promises original, high-quality content and refunds for plagiarized work.
10 Best Printable Handwriting Paper Template PDF For Free At PrintableeSandra Long
The document discusses differences between schools in America and India. It notes that American schools have earlier start times, later end times, and are divided into elementary, middle, and high school sections. American schools also place more emphasis on extracurricular activities and sports compared to Indian schools. Key differences include dress codes, lunch times, qualifications for teachers, and approaches to learning that are more hands-on in America versus memorization-focused in India.
More Related Content
Similar to Approximating TPACK In Teacher Preparation A Three-Pronged Approach To Effective Technology Integration
TPACK-XL Framework for Educators and Scholars: A Theoretical Grounding for Bu...Dr. Milad M. SAAD
What is the nature of preservice teachers knowledge base that would enable them teach with technology? How preservice teacher education programs should be structured to build this knowledge base? In an effort to respond to these questions, this study examines the mostly recognized relevant theoretical grounding of the nature of the teacher knowledge base. As a result, it introduces TPACK-XL as a transformative view of a strand of Mishra and Koehler (2005) TPACK (Technological Pedagogical And Content Knowledge) theoretical framework, named ICT-TPCK as proposed by Angeli and Valanides (2009).
This document provides an introduction to the Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK) framework. It discusses the history and components of TPACK, which integrates knowledge of technology, pedagogy and content. Key aspects of TPACK include understanding how these three bodies of knowledge overlap and influence each other. The document also summarizes findings from research studies that show effective technology integration depends on the pedagogical approaches used, not just the technologies themselves.
TPACK + Mathematics: A Review of Current TPACK LiteratureIJITE
This paper will summarize a review of current literature on the Technology, Pedagogy and Content
Knowledge (TPACK) framework, discuss innovative technology integration in teacher preparation and
mathematics methods courses for teacher candidates studying elementary education. Themes that emerged
in the review of current TPaCKliterature included the importance of understanding the TPACK framework,
developing self efficacy, the vital role that modeling plays, how collaboration impacts and finally, just how
powerful reflection can be in the application of TPACK. This paper will examine and explain these
different themes and summarize the current literature as well as highlight trends on technology integration
and TPACK.
TPACK + MATHEMATICS: A REVIEW OF CURRENT TPACK LITERATURE IJITE
This paper will summarize a review of current literature on the Technology, Pedagogy and Content Knowledge (TPACK) framework, discuss innovative technology integration in teacher preparation and mathematics methods courses for teacher candidates studying elementary education. Themes that emerged in the review of current TPaCKliterature included the importance of understanding the TPACK framework, developing self efficacy, the vital role that modeling plays, how collaboration impacts and finally, just how powerful reflection can be in the application of TPACK. This paper will examine and explain these different themes and summarize the current literature as well as highlight trends on technology integration and TPACK.
TPACK + MATHEMATICS: A REVIEW OF CURRENT TPACK LITERATUREIJITE
This paper will summarize a review of current literature on the Technology, Pedagogy and Content Knowledge (TPACK) framework, discuss innovative technology integration in teacher preparation and mathematics methods courses for teacher candidates studying elementary education. Themes that emerged in the review of current TPaCKliterature included the importance of understanding the TPACK framework, developing self efficacy, the vital role that modeling plays, how collaboration impacts and finally, just how powerful reflection can be in the application of TPACK. This paper will examine and explain these different themes and summarize the current literature as well as highlight trends on technology integration and TPACK.
1) The document presents a framework called technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) for teacher knowledge by Punya Mishra and Matthew Koehler of Michigan University.
2) TPACK emphasizes the importance of integrating teachers' knowledge of technology, pedagogy, and content. It posits that effective teaching with technology requires understanding the relationships between all three components.
3) The framework is intended to inform and guide teachers on how to teach using technology tools. It also provides a structure to analyze observations of teachers and develop teacher understanding of integrating technology in the classroom.
The document discusses technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) and its importance for effective technology integration in teaching. TPACK is a framework that describes the different types of knowledge teachers need, including content knowledge, pedagogical knowledge, technology knowledge, pedagogical content knowledge, technological content knowledge, and technological pedagogical content knowledge. The purpose of TPACK is to understand how to combine content, pedagogy and technology effectively in technology-enhanced learning environments.
This document discusses the Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK) framework for teacher knowledge. TPACK builds on Shulman's construct of pedagogical content knowledge to include technology knowledge. The TPACK framework argues that effective technology integration requires understanding the relationships between technology, pedagogy, and content. TPACK consists of seven knowledge areas and describes the complex interaction between content, pedagogy, and technology that produces flexible knowledge for technology integration in teaching. Measuring teacher TPACK is challenging and an area of ongoing research.
This document discusses the TPACK framework for integrating technology into teaching. It begins by explaining the PCK framework developed by Shulman and the addition of technological knowledge by Koehler and Mishra to create TPACK. TPACK consists of technological, pedagogical, and content knowledge, as well as their intersections. The document then discusses applying TPACK to teaching English as a second language and reviews related literature on measuring teachers' TPACK. It proposes using a survey to measure ESL teachers' knowledge and address research questions about the model.
The document discusses the importance of techno-pedagogic analysis in commerce education. It argues that techno-pedagogy, which refers to weaving technological skills into the learning process, is now a key factor in educational success. It presents a framework for technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) that recognizes the interplay between content, pedagogy, and technology. The challenges of teaching with newer digital technologies are also addressed. The conclusion emphasizes that techno-pedagogic analysis, while complex, can dramatically improve student learning and teacher effectiveness in commerce and other disciplines.
This document presents the Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPCK) framework. It discusses that effective teaching requires an understanding of how technology, pedagogy and content interact. The TPCK framework builds on Shulman's notion of Pedagogical Content Knowledge by emphasizing the connections between content, pedagogy and technology. It identifies seven domains of teacher knowledge: content knowledge, pedagogical knowledge, pedagogical content knowledge, technological knowledge, technological content knowledge, technological pedagogical knowledge, and technological pedagogical content knowledge. The framework supports constructivist teaching and inquiry-based learning.
The document discusses the Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPCK) framework for teacher knowledge regarding technology integration. [1] It explains the framework builds on Shulman's Pedagogical Content Knowledge by adding Technological Knowledge and its interactions. [2] TPCK represents the complex relationship between teachers applying technology to subject matter teaching and is key knowledge for effective technology-enhanced teaching. [3] The framework provides conceptual lenses to understand this relationship and guide curriculum design.
