See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/313143767

Describing the pre-service teacher TPACK literature using confidence intervals

Article  in  TechTrends · January 2012

CITATIONS READS
5 17

1 author:

Jamaal R. Young
University of Iowa
40 PUBLICATIONS   201 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Speaking STEM: The nexus of 4 disciplines View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Jamaal R. Young on 31 January 2017.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Describing the Pre-service Teacher
Technological Pedagogical
Content Knowledge (TPACK)
Literature Using Confidence
Intervals
By Jamaal R. Young, Jemimah L. Young, Ziad Shaker, University of North Texas

Abstract teacher education has created a need to de-

The validity and reliability of Technologi- velop valid and reliable instruments to measure
cal Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK) pre-service teacher knowledge of the frame-
as a framework to measure the extent to which work. Several reviews of the current methodol-
teachers can teach with technology hinges on the ogies and instruments used to measure pre-ser-
ability to aggregate results across empirical stud- vice teacher TPACK exist (Abbitt, 2011). How-
ies. The results of data collected using the sur- ever, studies that synthesize the measurement
vey of pre-service teacher knowledge of teaching of pre-service teacher TPACK are elusive.
with technology (TKTT) were synthesized us- Meta-analytic studies of pre-service teacher
ing confidence intervals (CIs). Mean pre-service TPACK are necessary because they can provide
teacher TPACK point estimates were character- a means to examine the precision and consis-
ized by graphing CIs across studies from 2009 tency of measurements across studies. These
until 2011. The results present approximations of results have implications for researchers as well
TPACK population parameters and implications as teacher educators.
for researchers and teacher educators.
Keywords: TPACK, pre-service teachers, Pre-service Teacher TPACK
confidence intervals, literature review The TPACK framework merges technol-

T
ogy with earlier work on Pedagogical Content
he theoretical underpinning of the Tech- Knowledge (PCK). Shulman (1986) explicated
nological Pedagogical Content Knowl- the interrelationship of pedagogy and content
edge framework is well documented in the in relation to teacher effectiveness. Shulman’s
research literature (Koehler & Mishra, 2009; work mediated the debate over the importance
Mishra & Koehler, 2006; Mishra & Koehler, of content knowledge as opposed to pedagogi-
2007). An entire handbook of TPACK was devel- cal knowledge. This paradigm shift lead to dras-
oped for educators in response to the influx of lit- tic changes in pre-service teacher education
erature on the subject. Of the numerous TPACK and training. Mishra and Koehler (2006) then
research areas under investigation pre-service elaborated this initial model to address the need
teacher preparation receives notable emphasis for teachers to understand how technology,
in the literature (Finger, Jamieson-Proctor, Albi- pedagogy, and content afford and constrain
on, 2010; Jang & Chen, 2010; Kereluik, Casper- one another.
son, & Akcaoglu, 2010; Ward & Overall, 2010). In an era of constant technological evolu-
The attention placed on the theoretical and tion this shift in thinking has the potential to
practical complexities of applying the TPACK have subsequent impacts on teacher education.
framework as means to support pre-service Therefore, the accurate measurement of TPACK

