Technological pedagogical content knowledge

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Figure 1. Visual representation of the Technological, Pedagogical, and Content Knowledge framework updated to include Context. “Reproduced by permission of the publisher, © 2012 by tpack.org”

The Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK) framework describes the kinds of knowledge required by teachers for the successful integration of technology in teaching. It suggests that teachers need to know about the intersections of technology, pedagogy, and content. Specifically, how these areas of knowledge interact and influence one another in unique and specific contexts.[1] In terms of teaching with technology, it suggests that it impacts not only what we teach but how we teach. This idea was in the zeitgeist in the early 2000s, with scholars working on variations of the idea.[2][3][4][5]

The TPACK framework looks at content knowledge (CK) as the "what" that is the subject matter (arts, English, mathematics, science, etc.) teachers teach, pedagogical knowledge (PK) is the "how" that tells how the teacher will make the content more accessible (via direct instruction, inquiry, group discussion, debate, modeling, etc.). Then, technological knowledge (TK) as the "partner" answering the question of what tools (laptops, projects, smart boards, multimedia, simulations, etc.) will be selected to make the content more accessible to the students. The TPACK framework goes beyond seeing these three knowledge bases in isolation and goes further by emphasizing the kinds of knowledge that lie at the intersections between three primary forms: Pedagogical Content Knowledge (PCK), Technological Content Knowledge (TCK), Technological Pedagogical Knowledge (TPK), and Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK). Researchers argue that pedagogical use of technology and effective technology integration using pedagogies for specific subject matter requires developing sensitivity to the dynamic, transactional relationship between these components of knowledge situated in unique contexts.[6] Individual teachers, grade-level, school-specific factors, demographics, culture, and other factors ensure that every situation is unique, and no single combination of content, technology, and pedagogy will apply to every teacher, every course, or every view of teaching. The outer dotted circle of the framework is thus renamed as the “Contextual Knowledge” (i.e., the teacher’s knowledge of the context)  and define it as everything from a teacher’s awareness of available technologies, to the teacher’s knowledge of the school, district, state, or national policies they operate within.[7] This also makes the outer circle another knowledge domain that teachers must possess to integrate technology in teaching. This, in turn, implies that contextual knowledge is something that we (as teacher educators) can act on, change, and help teachers develop. Since CK is taken (for Content Knowledge) and another CK would be confusing; therefore, the outer dotted circle is named as XK for "conteXtual Knowledge" distinguishing it from CK.

History[edit]

In the early 2000s, scholars noted a lack of theory and conceptual frameworks to inform and guide research and teacher preparation in technology integration.[8] The classic definition of PCK proposed by Shulman[9] included one dynamic and complex relationship between two different knowledge bodies: content knowledge and pedagogical knowledge. Shulman defined PCK as the blend between content and pedagogy, highlighting the teacher's comprehension of how specific topics are organized, adapted, and represented according to students' diverse interests and capabilities. For five years, Mishra & Koehler[1] participated in a design experiment whose focus was to understand P-20 educators’ professional development of rich technology uses as well as helping them develop their teaching with technology.  As a result of this work, they offered Technological, Pedagogical, Content Knowledge (TPCK). TPACK was called “TPCK” in the literature until 2008 when some in the research community proposed using the more easily spoken term TPACK.[10] The critical questions of "what the teachers need to know in order to appropriately incorporate technology into their teaching"[1] as well as "and how they might develop it"[1] were key to the framework development. Additionally, technology was identified as a significant player in the learning and teaching process as educational entities moved into the 21st century.

Both primary and secondary educators found they needed new skills and techniques as new technologies entered the field. Consequently, technology knowledge became an essential feature of teacher knowledge, not just an isolated item. Scholars proposed different frames about TPACK to promote a particular view, including ways and diverse perspectives on understanding and working with technology in the classroom.[2][3][11][12][13][14] TPACK-based research has led to the emergence of a significant literature body. As of March 2021 this included: Articles: 1418, Chapters: 318, Books: 28, Dissertations: 438 (TPACK Newsletter #44, 2021). In 2019, Mishra offered that a change was needed in the original TPACK image. While the inner circles of the image enclosed aspects of teacher knowledge, the outer dotted line circle was simply labeled “Context” or “Contexts''. To resolve this issue, the outer dotted circle should be renamed ConteXtual Knowledge (XK) meaning “the teacher’s knowledge of the context." Contextual Knowledge would range from a “teacher’s awareness of available technologies to the teacher’s knowledge of the school, district, state, or national policies they operate within."[7] This change highlights the organizational and situational constraints that teachers work within.

