The Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge Framework

  • Matthew J. Koehler
  • Punya Mishra
  • Kristen Kereluik
  • Tae Seob Shin
  • Charles R. Graham
Chapter

Abstract

In this chapter, we introduce a framework, called technological pedagogical content knowledge (or TPACK for short), that describes the kinds of knowledge needed by a teacher for effective technology integration. The TPACK framework emphasizes how the connections among teachers’ understanding of content, pedagogy, and technology interact with one another to produce effective teaching. Even as a relatively new framework, the TPACK framework has significantly influenced theory, research, and practice in teacher education and teacher professional development. In this chapter, we describe the theoretical underpinnings of the framework, and explain the relationship between TPACK and related constructs in the educational technology literature. We outline the various approaches teacher educators have used to develop TPACK in pre- and in-service teachers, and the theoretical and practical issues that these professional development efforts have illuminated. We then review the widely varying approaches to measuring TPACK, with an emphasis on the interaction between form and function of the assessment, and resulting reliability and validity outcomes for the various approaches. We conclude with a summary of the key theoretical, pedagogical, and methodological issues related to TPACK, and suggest future directions for researchers, practitioners, and teacher educators.

Keywords

TPACK Professional development Teacher knowledge Technology integration 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We would like to acknowledge and thank Laura Terry for help in preparing this chapter.

