Advertisement

The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher

, Volume 24, Issue 3, pp 535–543 | Cite as

Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK) and Design Thinking: A Framework to Support ICT Lesson Design for 21st Century Learning

  • Joyce Hwee Ling KohEmail author
  • Ching Sing Chai
  • Wong Benjamin
  • Huang-Yao Hong
Regular Article

Abstract

This conceptual paper argues that to develop students’ twenty first century competencies, teachers need to consider how technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) can be applied through design thinking processes. It proposes a conceptual framework articulating various TPACK considerations and how these various forms of TPACK can be used as epistemic resources to support design thinking for developing ICT-integrated lessons targeted at twenty first century learning. This framework provides an initial vocabulary for describing how teachers create TPACK through design, which is a critical gap in extant TPACK research. Implications for teachers’ design of ICT-integrated lessons as well as future directions of research are discussed.

Keywords

Design thinking TPACK Teacher education Twenty first century competencies Twenty first century learning 

References

  1. Angeli, C., & Valanides, N. (2009). Epistemological and methodological issues for the conceptualization, development, and assessment of ICT-TPCK: Advances in technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPCK). Computers & Education, 52(1), 154–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Archambault, L. M., & Barnett, J. H. (2010). Revisiting technological pedagogical content knowledge: Exploring the TPACK framework. Computers & Education, 55(4), 1656–1662.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bereiter, C., & Scardamalia, M. (2006). Education for the Knowledge Age. In P. A. Alexander & P. H. Winne (Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology (2nd ed., pp. 695–713). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  4. Brown, T. (2009). Change by design: How design thinking transforms organizations and inspires innovation. Boston, MA: HarperBusiness.Google Scholar
  5. Cameron, L. (2006). Picture this: My Lesson. How LAMS is being used with pre-service teachers to develop effective classroom activities. Paper presented at The First International LAMS Conference : Designing the Future of Learning, Sydney, Australia.Google Scholar
  6. Chai, C. S., Koh, J. H. L., Ho, H. N., & Tsai, C. C. (2012). Examining preservice teachers’ perceived knowledge of TPACK and cyberwellness through structural equation modeling. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 28(6), 1000–1019.Google Scholar
  7. Chai, C. S., Koh, E., Lim, C. P., & Tsai, C.-C. (2014). Deepening ICT integration through multilevel design of technological pedagogical content knowledge. Journal of Computers in Education, 1(1), 1–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Collins, A. (1996). Design issues for learning environments. In S. Vosniadou, E. E. Corte, R. Glaser, & H. Mandl (Eds.), International perspectives on the design of technology-supported learning environments (pp. 347–361). Hisdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.Google Scholar
  9. Cox, S., & Graham, C. R. (2009). Diagramming TPACK in practice: Using and elaborated model of the TPACK framework to analyze and depict teacher knowledge. TechTrends, 53(5), 60–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Coyne, R. (2005). Wicked problems revisited. Design Studies, 26(1), 5–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Cross, N. (2001). Designerly ways of knowing: Design discipline versus design science. Design Issues, 17(3), 49–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Cross, N. (2004). Expertise in design: An overview. Design Studies, 25(5), 427–441.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Cross, N. (2011). Design thinking. NY: Berg.Google Scholar
  14. Dorst, K. (2006). Design problems and design paradoxes. Design Issues, 22(3), 4–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Dorst, K. (2011). The core of ‘design thinking’and its application. Design Studies, 32, 521–532.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Dym, C., Agogino, A., Eris, O., Frey, D., & Leifer, L. (2005). Engineering design thinking, teaching, and learning. Journal of Engineering Education, 94(1), 103–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Ertmer, P. A. (1999). Addressing first and second-order barriers to change: Strategies for technology integration. Educational Technology Research and Development, 47(4), 47–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Eteokleous, N. (2008). Evaluating computer technology integration in a centralized school system. Computers & Education, 51(2), 669–686.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Grant, D. (1979). Design methodology and design methods. Design Methods and Theories, 13(1), 46–47.Google Scholar
  20. Heinich, R., Molenda, M., Russell, J., & Smaldino, S. (1999). Instructional media and technologies for learning (6th ed., pp. 7–92). Columbus, OH: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  21. Hong, H. Y., & Sullivan, F. R. (2009). Towards an idea-centered, principle-based design approach to support learning as knowledge creation. Educational Technology Research and Development, 57(5), 613–627.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Hong, H. Y., Zhang, J., Teo, C., & Scardamalia, M. (2009). Towards design-based knowledge-building practices in teaching. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 9th international conference on Computer supported collaborative learning-Vol 1 (pp. 257-261).Google Scholar
  23. Howland, J. L., Jonassen, D., & Marra, R. M. (2012). Meaningful learning with technology (4th ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.Google Scholar
  24. Jang, S.-J., & Chen, K.-C. (2010). From PCK to TPACK: Developing a transformative model for pre-service science teachers. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 19(6), 553–564.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Kershner, R., Warwick, P., Mercer, N., & Kleine Staarman, J. (2014). Primary children’s management of themselves and others in collaborative group work:‘Sometimes it takes patience…’. Education 313: International Journal of Primary, Elementary and Early Years Education, 42(2), 201–216.Google Scholar