As Herring and colleagues[15] described, the historical development of TPACK provided a conceptualization that both graphically and narratively explained what is studied, and presented the key concepts, factors, or variables and the presumed relationships found between them. Additionally, it scaffolds the application of findings to other contexts that theoreticians, researchers, and practitioners continue to examine.[15]

Definition[edit]

TPACK domains and related subdomains address the complex nature of teaching effectively with appropriate technologies.[1][16] While the different domains and subdomains can be explored as separate skill concepts, domains and subdomains were conceptualized to work in synergistic reciprocity meaning that the knowledge is not entirely separate indicating the intersectionality of each area. Accordingly, the TPACK model consists of three main domains, each containing one subdomain. The purpose of the subdomains is to unpack the broader domain concept by understanding intersections among the three primary knowledge anchors for the overall framework. The main domains are 1. Technological Content Knowledge (TCK); 2. Pedagogical Content Knowledge (PCK), and 3. Technological Pedagogical Knowledge (TPK). The three subdomains are 1. Technological Knowledge (TK); 2. Content Knowledge (CK); and 3. Pedagogical Knowledge (PK). In 2019, Mishra[7] proposed a revised TPACK diagram to emphasize the context in which technology integration occurs by retitling the outer circle as Contextual Knowledge or XK.

Technological Knowledge (TK) addresses how teachers demonstrate professional knowledge of technology. TK considers what is required for teachers to integrate technology tools and resources into their course content and instructional practice. The technology component of TPaCK in  Technology is most beneficial for learning when it brings a change in professional teaching practice[17][18] and in designs for learning. For teachers, TK not only addresses knowledge about technology but also knowledge of the skills needed to use technology to effectively plan instruction,[16][19] including with science teachers.[20][21][22][23][24] TK involves understanding cross-platform applications and capabilities as well as how to configure those applications to realize instructional objectives and student learning outcomes. Content Knowledge (CK) is situated within the following definitional parameters of a teacher's knowledge about a particular subject matter and how it is taught and learned.[25] As Shulman[9] noted, CK would include knowledge of concepts, theories, ideas, organizational frameworks, knowledge of evidence and proof, as well as established practices and approaches toward developing such knowledge." For educators, effective content instruction that engages students in higher-order activities using authentic, real-world examples facilitated through technology is the cornerstone of teaching and learning in the 21st century. Thus, educators must not only be thoughtful in the instructional techniques they use to present content but also strategic in the technology selected to teach the subject matter as it may result in positive or negative results in long-term learning and knowledge retention. Pedagogical Knowledge (PK) addresses how teachers demonstrate professional knowledge of pedagogy. PK refers to the specific knowledge about teaching such as approaches or methods of how teachers teach a particular topic or how to scaffold a concept to the diverse interests and abilities of learners.  For teachers and educators, an effective teaching method that engages students in higher-order activities using real-world examples facilitated through different learning styles is the cornerstone of teaching and learning in the current era. Accordingly, educators must be thoughtful in the instructional techniques to teach the subject matter as it may have a great impact on long-term learning and knowledge acquisition.  Choosing the right technology to enable higher-order thinking within the content, long-term knowledge retention, and facilitate student learning outcomes are paramount within the CK construct.  Finally, Context Knowledge (XK) is the umbrella domain that refers to how teachers contextualize implementation based on the overall teaching and learning context.

Strategies for building TPACK[edit]

A wide variety of strategies have been used to develop educators’ TPACK abilities, such as (a) collaborative, design-based lesson planning;[26] (b) the use of technology mapping, game-based learning, and deep-play[27][28] (c) scaffolding the design process;[29][30] and (d) accounting for how teacher's beliefs influence their TPACK.[31] Researchers have found collaborative strategies to be helpful to develop teachers’ TPACK, such as (a) faculty-wide mentoring programs,[32] (b) professional collaboration and teacher talk,[33] (c) collaborative reflection practices,[28] and (d) professional learning communities.[34][35] Teacher education leaders have used the Theory of Action to identify the critical areas as they plan for the effective integration of TPACK into their teacher education and faculty support programs.[15][36]

Measures[edit]

Since its introduction, researchers and professional developers have created a variety of processes and instruments to assess an educator's TPACK,[28][37] such as self-report measures, open-ended questionnaires, performance assessments, interviews, observations, and more.[38][39][40] Widely-used measures such as the Survey of Preservice Teachers’ Knowledge of Teaching and Technology,[41][42][43] the TPACK-21 questionnaire,[44] and the TPACK leadership diagnostic tool,[15][45] have been tested for reliability and validity and applied in a variety of educational settings.

