Advertisement

Journal of Computers in Education

, Volume 4, Issue 1, pp 71–86 | Cite as

Using TPACK to develop digital pedagogues: a higher education experience

  • Dorit MaorEmail author
Article

Abstract

This paper explores the use of the TPACK model in two higher education e-learning courses in Australia that enhanced students’ ability to use technology in their learning and later in their professions. The courses focused on teaching students becoming digital pedagogues who could integrate technology and pedagogy and be more interactive teachers using the latest technologies. The aims of the two courses were to encourage students to become reflective learners and to create knowledge collaboratively. Newer technological tools, such as iPads, ePortfolios, and eBooks, were used to create digital pedagogies to enhance the students’ learning experience and obtain students’ reflections on the course. To maximize students’ learning, TPACK was used in the design of the course, the learning activities and the assessment. It was also used as a framework to analyze the data. Results from the survey data found that students increased their confidence and their understanding of the use of the different domains of TPACK. The study also found that the majority of students became digital pedagogues and took the opportunity to implement the TPACK model in their classrooms. It contributes to understanding the value of the overlapping area of TPACK and the conceptual space necessary to implement digital pedagogies.

Keywords

e-Learning TPACK model Digital pedagogies Collaborative learning 

References

  1. Albion, P. R., Jamieson-Proctor, R., & Finger, G. (2010). Auditing the TPACK confidence of Australian pre-service teachers: The TPACK confidence survey (TCS). In C. D. Maddux, D. Ginson, & B. Dodge (Eds.), Research highlights in technology and teacher education 2010. Chesapeake: Society for Information Technology and Teacher Education (SITE).Google Scholar
  2. 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
  3. Archambault, L. (2011). The practitioner’s perspective on teacher education: Preparing for the K-12 online classroom. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 19(1), 73–91.Google Scholar
  4. Archambault, L., & Barnett, J. H. (2010). Revisiting technological pedagogical content knowledge: Exploring the TPACK framework. Computers & Education, 55, 1656–1662.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 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.Google Scholar
  6. Bate, F. (2010). A bridge too far? Explaining beginning teachers’ use of ICT in Australian schools. Australian Journal of Educational Technology, 26(7), 1042–1061.Google Scholar
  7. Bate, F., & Maor, D. (2010). TPACK and the real world: How useful is the framework? Paper presented to: European Association for Practitioner Research on Improving Learning (EAPRIL) Conference 2010, Lisbon, Portugal, 24–26 November 2010Google Scholar
  8. Bonk, C. J., & Zhang, K. (2008). Empowering online learning: 100+ activities for reading, reflecting, displaying, and doing. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  9. Borthwick, A., Charles, M., Pierson, M., Thompson, A., Park, J., Searson, M., & Bull, G. (2008). Realizing technology potential through TPACK. Learning and Leading with Technology, 36(2), 23–26.Google Scholar
  10. Bowers, J. S., & Stephens, B. (2011). Using technology to explore mathematical relationships: A framework for orienting mathematics courses for prospective teachers. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 14(4), 285–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Buabeng-Andoh, Charles. (2012). Factors influencing teachers’ adoption and integration of information and communication technology into teaching: A review of the literature. International Journal of Education and Development using Information and Communication Technology, 8(1), 136–155.Google Scholar
  12. Buss, R. R., Wetzel, K., Foulger, T. S., & Lindsey, L. (2015). Preparing teachers to integrate technology into K–12 instruction: Comparing a stand-alone technology course with a technology-infused approach. Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education, 31(4), 160–172. doi: 10.1080/21532974.2015.1055012.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Chang, Y., Jang, S.-J., & Chen, Y.-H. (2015). Assessing university students’ perceptions of their physics instructors’ TPACK development in two contexts. British Journal of Educational Technology, 46(6), 1236–1249. doi: 10.1111/bjet.12192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Cox, S. (2008). A conceptual analysis of technological pedagogical content knowledge. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Provo, UT, Brigham Young UniversityGoogle Scholar
