Advertisement

Education and Information Technologies

, Volume 21, Issue 2, pp 301–318 | Cite as

Teacher design in teams as a professional development arrangement for developing technology integration knowledge and skills of science teachers in Tanzania

  • Ayoub Kafyulilo
  • Petra Fisser
  • Joke Voogt
Article

Abstract

This study investigated the impact of teacher design teams as a professional development arrangement for developing technology integration knowledge and skills among in-service science teachers. The study was conducted at a secondary school in Tanzania, where 12 in-service science teachers participated in a workshop about technology integration in science teaching and worked in design teams to prepare technology-enhanced biology, chemistry and physics lessons. Through collaboration in design teams, teachers were able to make science animations using PowerPoint and record videos to use in their teaching. The designed lessons were taught in the classroom and reflected upon thereafter by all teachers. In order to determine the change in teachers’ technology integration knowledge and skills, data were collected before and after the professional development arrangement by using questionnaire, interview and observation data. Focus group discussion and reflection questionnaire data were used to assess teachers’ experience of working in design teams at the end of the professional development arrangement. Findings showed an increase in teachers’ technology integration knowledge and skills between pre- and post-measurements. Collaboration in design teams had the potential for teachers to share knowledge, skills, experience and challenges related to technology-enhanced teaching.

Keywords

Technology integration knowledge and skills TPACK Lesson design in teams In-service science teachers Professional development 