Volume 56, Number 5 TechTrends • September/October 2012 25

 is imperative to teacher education. Seven sepa- 2007). These skills are essential for pre-service
rate components are included in the TPACK teachers; therefore the adequate evaluation pre-
framework. The foundational components of service teacher TPACK is vital. The context spe-
the TPACK framework are: (a) Technology cific nature of the TPACK framework presents
Knowledge (TK), (b) Pedagogical Knowledge many challenges for the measurement and eval-
(PK), and Content Knowledge (CK). Technol- uation of pre-service teacher knowledge across
ogy Knowledge refers to knowledge about dif- the TPACK constructs.
ferent analog and digital technologies. Content
knowledge is the knowledge of content and Confidence Intervals as a Means
subject matter that is taught (Mishra & Koehler, to Characterize Pre-service
2006). Pedagogical knowledge is the methodol-
ogy and processes of teaching including class- Teacher TPACK
room management, assessment and lesson The inability to aggregate valid and reli-
planning. These three types of knowledge inter- able results across studies hinders the develop-
sect with one another to create the basic TPACK ment of TPACK as a framework to guide the
constructs: (a) Pedagogical Content Knowledge measurement of pre-service teachers ability to
(PCK), (b) Technological Content Knowl- teach with technology. According to Zientek,
edge (TCK), and (c) Technological Pedagogi- Yetkiner, and Thompson (2010) confidence in-
cal Knowledge (TPK) Technological Content tervals are one particularly useful medium for
Knowledge or TCK is the knowledge of how aggregating effects of prior research (p. 425).
technology enhances the teaching of content. Confidence intervals provide a means to ag-
This type of knowledge is important for pre-ser- gregate research across studies and draw con-
vice teachers because it supports the decision- clusions about population parameter estimates
making processes and skills necessary to choose and measurement precision. Cummings and
appropriate technologies to support content Finch (2005) suggest that Confidence intervals
learning. Likewise, this knowledge can help have four major advantages.
teachers avoid using inappropriate technology First confidence intervals give point esti-
to teach content that is constrained or hindered mates and intervals in measurement units that
by the use of that technology. Similarly, Techno- are comprehensible to the research context
logical Pedagogical Knowledge or TPK assists (Cummings & Finch, p.171). Confidence inter-
teachers in better understanding the affordanc- vals are comprised of a point estimate of a popu-
es and constraints of technology on pedagogy. lation parameter (e.g., means, medians, effect
Teachers TPK helps them to design lessons and sizes). In the context of the pre-service teacher
activities that use technology to assist in the ac- TPACK mean pre-service teacher PCK, TCK,
quisition of the content. TPK, and TPACK point estimates are most ap-
Pedagogical activities that support learn- propriate. Secondly, there is a link between
ing, such as simulations, are delivered via tech- confidence intervals and p values, thus there is
nology, and TPK helps teacher facilitate these a translation to null hypothesis statistical sig-
activities. According to Mishra and Koehler nificant testing (NHST) (Cummings & Finch, p.
(2008) the intersection of PCK, TCK, and TPK 171). Thirdly, confidence intervals support me-
is the quintessence of TPACK, and this type ta-analytic thinking by helping to combine evi-
of knowledge is vitally important for teaching dence across studies (p. 171). Thus, confidence
with technology. intervals could be used to aggregate evidence
The different sets of knowledge and skills across the various studies of pre-service teacher
that TPACK encompasses require: an under- TPACK and present a meta-analytic review of
standing of multiple representations of concepts the results.
using technologies; constructive pedagogical Finally, confidence intervals provide infor-
techniques that apply differentiated instruc- mation about the precision of measurements
tional technologies to meet the needs of all across studies (p. 171). The confidence intervals
students; knowledge of nuances of particular for pre-service teacher mean TPACK point es-
content areas that make them difficult for stu- timates allow researchers to survey the results
dents to comprehend and how technology can across administrations and evaluate the precision
assist with student acquisition of the concepts; of measurement. The aggregation of pre-service
knowledge of scope and sequence of content mean TPACK point estimates across studies us-
and epistemological assumptions; and knowl- ing confidence intervals would allow researchers
edge of how technologies can scaffold student to evaluate the quality of measurement precision
content knowledge (Harris, Mishra, Koehler, between studies as well as the consistency in the