TPACK -skills of Classroom Teachers in CraftsMari Kyllönen
This document summarizes a study on Finnish classroom teachers' self-assessed skills in integrating technology into their pedagogical practices for crafts, as measured by the TPACK framework. The study used a survey of 97 teachers and interviews of 5 teachers. The survey found 6 factors of TPACK skills and differences between teacher groups. Interviews found that teachers use technology for ideas/planning but pedagogy dominates, and they desire more training. The study concludes the TPACK model can assess Finnish teachers' skills but more research is needed on training and students' experiences.
This article proposes a framework called technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPCK) for understanding the knowledge teachers need to effectively integrate technology into their teaching. The framework builds on Shulman's idea of pedagogical content knowledge by adding an additional component of how content, pedagogy, and technology interrelate and influence each other. The authors argue that developing TPCK is important for transforming teacher education, training, and professional development related to educational technology integration. Over five years of research, the authors have studied how teachers develop TPCK and how this framework can guide research on technology integration.
This article proposes a framework called technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPCK) for understanding the knowledge teachers need to effectively integrate technology into their teaching. The framework builds on Shulman's idea of pedagogical content knowledge by adding an additional component of how content, pedagogy, and technology interrelate and influence each other. The authors argue that developing TPCK is important for teacher training programs, professional development, and educational research on technology integration. They have studied the development of TPCK through a design-based research project working with teachers.
Technology Integration and Teacher Education: Learning with Technologye_lomax
This presentation took place at the 2016 PeDTICE Colloquium at the University of Sherbrooke in Montreal, Canada. This presentation discusses the Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK) model, explores the affordances and constraints that are commonly associated with the integration educational technology into teacher education curricula in general, and highlights the relationship of relevant aspects of the TPACK model and technology integration debate that are likely to affect the future design goals and instructional objectives guiding the further development of pre-service teacher educational technology courses similar to EDM 310; a required undergraduate course in the teacher education program in the College of Education at the University of South Alabama that explores the use and integration of educational technology to support K-12 classroom instruction and student learning.
(PeDTICE: http://www.usherbrooke.ca/pedtice/)
(Colloquium program (in French): http://www.usherbrooke.ca/pedtice/fr/les-activites-de-pedtice/evenements-speciaux/colloquereleve/#c74326-1)
This symposium discusses strategies for developing teachers' TPACK (Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge) through professional development programs. Four contributions will be presented that use design-based approaches to prepare pre-service teachers in various countries to integrate technology. The first discusses a program in Kuwait using design teams, the second a US master's program, the third design teams for math teachers in Ghana, and the fourth the development of a TPACK assessment instrument. The goal is to identify characteristics of effective professional development for technology integration.
The document discusses the TPACK (Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge) framework, which describes the types of knowledge teachers need to effectively teach with technology. It introduces TPACK as an extension of Shulman's PCK (Pedagogical Content Knowledge) framework to include technology knowledge. The document then provides an overview of the TPACK framework and its components - technological knowledge, content knowledge, pedagogical knowledge, technological content knowledge, technological pedagogical knowledge, and pedagogical content knowledge. It discusses the interactions between these knowledge domains and challenges to implementing TPACK in teaching.
This document discusses the TPACK framework, which analyzes the combination of technological knowledge, pedagogical knowledge, and content knowledge that teachers should possess. It provides background on the development of the TPACK framework since 1986. It then explains the three core domains - technological knowledge, pedagogical knowledge, and content knowledge. It also describes the overlapping domains that are created by the intersection of the three core domains: technological content knowledge, pedagogical content knowledge, technological pedagogical knowledge, and technological pedagogical content knowledge. The document aims to provide a closer look at each of the domains within the TPACK framework.
Similar to Approximating TPACK In Teacher Preparation A Three-Pronged Approach To Effective Technology Integration (20)
Essay On Teachers Day (2023) In English Short, Simple BestSandra Long
The document provides instructions for submitting a request to an online writing service called HelpWriting.net. It outlines a 5-step process: 1) Create an account with a password and email. 2) Complete an order form with instructions, sources, and deadline. 3) Review bids from writers and select one. 4) Review the completed paper and authorize payment. 5) Request revisions until satisfied with the work. The service promises original, high-quality content and refunds for plagiarized work.
10 Best Printable Handwriting Paper Template PDF For Free At PrintableeSandra Long
The document discusses differences between schools in America and India. It notes that American schools have earlier start times, later end times, and are divided into elementary, middle, and high school sections. American schools also place more emphasis on extracurricular activities and sports compared to Indian schools. Key differences include dress codes, lunch times, qualifications for teachers, and approaches to learning that are more hands-on in America versus memorization-focused in India.
Buy College Application Essay. Online assignment writing service.Sandra Long
The document provides instructions for requesting an assignment writing service from HelpWriting.net. It outlines a 5-step process: 1) Create an account with valid email and password. 2) Complete a 10-minute order form providing instructions, sources, and deadline. 3) Review bids from writers and choose one based on qualifications. 4) Review the completed paper and authorize payment if satisfied. 5) Request revisions to ensure satisfaction, and the company offers refunds for plagiarized work.
FREE 6 Sample Informative Essay Templates In MS WordSandra Long
This document provides a summary of Ursula K. LeGuin's novel The Left Hand of Darkness. The story follows Genly Ai on a mission to persuade the nations of the planet Gethen, also called Winter, to join an intergalactic alliance. His journey is challenging due to major societal differences between Gethen and his home planet of Earth. One such difference is that the people of Gethen experience periods of sexual arousal and function during certain parts of their monthly cycle, which impacts their society and relationships. The document will discuss how sex and gender roles are portrayed in the novel.
Small Essay On Education. Small Essay On The EducSandra Long
The document provides instructions for using an online writing service called HelpWriting.net. It outlines a 5-step process: 1) Create an account with an email and password. 2) Complete an order form with instructions, sources, and deadline. 3) Review bids from writers and choose one. 4) Review the completed paper and authorize payment. 5) Request revisions until satisfied with the work. The service offers original, plagiarism-free content and multiple revisions.
Where Can I Buy A Persuasive Essay, Buy PerSandra Long
The document discusses a dermal fillers training course that fully trains and certifies students to administer dermal fillers, allowing them to add the procedure to their practice once completed. Students receive all necessary training on dermal fillers during the course. While certified after completion, students can also get follow up assistance from the instructor by sending in photos and questions about early cases.