Researchers have made considerable efforts to explore the details of educators’ TPACK through both quantitative[46] and qualitative measures.[47] Qualitative approaches for evaluating TPACK have included classroom observations,[47] the analysis of lesson plans, classroom videos, and interviews.[48] Furthermore, as researchers have sought to better address how the components of XK (including online learning environments and global contexts) influence the development of TPACK, measures of TPACK have begun to include educators’ future intentions to use technology. [49]Additionally, researchers have also considered educators’ self-efficacy alongside TPACK.[50][51][52]

Criticisms[edit]

The TPACK framework has received a number of criticisms, the majority of which are related to the lack of a precise definition. Similar to Shulman's Pedagogical Content Knowledge (PCK), which serves as a foundation for TPACK, scholars have debated whether TPACK is integrative or transformative leading to varied and nuanced perspectives.[33] Furthermore, scholars have debated precise definitions for the seven knowledge domains associated with the TPACK framework,[53] and what differentiates one domain from another varies widely across studies.[53][54] These challenges have led to what has been called "fuzzy boundaries" distinguishing TPACK domains[28][55][56][57][58] that have resulted in even more variations or adaptations of TPACK including TPACK-W for web technologies, G-TPACK for geospatial, TPACK-CT for computational thinking, TPACK-P for TPACK practical, etc. These variations have been considered by some researchers to be misappropriations or conceptual dilution.[59]

A second major area of criticism of TPACK is the lack of reliable assessment instruments, as well as difficulties with existing instruments. Some researchers have cited problems related to participant interpretation of survey items,[52][55][56][60] while others have reported problems with convergence when multiple measures are used.[61][62][63]

A third major area of criticism is related to the implications of TPACK for practice. Some scholars argue that the complexity of the framework makes it difficult to operationalize among both researchers and practitioners.[62] Further, as a framework for teacher knowledge, it is not accompanied by specific recommendations or strategies for how to help develop this body of knowledge for teachers.[37] Finally, scholars have noted that is unclear whether the TPACK framework promotes the type of reform-oriented teaching encouraged in new standards and curricula.[64]

References[edit]