26 TechTrends • September/October 2012 Volume 56, Number 5

measurement of the constructs. These results Mishra and Koehler (2005) designed their
would provide estimates of population parame- survey for administration in a specific faculty
ters and support implications for further TPACK development course to measure participant
research and practice. However, the validity of attitudes, opinions, and learning. Because the
these measurements hinges on the selection and focus of the course was learning by the design,
implementation of an appropriate instrument to faculty as well as graduate students participated
measure pre-service teacher TPACK. in the course and survey. Accordingly, the ques-
tions in the survey were written specifically for
Pre-service Teacher TPACK Survey this context. For example, one item read, “Our
Instruments group has been considering how course peda-
gogy and technology influence one another”
Several survey instruments are currently (Mishra & Koehler, 2005). The Schmidt et al.
available to measure teacher TPACK (Archam- (2009) survey was designed to measure pre-
bault, & Crippen, 2009; Jamieson-Proctor, Fin- service early childhood education (ECE) teach-
ger, Albion, 2010; Mishra & Koehler, 2005; ers TPACK. Thus, the items address mathemat-
Schmidt, Baran, Thompson, Koehler, Sahin & ics, science, literacy and social studies content,
Erdogan, 2010; Shin,  & Mishra, 2009). How- which is commonly taught in ECE. The Sahin
ever, some of the aforementioned instruments and Erdogan (2010) survey was administered
were designed for use with in-service teachers. to college students to address their acquain-
Table 1 presents the descriptive information for tance with different applications of TPACK.
the available pre-service teacher TPACK survey The TPACK Confidence survey addressed spe-
instruments and excludes instruments designed cific elements of TPACK as the related to Infor-
for in-service teachers. The pre-service teacher mation Communication Technology (ICT). Ja-
TPACK surveys presented in table 1 were de- mieson-Proctor, Finger, Albion (2010) admin-
signed to assess pre-service teacher TPACK in istered the survey to senior pre-service teachers
different contexts. in association with an ICT course. The design

Table 1. TPACK Survey Descriptions

Study D escription Population of Interest N umber

of items

Mishra & Survey Designed to assess pre- Pre-service teachers 3 5

Koehler (2005) service teachers perceptions of
the classroom environment and
TPACK

Schmidt et al. Survey designed to assess pre- Pre-service Early 47

(2009) service (Early childhood) Childhood teachers
teachers TPACK

Sahin & Survey designed to assess College Students 47

Erdogan (2010) college students perceptions of
TPACK

Jamieson- TPACK Confidence Survey – Final year Pre-service 25

Proctor, Finger, combination of Learning with teachers
Albion (2010) ICT & ICT Audit Survey

Volume 56, Number 5 TechTrends • September/October 2012 27

 of each of these surveys although very specif- Method
ic, is consistent with the nature of the TPACK
framework. To locate studies that measured TPACK us-
The specific nature of the available TPACK ing the TKTT survey a four-step process was ap-
instruments may limit the broader applications plied. First, four databases from 2009 until 2011
to different context (Abbitt, 2011), but a univer- were searched using the key words “TPACK”
sal survey instrument is not available, neither is “TPCK”, Technological Pedagogical Content
it reflective of the TPACK framework. Although Knowledge, and pre-service teachers. The initial
several instruments currently exist to measure year of 2009 was selected although TPACK was
teacher TPACK, studies summarizing the cur- first proposed by in Pierson (2001) Technology
rent pre-service teacher TPACK knowledge integration practice as a function of pedagogical
base are elusive. The lack of research synthesis is expertise because the TKTT was not available
partly attributed to the context specific nature of until 2009. The four databases were the Educa-
the TPACK framework that limits the numbers tional Resources Information Center (ERIC),
of studies that can reasonably be compared. De- Education and Information Technology Digital
spite these limitations the need for a valid and Library, PyschInfo Search, and ProQuest Dis-
reliable measure of teacher TPACK is imperative sertations and Thesis. Then a search of jour-
(Mishra & Koehler, 2006; Schmidt et al., 2009). nals with a technology focused was conducted.
The survey developed by Schmidt et al. (2009) These journals included, Journal of Computers
is the most universally used survey, and encom- in Mathematics and Science Teaching (JCMST),
passes most of the aspects of TPACK associated Journal of Interactive Learning Research (JILR),
with pre-service teacher education. This survey Journal of Technology and Teacher Education
is not perfect, but very appropriate for the de- (JTATE), AACE Journal, and, Contemporary Is-
scription of pre-service teacher TPACK given its sues in Technology & Teacher Education (CITE).
support in the literature. Finally, other articles were selected from the ref-
erences cited within the retrieved studies.
Purpose These procedures yielded 139 appropriate
articles, conference presentations, theses, and
The purpose of this study was to summa- dissertations. The methodology and results sec-
rize the current literature on pre-service teacher tions were then read to establish pertinence. A
TPACK and provide implications for research- study was considered pertinent if (a) the study
ers and teachers. This study aggregates the re- used the TKTT survey to measure the TPACK,
search on pre-service teacher TPACK, and more (b) the article provided sufficient details to cate-
specifically within the research using the survey gorize the sample accordingly, and (c) statistical
of pre-service teacher knowledge of teaching data such as the mean, standard deviation, and
and technology (TKTT). The TKTT is a sur- sample size were present or could be obtained
vey instrument designed specifically to measure reasonably. After each article was reviewed the
pre-service teacher TPACK with an internal re- initial pool of 139 articles was reduced to 10
liability that ranges from .80 to .92 (Schmidt et studies that met all of the criteria for this study.
al., 2009). The individual reliability for Content The articles with preceding superscripts denote
Knowledge, Pedagogy Knowledge, Pedagogi- the 10 studies used in the present study.
cal Content Knowledge, Technological Content
Knowledge, Technological Pedagogical Knowl- Procedures
edge, and Technological Pedagogical Content To compare the various confidence inter-
Knowledge are .85, .84, .85, .86, .80, and .92, re- vals across studies, the conventional 95% con-
spectively (Schmidt et al.). The survey is scored fidence level was chosen because it is the most
on a 5-point likert scale where a score of 1 is as- commonly found level in the literature. Fortu-
signed to strongly disagree and a score of 5 is nately, all of the studies selected provided all the
assigned to strongly agree. The scores with in information pertinent to the confidence inter-
each construct are then averaged and the aver- val calculations, thus no other information was
age constitutes the score for that construct. Al- needed. The stock option in Microsoft Excel was
though the TKTT is one of many surveys avail- used to create the graphical displays of the con-
able to measure teacher TPACK, the TKTT is fidence intervals for the four major constructs
the most suitable for the purpose of this study (PCK, TCK, TPK, and TPACK). The point and
because of its broad applications across pre-ser- interval estimates for the individual means for
vice teaching. each study was compared to the other studies