Chinese Writing Practice Paper With Pinyin GoodnotSandra Long
Here are the key ways of knowing that would be relevant in this situation:
Empirical: The rising lactate level and increasing discomfort experienced by the patient provide empirical evidence that the chlorhexedine wipes are irritating her skin. Direct observation of physical signs and symptoms allows the nurse to gather empirical knowledge.
Personal: Communicating directly with the patient about her experience of burning and distress allows the nurse to understand her personal experience of the situation from her own perspective. This gives the nurse personally-derived knowledge.
Ethical: Considering the patient's best interests and right to be free from unnecessary distress or harm guides the nurse to stop using the irritating wipes. The ethical way of knowing emphasizes caring for the patient in
Elephant Story Writing Sample - Aus - Elephant WSandra Long
The document provides instructions for requesting writing assistance from HelpWriting.net in 5 steps:
1. Create an account with a password and email.
2. Complete a 10-minute order form providing instructions, sources, deadline, and attach a sample work.
3. Review bids from writers and choose one based on qualifications.
4. Review the completed paper and authorize payment if satisfied. Free revisions are allowed.
5. Multiple revisions can be requested to ensure satisfaction. Plagiarized work will result in a full refund.
391505 Paragraph-Writ. Online assignment writing service.Sandra Long
The document provides information about a performance that will take the audience through centuries of musical innovation and revolution, from the Middle Ages to the Baroque period. It begins with a secular song by early troubadours, then discusses Machaut's secular ballades and virelais from the 14th century. Finally, it mentions an Italian soprano aria by Handel from the early 18th century Baroque period. The performance aims to showcase changes in vocal arrangements, instruments, mood and style over different historical periods of music.
Get Essay Writing Assignment Help Writing Assignments, Essay WritingSandra Long
This document provides instructions for getting essay writing assignment help from the website HelpWriting.net. It outlines a 5-step process: 1) Create an account with an email and password. 2) Complete a form with assignment details. 3) Review bids from writers and choose one. 4) Review the completed paper and authorize payment. 5) Request revisions until satisfied. The document emphasizes that original, high-quality work is guaranteed, with refunds for plagiarism.
Ampad EZ Flag Writing Pad, LegalWide, 8 12 X 11, WhiSandra Long
The document discusses various methods for maintaining a healthy septic system, noting that certain cleaning agents and detergents can weaken or kill the bacteria that maintains the system. It recommends using liquid detergents labeled as safe for septic tanks, and provides tips for good laundry habits like avoiding bleach and antibacterial soaps. Combining these laundry best practices with regular septic system maintenance can help the system operate effectively for 20-30 years.
The Federalist Papers Writers Nozna.Net. Online assignment writing service.Sandra Long
The document summarizes an accounting software installation project that was going poorly after being well-planned initially. A task force from each company division provided input into the proposed installation and divisions were trained on how they would use the new software. However, four months into the project it was falling apart, with contractors complaining about delays caused by other contractors. The project manager called an emergency meeting to address the problems arising.
Whoever Said That Money CanT Buy Happiness, Simply DidnTSandra Long
The novel follows Cedric Jennings' journey from a dangerous neighborhood in Washington D.C. to attending an Ivy League university. To survive in his high school and pursue his dream of an Ivy education, Cedric isolates himself from his peers. When he reaches Brown University, Cedric still believes isolation is key to survival and sees himself in conflict with peers who have different values or successes. This leads to conflicts erupting from Cedric's refusal to socialize or celebrate achievements with others.
How To Write An Essay In College Odessa HowtowritSandra Long
The document discusses the steps to get writing help from the website HelpWriting.net, which include creating an account, submitting a request with instructions and deadline, and reviewing writer bids before choosing one and placing a deposit to start the assignment. It notes that customers can request revisions until satisfied with the final paper and receive a refund if the paper is plagiarized. The process aims to ensure customers' needs are fully met for original, high-quality content.
How To Write A Career Research Paper. Online assignment writing service.Sandra Long
This document provides instructions for creating an account and submitting an assignment request on the website HelpWriting.net. It outlines a 5-step process: 1) Create an account with a password and email. 2) Complete a form with assignment details, sources, and deadline. 3) Review bids from writers and choose one. 4) Review the completed paper and authorize payment. 5) Request revisions to ensure satisfaction, with a full refund option for plagiarized work. The purpose is to help students get high-quality assignment help and writing services from this online platform.
Columbia College Chicago Notable Alumni - INFOLEARNERSSandra Long
The Great Sphinx of Giza in Egypt is one of the most famous ancient monuments, but its origins remain mysterious. It is generally believed to have been built around 2500 BC as a statue of Pharaoh Khafre, but some details of its construction and purpose are uncertain. The Sphinx represents a guardian of the Giza plateau and holds symbolic meaning in ancient Egyptian culture. Recent archaeological excavations have uncovered additional clues, but the Sphinx continues to puzzle historians with the mysteries of its ancient construction and original function.
001 P1 Accounting Essay Thatsnotus. Online assignment writing service.Sandra Long
The document provides instructions for requesting writing assistance from HelpWriting.net in 5 steps:
1. Create an account with a password and email.
2. Complete a 10-minute order form providing instructions, sources, and deadline.
3. Choose a writer based on their bid, qualifications, and feedback to start the assignment.
4. Review the completed paper and authorize payment or request revisions.
5. Request multiple revisions to ensure satisfaction, and HelpWriting.net offers refunds for plagiarized work.
Essay Writing Tips That Will Make Col. Online assignment writing service.Sandra Long
The document discusses the materials needed for rockets and space shuttles. Early rockets were disposable to launch astronauts into space but were expensive. Later, space shuttles were designed to be reusable by having aircraft connect to rockets to boost them into space and land back on Earth. Engineers had to develop materials that could withstand extreme heat, cold, pressure changes and debris collisions in space while being reusable.
Pin On Essay Writer Box. Online assignment writing service.Sandra Long
The document provides an analysis of the memoir The Glass Castle by Jeannette Walls. It discusses how Walls endured a difficult childhood, growing up in poverty with alcoholic parents who often neglected to properly care for their children. However, it argues that these hardships helped shape Walls into an independent, successful woman by teaching her self-reliance and resilience at a young age. While her upbringing exposed her to challenges that could have had negative long-term effects, Walls was able to overcome obstacles and achieve success despite coming from a low-income family environment.
How To Write A Funny Essay For College - AiSandra Long
The document discusses process improvement from a principal's perspective, noting that principals must assess delivery mechanisms, facilities, and equipment before making enhancement recommendations. It focuses on two learning delivery mechanisms, school facilities and technologies, and how process improvement relates to educational institutions. The principal is tasked with purposeful planning, preparation, and leadership to effectively evaluate an institution's success.