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.Google Scholar
  2. Agyei, D. D., & Voogt, J. M. (2012). Developing technological pedagogical content knowledge in pre-service mathematics teachers through collaborative design. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 28(4), 547–564.Google Scholar
  3. Alayyar, G., Fisser, P., & Voogt, J. (2011). ICT integration through design teams in science teacher preparation. International Journal of Learning Technology, 6(2), 125–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Kafyulilo, A., Fisser, P., & Voogt, J. (2011). ICT Use in Science and Mathematics Teachers’ preparation: Developing pre-service teachers’ TPACK. Paper presented at e-Learning Africa conference 25th -27th May, 2011 in Dar es salaam, Tanzania.Google Scholar
  5. Bakah, M. A. (2011). Teacher professional development through collaborative curriculum design in Ghana’s polytechnics. Doctoral Dissertation. Enschede: University of Twente.Google Scholar
  6. Deketelaere, A., & Kelchtermans, G. (1996). Collaborative curriculum development: An encounter of different professional knowledge systems. Teachers and teaching: Theory and practice, 2(1), 71-85.Google Scholar
  7. De Vellis, R. F. (2003). Scale development: Theory and application (2nd ed.). London: SAGE Publication.Google Scholar
  8. Graham, C. R., Burgoyne, N., Cantrell, P., Smith, L., Clair, L., & Harris, R. (2009). TPACK development in science teaching: measuring the TPACK confidence of in-service science teachers. Technological Trends, 53(5), 70–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Handelzalts, A. (2009). Collaborative curriculum development in teacher design team. Doctoral Dissertation. Enschede: University of Twente.Google Scholar
  10. Hare, H. (2007). Survey of ICT in education in Tanzania. In G. Farrell, S. Isaacs, & M. Trucano (Eds.), Survey of ICT and education in Africa (volume 2): 53 country reports. Washington, DC: infoDev/World Bank.Google Scholar
  11. 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: AACE.Google Scholar
  12. Jimoyiannis, A. (2010). Designing and implementing an integrated technological pedagogical science knowledge framework for science teachers’ professional development. Computers & Education, 55, 1259–1269.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Kitta, S. (2004). Enhancing mathematics teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge and skills in Tanzania. Doctoral dissertation. Enschede: University of Twente.Google Scholar
  14. Koehler, M., & Mishra, P. (2005). What happens when teachers design educational technology? The development of technological pedagogical content knowledge. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 32(2), 131–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Koehler, M., & Mishra, P. (2009). What is technological pedagogical content knowledge. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 9(1), 60–70.Google Scholar
  16. Koehler, M., Mishra, P., & Yahya, K. (2007). Tracing the development of teacher knowledge in a design seminar: integrating content, pedagogy and technology. Computers and Education, 49, 740–762.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Mclndoe, A., & Hammond, E. (2008). How to maintain an anaesthetic logbook. Bulletin, 51, 2633–2637.Google Scholar
  18. Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis. London: SAGE Publication.Google Scholar
  19. Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: a framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017–1054.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Niess, M. L. (2005). Preparing teachers to teach science and mathematics with technology: developing a technological pedagogical content knowledge. Teaching and Teacher Education, 21, 509–523.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Niess, M. L., Ronau, R. N., Shafer, K. G., Driskell, S. O., Harper, S. R., Johnston, C., Browning, C., Özgün-Koca, S. A., & Kersaint, G. (2009). Mathematics teacher TPACK standards and development model. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 9(1), 4–24.Google Scholar
  22. Nihuka, K., & Voogt, J. (2011). E-learning course design in teacher design teams: experiences in the open university of Tanzania. International Journal of Learning Technology, 6(2), 107–124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Peker, M. (2010). The use of expanded microteaching for reducing pre-service teachers’ teaching anxiety about mathematics. Scientific Research and Essay, 4(9), 872–880.Google Scholar
  24. Pineda, R. C., Barger, B., & Lerner, L. D. (2009). Exploring differences in student perceptions of teamwork: the case of U. S. and Lithuanian students. Journal of International Business and Cultural Studies, 1, 50–58.Google Scholar
  25. Putnam, R. P., & Borko, H. (2000). What do new views of knowledge and thinking have to say about research on teachers learning. Educational Researcher, 29(1), 1–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Schmidt, D. A., Baran, E., Thompson, A. D., Punya, M., Koehler, M. J., & Shin, T. S. (2009). Technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK): the development and validation of an assessment instrument for pre-service teachers. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 42(2), 123–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Swarts, P., & Wachira, E. M. (2010). Tanzania: ICT in education, situational analysis. Dar es salaam: Global e-School and Communities Initiative.Google Scholar
  28. The Hofstede Centre (nd). Dimensions of national culture: Tanzania. Retrieved April 3, 2013 from http://geert-hofstede.com/tanzania.html.
  29. Thurmond, V. A. (2001). The point of triangulation. Clinical Scholarship, 33(3), 253–258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Tilya, F. (2003). Teacher support for the use of MBL in activity-based physics teaching in Tanzania. Doctoral dissertation, Enschede: University of Twente.Google Scholar
  31. Tondeur, J., van Braak, J., Sang, G., Voogt, J., Fisser, P., & Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. (2012). Preparing pre-service teachers to integrate technology in education: a synthesis of qualitative evidence. Computers and Education, 59, 134–144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. URT. (2007). Information and communication technology policy for basic education. Dar es salaam: Ministry of Education and Vocational Training.Google Scholar
  33. URT. (2009). A framework for ICT use in teacher professional development in Tanzania. Dar es Salaam: Global e-School and Communities Initiative.Google Scholar
  34. Van den Akker, J. (1988). The teacher as learner in curriculum implementation. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 20(1), 47–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Viera, A. J., & Garrett, J. M. (2005). Understanding inter-observer agreement: the kappa statistic. Family Medicine, 37(5), 360–363.Google Scholar
  36. Voogt, J., Tilya, F., & van den Akker, J. (2009). Science teacher learning for MBL-supported student-centered science education in the context of secondary education in Tanzania. Journal of Science and Education and Technology, 18, 429–428.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Voogt, J., Westbroek, H., Handelzalts, A., Walraven, A., McKenney, S., Pieters, J., & de Vries, B. (2011). Teacher learning in collaborative curriculum design. Teaching and Teacher Education, 27, 1235–1244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Whitcomb, J., Borko, H., & Liston, D. (2009). Growing talent: promising professional development models and practices. Journal of Teacher Education, 60(3), 207–212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Yin, R. (2003). Case study research: Design and methods (3rd ed.). Califonia: Sage Publications, Inc.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Curriculum and TeachingDar Es Salaam University College of EducationDar-es-SalaamTanzania
  2. 2.National Institute for Curriculum DevelopmentEnschedeThe Netherlands
  3. 3.Faculty of Social and Behavioural SciencesUniversity of AmsterdamAmsterdamThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations