Prospective Classroom Teachers’ Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge Assessment in Terms of Some Variables (TPCK)

Abstract

The aim of this study is to determine classroom teacher candidates' technological pedagogical content knowledge. The research was based on the survey model and consists of 293 students in 2nd, 3rd, and 4th years of the department of classroom teaching, Faculty of Education, Sakarya University. Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge Scale developed by Schmidt and others (2009) and adapted into Turkish by Öztürk and Horzum (2011) has been used to collect data for the study. T-test for independent groups has been applied in order to test whether there is a difference between prospective classroom teachers’ gender, type of education, technology training they have received or not, how competent they see themselves in the use of technology and their TPCK. It has been tested whether TPCK differs according to classroom teachers’ gender, type of education, technology training they have received or not. According to the findings, it has been seen that there is not a statistically significant difference between technological knowledge (TK), content knowledge (CK), pedagogical content knowledge (PCK), technological content knowledge (TCK), technological pedagogical knowledge (TPK) and TPCK. As a last part of research, whether there is a difference between how competent prospective teachers see themselves in the use of technology and TPCK has been observed in this study. Accordingly, a statistically significant difference has been found between how competent they see themselves in the use of technology and TK, CK, PCK, TCK, TPK, TPCK.

Keywords

• Prospective Teacher, Technological Knowledge, Pedagogical Knowledge, Content Knowledge.

Sınıf Öğretmeni Adaylarının Teknolojik Pedagojik Alan Bilgilerinin Bazı Değişkenler Açısından Değerlendirilmesi

Abstract

Bu araştırma sınıf öğretmeni adaylarının Teknolojik Pedagojik Alan Bilgilerini belirlemek amacıyla yapılmıştır. Araştırma tarama modeliyle yapılmış ve çalışmaya Sakarya Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Sınıf Öğretmenliği Eğitimi Anabilim dalında okuyan 2., 3. ve 4. sınıf öğrencilerinden oluşan 239 kişi katılmıştır. Çalışmada veri toplama aracı olarak Schmidt ve diğerleri tarafından (2009) yılında geliştirilen ve Öztürk ve Horzum (2011) tarafından Türkçeye uyarlanan Teknolojik Pedagojik İçerik Bilgisi Ölçeği kullanılmıştır. Öğretmen adaylarının teknolojik pedagojik alan bilgilerinin cinsiyetlerine, öğrenim türlerine, teknoloji eğitimi alıp almadıkları ve teknoloji kullanımında kendilerini yeterli bulup bulmamaları ile TPAB arasında fark olup olmadığını test etmek için bağımsız gruplar için t-testi uygulanmıştır. Sınıf öğretmenliği öğrencilerinin cinsiyet, öğrenim türün ve daha önce teknoloji eğitimi alıp almamaları ile TPAB arasında fark olup olmadığına bakılmıştır. Elde edilen bulgulara göre teknolojik bilgileri, alan bilgileri, pedagojik alan bilgileri, teknolojik alan bilgileri, teknolojik pedagoji bilgileri ve teknolojik pedagojik alan bilgilerinin istatistiksel olarak anlamlı bir farklılığa sahip olmadığı bulunmuştur. Araştırmada son olarak öğrencilerin teknoloji kullanımında kendilerini yeterli bulup bulmamaları ile TPAB arasında fark olup olmadığına bakılmıştır. Sınıf öğretmenliği öğrencilerinin teknoloji kullanımında kendilerini yeterli hissedip hissetmemelerine göre teknolojik bilgileri, alan bilgileri, pedagoji bilgilerinde, pedagojik alan bilgileri, teknolojik alan bilgileri, teknolojik pedagoji bilgileri ve teknolojik pedagojik alan bilgileri istatistiksel olarak anlamlı bir farklılığa sahip olduğu bulunmuştur.

Keywords

• Öğretmen adayı, Teknoloji Bilgisi, Pedagojik Bilgi, Alan Bilgisi

References

1. Angeli C. & Valanides N. (2009) Epistemological and methodological issues for the conceptualization, development, and assessment of ICTTPCK: advances in technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPCK). Computers & Education 52, 154–168.
2. 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.
3. Brown, D., & Warschauer, M. (2006). From the university to the elementary classroom: Students' experiences in learning to integrate technology in instruction. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 14(3), 599-621.
4. Cobb, P., Stephan, M., McClain, K. & Gravemeijer, K. (2001). Participating in classroom mathematical practices, Journal of the Learning Sciences, 10(1), 113-164.
5. Cox, S., Graham, R. C. (2009). Using an Elaborated Model of the TPACK Framework to Analyze and Depict Teacher Knowledge. TechTrends September/October. Volume 53, Number 5
6. Hammond, M., Fragkouli, E., Suandi, I., Crosson, S., Ingram, J., JohnstonWilder. P., Johnston-Wilder, S., Kingston, Y., Harris, J. B., Mishra, P. ve Koehler, M. J. (2007). Teachers’ technological pedagogical content knowledge: Curriculum-based technology integration reframed. Içinde Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, IL.
7. Heinich, R., Molenda, M., Russell, J.D. ve Smaldino, S. (2002). Instructional media and technologies for learning, 7th ed. Columbus: Merrill/Prentice Hall.
8. Hoyles, C., Noss, R. & Kent, P. (2004). On the integration of digital Technologies into mathematics classrooms, International Journal of Computers for Mathematical Learning, 9(3), 309-326.

9. Koh, J.H.L.; Chai, C.S. ve Tsai, C.C. (2010). Examining the technological pedagogical content knowledge of Singapore pre-service teachers with a large-scale survey. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning. 26(6), 563–573.
10. Koh, J.H.L., & Chai, C.S. (2011),. Modeling pre-service teachers’ technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) perceptions: The influence of demographic factors and TPACK constructs. IN G.Williams, N. Brown, M. Pittard, B. Cleland (ED.) Changing Demands, Changing Directions. Proceedings ascilite Hobart 2011, 17, 735-746.
11. Lee, M.H. ve 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: An International Journal of the Learning Sciences, 38(1), 1-21.
12. Lee, C. B., Chai, C. S., Teo, T., & Chen, D. (2008). Preparing pre-service teachers’ for the integration of ICT based studentcentred learning (SCL) curriculum. Journal of Education, 13, 15-28.
13. Mishra, P. ve Koehler, M.J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. The Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017–1054.
14. North, A. S., & Noyes, J. M. (2002). Gender influences on children's computer attitudes and cognitions. Computers in Human Behavior, 18(2), 135-150
15. Öztürk, E., Horzum, M.B. (2011). Teknolojik Pedagojik İçerik Bilgisi Ölçeği’nin Türkçeye Uyarlaması. Ahi Evran Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, Cilt 12, Sayı 3, Ağustos 2011, Sayfa 255-278
16. Pope, M., & Wray, D. (2009). What happens as student teachers who made very good use of ICT during pre-service training enter their first year of teaching? Teacher Development, 13(2), 93-106.
17. Schmidt, D.A., Baran, E., Thompson, A.D., Mishra, P., Koehler, M.J. ve 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), 27.
18. Schoenfeld, A.H. (1998) Toward a theory of teaching-in-context, Issues in Education, 4(1), 1-94.
19. Shulman, L.S. (1986). Those Who Understand: Knowledge Growth in Teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4-14.
20. Shulman, L.S. (1987). Knowledge and Teaching: Foundations of the New Reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57(1), 1-22.