ISO/IEC 27001, ISO/IEC 42001, and GDPR: Best Practices for Implementation and...PECB
Denis is a dynamic and results-driven Chief Information Officer (CIO) with a distinguished career spanning information systems analysis and technical project management. With a proven track record of spearheading the design and delivery of cutting-edge Information Management solutions, he has consistently elevated business operations, streamlined reporting functions, and maximized process efficiency.
Certified as an ISO/IEC 27001: Information Security Management Systems (ISMS) Lead Implementer, Data Protection Officer, and Cyber Risks Analyst, Denis brings a heightened focus on data security, privacy, and cyber resilience to every endeavor.
His expertise extends across a diverse spectrum of reporting, database, and web development applications, underpinned by an exceptional grasp of data storage and virtualization technologies. His proficiency in application testing, database administration, and data cleansing ensures seamless execution of complex projects.
What sets Denis apart is his comprehensive understanding of Business and Systems Analysis technologies, honed through involvement in all phases of the Software Development Lifecycle (SDLC). From meticulous requirements gathering to precise analysis, innovative design, rigorous development, thorough testing, and successful implementation, he has consistently delivered exceptional results.
Throughout his career, he has taken on multifaceted roles, from leading technical project management teams to owning solutions that drive operational excellence. His conscientious and proactive approach is unwavering, whether he is working independently or collaboratively within a team. His ability to connect with colleagues on a personal level underscores his commitment to fostering a harmonious and productive workplace environment.
Date: May 29, 2024
Tags: Information Security, ISO/IEC 27001, ISO/IEC 42001, Artificial Intelligence, GDPR
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Find out more about ISO training and certification services
Training: ISO/IEC 27001 Information Security Management System - EN | PECB
ISO/IEC 42001 Artificial Intelligence Management System - EN | PECB
General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) - Training Courses - EN | PECB
Webinars: https://pecb.com/webinars
Article: https://pecb.com/article
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For more information about PECB:
Website: https://pecb.com/
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/pecb/
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/PECBInternational/
Slideshare: http://www.slideshare.net/PECBCERTIFICATION
বাংলাদেশের অর্থনৈতিক সমীক্ষা ২০২৪ [Bangladesh Economic Review 2024 Bangla.pdf] কম্পিউটার , ট্যাব ও স্মার্ট ফোন ভার্সন সহ সম্পূর্ণ বাংলা ই-বুক বা pdf বই " সুচিপত্র ...বুকমার্ক মেনু 🔖 ও হাইপার লিংক মেনু 📝👆 যুক্ত ..
আমাদের সবার জন্য খুব খুব গুরুত্বপূর্ণ একটি বই ..বিসিএস, ব্যাংক, ইউনিভার্সিটি ভর্তি ও যে কোন প্রতিযোগিতা মূলক পরীক্ষার জন্য এর খুব ইম্পরট্যান্ট একটি বিষয় ...তাছাড়া বাংলাদেশের সাম্প্রতিক যে কোন ডাটা বা তথ্য এই বইতে পাবেন ...
তাই একজন নাগরিক হিসাবে এই তথ্য গুলো আপনার জানা প্রয়োজন ...।
বিসিএস ও ব্যাংক এর লিখিত পরীক্ষা ...+এছাড়া মাধ্যমিক ও উচ্চমাধ্যমিকের স্টুডেন্টদের জন্য অনেক কাজে আসবে ...
This presentation includes basic of PCOS their pathology and treatment and also Ayurveda correlation of PCOS and Ayurvedic line of treatment mentioned in classics.
How to Setup Warehouse & Location in Odoo 17 InventoryCeline George
In this slide, we'll explore how to set up warehouses and locations in Odoo 17 Inventory. This will help us manage our stock effectively, track inventory levels, and streamline warehouse operations.
Strategies for Effective Upskilling is a presentation by Chinwendu Peace in a Your Skill Boost Masterclass organisation by the Excellence Foundation for South Sudan on 08th and 09th June 2024 from 1 PM to 3 PM on each day.
How to Fix the Import Error in the Odoo 17Celine George
An import error occurs when a program fails to import a module or library, disrupting its execution. In languages like Python, this issue arises when the specified module cannot be found or accessed, hindering the program's functionality. Resolving import errors is crucial for maintaining smooth software operation and uninterrupted development processes.
How to Make a Field Mandatory in Odoo 17Celine George
In Odoo, making a field required can be done through both Python code and XML views. When you set the required attribute to True in Python code, it makes the field required across all views where it's used. Conversely, when you set the required attribute in XML views, it makes the field required only in the context of that particular view.
A review of the growth of the Israel Genealogy Research Association Database Collection for the last 12 months. Our collection is now passed the 3 million mark and still growing. See which archives have contributed the most. See the different types of records we have, and which years have had records added. You can also see what we have for the future.
Leveraging Generative AI to Drive Nonprofit InnovationTechSoup
In this webinar, participants learned how to utilize Generative AI to streamline operations and elevate member engagement. Amazon Web Service experts provided a customer specific use cases and dived into low/no-code tools that are quick and easy to deploy through Amazon Web Service (AWS.)
A workshop hosted by the South African Journal of Science aimed at postgraduate students and early career researchers with little or no experience in writing and publishing journal articles.
South African Journal of Science: Writing with integrity workshop (2024)
Approximating TPACK In Teacher Preparation A Three-Pronged Approach To Effective Technology Integration
1. Approximating TPACK in Teacher Preparation: A
Three-Pronged Approach to Effective Technology
Integration
Royce Kimmons
The University of Texas
Abstract
TPACK (Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge) as a framework
for describing technology-related teacher knowledge has gained some
traction in recent years as a lens for understanding the complex
interactions that exist within education betwixt the three domains of
Technological Knowledge (TK), Pedagogical Knowledge (PK), and
Content Knowledge (CK). In this paper, I will attempt to support the
notion that TPACK has much to offer teacher preparation programs as a
useful tool for conceptualizing what sorts of technological proficiencies
should be desired amongst developing teachers. Yet, despite
documented, targeted attempts at incorporating the framework, I will
discuss how TPACK-related goals remain elusive and largely unrealized
in teacher preparation due to 1) the fuzziness of TPACK and its
component parts as knowledge domains and 2) the lack of a proper
model for understanding how TPACK-related knowledge and skills are
developed and should be assessed. I then offer an approach to
integration and assessment which focuses on the three fuzzy domains of
TPK, TCK, and PCK in order to give a clearer picture of what effective
technology integration looks like in practice and to offer some potential
guidelines for implementing TPACK-approximating initiatives.
“A thing is what it is and not another thing.” – Joseph Butler
Summary
The TPACK (technological, pedagogical, and content knowledge) framework of
teacher knowledge for technology integration has quickly come to the attention of
Kimmons (2010) – Approximating TPACK in Teacher Preparation - 1
2. many within teacher preparation research as a useful tool for conceptualizing what
sorts of technological proficiency is desired amongst developing teachers, as it
recognizes and seeks to describe the “complex interaction” that exists “among
[these] three bodies of knowledge” (M. Koehler & Punya Mishra, 2009). As noted in
the initial formulation of TPACK, much of what has been lacking in teacher-technology
integration has been the result of poor understandings of how different domains of
technological, pedagogical, and content knowledge interact with one another (Punya
Mishra & Matthew J. Koehler, 2006).
Though this assumption seems true, and teacher education programs would most
definitely be benefitted from an increased understanding of how these three
knowledge domains interact with one another, problems arise with the TPACK model
once implementation agents attempt to move from a conceptual understanding of
how these domains interact on to more practical or evaluative uses of the framework.
I hypothesize that these problems consist of three types:
1. Translation to practice issues (i.e.TPACK implementations not accurately
reflecting TPACK concepts);
2. Completeness issues (i.e.TPACK approaches not reflecting a full
understanding of complexities surrounding technology integration);
3. And quality issues (i.e. focusing on the mere existence of relationships, not
evaluating how these relationships are impacting teaching).
Though all of these problems deserve attention, the scope of the current paper is to
address the first: whether or not implementations of TPACK in professional
development and evaluation reflect the core concepts of the model and why that
Kimmons (2010) – Approximating TPACK in Teacher Preparation - 2
3. might be the case. In so doing, I hope to reemphasize the merits of TPACK while
conversely identifying the elusiveness of its goals for teacher preparation. I will do
this by analyzing approaches others have documented for attempting to achieve
TPACK-related goals in the teacher preparation process, discussing how these
approaches match up to the conceptual framework of TPACK, and, ultimately, offering
an implementation model that avoids some of the pitfalls arising out of these early
approaches in an attempt to inform TPACK implementation methods that are more
internally consistent with the model. By going through this process, we can begin to
understand the true complexity of teacher technology integration and what it looks
like in action and, thus, hope to facilitate communication and collaboration across the
borders of TPACK’s three fundamental domains of knowledge: technology, pedagogy,
and content.
The Merits of TPACK
When Mishra and Koehler first published the TPACK framework (then formulated as
TPCK), they considered it to be a necessarily incomplete model of teacher
knowledge that, nonetheless,“allows us to tease apart some of the key issues that are
necessary for scholarly dialogue about educational technology” (Punya Mishra &
Matthew J. Koehler, 2006). In the authors’ view at the time,TPACK represented a
“critical goal” of teacher education, as it allowed researchers to “view the entire
process of technology integration as amenable to analysis and development work,”
which had heretofore proven to be difficult. In so doing, they believed that the TPACK
framework could be used in an all-encompassing way and would be instrumental in
determining “what is important and what is not [important] in any discussions of
teacher knowledge surrounding using technology for teaching subject matter”
(Punya Mishra & Matthew J. Koehler, 2006).
Kimmons (2010) – Approximating TPACK in Teacher Preparation - 3
4. The skeleton of the framework as presented by Mishra and Koehler was fairly
straightforward. First, it assumed that there are three distinct domains of knowledge
that relate to teacher understanding and implementation of technology: content
knowledge (i.e. subject-matter knowledge), pedagogical knowledge (i.e. knowledge
of how to teach and how to facilitate learning), and technological knowledge (i.e.
knowledge of how to use technology tools). Second, spinning off of Shulman’s work,
which proposed that good teachers develop an additional knowledge domain
constituted of the complex interactions that exist between content knowledge and
pedagogical knowledge called pedagogical content knowledge (or PCK), Mishra and
Koehler proposed that similar, separate domains could be said to exist that illustrate
the complex interactions occurring in the classroom between technological
knowledge and pedagogical knowledge, coined as technological pedagogical
knowledge (or TPK), and between technological knowledge and content knowledge,
coined as technological content knowledge (TCK) (Punya Mishra & Matthew J.
Koehler, 2006; Shulman, 1986). This acceptance of PCK as a knowledge domain and
the creation of TPK and TCK as additional domains thereby brought the number of
knowledge domains which inform teacher competency in technology-related
education for the TPACK model to six (TK, PK, CK,TPK,TCK, and PCK).
The acronym TPACK (or TPCK), then, came about as Mishra and Koehler ultimately
proposed that yet a seventh important domain of knowledge exists for teachers called
technological pedagogical content knowledge. This TPACK, which Mishra and
Koehler later identify as being equally important to their model of teacher knowledge
as the earlier, fundamental domains, is thought to include all of the complex
interactions existing between the base domains (TK, PK, and CK) and, as such, is
meant to provide a way of thinking about technology integration and teacher
Kimmons (2010) – Approximating TPACK in Teacher Preparation - 4
5. knowledge that “goes beyond all three ‘core’ components” to elicit “truly meaningful,”
“deeply skilled,” and contextualized teaching (M. Koehler & Punya Mishra, 2009).
Within this framework, teaching with technology is seen to be “a difficult thing to do
well,” which requires teachers to successfully and continually create, maintain, and re-
establish “a dynamic equilibrium among all components” within their teaching
contexts (M. Koehler & Punya Mishra, 2009). Finally, to help their readers
conceptualize this “dynamic equilibrium,” the authors provide a Venn diagram as a
visual for recognizing the postulated overlaps that exist between TK, PK, and CK.
The Fuzziness of TPACK
Since TPACK is conceptualized as a complex domain of knowledge (or even an
“emergent form”) which includes the complex and dynamic interrelations that exist
between its base domains (and, in fact,“goes beyond all three”), articulating exactly
Kimmons (2010) – Approximating TPACK in Teacher Preparation - 5
6. what TPACK looks like in practice can be very difficult (P. Mishra & M. J Koehler, 2007).