28 TechTrends • September/October 2012 Volume 56, Number 5

on the four TPACK constructs. The purpose of The larger sample sizes yielded smaller confi-
this comparison was twofold. First this allows the dence intervals; likewise the smaller sample
one to assess the precision of the point and in- sizes yielded larger confidence intervals. The
terval estimates in comparison to other studies. ten samples in this study are comprised of five
Secondly, the reasonableness of the mean point samples of Early Childhood Education majors
estimates can be assessed across studies. Both (ECE), and five secondary content specialist
of these assessments are performed by means of groups. The studies were organized by par-
visual inspection and are to a certain degree sub- ticipate characteristics for ease of comparison,
jective, but guided by sound theory. thus the five ECE studies were clustered to-
The precision of the point estimate hinges gether, and likewise the five secondary content
upon the margin of error associated with the specialist studies were clustered together. The
point estimate. According to Cumming and study years of publication ranged from 2009 to
Finch (2005) the confidence interval will be a 2011, with two studies published in 2009, three
range centered on M, and extending a distance w studies published in 2010, and five studies pub-
on either side of M, where w (for width) is called lished in 2011. The references for all studies in-
the margin of error (p. 170). Therefore, confidence cluded in this analysis are located in Appendix.
intervals with a smaller margin of error or width Each reference is preceded by a superscript that
are more precise. The margin of error is based on corresponds to the order of representation in
the standard error and is a function of the SD and each figure. For example a superscript of 1-1 in-
n, as seen in the formula for standard error SE dicates that the referenced article was located in
= SD/√n (Cumming & Finch). The confidence figure one and was the first study in the figure.
intervals that have narrowed bands or widths
are more precise and tend to have a large sample Pre-service Teacher Pedagogical
sizes or smaller SDs. This logic holds true with Content Knowledge
the studies presented in this analysis. Because the The 95 % CI for the mean scores of pre-ser-
sample sizes in some of the studies were relatively vice teachers in these studies are presented in
small comparing the point and interval estimates figure 1. A subjective comparison of the over-
across studies allows one to better ascertain the laps in figure one suggested that the mean PCK
relative precision of the estimates across studies. of pre-service teachers ranges from 3.4 to 3.8.
Studies five and eight from the secondary con-
Results tent specific cluster fall way outside the ranges
presented here. These studies were therefore
The ten studies included eight journal ar- considered outliers and not included in the
ticles, one dissertation, and one conference pre- range for the population approximation. Fur-
sentation. The study sample sizes ranged from thermore, studies five and eight were among
12 to 1664, with a median sample size of 146. the studies with the smallest samples sizes 12

