Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Exploring pre-service technology teachers’ content and instructional knowledge to determine teaching readiness

  • Published:
International Journal of Technology and Design Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Instructional practice plays a significant role in revealing how well teachers understand the subjects they teach. Many studies have been conducted in South Africa on the relationship between teachers’ knowledge of well-established subjects like Science and Mathematics and how well teachers apply their knowledge in the classroom. However, relatively little research has been done on the subject of Technology, which was only included in the national school curriculum after 1994. The aim of this study was to explore pre-service (i.e. in-training) Technology teachers’ content knowledge and instructional knowledge in the context of various theories about teaching. The study followed a case study approach. Five female pre-service Technology teachers, who were in their final year of teacher training at a South African university of technology and were doing their in-school practicum were observed. Video recorder was used to capture the delivering of a lesson to a class of Grade 8 learners. The researcher used the 9E instructional model, which comprises nine phases in the presentation of a lesson, as the basis for her observation work and final analysis. A key finding was that the content and instructional knowledge displayed by most pre-service Technology teachers was inadequate, which weakened their effectiveness in the classroom. As a result, learners were deprived of the opportunity to sharpen their cognitive skills and develop authentic interest in Technology. This study, though limited in scope, has laid an important foundation for more in-depth studies to be conducted on the extent of content and instructional knowledge in the sphere of Technology Education, which should be of value to other universities offering teacher-training programmes.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Adler, J., Slonimsky, L., & Reed, Y. (2002). Subject-focused INSET and teachers’ conceptual knowledge-in-practice. In Challenges of teacher development: An investigation of take-up in South Africa (pp. 135–152).

  • Ausubel, D. P. (1980). Schemata, cognitive structure, and advance organizers: A reply to Anderson, Spiro, and Anderson. American Educational Research Journal, 17(3), 400–404.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bertram, C., Mthiyane, N., & Mukeredzi, T. (2013). ‘It will make me a real teacher’: Learning experiences of part-time PGCE students in South Africa. International Journal of Educational Development, 33(5), 448–456.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, J. S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18(1), 32–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bunn, T. L., Slavova, S., & Hall, L. (2008). Narrative text analysis of Kentucky tractor fatality reports. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 40(2), 419–425.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chai, K. (2015). The principles and the ways of classroom interaction. In 1st international conference on arts, design and contemporary education (ICADCE 2015). Atlantis Press.

  • Eisenkraft, A. (2003). Expanding the 5E model. Science Teacher, 70(6), 56–59.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fowler, K. (2008). SQL server forenisc analysis. Pearson Education. Google scholar.

  • Gardner, J. (Ed.). (2012). Assessment and learning. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heritage, M. (2007). Formative assessment. In EED winter conference: Informing instruction, improving achievement. Anchorage, AK.

  • Kearsley, G., & Shneiderman, B. (1998). Engagement theory: A framework for technology-based teaching and learning. Educational Technology, 38(5), 20–23.

    Google Scholar 

  • Larkin, D. (2012). Misconceptions about “misconceptions”: Preservice secondary science teachers’ views on the value and role of student ideas. Science Education, 96(5), 927–959.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lauzon, A. C. (1999). Situating cognition and crossing borders: Resisting the hegemony of mediated education. British Journal of Educational Technology, 30(3), 261–276.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Manouchehri, A., & Goodman, T. (1998). Mathematics curriculum reform and teachers: Understanding the connections. The Journal of Educational Research, 92(1), 27–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mathew, P., Mathew, P., & Peechattu, P. J. (2017). Reflective practices: A means to teacher development. Asia Pacific Journal of Contemporary Education and Communication Technology (APJCECT), 3(1), 126–131.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mavhunga, E., & Rollnick, M. (2013). Improving PCK of chemical equilibrium in pre-service teachers. African Journal of Research in Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 17(1–2), 113–125.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mehmetlioglu, D., & Ozdem, Y. (2014). Connectivity Theory at work: The referrals between science and mathematics in a science unit. International Journal of Education in Mathematics Science and Technology, 2(1), 35–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mhlolo, M. K. (2012). To what extent do Mathematics teachers negotiate with and adapt to learners’ novel comments and actions in practice? In Proceedings of SAARMSTE Conference 2011.

  • Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017–1054.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Niess, M. L. (2005). Preparing teachers to teach science and mathematics with technology: Developing a technology pedagogical content knowledge. Teaching and Teacher Education, 21, 509–523.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Petrou, M., & Goulding, M. (2011). Conceptualising teachers’ mathematical knowledge in teaching. In Mathematical knowledge in teaching (pp. 9‒25). Netherlands: Springer.

  • Putnam, R. T., & Borko, H. (2000). What do new views of knowledge and thinking have to say about research on teacher learning? Educational Researcher, 29(1), 4–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ramaligela, S. M., Ogbonnaya, U. I., & Mji, A. (2019). Comparing pre-service teachers’ PCK through 9E Instructional Practice: A case of mathematics and technology pre-service teachers. Africa Education Review, 16(3), 101–116.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rivet, A. E., & Krajcik, J. S. (2008). Contextualizing instruction: Leveraging students’ prior knowledge and experiences to foster understanding of middle school science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching: The Official Journal of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, 45(1), 79–100.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rollnick, M., Bennett, J., Rhemtula, M., Dharsey, N., & Ndlovu, T. (2008). The place of subject matter knowledge in pedagogical content knowledge: A case study of South African teachers teaching the amount of substance and chemical equilibrium. International Journal of Science Education, 30(10), 1365–1387.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schuh, K. L. (2003). Knowledge construction in the learner-centered classroom. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(2), 426.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • South Africa. Department of Basic Education. (2011). Curriculum and Assessment Policy Statement. Pretoria: Government Printers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stein, M. K., Engle, R. A., Smith, M. S., & Hughes, E. K. (2008). Orchestrating productive mathematics discussions: Five practices for helping teachers move beyond show and tell. Mathematics Thinking and Learning, 10(4), 313–340.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Venkat, H., & Spaull, N. (2015). What do we know about primary teachers’ mathematical content knowledge in South Africa? An analysis of SACMEQ 2007. International Journal of Educational Development, 41, 121–130.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yackel, E. (2004). Theoretical perspectives for analyzing explanation, justification and argumentation in mathematics classrooms. Communications of Mathematical Education, 18(1), 1–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yamtim, V., & Wongwanich, S. (2014). A study of classroom assessment literacy of primary school teachers. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 116, 2998–3004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to S. M. Ramaligela.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ramaligela, S.M. Exploring pre-service technology teachers’ content and instructional knowledge to determine teaching readiness. Int J Technol Des Educ 31, 531–544 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-020-09570-5

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-020-09570-5

Keywords

Navigation