Mishra and Koehler explain that TPACK is inherently “different from knowledge of all
three concepts individually” and that it is important for us to understand, because it
forms the “basis of effective teaching with technology” (P. Mishra & M. J Koehler,
2007). They continue that the complexities of TPACK are further compounded by the
contextual nature of teaching instances or “wicked problems” in that each one is “a
unique combination or weaving together” of the base domains and that “there is no
single technological solution that applies for every teacher, every course, or every
view of teaching.” This is why a dotted circle was eventually added to surround the
TPACK Venn diagram, thereby depicting the contextual nature of all TPACK
integration. In the words of its creators:
“[T]eachers need to develop fluency and cognitive
flexibility not just in each of these key domains (T, P, and
C) but also in the manner in which these domains
interrelate, so that they can effect solutions that are
sensitive to specific contexts. This is the kind of deep,
flexible, pragmatic and nuanced understanding of teaching
with technology that we advocate” (P. Mishra & M. J
Koehler, 2007).
Given such a complex description of the domain (and such a clear need for achieving
it), it behooves us to consider how we should approach TPACK so that we can evaluate
teaching in a way that allows us to pin-point its presence or absence in practice.
Even putting contextual considerations aside, however, problems will arise in
formulating any TPACK-centric assessment or evaluation due to the “fuzzy” nature of
the construct and its constituent parts. Shulman’s PCK, for instance, upon which
TPACK is conceptually built, remains itself a “fuzzy” construct. As has been pointed
out,“identifying instances of PCK is not an easy task […] [M]ost authors agree that the
Kimmons (2010) – Approximating TPACK in Teacher Preparation - 6
7. PCK construct has fuzzy boundaries, demanding unusual and ephemeral clarity on
the part of the researcher to assign knowledge to PCK or one of its related
constructs”(Gess-Newsome & Ledderman, 1999). Thus, though the concept of PCK as
a separate domain which includes PK, CK, and the complex interactions which exist
between them seems fairly straight-forward, actually assessing and identifying PCK
in practice remains a difficult, if not “ephemeral” task (Gess-Newsome & Ledderman,
1999).
This is problematic for assessing TPACK for two important reasons. First,TPACK
recognizes PCK as a knowledge domain that is a necessary part of the larger
construct, implying that if PCK is difficult to assess, then TPACK will be at least as
difficult to assess. And second, the foundational concept of TPACK as presented by
Mishra and Koehler is built in the same manner as was PCK. In creating PCK, Shulman
first recognized the existence of PK and CK and then postulated that a new domain
exists which includes “content knowledge that embodies the aspects of content most
germane to its teachability” and “an understanding of what makes the learning of
specific topics easy or difficult” (Shulman, 1986). In other words, Shulman proposed a
separate domain that is composed entirely by the complex interactions of its base
components. This conceptual approach to creating categories for understanding
teacher knowledge was then mimicked by Mishra and Koehler as they went about
creating their three new domains (TCK,TPK, and TPACK). So, if the actual process that
Shulman went through for creating the single domain of PCK yields “fuzzy” results,
then we can only suppose that duplicating the process for creating three new
domains would produce similar or even “fuzzier” results, and this would seem
especially true in this case, since the TPACK domain is not built strictly out of pre-
established,“non-fuzzy” domains but, rather, relies upon other “fuzzy” domains. If you
Kimmons (2010) – Approximating TPACK in Teacher Preparation - 7
8. attempt to build new conceptual domains grounded upon other “fuzzy” domains, can
the “fuzziness” of your constructs do anything but increase?
This “fuzziness” poses a problem for implementation and assessment endeavors,
since it drastically increases the complexity of measurement tools and for the TPACK
model itself, because if the conceptualized domains of TCK,TPK, and TPACK cannot
be clearly identified in practice, then their formulation represents an unnecessary
and untenable complication to the evaluation of teacher practice. To illustrate this
second point, Archambault and Crippen’s research into TPACK development amongst
K-12 online distance educators has found high correlations between TCK and TPK
(.743),TPK and TPACK (.787), and TCK and TPACK (.733), while maintaining a high
level of internal consistency for each (.85 or greater), which casts doubt upon the
idea that TCK,TPK, and TPACK are in fact distinct domains (Archambault & Crippen,
2009). Whether or not this reflects inadequacies in the researchers’ assessment tools
or deeper conceptual problems within the TPACK framework itself remains to be
seen, but the point remains that if it is difficult or impossible to recognize the
differences between these “fuzzy” constructs in practice, then there is no reason to
recognize them as separate domains in teacher development and technology
integration. In other words, if the TPACK theoretical framework is not useful for
explaining what we actually see in practice, then there is no reason to use it as a
framework.
Attempts at Implementation
Current attempts at implementing TPACK for teacher assessment reflects this
“fuzziness.” Rather than constructing assessment tools which would allow researchers
to tease out educators' understanding and use of TPACK in an observable way,
Kimmons (2010) – Approximating TPACK in Teacher Preparation - 8
9. research has tended to rely upon surveys and self-assessment to determine the
presence of TPACK-related understandings (Archambault & Crippen, 2009; Denise
Schmidt, E. Baran, et al., 2009; Denise Schmidt, Evrim Baran, et al., 2009;T. Shin et al.,
2009). Further, the types of questions asked in the survey tools tend themselves to be
“fuzzy,” of which the following is meant to represent examples of effective TPACK
integration:
“I can teach lessons that appropriately combine literacy,
technologies, and teaching approaches[;]”
“I can teach lessons that appropriately combine science,
technologies, and teaching approaches[;] [...]”
“I can provide leadership in helping others to coordinate
the use of content, technologies, and teaching approaches
at my school and/or district” (Denise Schmidt, E. Baran, et
al., 2009).
As you can see in the first two examples, terminology like “appropriately” is
introduced to the tool to deliberately make the assessment more contextualized and,
therefore, subject to responder bias and interpretation. If, for instance, the
respondent is not aware of any technologies that might appropriately be used to
teach a particular literacy content item, then he or she might effectively answer “yes”
to the first question (i.e. if there is no appropriate technology known, then appropriate
use would constitute not using any technology) and thereby be evaluated as
incorporating TPACK when, in fact, he or she merely didn't know of any technological
tool to use. Further, what is deemed as appropriate by one instructor may not be
deemed as appropriate by another, so all this assessment reveals is that the instructor
has an opinion on his or her own use of technology in pedagogical practice that
cannot be mapped to any external standard. Interestingly,TPK and TPACK
evaluations in this study had a mid to high (.71) correlation coefficient, suggesting
Kimmons (2010) – Approximating TPACK in Teacher Preparation - 9
10. that either the tool had difficulty in differentiating between them or that they are one
and the same domain.
