Skip to main content

Aligning with Practice: Examining the Effects of a Practice-Based Educational Technology Course on Preservice Teachers’ Potential to Teach with Technology

Abstract

This study was conducted to examine the design of a face-to-face undergraduate educational technology course for preservice teachers. The design of the course used Grossman et al.’s (2009) pedagogies of practice to emphasize the blended teaching practices of teachers in the university’s nine placement districts and designing instruction for technology-rich and blended environments. Using Schmidt et al.’s (2009) technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) survey, Harris et al.’s (2010) Technology Integration Assessment Rubric, lesson plan reflections, and course reflections, this study investigates using the pedagogies of practice to design a course that prepares preservice teachers to teach with technology in technology-rich and blended environments. Results indicate statistically significant growth in preservice teachers’ teaching and technology self-perceptions, technological pedagogical knowledge, and overall TPACK application after the completion of the course. Suggestions for research and practice are provided.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1

References

  1. Abbitt, J. T. (2011). An investigation of the relationship between self-efficacy beliefs about technology integration and technological and pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) among preservice teachers. Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education, 27(4), 134–143. https://doi.org/10.1080/21532974.2011.10784670

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. 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. https://www.learntechlib.org/primary/p/31410/

  3. Archambault, L. M., & Barnett, J. H. (2010). Revisiting technological pedagogical content knowledge: Exploring the TPACK framework. Computers & Education, 55(4), 1656–1662. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2010.07.009

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. 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) https://citejournal.org/volume-9/issue-1-09/general/examining-tpack-among-k-12-online-distance-educators-in-the-united-states

  5. Archambault, L., DeBruler, K., & Freidhoff, J. (2014). K-12 online and blended teacher licensure: Striking a balance between policy and preparedness. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 22(1), 83–106 https://www.learntechlib.org/primary/p/112361/

    Google Scholar 

  6. Arnesen, K. T., Graham, C. R., Short, C. R., & Archibald, D. (2019). Experiences with personalized learning in a blended teaching course for preservice teachers. Journal of Online Learning Research, 5(3), 251–274.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Auerbach, C. F., & Silverstein, L. B. (2003). Qualitative data: An introduction to coding and analysis. New York University Press.

  8. Bakir, N. (2015). An exploration of contemporary realities of technology and teacher education: Lessons learned. Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education, 31(3), 117–130. https://doi.org/10.1080/21532974.2015.1040930

  9. Betrus, A. (2012). Historical evolution of instructional technology in teacher education programs: A ten-year update. TechTrends, 56(5), 42–45. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-012-0597-x

  10. Bolick, C. M., & Cooper, J. M. (2015). Classroom management and technology. In E. Emmer & E. J. Sabornie (Eds.), Handbook of classroom management (2nd ed., pp. 479–495). Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Bransford, J., Brown, A., & Cocking, R. (2000). How people learn. National Academy of Sciences.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Brantley-Dias, L., & Ertmer, P. A. (2013). Goldilocks and TPACK. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 46(2), 103–128. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2013.10782615

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa

  14. Britten, J. S., & Cassady, J. C. (2005). The technology integration assessment instrument: Understanding planned use of technology by classroom teachers. Computers in the Schools, 22(3–4), 49–61. https://doi.org/10.1300/J025v22n03_05

  15. Buss, R. R., Wetzel, K., Foulger, T. S., & Lindsey, L. (2015). Preparing teachers to integrate technology into K-12 instruction: Comparing a stand-alone course with a technology infused approach. Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education, 31(4), 160–172. https://doi.org/10.1080/21532974.2015.1055012

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Chai, C. S., Koh, J. H. L., & Tsai, C. C. (2011). Facilitating preservice teachers’ development of technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK). Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 13(4), 63–73 https://www.learntechlib.org/p/52307/

    Google Scholar 

  17. Consortium for School Networking. (2020). The state of ed tech leadership in, 2020. https://www.ed-fi.org/assets/2020/05/CoSN_EdTechLeadership_2020.pdf

  18. Darling-Hammond, L., Banks, J., Zumwalt, K., Gomez, L., Gamoran Sherin, M., Griesdorn, J., & Finn, L. (2005). Educational goals and purposes: Developing a curricular vision for teaching. In L. Darling-Hammond & J. Bransford (Eds.), Preparing teachers for a changing world: What teachers should learn and be able to do (pp. 169–200). Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Fazal, M., & Bryant, M. (2019). Blended learning in middle school math: The question of effectiveness. Journal of Online Learning Research, 5(1), 49–64.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Foulger, T. S., Buss, R. R., Wetzel, K., & Lindsey, L. (2012). Preservice teacher education: Benchmarking a stand-alone ed tech course in preparation for change. Journal of Digital Learning Teacher Education, 29(2), 48–58. https://doi.org/10.1080/21532974.2012.10784704