  15. Dawson, K. (2007). The role of teacher inquiry in helping prospective teachers untangle the complexities of technology use in classrooms. Journal of Computing in Teacher Education, 24(1), 5–14.Google Scholar
  16. Doering, A., Veletsianos, G., Scharber, C., & Miller, C. (2009). Using the technological, pedagogical, and content knowledge framework to design online learning environments and professional development. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 41(3), 319–346.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Dron, J. (2012). The pedagogical-technological divide and the elephant in the room. International Journal on E-Learning, 11(1), 23–38.Google Scholar
  18. Duffy, T. M., & Cunningham, D. J. (1996). Constructivism: Implications for the design and delivery of instruction. In D. H. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of research for educational communications and technology (pp. 170–198). New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  19. Feride, K. R. C. (2015). An investigation of preservice teachers’ technological pedagogical content knowledge based on a variety of characteristics. International Journal of Higher Education, 4(4), 128–136. doi: 10.5430/ijhe.v4n4p128.Google Scholar
  20. Gess-Newsome, J. (2002). Pedagogical content knowledge: An introduction and orientation. In J. Gess-Newsome & N. Lederman (Eds.), PCK and science education (pp. 3–17). New York: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  21. Graham, C. R. (2011). Theoretical considerations for understanding technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK). Computers & Education, 57(3), 1953–1960.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Harris, J. B. (2008). TPACK in in-service education: Assisting experienced teachers’ planned improvisations. In AACTE Committee on Innovation & Technology (Eds.), Handbook of technological pedagogical content knowledge for educators (pp. 251–271). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  23. Harris, J., Grandgenett, N., & Hofer, M. (2010). Testing a TPACK-based technology integration assessment rubric. In D. Gibson & B. Dodge (Eds.), Proceedings of society for information technology & teacher education international conference 2010 (pp. 3833–3840). Chesapeake, VA: AACEGoogle Scholar
  24. Harris, J., & Hofer, M. (2009). Instructional planning activity types as vehicles for curriculum-based TP ACK development. In C. D. Maddux, (Ed.). Research highlights in technology and teacher education 2009 (pp. 99–108). Chesapeake, VA: Society for Information Technology in Teacher Education (SITE)Google Scholar
  25. Hechter, R. (2012). Pre-service teachers’ maturing perceptions of a TPACK-framed signature pedagogy in science education. Computers in the schools. Interdisciplinary Journal of Practice Theory and Applied Research, 29(1–2), 53–69.Google Scholar
  26. Kafyulilo, A., Fisser, P., Pieters, J., & Voogt, J. (2015). ICT use in science and mathematics teacher education in Tanzania: Developing technological pedagogical content knowledge. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 31(4), 381–399. Retrieved from http://ajet.org.au/index.php/AJET/article/viewFile/1240/1288
  27. Karaca, F. (2015). An investigation of preservice teachers’ technological pedagogical content knowledge based on a variety of characteristics. International Journal of Higher Education, 4(4), 128–136. doi: 10.5430/ijhe.v4n4p128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Kember, D. (2008). Digital world, digital pedagogies: Reframing the learning landscape. Paper presented at the Australian Computers in Education Conference (ACEC), Canberra, Australia.Google Scholar
  29. Koehler, M. J., & Mishra, P. (2009). What is technological pedagogical content knowledge. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 9(1), 60–70.Google Scholar
  30. Lawless, K., & Pellegrine, J. (2007). Professional development in integrating technology into teaching and learning: Knows, unknowns, and ways to pursue better questions and answers. Review of Educational Research, 77(4), 575–614.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Lehiste, P. (2015). The impact of a professional development program on in-service teachers’ TPACK: A study from Estonia. Problems of Education in the 21st Century, 66, 18–28. Retrieved from http://oaji.net/articles/2015/457-1441441936.pdf
  32. Lewthwaite, B. E., Knight, C., & Lenoy, M. (2015). Epistemological considerations for approaching teaching in an on-line environment Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander teacher education program: Reconsidering TPACK. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 40(9), 63–85. doi: 10.14221/ajte.2015v40n9.4.Google Scholar
  33. Lin, C.Y., Kuo, Y.C., & Ko, Y.Y. (2015). A study of pre-service teachers’ perception of technological pedagogical content knowledge on algebra. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 34(3), 327–344. Abstract retrieved from http://www.editlib.org/p/148706/
  34. Maor, D. (2003). Teacher’s and students’ perspectives on on-line learning in a social constructivist learning environment. Technology Pedagogy and Education, 12(2), 201–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Maor, D. (2008). Changing relationship: Who is the learner and who is the teacher in the online educational landscape. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 24(5), 627–638.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Maor, D., & Fraser, B. (1996). Use of classroom environment perceptions in evaluating inquiry-based computer-assisted learning. International Journal of Science Education, 18(4), 401–421.CrossRefGoogle 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. O’Brien, T., & Maor, D. (2013). Pipe dreams or digital dreams: Technology, pedagogy and content knowledge in the vocational educational and training sector. In M. Gosper, H. Carter, & J. Hedberg (Eds.), Electric dreams. Proceedings ascilite Sydney 2013 (pp. 647–651).Google Scholar
  39. Pierson, M. (2001). Technology integration practice as a function of pedagogical expertise. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 33(4), 413–430.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Pierson, M. (2008). Teacher candidates reflect together on their own development of TPCK: Edited teaching videos as data for inquiry. In K. McFerrin et al., (Eds.), Proceedings of the Society for Information Technology and Teacher Education International Conference 2008, (pp. 5305–5309). Chesapeake, VA: AACEGoogle Scholar
  41. Puentedura, R. R. (2012). “Technology in education: The first 200,000 years”. NMC Summer Conference, Ideas that Matter Presentation. http://www.hippasus.com/rrpweblog/archives/000069.html. Retrieved May 19, 2014.
  42. Schmidt, D. A., Baran, E., Thompson, A. D., Mishra, P., Koehler, M. J., & Shin, T. S. (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), 123–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Scott, C. (2010). The enduring appeal of ‘learning style’. Australian Journal of Education, 54(1), 5–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Sheffield, R., Dobozy, E., Gibson, D., Mullaney, J., & Campbell, C. (2015). Teacher education students using TPACK in science: A case study. Educational Media International. Advance online publication. doi:  10.1080/09523987.2015.1075104
  45. Shulman, L. S. (1986). Paradigms and research programs in the study of teaching: A contemporary perspective. In M. C. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (3rd ed., pp. 3–36). New York: MacMillan.Google Scholar
  46. Shulman, L. S. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57(1), 1–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Siemens, G. (2006). Connectivism: The changing nature of knowledge. Keynote address at the education.au Global eLearning Summit, Sydney, 2006. Retrieved by podcast at http://media.educationau.edu.au/gs06-day1-am-siemens.mp3. Retrieved May 5, 2014.
  48. Von Glaserfeld, E. (1989). Cognition, construction of knowledge, and teaching. Synthese, 80(1), 121–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Voogt, J., Fisser, P., Pareja Roblin, N., 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
  50. Yaniv, H. (2008). S-AI-L: A Model for the design of simulated learning environments. Surfing the Internet, 7, Tel-Aviv, Israel, Mofet Institute. (Hebrew).Google Scholar
  51. Yurdakul, K. I., Odabasi, H. F., Kilicer, K., Coklar, A. N., Birinci, G., & Kurt, A. A. (2012). The development, validity and reliability of TPACK-deep: A technological pedagogical content knowledge scale. Computers & Education, 58(3), 964–977.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Beijing Normal University 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of EducationMurdoch UniversityPerthAustralia

Personalised recommendations