It is also interesting to note how other knowledge domains (beyond TK, PK, CK,TPK,
TCK, and PCK) are convoluted into the process of assessment, as with the third
example in which “providing leadership” is the focus of the tool, something
completely outside the scope of the TPACK formulation (or are we talking about
TPACLK now?). This is not to say that technology leadership isn't an important
component of teacher competency for us to consider and assess, but, rather, this
exemplifies how a “fuzzy” construct can easily become a dumping ground for
researchers to evaluate whatever they want in the name of the construct.
Beyond the “fuzziness” factor, there is even perhaps a more problematic issue arising
in the literature as researchers attempt to evaluate TPACK in terms of the presence of
only some of its constituent parts. To consider the survey questions again, one
explanation of TPACK was formulated as a teacher being able to “use strategies that
combine content, technologies, and teaching approaches that I learned about in my
coursework in my classroom” (Denise Schmidt, E. Baran, et al., 2009). To think about
this as a mathematical expression, the survey item evaluates TPACK as using
strategies that combine TK+PK+CK without any explanation as to how these domains
should be combined beyond the simple contextual suffix “in my classroom.” Thus, as
long as a teacher is using all three in his or her classroom, he or she can answer “yes”
for TPACK integration. Another example of TPACK integration is illustrated as follows:
“I can choose technologies that enhance the content for a lesson” (Denise Schmidt, E.
Baran, et al., 2009).Though perhaps a bit more sophisticated, this statement
presupposes that the teacher has a lesson (PCK or CK) and then chooses an
Kimmons (2010) – Approximating TPACK in Teacher Preparation - 10
11. “enhancing” technology (PCK+TK or CK+TK). At first glance, this may seem fine, but
in both mathematical formulations presented, key components of TPACK are missing.
Namely, PCK+TK ignores TCK and TPK, and if TPACK in fact includes all of the
interactions between TK, PK, and CK, then it should also include TCK and TPK.
This same problem is duplicated in professional development endeavors as
described in the literature. To illustrate, it's been proposed that successful TPACK
professional development should involve mapping technology tools to effective
pedagogical activity types or PCK+TK (Harris, P. Mishra, & M. Koehler, 2009). Others
have looked at a phased approach for utilizing PCK+TK (and even graphically label it
as such) in teacher mathematics education (Niess, Suharwoto, Lee, & Sadri, 2006;
Niess et al., 2009). In all of these cases,TPACK is seen as grouping of “blends of all
three categories” in which the intersection of one “fuzzy” domain (TPK,TCK, or PCK)
with one base domain (TK, PK, or CK) can be evaluated as full TPACK (Richardson,
2009). The problem with this formulation is that in combining PCK and TK, for
instance, there is no assurance that TCK or TPK are being included, because one can,
after all, map a technological tool to a lesson without understanding how technology
influences the content being studied (TCK) or how technology influences pedagogy
(TPK) outside the realm of the lesson (PCK).
To illustrate, as a result of the May 2005 National Council of Teachers of English
(NCTE) Conference on English Education (CEE) Leadership and Policy Summit, 75
leaders in English education across the nation reported that “Newer technologies
have altered the space in which the study of meaning-making and meaning-makers
occur and these changes have important implications for teachers, learners, and
communities” (Swenson, Rozema,Young, McGrail, & Whitin, 2005). They continue that
Kimmons (2010) – Approximating TPACK in Teacher Preparation - 11
12. “[i]n our society, issues of gender, class, race, ethnicity, and other demographics are
intricately intertwined with equitable access to technology and, therefore, discussions
of social, economic, and political power” (Swenson et al., 2005). This means that
teacher competency with technology in the classroom extends far beyond just seeing
how a particular tool (TK) can be merged into a given lesson (PCK), but, rather,
suggests that the content that we study (like “meaning-making,”“social equity,” and
so forth) or CK has very complex interactions with technology (TK) that may very well
be outside of the scope of a given lesson (PCK). Thus, if TCK is missing from a
formulation of TPACK, then that formulation of TPACK certainly is not 'the entire
package,' because it is lacking a key component.
Likewise, there is a connection between technology (TK) and pedagogy (PK) that
extends beyond particular lessons (PCK), which should be an essential measured
component of TPACK as well. Consider, for instance, how technology influences
classroom management, student-to-student interactions, student-to-teacher
interactions, and so forth. Should a teacher develop competency in helping students
gain media literacy and technological self-organizing and communication
techniques? Certainly. But, can an approach to professional development in
technology that views all technology through the lens of a particular lesson or
pedagogical instance account for this? Probably not.
The core of this discussion returns to the fundamental reason for looking to TPACK as
a useful model to begin with. What TPACK gives us is a framework for thinking about
the complex interactions that exist between these various domains of knowledge,
and, yet, when we go about evaluating and implementing TPACK, the literature
Kimmons (2010) – Approximating TPACK in Teacher Preparation - 12
13. suggests that we tend to do so in a way that ignores some of those very important
complex interactions.
TheVenn Diagram and Necessary vs. Sufficient Causes
Whenever discussions of TPACK begin (and this discussion is no exception), there is
typically a reference to the Venn diagram that the TPACK creators have gradually
developed through time to help readers conceptualize the notion of complex
interactions existing between diverse knowledge domains. Contrary to this purpose,
however, the TPACK Venn diagram may actually be a central point of confusion which
has contributed to many of these recent “fuzzy” and incomplete attempts at
implementation.
At its heart, a Venn diagram is a logical tool and, as such, is meant to be used to
determine the validity of a statement with regard to relationships. For instance, if we
accept that there are “cats” in the world and “black things” in the world, we might
construct a diagram to show this as follows:
This tool would then be valuable for us in order to categorize things we might see in
the world. Thus, any objects that I see which are “cats” I could conceptually place in
the left circle, any objects that I see which are “black things” I could conceptually
place in the right circle, and the only objects which would be in the overlapped area
would be those which were both “cats” and “black things.” Thus, if I were to see a
black figure in a dark ally, I might begin by categorizing it as a “black thing,” but then
Kimmons (2010) – Approximating TPACK in Teacher Preparation - 13
14. as I begin to make it out, I might also see that it is a “cat,” and so, I could conceptually
make the movement to the middle area of identifying it as a “black cat.” Or, if I see a
cat and only later realize its color, I could make the movement from the other
direction as illustrated:
The reason that this logical process works is that the region “black cats” includes all
things that are both “cats” and “black things.” So, if you attempt to categorize an
object in your experience in accordance with this diagram, you could only place it in
one of four places, as a “cat,” as a “black thing,” as a “black cat,” or as a “non-black,
non-cat thing,” and as you clarify your understanding of an object, you can move it
from one area to another.