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Graham, C. R. (2006). Blended learning systems: Definition, current trends, and future directions (pp. 3-21). In C. J. Bonk & C. R. Graham (Eds.), Handbook of blended learning: Global perspectives, local designs. Pfeiffer.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Graham, C. R. (2011). Theoretical considerations for understanding technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK). Computers & Education, 57(3), 1953–1960.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Graham, C. R. (2019). Current research in blended learning. In M. G. Moore & W. C. Diehl (Eds.), Handbook of distance education (4th ed., pp. 173–188). Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Graham, C. R., Borup, J., & Smith, N. B. (2012). Using TPACK as a framework to understand teacher candidates' technology integration decisions. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 28(6), 530–546. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2729.2011.00472.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Graham, C. R., Borup, J., Pulham, E., & Larsen, R. (2019). K–12 blended teaching readiness: Model and instrument development. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 51(3), 239–258. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2019.1586601

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Graham, C. R., Borup, J., Jensen, M. A., Arnesen, K. T., & Short, C. R. (2021). K-12 blended teaching competencies. In C. R. Graham, J. Borup, M. A. Jensen, K. T. Arnesen, & C. R. Short (Eds.), K-12 blended teaching (Vol. 2): A guide to practice within the disciplines. EdTech Books. https://edtechbooks.org/k12blended2/competencies

  27. Grossman, P., Compton, C., Igra, D., Ronfeldt, M., Shahan, E., & Williamson, P. (2009). Teaching practice: A cross-professional perspective. Teachers College Record, 111(9), 2055–2100 http://www.tcrecord.org/Content.asp?ContentId=15018

  28. Hall, J. A. (2018). Flipping with the first principles of instruction: An examination of preservice teachers’ technology integration development. Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education, 34(4), 201–218. https://doi.org/10.1080/21532974.2018.1494520

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Hall, J. A., Lei, J., & Wang, Q. (2020). The first principles of instruction: An examination of their impact on preservice teachers’ TPACK. Educational Technology Research & Development, 68(6), 3115–3142. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-020-09866-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Harris, J., Grandgenett, N., & Hofer, M. J. (2010). Testing a TPACK-based technology integration assessment rubric. In C. D. Maddux, D. Gibson, & B. Dodge (Eds.), Research highlights in technology and teacher education 2010 (pp. 323–331). Society for Information Technology and Teacher Education.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Hatch, T., & Grossman, P. (2009). Learning to look beyond the boundaries of representation: Using technology to example teaching. Journal of Teacher Education, 60(1), 70–85. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487108328533

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Hofer, M., & Grandgenett, N. (2012). TPACK development in teacher education: A longitudinal study of preservice teachers in a secondary M.a.Ed. program. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 45(1), 83–106. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2012.10782598

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Hrastinski, S. (2019). What do we mean by blended learning? TechTrends, 63(5), 564–569. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-019-00375-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. International Society for Technology in Education (2016). ISTE standards for students. https://www.iste.org/standards/for-students

  35. International Society for Technology in Education (2017). ISTE standards for educators. https://www.iste.org/standards/for-educators

  36. Janssen, F., Grossman, P., & Westbroek, H. (2015). Facilitating decomposition and recomposition in practice-based teacher education: The power of modularity. Teaching and Teacher Education, 51, 137–146. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2015.06.009

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Kay, R. H. (2006). Evaluating strategies used to incorporate technology into preservice education: A review of the literature. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 38(4), 385–410. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2006.10782466

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Koehler, M. J., Mishra, P., & Cain, W. (2013). What is technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK)? Journal of Education, 193(3), 13–19. https://doi.org/10.1177/002205741319300303

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Koehler, M. J., Mishra, P., Kereluik, K., Shin, T. S., & Graham, C. R. (2014). The technological pedagogical content knowledge framework. In J. M. Spector, M. D. Merrill, J. Elen, & M. J. Bishop (Eds.), Handbook of research on educational communications and technology (4th ed., pp. 101–111). Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  40. Koh, J. H. L. (2013). A rubric for assessing teachers’ lesson activities with respect to TPACK for meaningful learning with ICT. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 29(6), 887–900. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.228

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Kopcha, T. J., Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A., Jung, J., & Baser, D. (2014). Examining the TPACK framework through the convergent and discriminant validity of two measures. Computers & Education, 78, 87–96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.05.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Lee, C., & Kim, C. M. (2014). An implementation study of a TPACK-based instructional design model in a technology integration course. Educational Technology Research and Development, 62(4), 437–460. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-014-9335-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (2000). Paradigmatic controversies, contradictions, and emerging confluences. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed., pp. 163–188). Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  44. Merrill, M. D. (2002). First principles of instruction. Educational Technology Research and Development, 50(3), 43–59. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02505024