  26. Koehler, M. J., Mishra, P., & Yahya, K. (2007). Tracing the development of teacher knowledge in a design seminar: Integrating content, pedagogy and technology. Computers & Education, 49(3), 740–762.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Koh, J. H. L., Chai, C. S., & Tay, L. Y. (2014). TPACK-in-action: Unpacking the contextual influences of teachers’ construction of technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK). Computers & Education, 78, 1–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Koh, J. H. L., Chai, C. S., & Tsai, C. C. (2013). Examining practicing teachers’ perceptions of technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) pathways: A structural equation modeling approach. Instructional Science, 41(4), 793–809. doi: 10.1007/s11251-012-9249-y.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Kozma, R. B. (2008). Comparative analysis of policies for ICT in education International handbook of information technology in primary and secondary education (pp. 1083–1096). USA: Springer.Google Scholar
  30. Laurillard, D. (2012). Teaching as a design science: Building pedagogical patterns for learning and technology. New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
  31. Lawson, B. (1997). How designers think: the design process demystified. Oxford: Architectural Press.Google Scholar
  32. Lawson, B., & Dorst, K. (2009). Design expertise (Vol. 31). Oxford: Architectural Press.Google Scholar
  33. Levin, T., & Wadmany, R. (2008). Teachers’ views on factors affecting effective integration of information technology in the classroom: Developmental scenery. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 16(2), 233.Google Scholar
  34. Lim, C. P., & Chai, C. S. (2008). Teachers’ pedagogical beliefs and their planning and conduct of computer-mediated classroom lessons. British Journal of Educational Technology, 39(5), 807–828.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Lin, X. D., Hmelo, C., Kinzer, C., & Secules, T. (1999). Designing technology to support reflection. Educational Technology Research and Development, 47(3), 43–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Metiri Group, & NCREL. (2003). EnGauge twenty first century skills: Literacy in the digital age. Chicago: IL NCREL.Google Scholar
  37. Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017–1054.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Niess, M. L. (2013). Central component descriptors for levels of technological pedagogical content knowledge. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 48(2), 173–198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. OECD. (2005). The definition and selection of key competencies: Executive summary. Paris: Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.Google Scholar
  40. Oxman, R. (1999). Educating the designerly thinker. Design Studies, 20(2), 105–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. P21. (2007). Maximizing the impact: The pivotal role of technology in a twenty first century education system. Retrieved from http://www.p21.org/documents/p21setdaistepaper.pdf
  42. Rittel, H. W. J., & Webber, M. M. (1973). Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Sciences, 4(2), 155–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Rosenberg, S., Hammer, D., & Phelan, J. (2006). Multiple epistemological coherences in an eighth-grade discussion of the rock cycle. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 15(2), 261–292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Rowe, P. G. (1991). Design thinking. Cambridge: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
  45. Rowland, G. (2004). Shall we dance? A design epistemology for organizational learning and performance. Educational Technology Research and Development, 52(1), 33–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Sandoval, W. A. (2003). Conceptual and epistemic aspects of students’ scientific explanations. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 12(1), 5–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Schön, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  48. Shulman, L. S. (1999). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform Learners and pedagogy (pp. 61–77). London: Paul Chapman Publishing Ltd.Google Scholar
  49. Simon, H. A. (1996). The sciences of the artificial. Cambridge: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
  50. Starkey, L. (2010). Teachers’ pedagogical reasoning and action in the digital age. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 16(2), 233–244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Summerville, J., & Reid-Griffin, A. (2008). Technology integration and instructional design. TechTrends, 52(5), 45–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Tondeur, J., Van Keer, H., van Braak, J., & Valcke, M. (2008). ICT integration in the classroom: Challenging the potential of a school policy. Computers & Education, 51(1), 212–223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Tsai, C. C., & Chai, C. S. (2012). The “third”-order barrier for technology-integration instruction: Implications for teacher education. Building the ICT capacity of the next generation of teachers in Asia. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 28, 1057–1060.Google Scholar
  54. Voogt, J., Fisser, P., Roblin, N. P., Tondeur, J., & van Braak, J. (2013). Technological pedagogical content knowledge—a review of the literature. Journal of Computer Assisted learning, 29(2), 109–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Voogt, J., & Roblin, N. P. (2012). A comparative analysis of international frameworks for twenty first century competences: implications for national curriculum policies. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 44(3), 299–321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Ward, L., & Parr, J. M. (2010). Revisiting and reframing use: Implications for the integration of ICT. Computers & Education, 54(1), 113–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Windschitl, M. (2002). Framing constructivism in practice as the negotiation of dilemmas: An analysis of the conceptual, pedagogical, cultural, and political challenges facing teachers. Review of Educational Research, 72(2), 131–175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Zhang, J., Hong, H.-Y., Scardamalia, M., Teo, C. L., & Morley, E. A. (2011). Sustaining knowledge building as a principle-based innovation at an elementary school. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 20(2), 262–307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Zhao, Y., & Frank, K. A. (2003). Factors affecting technology uses in schools: An ecological perspective. American Educational Research Journal, 40(4), 807–840.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© De La Salle University 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Joyce Hwee Ling Koh
    • 1
    Email author
  • Ching Sing Chai
    • 1
  • Wong Benjamin
    • 1
  • Huang-Yao Hong
    • 2
  1. 1.National Institute of EducationNanyang Technological UniversitySingaporeSingapore
  2. 2.Department of EducationNational Chengchi UniversityTaipeiTaiwan

Personalised recommendations