Systematic Review of Research Conducted on the Techno-Pedagogical Content Knowledge of English Teachers

Abstract

This study is a systematic review of research on the databases of Web of Science, and Springer between the years 2012 and 2022 on the subject of the development of English teacher techno-pedagogical content knowledge. For the study group, the key concepts “the English teachers’ technological pedagogical knowledge”, “English teacher & technology”, “EFL & technology”, “ESL & technology”, “TPACK (technological pedagogical content knowledge)”, “English teaching & technology” were used to search on databases. The study group was formed with a total of 36 articles. In data analysis, Latent Dirichlet Allocation (LDA) was used from topic modeling methods. As a result of LDA, four topics were created: “teachers’ self-efficacy in technology integration”, “instructional challenges in higher education institutions”, “pre-service teachers' approaches to the implementations of information and communication technologies” and “teachers' professional development in Teaching English as a Foreign Language”. Accordingly, the need for TPACK for English teachers and teaching English, technology-based transformation and opportunities in English curriculums caused by TPACK, differences in teaching principles and methods of English brought out by TPACK, diversification of technology of teaching and materials, including TPACK in pre-service and in-service professional development curriculum, other qualifications of teachers such as thinking skills are some distinctive trends.

Keywords

• English teacher
• professional development
• techno-pedagogical content knowledge

References

1. Baran, E., & Canbazoğlu Bilici, S. (2015). A Review of the research on technological pedagogical content knowledge: the case of Turkey. Hacettepe University Journal of Education, 30(1), 15-32.
2. Blei, D. M., Ng, A. Y., & Jordan, M. I. (2003). Latent dirichlet allocation. Journal of Machine Learning Research, 3(Jan), 993-1022.
3. Çınar, S. (2022). Thematic content analysis of postgraduate dissertations on technological pedagogical content knowledge: The case of Turkey. Kastamonu Education Journal, 30(1), 251-272. https://doi.org/10.24106/kefdergi.819783
4. Dikmen, C., & Demirer, V. (2016). Trends in studies on technological pedagogical content knowledge in Turkey between 2009 and 2013 years. Turkish Journal of Education, 5(1), 33-46 https://doi.org/10.19128/turje.77632
5. Ekmekçi, E. (2018). Examination of studies regarding pre-service efl teachers’ technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) in Turkey. International Journal of Eurasia Social Sciences, 9(34), 2180-2193.
6. Greene, M. D., & Jones, W. M. (2020). Analyzing contextual levels and applications of technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) in English as a second language subject area. Educational Technology & Society, 23(4), 75-88. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26981745
7. Guzmán, D. B. (2019). Technology integration for the professional development of English Teachers. Tecné, Episteme y Didaxis: TED, 46, 157-168. https://doi.org/10.17227/ted.num46-10545
8. Hennessy, S., D'Angelo, S., McIntyre, N., Koomar, S., Kreimeia, A., Cao, L., Brugha, M. & Zubairi, A. (2022). Technology use for teacher professional development in low-and middle-income countries: A systematic review. Computers and Education Open. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeo.2022.100080

9. Hippner, H., & Rentzmann, R. (2006). Text mining. Informatik-Spektrum, 29(4), 287-290. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00287-006-0091-y
10. Jelodar, H., Wang, Y., Rabbani, M., & Ayobi, S. (2019). Natural language processing via LDA topic model in recommendation systems. arXiv preprint arXiv:1909.09551. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1909.09551
11. Kaleli Yılmaz, G. (2015). Analysis of technological pedagogical content knowledge studies in Turkey: a meta-synthesis study. Eğitim ve Bilim, 40(178), 103-122. http://dx.doi.org/10.15390/EB.2015.4087
12. Kavcar, C., (1999). The issue of qualified teacher. Eğitimde Yansımalar: V. 21. Yüzyılın eşiğinde. Eğitim Sistemi Ulusal Sempozyumu. Ankara. Retrieved from http://egitimvebilim.ted.org.tr/index.php/EB/article/view/5506/1662
13. Kharatova, S. K., & Ismailov, T. X. O. G. L. (2022). Use of innovative technologies in the educational process. Science and Education, 3(3), 713-718. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7691727
14. Korucu, A. T., Usta, E., & Atun, H. (2017). Trends in research on technological pedagogical content knowledge in the period of 2010-2016. Amasya Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 6(1), 104-133. Retrieved from https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/download/article-file/329533
15. König, J., Lammerding, S., Nold, G., Rohde, A., Strauß, S., & Tachtsoglou, S. (2016). Teachers’ professional knowledge for teaching English as a foreign language: Assessing the outcomes of teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education, 67(4), 320-337. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487116644956
16. Luke, C. L., & Britten, J. S. (2007). The expanding role of technology in foreign language teacher education programs. Calico Journal, 253-267. Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org/stable/24147911
17. Mishra, P., & Koehler, M.J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017-1054. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9620.2006.00684.x
18. Prapphal, K. (1997). Educational technology for TEFL. PASAA, 27(12), l-127. Retrieved from https://www.culi.chula.ac.th/Images/asset/pasaa_journal/file-39-516-1xjrvd512786.pdf
19. Puebla, C., Fievet, T., Tsopanidi, M., & Clahsen, H. (2022). Mobile assisted language learning in older adults: Chances and challenges. ReCALL, 34(2), 169-184. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0958344021000276
20. Shulman, L. S. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57(1), 1-22. Retrieved from https://people.ucsc.edu/~ktellez/shulman.pdf
21. Sing, L. P., Din, W. A., Mohamed, N. Z. N., & Swanto, S. (2021). Current trends in tpack research in English language education: A systematic review of literature From 2017 to 2021. International Journal of Education, Psychology and Counseling, 6 (43), 219-234. Doi: 10.35631/IJEPC.643018
22. Stern, H. H. (1983). Fundamental concepts of language teaching: Historical and interdisciplinary perspectives on applied linguistic research. Oxford University Press.
23. Strommen, E. F., & Lincoln, B. (1992). Constructivism, technology, and the future of classroom learning. Education and urban society, 24(4), 466-476. https://www.learntechlib.org/p/144642/.
24. Şen, H. Ş., & Erişen, Y. (2002). Effective teaching specialities of teacher trainers working at teacher training institutions. Gazi Üniversitesi Gazi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 22(1). https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/gefad/issue/6766/91036
25. Valiathan, P. (2002). Blended learning models. Learning circuits, 3(8), 50-59. https://www.purnima-valiathan.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/Blended-Learning-Models-2002-ASTD.pdf
26. Zhao, H., Phung, D., Huynh, V., Jin, Y., Du, L., & Buntine, W. (2021). Topic modelling meets deep neural networks: A survey. arXiv preprint arXiv:2103.00498. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/349703833_Topic_Modelling_Meets_Deep_Neural_Networks_A_Survey. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2103.00498