Figure 1. Confidence intervals for mean Pedagogical Content Knowledge (PCK) of pre-service teachers

Volume 56, Number 5 TechTrends • September/October 2012 29

 and 24 respectively. The relatively large widths different for figure 2, studies six and nine are the
of these confidence intervals are indicative of same studies from the secondary content spe-
the smaller sample sizes that constitute larger cific cluster that were outliers in the previous
amounts of sampling error. analysis. The confidence intervals for studies six
and nine are much smaller than the confidence
Pre-service Teacher Technological
intervals for the mean PCK scores, this suggest
Pedagogical Knowledge
that the SD for these scores is much smaller, be-
Confidence intervals for mean pre-service
cause the sample size did not change.
teacher TPK are presented in figure 2. The ap-
proximate mean TPK score for the pre-service Pre-service Teacher Technological
teacher population is between 3.6 and 4.0. Stud- Content Knowledge
ies six and nine represent outliers in this analysis Mean confidence intervals for TCK are pre-
and thus are not representative of the remaining sented in figure 3. As shown in the figure the
mean scores. Although the study numbers are spread of scores for TCK are less concentrated in

Figure 2. Confidence intervals for mean Technological Pedagogical Knowledge (TPK) of pre-service teachers

Figure 3. Confidence intervals for mean Technological Content Knowledge (TCK) of pre-service teachers

30 TechTrends • September/October 2012 Volume 56, Number 5

Figure 4. Confidence intervals for mean Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK) of pre-service teachers

a specific range and appear to have more varia- constructs were used as a means of meta-
tion between mean confidence intervals. Thus, analytically summarizing the TPACK litera-
the approximate population range of mean TCK ture. The results of this study present implica-
scores is slightly larger, 3.2 to 3.6. The same tions for teacher educators and researchers,
two studies from the secondary content spe- and provide approximations of the population
cific cluster continue to fall outside the range of means for the four TPACK constructs ana-
the other studies, and studies six and eight fall lyzed. The approximate mean score population
slightly below and above the range respectively. for PCK, TPK, TCK, and TPACK respectively
Furthermore, two additional studies fall outside are 3.4-3.8, 3.6-4.0, 3.2-3.8, and 3.4-3.8. Thus,
the range. First study two from the ECE cluster pre-service teachers report to have and above
falls just outside the range, and study seven from average knowledge of PCK, TPK, TCK, and
the secondary content specific cluster falls well TPACK. Ideally, one would like for the mean
outside the range. These variations suggest that scores to fall between the 4.0-5.0 score range,
pre-service teacher TCK is less consistent across however these results are representative of only
the studies presented here. three years of data collection. Although these
results suggest that pre-service teachers have
Pre-service Teacher TPACK
room to improve, the results are an evalua-
Figure 4 shows the mean pre-service teacher
tion of pre-service teacher TPACK in its in-
confidence intervals for TPACK. The approxi-
fancy. Of the three constructs analyzed in this
mate range for pre-service teacher TPACK is
study TCK mean confidence intervals were
between 3.4 and 3.8. Studies six, eight, and nine
the least consistently measured. The spread of
from the secondary content specific cluster fall
the mean confidence intervals for TCK were
well outside this range and should thus be con-
less concentrated in terms of overlap between
sidered as outliers. The widest confidence inter-
confidence intervals. Furthermore, the widths
val shown in figure four is for study number two
of the confidence bands were wider than the
which has the third smallest sample size. The re-
bands for the same studies mean scores on
maining confidence intervals are relatively small,
the other constructs. This suggests that the level
which indicates high levels of precision present
of precision in the measurement of this con-
in the measurements.
struct is not as precise as the measurement of
the other constructs. Sampling error may ac-
Discussion count for a significant amount of the lack of
The purpose of this study was to summa- consistency and overlap in the TCK construct
rize the current literature on pre-service teacher mean CIs.
TPACK and provide implications for research- This initial characterization of pre-service
ers and teachers. The TKTT mean Confidence teacher mean TPACK suggest that pre-service
intervals for the TPK, TCK, PCK, and TPACK teachers have a stable foundation upon which