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017–1054 https://www.tcrecord.org/content.asp?contentid=12516

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Mouza, C., Karchmer-Klein, R., Nandakumar, R., Ozden, S. Y., & Hu, L. (2014). Investigating the impact of an integrated approach to the development of preservice teachers’ technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK). Computers & Education, 71, 206–221. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2013.09.020

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Nelson, M. J., & Hawk, N. A. (2020). The impact of field experiences on prospective preservice teachers’ technology integration beliefs and intentions. Teaching and Teacher Education, 89, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2019.103006

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. T., Glazewski, K. D., Newby, T. J., & Ertmer, P. A. (2010). Teacher value beliefs associated with using technology: Addressing professional and student needs. Computers & Education, 55(3), 1321–1335. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2010.06.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Osguthorpe, R. T., & Graham, C. R. (2003). Blended learning environments: Definitions and directions. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 4(3), 227–233.

    Google Scholar 

  50. Ozgun-Koca, S. A. (2009). The views of preservice teachers about the strengths and limitations of the use of graphing calculators in mathematics instruction. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 17(2), 203–227 https://www.learntechlib.org/primary/p/26268/

    Google Scholar 

  51. Prescott, J. E., Bundschuh, K., Kazakoff, E. R., & Macaruso, P. (2018). Elementary school-wide implementation of a blended learning program for reading intervention. The Journal of Educational Research, 111(4), 497–506. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220671.2017.1302914

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Project Tomorrow (2021). Education leadership brief: Examining the evolving digital responsibilities of school principals: findings and insights from the Speak Up Research Project. https://tomorrow.org/speakup/evolving-digital-leadership.html

  53. Sanders, R. K., Kopcha, T. J., Neumann, K. L., Brynteson, K., & Bishop, C. (2019). Maker’s workshop: A framework to support learning through making. Tech Trends, 63(4), 386–396. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-018-0328-z

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. 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. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2009.10782544

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Shambaugh, N., & Magliaro, S. G. (2006). Instructional design: A systematic approach for reflective practice. Pearson.

    Google Scholar 

  56. Shand, K., & Farrelly, S. G. (2017). Using blended teaching to teach blended learning: Lessons learned from preservice teachers in an instructional methods course. Journal of Online Learning Research, 3(1), 5–30 https://www.learntechlib.org/primary/p/172566/

    Google Scholar 

  57. Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4–14. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X015002004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. So, H., & Kim, B. (2009). Learning about problem based learning: Student teachers integrating technology, pedagogy and content knowledge. Australian Journal of Educational Technology, 25(1), 101–116. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.1183

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. tpack.org. (2012). Using the TPACK image. http://matt-koehler.com/tpack2/using-the-tpack-image/

  60. U.S. Department of Education (2017). Reimagining the role of technology in education: 2017 national education technology plan update. https://tech.ed.gov/files/2017/01/NETP17.pdf

  61. Voogt, J., Fisser, P., Pareja, N., Tondeur, J., & van Braak, J. (2013). Technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK): A review of the literature. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 29(2), 109–121. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2729.2012.00487.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  62. Wang, W., Schmidt-Crawford, D., & Jin, Y. (2018). Preservice teachers’ TPACK development: A review of literature. Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education, 34(4), 234–258. https://doi.org/10.1080/21532974.2018.1498039

    Article  Google Scholar 

  63. Willingham, D. T. (2002). Allocating student study time: “Massed” versus “distributed” practice. American Educator, 26(2), 37–39 https://www.aft.org/periodical/american-educator/summer-2002/ask-cognitive-scientist

    Google Scholar 

  64. Wolff, C. E., van den Bogert, N., Jarodzka, H., & Boshuizen, H. P. (2015). Keeping an eye on learning: Differences between expert and novice teachers’ representations of classroom management events. Journal of Teacher Education, 66(1), 68–85. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487114549810

    Article  Google Scholar 

  65. Zeichner, K. (2012). The turn once again toward practice-based teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education, 65(5), 376–382. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487112445789

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kalianne L. Neumann.

Ethics declarations

Ethical Approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the researchers’ institutional review board and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. It was approved by the researchers’ institutional review board.

Consent to Participate

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Consent to Publish

Participants signed informed consent regarding publishing their data.

Conflicts of Interest/Competing Interests

The authors have no relevant financial or non-financial interests to disclose.

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

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Neumann, K.L., Alvarado-Albertorio, F. & Ramírez-Salgado, A. Aligning with Practice: Examining the Effects of a Practice-Based Educational Technology Course on Preservice Teachers’ Potential to Teach with Technology. TechTrends 65, 1027–1041 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-021-00672-y

Download citation

Keywords

  • Practice-based teacher education
  • Teacher preparation
  • Pedagogies of practice
  • Blended learning
  • TPACK