References

  1. *Angeli, C., & Valanides, N. (2005). Pre-service elementary teachers as information and communication technology designers: An instructional systems design model based on an expanded view of pedagogical content knowledge. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 21(4), 292–302.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 and Education, 52, 154–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. *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
  4. Becker, H. J. (2000). Findings from the teaching, learning and computing survey: Is Larry Cuban right? Education Policy Analysis Archives, 8(51), 2–32.Google Scholar
  5. Bruce, B. C. (1997). Literary technologies: What stance should we take? Journal of Literacy Research, 29(2), 289–309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Brush, T., & Saye, J. W. (2009). Strategies for preparing pre-service social studies teachers to integrate technology effectively: Models and practices. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 9(1), 46–59.Google Scholar
  7. Bull, G., Hammond, T., & Ferster, B. (2008). Developing web 2.0 tools for support of historical inquiry in social studies. Computers in the Schools, 25(3–4), 275–287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cochran, K. F., Deruiter, J. A., & King, R. A. (1993). Pedagogical content knowing: An integrative model for teacher preparation. Journal of Teacher Education, 44(1), 263–272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cox, S., & Graham, C. R. (2009). Diagramming TPACK in practice: Using an elaborated model of the TPACK framework to analyze and depict teacher knowledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Curaoglu, O., Bu, L., Dickey, L., Kim, H., & Cakir, R. (2010, March 29–April 2). A case study of investigating pre-service mathematics teachersinitial use of the next-generation TI-Nspire graphing calculators with regard to TPACK. Paper presented at Society for Information Technology and Teacher Education. San Diego, CA.Google Scholar
  11. Dawson, K. (1998). Factors influencing elementary teachers’ instructional use of computers. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Virginia, Charlottesville.Google Scholar
  12. Dewey, J., & Bentley, A. F. (1949). Knowing and the known. Boston, MA: Beacon.Google Scholar
  13. Doering, A., & Veletsianos, G. (2007). An investigation of the use of real-time, authentic geospatial data in the k-12 classroom. Journal of Geography, 106(6), 217–225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 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. doi: 10.2190/EC.41.3.d.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Franklin, C. (2004). Teacher preparation as a critical factor in elementary teachers: Use of computers. In R. Carlsen, N. Davis, J. Price., R. Weber, & Dl Willis (Eds.), Society for Information Technology and Teacher Education Annual, 2004 (pp. 4994–4999). Norfolk, VA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. *Graham, C. R. (2011). Theoretical considerations for understanding technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK). Computers and Education, 57(2011), 1953–1969.Google Scholar
  17. 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. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2729.2011.00472.x
  18. Graham, C. R., Tripp, T., & Wentworth, N. (2009). Assessing and improving technology integration skills for pre-service teachers using the teacher work sample. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 41(1), 39–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Guzey, S. S., & Roehrig, G. H. (2009). Teaching science with technology: Case studies of science teachers’ development of technology, pedagogy, and content knowledge. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Science Teacher Education, 9(1). Retrieved from http://www.citejournal.org/vol9/iss1/science/article1.cfm.
  20. 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 and Teacher Education International Conference 2010 (pp. 3833–3840). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.Google Scholar
  21. Harris, J., & Hofer, M. (2009). Instructional planning activity types as vehicles for curriculum-based TPACK development. In C. D. Maddux (Ed.), Research highlights in technology and teacher education 2009 (pp. 99–108). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.Google Scholar
  22. *Harris, J. B., & Hofer, M. J. (2011). Technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) in action: A descriptive study of secondary teachers’ curriculum-based, technology-related instructional planning. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 43(3), 211–229.Google Scholar
  23. *Harris, J., Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2009). Teachers technological pedagogical content knowledge and learning activity types: Curriculum-based technology integration reframed. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 41(4), 393–416.Google Scholar
  24. Hofer, M., & Swan, K. O. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge in action: A case study of a middle school digital documentary project. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 41(2), 179–200.Google Scholar
  25. Holmes, K. (2009). Planning to teach with digital tools: Introducing the interactive whiteboard to pre-service secondary mathematics teachers. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 25(3), 351–365.Google Scholar
  26. *Irving, K. (2006). The impact of technology on the 21st century classroom. In J. Rhonton & P. Shane (Eds.), Teaching science in the 21st century (pp. 3–19). Arlington, VA: NSTA.Google Scholar
  27. Kelly, M. (2010). Technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK): A content analysis of 2006–2009 print journal articles. In D. Gibson & B. Dodge (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology and Teacher Education International Conference 2010 (pp. 3880–3888). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.Google Scholar
  28. Kereluik, K., Casperson, G., & Akcaoglu, M. (2010). Coding pre-service teacher lesson plans for TPACK. In D. Gibson & B. Dodge (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology and Teacher Education International Conference 2010 (pp. 3889–3891). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.Google Scholar
  29. Koehler, M. J., & Mishra, P. (2005a). Teachers learning technology by design. Journal of Computing in Teacher Education, 21(3), 94–102.Google Scholar
  30. Koehler, M. J., & Mishra, P. (2005b). 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
  31. Koehler, M. J., & Mishra, P. (2008). Introducing TPACK. In AACTE Committee on Innovation & Technology (Eds.), Handbook of technological pedagogical content knowledge for educators (pp. 3–29). New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
  32. Koehler, M. J., Mishra, P., Bouch, E., DeSchryver, M., Kereluik, K., Shin, T. S., et al. (2011). Deep-play: Developing TPACK for 21st century teachers. International Journal of Learning Technology, 6(2), 146–163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Koehler, M. J., Mishra, P., Wolf, L. G., Zellner, A., & Kereluik, K. (2012). Thematic considerations in integrating TPACK in a graduate program. In D. Polly, C. Mims & K. Persichitte (Eds.), Creating technology-rich teacher education programs: Key issues (pp. 1–12). Hershey, PA: IGI Global.Google Scholar