However, this intended use of the Venn diagram does not work with the TPACK
conceptual diagram, because in TPACK's formulation of the “fuzzy” domains, they are
seen as more than the mere presence of their constituent parts, because they include
all of the complex interactions that exist between the base components and exclude
instances of the base components which are non-interactive. To illustrate, it may make
conceptual sense to think about PCK in the following manner:
Kimmons (2010) – Approximating TPACK in Teacher Preparation - 14
15. However, if we formulate PCK in this manner, the Venn Diagram cannot be used as a
valid categorization tool for evaluating PCK. For instance, say that a teacher exhibits
content knowledge and pedagogical knowledge at the same time but makes no
connection between the two. Where would you place that teacher's performance on
the diagram? You cannot, because you would actually be evaluating for something
else also: an understanding of the interaction between CK and PK. If you wanted to
use this diagram as an evaluative tool, it would need to be reconstructed as follows:
Only in this way would you be able to differentiate between practice that exhibits
PCK (which is characterized by understanding the complex interactions between CK
and PK) and practice that merely exhibits the presence of CK and PK. An important
offshoot of this formulation is that it helps us to see that PCK is, in fact, a subset of
CK&PK, thus revealing that PCK cannot exist without its component parts (revealing
them to be necessary causes) but that the mere existence of its component parts do
not logically imply the existence of PCK (revealing them not to be sufficient causes).
If we were to take this logical model of PCK and attempt to turn it into a logical
diagram for more robust TPACK evaluation, it would become extremely complex very
quickly, because it would require that we include subsets of each overlapping area
from the base knowledge domains to represent the “fuzzy” domains:
Kimmons (2010) – Approximating TPACK in Teacher Preparation - 15
16. Once formulated in this manner, the problems with a PCK+TK or TK+PK+CK approach
begin to come clear: both approaches are missing important components of the
conceptual TPACK framework. The first ignores two important “fuzzy” domains and
the second ignores all three (because it is possible to exhibit TK, PK, and CK without
exhibiting any understanding of the complex interactions between the three).
You will further notice that within this logical formulation of the diagram, there is no
place for TPACK itself, which remains the ultimate goal of the model. So, what is it we
are really talking about when we talk about TPACK? Is it TK, PK, and CK? Is it x, y, or
z? Is it all of them together simultaneously taking into consideration the complex
interactions of all six between one another? Certainly no diagram could account for
Kimmons (2010) – Approximating TPACK in Teacher Preparation - 16
17. all of that. So, where do we stand in terms of teacher preparation and technology
integration?
Conclusion
It has been the purpose of this paper to illustrate the “fuzziness” of TPACK and its
constituent parts in order to tease out some of the difficulties associated with the
implementation of professional development and assessment strategies intent on
improving teacher technology integration. Far from attempting to undermine the
conceptual framework of TPACK itself, the purpose of this paper has been to establish
a bit more clearly what can and cannot be assessed in a clear way with regard to
technology integration and implementation. As such, the point remains that any
attempt at implementing TPACK which ignores any key component of the framework
(namely,TPK,TCK, or PCK) does not give a full understanding of the issue and,
therefore, remains an incomplete assessment.
It is, therefore, my suggestion that the closest way to approximate the goals of TPACK
(namely, technology integration that accounts for TK, PK, CK, and all of the complex
interactions that exist between them) is to focus on the mid-level “fuzzy” domains
(TPK,TCK, and PCK) in order to make sure that they are first achieved. Teacher
education and improvement programs that are built on the belief that they can
achieve full TPACK integration without understanding the complexity of what it is they
are seeking will be sorely disappointed when they finally discover that the 'full
package' they are looking for consists of more than two or three domains being
thrown together in a hodgepodge manner.
Kimmons (2010) – Approximating TPACK in Teacher Preparation - 17
18. References
Archambault, L., & Crippen, K. (2009). Examining TPACK Among K-12 Online
Distance Educators in the United States. Contemporary Issues in
Technology and Teacher Education, 9(1), 71–88.
Gess-Newsome, J., & Ledderman, N. (1999). Examining pedagogical content
knowledge. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Harris, J., Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. (2009).Teachers’Technological Pedagogical
Content Knowledge and Learning Activity Types: Curriculum-based
Technology Integration Reframed.
Koehler, M., & Mishra, P. (2009).What Is Technological Pedagogical Content
Knowledge?
Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2007).Technological pedagogical content
knowledge (TPCK): Confronting the wicked problems of teaching with
technology.Technology and Teacher Education Annual, 18(4), 2214.
Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006).Technological Pedagogical Content
Knowledge: A Framework for Teacher Knowledge.Teachers College
Record, 108(6), 1017-1054.
Niess, M., Suharwoto, G., Lee, K., & Sadri, P. (2006). Guiding Inservice
Mathematics Teachers In Developing Technology Pedagogical Content
Knowledge (TPCK). In Society for Information Technology and Teacher
Education Annual Conference.
Niess, M. L., Ronau, R. N., Shafer, K. G., Driskell, S. O., Harper, S. R., Johnston, C.,
Browning, C., et al. (2009). Mathematics Teacher TPACK Standards and
Kimmons (2010) – Approximating TPACK in Teacher Preparation - 18
19. Development Model. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher
Education, 9(1), 4–24.
Richardson, S. (2009). Mathematics Teachers’ Development, Exploration, and
Advancement of Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge in the
Teaching and Learning of Algebra. Contemporary Issues in Technology
and Teacher Education, 9, 2.
Schmidt, D., Baran, E.,Thompson, A., Koehler, M., Punya, M., & Shin,T. (2009).
Examining Preservice Teachers' Development of Technological
Pedagogical Content Knowledge in an Introductory Instructional
Technology Course.
Schmidt, D., Baran, E.,Thompson, A., Mishra, P., Koehler, M., & Shin,T. (2009).
Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK):The
Development and Validation of an Assessment Instrument for Preservice
Teachers. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 42(2), 123-49.
Shin,T., Koehler, M., Mishra, P., Schmidt, D., Baran, E., & Thompson, A. (2009).
Changing Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK)
through Course Experiences.
Shulman, L. S. (1986).Those Who Understand: Knowledge Growth in Teaching.
Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4-14.
Swenson, J., Rozema, R.,Young, C. A., McGrail, E., & Whitin, P. (2005). Beliefs
about technology and the preparation of English teachers: Beginning
the conversation. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher
Education, 5(3/4), 210–236.
Kimmons (2010) – Approximating TPACK in Teacher Preparation - 19