Volume 56, Number 5 TechTrends • September/October 2012 31

 teacher educators can build new knowledge and ing with technology across content areas. These
skills for teaching with technology. According conclusions can then help to better inform
to Hughes (2005) teacher knowledge affects teaching and learning with technology across all
teachers’ actions in the classroom. Therefore, content areas, which is one of the major goals of
if pre-service teachers possess the appropriate the TPACK framework.
knowledge to teach with technology then the
translation of this knowledge to the classroom Jamaal Young, Ph.D. is an Assistant Professor at the Uni-
is reasonable. Since the results indicate that pre- versity of North Texas. His research interest revolves around
service teachers exhibit above average knowl- the use of technology to develop teacher’s knowledge of math-
edge of TPACK more classroom resources can ematics. Other emphases in his work are culturally responsive
STEM education and mathematics achievement of children
be allocated to transition TPACK knowledge
of color.
into practice. Transitioning pre-service teachers
beyond their knowledge of TPACK to formal Jemimah Young focuses her attention on preparing pre-
implementation of their knowledge is difficult service teachers to meet the needs of all their students. Her
(McDougall, 2008; Law, Pelgrum & Anderson, research interest is in the investigation of alternative cultures
2008; Lock & Redmond, 2010). Likewise, prac- in education. Other emphases in her work are culturally re-
tices to increase pre-service teacher implemen- sponsive education and achievement of children of color.
tation of TPACK are currently scarce. The de-
velopment of these practices is essential to the Ziad Shaker is currently a doctoral candidate at the Univer-
development of pre-service teachers that are sity of North Texas specializing in curriculum and instruc-
equipped to maximize the technology at their tion studies in the field of science education. His doctoral
research is in the use of concept maps to assess elementary
disposal. This study also provides several re-
pre-service teachers’ understanding of science concepts and
search implications. misconceptions using Vygotsky’s theory of concept develop-
Although TPACK is a fairly new framework ment.
more research is needed to ascertain better ap-
proximations of the mean levels of TPACK pos- References
sessed by pre-service teachers. The TKTT is
one of several survey instruments available to Abbitt, J. T. (2011). Measuring technological pedagogical
measure pre-service teacher TPACK, but it is content knowledge in preservice teacher education: A
specially designed for early childhood teachers, review of current methods and instruments. Journal
of Research on Technology in Education, 43(4), 281-
which limits its use in other areas. The results
300.
of this study indicate that the current measure- Archambault, L., & Crippen, K. (2009). Examining
ments of mean PCK, TPK, and overall TPACK TPACK among K-12 online distance educators in the
are relatively consistent, however the mean con- United States. Contemporary Issues in Technology and
fidence intervals for TCK are less consistent and Teacher Education, 9(1), 71-88.
precise. The lack of overlap shown in the TCK Baran, E., Chuang, H., Thompson, A. (2011). TPACK: An
scores is indicative of the difficulty in apply- emerging research and development took for teacher
ing this survey across content specific context. educators. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational
Because the TCK construct is the most content Technology, 10(4), 370-377.
specific TPACK construct it is plausible that Cummings, G., & Finch, S. (2005). Inference by eye: Con-
some of the variation in mean scores is due to fidence intervals and how to read pictures of data.
American Psychologist, 60(2), 170-180.
the various groups of pre-service teachers rep-
Finger, G., Jamieson-Proctor, R., Albion, P. (2010). Beyond
resented in this study. Thus, the development Pedagogical Content Knowledge: The importance of
of content specific measures of TPACK is es- TPACK for informing preservice teacher education
sential to the refinement of the TPACK frame- in Australia. In M.Turcanyis-Szabo & N. Reynolds
work. Several content specific instruments and (Eds.), Key competencies in the knowledge society (pp.
standards are currently available for science and 114-125). Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer.
mathematics, (Graham, Burgoyne, Cantrell, Graham, C. R., Burgoyne, N., Cantrell, P., Smith, L., St.
Smith, St. Clair, & Harris, 2009; Niess, et al., Clair, L., & Harris, R. (2009). TPACK development in
2009). More work is needed to development science teaching: Measuring the TPACK confidence
instruments and standards for other content of inservice science teachers. Tech Trends, 53(5), 70-
areas such as social studies, literacy, and the 79.
Harris, J. B., Mirsha, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2007, April).
arts. One difficulty in aggregating the TPACK
Teachers’ technological pedagogical content knowl-
literature is the nature of the framework, which edge: Curriculum-based technology integration re-
is context specific, but as more instruments framed. Paper presented at American Educational
and standards are developed researchers can Research Association conference, Chicago, IL.
begin to draw better conclusion about teach-