  34. Koehler, M. J., Mishra, P., & Yahya, K. (2007). Tracing the development of teacher knowledge in a design seminar: Integrating content, pedagogy and technology. Computers and Education, 49(3), 740–762.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Koehler, M. J., Shin, T. S., & Mishra, P. (2012). How do we measure TPACK? Let me count the ways. In R. N. Ronau, C. R. Rakes, & M. L. Niess (Eds.), Educational technology, teacher knowledge, and classroom impact: A research handbook on frameworks and approaches (pp. 16–31). Hersey, PA: IGI Global.Google Scholar
  36. Lambert, J., & Sanchez, T. (2007). Integration of cultural diversity and technology: Learning by design. Meridian Middle School Computer Technologies Journal, 10(1).Google Scholar
  37. Lee, E., & Luft, J. (2008). Experienced secondary science teachersʼ representation of pedagogical content knowledge. International Journal of Science Education, 30(10), 1343–1363.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Lee, M. H., & Tsai, C. C. (2010). Exploring teachers’ perceived self-efficacy and technological pedagogical content knowledge with respect to educational use of the World Wide Web. Instructional Science, 38(1), 1–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. *Margerum-Lays, J., & Marx, R. W. (2003). Teacher knowledge of educational technology: A case study of student/mentor teacher pairs. In Y. Zhao (Ed.), What should teachers know about technology? Perspectives and practices (pp. 123–159). Greenwich, CO: Information Age.Google Scholar
  40. McCormick, R., & Scrimshaw, P. (2001). Information and communications technology, knowledge and pedagogy. Education, Communication and Information, 1(1), 39–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. McCrory, R. (2008). Science, technology, and teaching: The topic-specific challenges of TPCK in science. In AACTE Committee on Innovation and Technology (Eds.), Handbook of technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPCK) for Educators (pp. 193–206). RoutledgeGoogle Scholar
  42. McCrory, R., Putnam, R., & Jansen, A. (2008). Interaction in online courses for teacher education: Subject matter and pedagogy. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 16(2), 155–180.Google Scholar
  43. Mishra, P., & Kereluik, K. (2011). What 21st century learning? A review and a synthesis. In M. Koehler & P. Mishra (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology and Teacher Education International Conference 2011 (pp. 3301–3312). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.Google Scholar
  44. *Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017–1054.Google Scholar
  45. Mishra, P., Koehler, M. J., & Henriksen, D. (2011). The seven trans-disciplinary habits of mind: Extending the TPACK framework towards 21st century learning. Educational Technology, 11(2), 22–28.Google Scholar
  46. Mishra, P., Koehler, M. J., & Kereluik, K. (2009). The song remains the same: Looking back to the future of educational technology. TechTrends, 53(5), 48–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Mouza, C., & Wong, W. (2009). Studying classroom practice: Case development for professional learning in technology integration. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 17(2), 175–202.Google Scholar
  48. Niess, M. L. (2008). Guiding pre-service teachers in developing TPCK. In AACTE Committee on Innovation and Technology (Eds.), Handbook of technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPCK) for educators (pp. 223–250). RoutledgeGoogle Scholar
  49. Niess, M. L., van Zee, E. H., & Gillow-Wiles, H. (2010). Knowledge growth in teaching mathematics/science with spreadsheets: Moving PCK to TPACK through online professional development. Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education, 27(2), 42–53.Google Scholar
  50. Norman, D. (2010). Why design education must change. http://www.core77.com/blog/columns/whydesigneducationmustchange17993.asp.
  51. 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, 203–227.Google Scholar
  52. Rhonton, J., & Shane, P. (Eds.). (2006). Teaching science in the 21st century. Arlington, VA: NSTA Press.Google Scholar
  53. Rosenblatt, L. M. (1978). The reader, the text, the poem: The transactional theory of literary work. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press.Google Scholar
  54. *Sahin, I. (2011). Development of survey of technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK). The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 10(1), 97–105.Google Scholar
  55. *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 pre-service teachers. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 42(2), 123–149.Google Scholar
  56. *Shulman, L. E. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Research, 15(2), 4–14.Google Scholar
  57. Slough, S., & Connell, M. (2006). Defining technology and its natural corollary, technological content knowledge (TCK). In C. Crawford et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology and Teacher Education International Conference 2006 (pp. 1053–1059). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.Google Scholar
  58. So, H.-J., & Kim, B. (2009). Learning about problem based learning: Student teachers integrating technology, pedagogy and content knowledge. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 25(1), 101–116.Google Scholar
  59. Suharwoto, G. (2006). Developing and implementing a technology pedagogical content knowledge (TPCK) for teaching mathematics with technology. In C. Crawford, D. Willis, R. Carlsen, I. Gibson, K. McFerrin, J. Price, & R. Weber (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology and Teacher Education International Conference 2006 (pp. 3824–3828). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.Google Scholar
  60. Swan, K., & Locascio, D. (2008). Evaluating alignment of technology and primary source use within a history classroom. In G. L. Bull & L. Bell (Eds.), Contemporary issues in technology and teacher education, 8(2), 175–186Google Scholar
  61. Toth, E. E. (2009). “Virtual inquiry” in the science classroom: What is the role of technological pedagogical content knowledge? International Journal of Information and Communication Technology Education, 5(4), 78–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Trautmann, N. M., & MaKinster, J. G. (2010). Flexibly adaptive professional development in support of teaching science with geospatial technology. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 21(3), 351–370.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. U.S. Department of Education (2010). Transforming American education: Learning powered by technology; National educational technology plan 2010. Washington DC: Office of Educational Technology, U.S. Department of Education.Google Scholar
  64. Valanides, N., & Angeli, C. (2008). Professional development for computer-enhanced learning: A case study with science teachers. Research in Science and Technological Education, 26(1), 3–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. van Driel, J. H., Verloop, N., & de Vos, W. (1998). Developing science teachers pedagogical content knowledge. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35(6), 673–695.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Matthew J. Koehler
    • 1
  • Punya Mishra
    • 1
  • Kristen Kereluik
    • 2
  • Tae Seob Shin
    • 3
  • Charles R. Graham
    • 4
  1. 1.Michigan State UniversityEast LansingUSA
  2. 2.Michigan State UniversityEast LansingUSA
  3. 3.Hanyang UniversitySeoulRepublic of Korea
  4. 4.Brigham Young UniversityProvoUSA

Personalised recommendations