  1. ^ a b c d e Mishra P, Koehler MJ. (2006) Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017–1054.
  2. ^ a b Angeli, C.; Valanides, N. (2005). "Preservice 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. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2729.2005.00135.x. ISSN 1365-2729.
  3. ^ a b Koehler, Matthew J.; Mishra, Punya (1 March 2005). "What Happens When Teachers Design Educational Technology? The Development of Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge". Journal of Educational Computing Research. 32 (2): 131–152. doi:10.2190/0EW7-01WB-BKHL-QDYV. ISSN 0735-6331.
  4. ^ Niess ML. (2005) Preparing teachers to teach science and mathematics with technology: Developing a technology pedagogical content knowledge. Teaching and Teacher Education, 21, 509–523.
  5. ^ Pierson, Melissa E. (1 June 2001). "Technology Integration Practice as a Function of Pedagogical Expertise". Journal of Research on Computing in Education. 33 (4): 413–430. doi:10.1080/08886504.2001.10782325. ISSN 0888-6504.
  6. ^ Koehler, M. J., Shin, T. S., & Mishra, P. (2012). How do we measure TPACK? Let me count the ways. In Educational technology, teacher knowledge, and classroom impact: A research handbook on frameworks and approaches (pp. 16–31). IGI Global.
  7. ^ a b c Mishra, Punya (3 April 2019). "Considering Contextual Knowledge: The TPACK Diagram Gets an Upgrade". Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education. 35 (2): 76–78. doi:10.1080/21532974.2019.1588611. ISSN 2153-2974.
  8. ^ Angeli, Charoula; Valanides, Nicos; Mavroudi, Anna; Christodoulou, Andri; Georgiou, Kyriakoula (24 October 2014), "Introducing e-TPCK: An Adaptive E-Learning Technology for the Development of Teachers' Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge", Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge, Boston, MA: Springer US, pp. 305–317, ISBN 978-1-4899-8079-3, retrieved 25 June 2021
  9. ^ a b Shulman LS. (1986) Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(4).
  10. ^ Thompson, Ann D.; Mishra, Punya. "Editors' Remarks". Journal of Computing in Teacher Education. 24: 38–64. doi:10.1080/10402454.2007.10784583.
  11. ^ Margerum-Leys, Jon; Marx, Ronald W. (November 2004). "The Nature and Sharing of Teacher Knowledge of Technology in a Student Teacher/Mentor Teacher Pair". Journal of Teacher Education. 55 (5): 421–437. doi:10.1177/0022487104269858. ISSN 0022-4871.
  12. ^ Hughes, Joan (1997). "The Role of Teacher Knowledge and Learning Experiences in Forming Technology-Integrated Pedagogy". Journal of Technology and Teacher Education: 277–302. ISSN 1059-7069.
  13. ^ Niess, Margaret L. (2005). "Scaffolding Math Learning with Spreadsheets. Learning Connections—Mathematics". Learning & Leading with Technology. 32 (5): 24. ISSN 1082-5754.
  14. ^ Harris J, Mishra P, Koehler M. (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
  15. ^ a b c d Graziano, Kevin J.; Herring, Mary C.; Carpenter, Jeffrey P.; Smaldino, Sharon; Finsness, Elizabeth S. (11 March 2017). "A TPACK Diagnostic Tool for Teacher Education Leaders". TechTrends. 61 (4): 372–379. doi:10.1007/s11528-017-0171-7. ISSN 8756-3894.
  16. ^ a b Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (March 2008). Introducing technological pedagogical content knowledge. In annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association (pp. 1–16). http://www.matt-koehler.com/publications/Mishra_Koehler_AERA_2008.pdf
  17. ^ Papert, S. (1996). Computers in the classroom: Agents of change. The washington post education review, 27.
  18. ^ Polin, L. & Moe, R. (2015). Locating TPACK in mediated practice. http://profmoe.com/PolinMoe_OnlineTeaching_v1a.pdf
  19. ^ Bell, Randy L.; Maeng, Jennifer L.; Binns, Ian C. (March 2013). "Learning in context: Technology integration in a teacher preparation program informed by situated learning theory". Journal of Research in Science Teaching. 50 (3): 348–379. doi:10.1002/tea.21075.
  20. ^ Çalik, Muammer; Özsevgeç, Tuncay; Ebenezer, Jazlin; Artun, Hüseyin; Küçük, Zeynel (June 2014). "Effects of 'Environmental Chemistry' Elective Course Via Technology-Embedded Scientific Inquiry Model on Some Variables". Journal of Science Education and Technology. 23 (3): 412–430. doi:10.1007/s10956-013-9473-5. ISSN 1059-0145.
  21. ^ Karadeniz Teknik Üniversitesi; Çalik, Muammer; Aytar, Ayşe (6 June 2013). "Sınıf Öğretmen Adaylarının Öğretmenlik Uygulaması Sürecinde İnsanın Çevreye Etkisi Konusu İle İlgili Pedagojik Alan Bilgilerinin Araştırılması". Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice. doi:10.12738/estp.2013.3.1649.
  22. ^ Bilici, Sedef Canbazoglu; Guzey, S. Selcen; Yamak, Havva (3 May 2016). "Assessing pre-service science teachers' technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) through observations and lesson plans". Research in Science & Technological Education. 34 (2): 237–251. doi:10.1080/02635143.2016.1144050. ISSN 0263-5143.