32 TechTrends • September/October 2012 Volume 56, Number 5

Hughes, J. (2005). The role of teacher knowl- lems of teaching with technology. In R. 1-5,2-6,3-7,4-6
Agyei, D. & Voogt, J. (2011). De-
edge and learning experience in forming Carlsen, K. McFerrin, J. Price, R. Weber termining Teachers’ TPACK through
technology-integrated pedagogy. Journal & D. A. Willis (Eds.), Proceedings of the observations and self-report data. In M.
of Technology and Teacher Education, 13, Society for InformationTechnology & Koehler & P. Mishra (Eds.), Proceedings
277-302 Teacher Education International Confer- of Society for Information Technology &
Jamieson-Proctor, R., Finger, G., & Albion, ence 2007 (pp.2214-2226). Chesapeake, Teacher Education International Confer-
P., (2010). Auditing the TK and TPACK VA:AACE. ence 2011 (pp. 2314-2319). Chesapeake,
confidence of pre-service teachers: Are Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. (2008, March). VA: AACE.
they ready for the profession? Australian Introducing technological pedagogical 1-1,2-1,3-1,4-1
Baran, E., Chuang, H., Thompson, A.
Educational Computing, 25(1), 8-17. content knowledge. Paper presented at the (2011). TPACK: An emerging research
Jang, S., & Chen, K. (2010). From PCK to annual meeting of the American Educa- and development took for teacher educa-
TPACK: Developing a transformative tional Research Association, New York. tors. The Turkish Online Journal of Edu-
model for pre-service science teachers. Niess, M. L., Ronau, R. N., Shafer, K. G., cational Technology, 10(4), 370-377.
Journal of Science Education and Technol- Driskell, S. O., Harper S. R., Johnston, 4-4
Chai, C. S., Koh, J. H. L., & Tsai, C.-C.
ogy 19(6), 533-564. C., Browning, C.,Ozgün-Koca, S. A., & (2010). Facilitating Preservice Teachers’
Kereluik, K., Casperson, G. & Akcaoglu, M. Kersaint, G. (2009). Mathematics teacher Development of Technological, Pedagog-
(2010). Coding Pre-Service Teacher Les- TPACK standards and development ical, and Content Knowledge (TPACK).
son Plans model. Contemporary Issues in Technol- Educational Technology & Society, 13
for TPACK. In D. Gibson & B. Dodge (Eds.), ogy and Teacher Education, 9(1), 4-24. (4), 63–73.
Proceedings of Society for Information Pierson, M. E. (2001). Technology integration 2-3,4-3
Chai, C. S., Ling Koh, J. H., Tsai, C., Wee
Technology & Teacher Education Interna- practice as a function of pedagogical Tan, L. L. (2011). Modeling primary
tional Conference 2010 (pp. 3889-3891). expertise. Journal of Research on Com- school pre-service teachers’ techno-
Chesapeake, VA: AACE. puting in Education, 33(3), 413-429. logical pedagogical content knowledge
Koehler, M., & Mishra, P. (2009). What is Sahin, I., & Erdogan, A. (2010). Relation- (TPACK) for meaningful learning with
technological pedagogical content ship between math teacher candidates’ information and communication tech-
knowledge? Contemporary Issues in technological pedagogical and content nology (ICT), Computers & Education,
Technology and Teacher Education, 9(1), knowledge (TPACK) and achievement 57, 1184-1193.
60-70. levels. Procedia Social and Behavioral 1-6,2-8,3-5
Koh, J.H.L., Chai, C. S., & Tsai, C. C.
Law, N., Pelgrum, W. J. & Plomp, T. (2008). Sciences, 2, 2707-2711. (2010). Examining the technological
Pedagogy and ICT use in schools around Schmidt, D. A., Baran, E., Thompson, A. D., pedagogical content knowledge of Singa-
the world. Findings from the IEA SITES Mishra, P., Koehler, M. J., & Shin, T. S. pore pre-service teachers with large-scale
2006 study. CERC Studies in compara- (2009). Journal of Research on Technology survey. Journal of Computer Assisted
tive education. Hong Kong: Comparative in Education, 42(2), 123-149. Learning, 26, 563-573.
Education Research Centre, The Univer- Ward, G. & Overall, T. (2010). Pre-Service 1-3,2-4,3-3,4-3
Nathan, E. J. (2009). An examination
sity of Hong Kong, and: Springer. Teacher Technology Integration: The of the relationship between pre-service
Lock, J. V., & Redmond, P. (2010, December) Team-Taught Cohort Model and teachers’ level of technology integration
Transforming pre-service teacher cur- TPACK. In D. Gibson & B. Dodge (Eds.), self-efficacy (TISE) and level of techno-
riculum: observation through a TPACK Proceedings of Society for Information logical pedagogical content knowledge
lens. In: ASCILITE 2010: Curriculum, Technology & Teacher Education Interna- (TPACK) (Unpublished Dissertation).
Technology and Transformation for an tional Conference 2010 (pp. 3944-3951). University of Houston, Houston, Tx.
Unknown Future, 5-8, Sydney, Australia. Chesapeake, VA: AACE. 1-7,2-7,3-6,4-7
Nordin, H., Morrow, D., & Davis,
McDougall, A. (2008). Models and practices Zientek, L. R., Yetkiner, Z. E., & Thompson, N. (2011). Pre-service teachers’ experi-
in teacher education programs for teach- B. (2010). Characterizing the mathemat- ence with ICT in secondary schools: A
ing with and about ICT. In J. Voogt & G. ics anxiety literature using confidence case study of one New Zealand context.
Knezek (Eds.), International handbook intervals as a literature review mecha- Unpublished manuscript, College of edu-
of information technology in primary nism. The Journal of Educational cation, University of Canterbury, New
and secondary education (pp. 461 - 474). Research, 103, 424-438. Zealand.
NewYork: Springer. 1-7,2-8,3-4,4-5
Schmidt, D. A., Baran, E., Thompson,
Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. (2005). What hap- A. D., Mishra, P., Koehler, M. J., & Shin,
pens when teachers design educational
Appendix: References T. S.
technology? The development of techno- for Studies Included in (2009). Journal of Research on Technology
logical pedagogical content knowledge.
Journal of educational Computing Re-
the Analysis in Education, 42(2), 123-149.
1-8,2-9,3-8,4-9
Yang, H. H., & Chen, P., (2010).
search, 32(2), 131-152. Abitt, J. T. (2011). An Investigation
1-2,2-2,3-2,4-2
Building teachers’ TPACK through web-
Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Techno- of the Relationship between Self-Efficacy quest development and blended learning
logical pedagogical content knowledge: Beliefs about Technology Integration process. Lecture Notes in Compute Sci-
A framework for integrating technology and Technological Pedagogical Content ence, 6248, 71-81.
in teachers’ knowledge. Teachers College Knowledge (TPACK) among Preservice
Record, 108(6), 1017–1054. Teachers. Journal of Digital Learning in
Mishra, P., & Koehler, M., J. (2007). Techno- Teacher Education, 27(4), 134-143
logical pedagogical content knowledge
(TPCK): Confronting the wicked prob-

Volume 56, Number 5 TechTrends • September/October 2012 33

View publication stats