  23. ^ Maeng, Jennifer L.; Mulvey, Bridget K.; Smetana, Lara K.; Bell, Randy L. (December 2013). "Preservice Teachers' TPACK: Using Technology to Support Inquiry Instruction". Journal of Science Education and Technology. 22 (6): 838–857. doi:10.1007/s10956-013-9434-z. ISSN 1059-0145.
  24. ^ Sheffield, Rachel; Dobozy, Eva; Gibson, David; Mullaney, Jim; Campbell, Chris (3 July 2015). "Teacher education students using TPACK in science: a case study". Educational Media International. 52 (3): 227–238. doi:10.1080/09523987.2015.1075104. ISSN 0952-3987.
  25. ^ Koehler, M., & Mishra, P. (2009). What is technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK)? Contemporary issues in technology and teacher education, 9(1), 60–70.
  26. ^ Papanikolaou, Kyparisia; Makri, Katerina; Roussos, Petros (18 September 2017). "Learning design as a vehicle for developing TPACK in blended teacher training on technology enhanced learning". International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education. 14 (1). doi:10.1186/s41239-017-0072-z. ISSN 2365-9440.
  27. ^ Koehler, Matthew J.; Mishra, Punya; Bouck, Emily C.; DeSchryver, Michael; Kereluik, Kristen; Shin, Tae Seob; Wolf, Leigh Graves (2011). "Deep-play: developing TPACK for 21st century teachers". International Journal of Learning Technology. 6 (2): 146. doi:10.1504/ijlt.2011.042646. ISSN 1477-8386.
  28. ^ a b c d Angeli, Charoula; Valanides, Nicos (January 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. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2008.07.006. ISSN 0360-1315.
  29. ^ "Seven design frames that teachers use when considering technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK)". Computers & Education. 102: 244–257. 1 November 2016. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2016.09.003. ISSN 0360-1315.
  30. ^ Tsai, Chin-Chung; Chai, Ching Sing (15 August 2012). "The "third"-order barrier for technology-integration instruction: Implications for teacher education". Australasian Journal of Educational Technology. 28 (6). doi:10.14742/ajet.810. ISSN 1449-5554.
  31. ^ Boschman, Ferry; McKenney, Susan; Voogt, Joke (March 2015). "Exploring teachers' use of TPACK in design talk: The collaborative design of technology-rich early literacy activities". Computers & Education. 82: 250–262. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2014.11.010. ISSN 0360-1315.
  32. ^ Baran, Evrim; Correia, Ana-Paula; Thompson, Ann (November 2011). "Transforming online teaching practice: critical analysis of the literature on the roles and competencies of online teachers". Distance Education. 32 (3): 421–439. doi:10.1080/01587919.2011.610293. ISSN 0158-7919.
  33. ^ a b Voogt, J.; Fisser, P.; Pareja Roblin, N.; Tondeur, J.; van Braak, J. (16 March 2012). "Technological pedagogical content knowledge – a review of the literature". Journal of Computer Assisted Learning. 29 (2): 109–121. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2729.2012.00487.x. ISSN 0266-4909.
  34. ^ Phillips, Michael (7 July 2016). "Processes of practice and identity shaping teachers' TPACK enactment in a community of practice". Education and Information Technologies. 22 (4): 1771–1796. doi:10.1007/s10639-016-9512-y. ISSN 1360-2357.
  35. ^ Porras-Hernández, Laura Helena; Salinas-Amescua, Bertha (March 2013). "Strengthening Tpack: A Broader Notion of Context and the Use of Teacher's Narratives to Reveal Knowledge Construction". Journal of Educational Computing Research. 48 (2): 223–244. doi:10.2190/ec.48.2.f. ISSN 0735-6331.
  36. ^ Herring, Mary; Thomas, Tommye; Redmond, Pamela (21 April 2014). "Special Editorial: Technology Leadership for Preparing Tomorrow's Teachers to Use Technology". Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education. 30 (3): 76–80. doi:10.1080/21532974.2014.891875. ISSN 2153-2974.
  37. ^ a b Niess, Margaret L. (April 2011). "Investigating TPACK: Knowledge Growth in Teaching with Technology". Journal of Educational Computing Research. 44 (3): 299–317. doi:10.2190/EC.44.3.c. ISSN 0735-6331.
  38. ^ Koehler, Matthew J.; Mishra, Punya; Kereluik, Kristen; Shin, Tae Seob; Graham, Charles R. (2014), Spector, J. Michael; Merrill, M. David; Elen, Jan; Bishop, M. J. (eds.), "The Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge Framework", Handbook of Research on Educational Communications and Technology, New York, NY: Springer New York, pp. 101–111, doi:10.1007/978-1-4614-3185-5_9, ISBN 978-1-4614-3184-8, retrieved 26 June 2021
  39. ^ Mouza, Chrystalla. "Developing and assessing TPACK among pre-service teachers." Handbook of technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) for educators 169 (2016).
  40. ^ Su, M., & Foulger, T. (March 2019). We aren't there yet: A progression of literature on TPACK measures to assess technology integration. In Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference (pp. 2534–2542). Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE).
  41. ^ Hall, Jacob A.; Lei, Jing; Wang, Qiu (1 December 2020). "The first principles of instruction: an examination of their impact on preservice teachers' TPACK". Educational Technology Research and Development. 68 (6): 3115–3142. doi:10.1007/s11423-020-09866-2. ISSN 1556-6501.
  42. ^ Schmidt DA, Baran E, Thompson AD, Mishra P, Koehler MJ, Shin TS. (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.
  43. ^ Wang, Wei; Schmidt-Crawford, Denise; Jin, Yi (2 October 2018). "Preservice Teachers' TPACK Development: A Review of Literature". Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education. 34 (4): 234–258. doi:10.1080/21532974.2018.1498039. ISSN 2153-2974.
  44. ^ Valtonen, Teemu; Kukkonen, Jari; Kontkanen, Sini; Mäkitalo-Siegl, Kati; Sointu, Erkko (2018). "Differences in pre-service teachers' knowledge and readiness to use ICT in education". Journal of Computer Assisted Learning. 34 (2): 174–182. doi:10.1111/jcal.12225. ISSN 1365-2729.
  45. ^ Clausen, J. M., Finsness, E. S., Borthwick, A. C., Graziano, K. J., Carpenter, J. P., & Herring, M. (2019). TPACK leadership diagnostic tool: Adoption and implementation by teacher education leaders. Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education, 35(1), 54–72.
  46. ^ Chai, C. S., Koh, J. H. L., & Tsai, C. C. (2016). 6A Review of the quantitative measures of Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK). In Handbook of technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) for educators (pp. 97–116). Routledge.
  47. ^ a b Archambault, L. (2016). Exploring the use of qualitative methods to examine TPACK. Handbook of technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) for educators, 2, 65–86.
  48. ^ Polly, D., & Orrill, C. H. (2016). Designing professional development to support teachers’ TPACK in elementary school mathematics. Handbook of technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) for educators, 2, 259–269.
  49. ^ Foulger, Teresa S.; Buss, Ray R.; Su, Man (18 August 2021). "The IT2 Survey: contextual knowledge (XK) influences on teacher candidates' intention to integrate technology". Educational Technology Research and Development. doi:10.1007/s11423-021-10033-4. ISSN 1042-1629. PMC 8373295. PMID 34426722.
  50. ^ Byker, E. J., Putman, S. M., Polly, D., & Handler, L. (2018). Examining elementary education teachers and preservice teachers’ self-efficacy related to technological pedagogical and content knowledge (TPACK). In Self-efficacy in instructional technology contexts (pp. 119–140). Springer, Cham.
  51. ^ Kiray, S. A. (2016). Development of a TPACK self-efficacy scale for preservice science teachers. International Journal of Research in Education and Science, 2(2), 527–541.
  52. ^ a b Koh, J. H. L., Chai, C. S., & Tsai, C. C. (2010). Examining the technological pedagogical content knowledge of Singapore preservice teachers with a large-scale survey. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 26, 563–573.
  53. ^ a b Cox, S. M. (2008). A conceptual analysis of technological pedagogical content knowledge.
  54. ^ Graham, C. R. (2011). Theoretical considerations for understanding technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK). Computers & Education, 57(3), 1953–1960.
  55. ^ a b Archambault, L. M., & Barnett, J. H. (2010). Revisiting technological pedagogical content knowledge: Exploring the TPACK framework. Computers & Education, 55(4), 1656–1662.
  56. ^ a b 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
  57. ^ Cox, S., & Graham, C. R. (2009). Using an elaborated model of the TPACK framework to analyze and depict teacher knowledge. TechTrends, 53(5), 60–69.
  58. ^ Jimoyiannis, A. (2010). Designing and implementing an integrated technological pedagogical science knowledge framework for science teacher’s professional development. Computers & Education,55(3), 1259–1269. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2010.05.022
  59. ^ Bull, G., Hodge, C., Mouza, C., Grant, M., Archambault, L., Borup, J., ... & Schmidt-Crawford, D. A. (2019). Conceptual Dilution. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 19(2), 117–128.
  60. ^ Chai, C. S., Koh, J. H. L., & Tsai, C. C. (2010). Facilitating preservice teachers' development of technological, pedagogical, and content knowledge (TPACK). Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 13(4), 63–73.
  61. ^ Agyei, D. D., & Keengwe, J. (2014). Using technology pedagogical content knowledge development to enhance learning outcomes. Education and Information Technologies, 19(1), 155–171.
  62. ^ a b Brantley-Dias, L., & Ertmer, P. A. (2014). Goldilocks and TPACK. Journal of Research on Technology in Education 46(2), 103–128.
  63. ^ 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.
  64. ^ Harris, J., Grandgenett, N., & Hofer, M. (March 2010). Testing a TPACK-based technology integration assessment rubric. In Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference (pp. 3833–3840). Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE).