Application of Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge Framework to Primary Mathematics Teaching: A Scale Adaptation Study

Abstract

The present study aimed to adapt the Technological Pedagogical and Content Knowledge (TPACK) for mathematics teaching questionnaire into Turkish for classroom teachers who work in public schools. There were three stages in the questionnaire adaptation process. The questionnaire’s language validity was established in the first stage, validity in the second and reliability in the third stage.  Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) and Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) have been utilized in establishing the validity of the questionnaire. 372 classroom teachers’ responses have been used in EFA and 310 for CFA. A four-factor solution emerged as a result of EFA. These factors (in the order of factor loadings) were named as: 1) Knowledge of Teaching Mathematics with Technology (KTMT) under which items that belonged to Technological Pedagogical Knowledge (TPK), Technological Content Knowledge (TCK), and Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPCK) sub-sections merged together;  2) Knowledge of Teaching Mathematics (KTM) under which items that belonged to Pedagogical Content Knowledge (PCK) and Pedagogy Knowledge (PK) sub-sections merged together as one factor; 3) Content Knowledge for Mathematics (CKM) which included items from the Content Knowledge (CK) sub-section; and 4) Technology Knowledge (TK). Those four factors explained 62.20 % of the total variation in the questionnaire. In addition, the results of CFA suggested a good model fit; NNFI .98, NFI .97, CFI .98, IFI .98, RMR .06, and RMSEA .07. Cronbach’s Alpha (α) internal consistency and total item correlations were calculated to establish reliability. The internal consistency (α) for the whole questionnaire was calculated as .97. The α levels for each subscale was; .96 for TPACK, .94 for PCK, .89 for CK, and .91 for TK and total item correlation coefficients were higher than .30. Evaluation of these results suggests that a valid and reliable Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge questionnaire, which consists of 47 items under four subscales (KTMT, KTM, CKM, and TK), was developed.

Keywords

• Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge,TPACK,technology,primary mathematics,primary school teacher

Teknolojik Pedagojik Alan Bilgisi (TPAB) Modelinin İlkokul Matematik (İM) Öğretimine Uygulanması: Ölçek Uyarlama Çalışması

Öz

The present study aimed to adapt the Technological Pedagogical and Content Knowledge (TPACK) for mathematics teaching questionnaire into Turkish for classroom teachers who work in public schools. There were three stages in the questionnaire adaptation process. The questionnaire’s language validity was established in the first stage, validity in the second and reliability in the third stage.  Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) and Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) have been utilized in establishing the validity of the questionnaire. 372 classroom teachers’ responses have been used in EFA and 310 for CFA. A four-factor solution emerged as a result of EFA. These factors (in the order of factor loadings) were named as: 1) Knowledge of Teaching Mathematics with Technology (KTMT) under which items that belonged to Technological Pedagogical Knowledge (TPK), Technological Content Knowledge (TCK), and Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPCK) sub-sections merged together;  2) Knowledge of Teaching Mathematics (KTM) under which items that belonged to Pedagogical Content Knowledge (PCK) and Pedagogy Knowledge (PK) sub-sections merged together as one factor; 3) Content Knowledge for Mathematics (CKM) which included items from the Content Knowledge (CK) sub-section; and 4) Technology Knowledge (TK). Those four factors explained 62.20 % of the total variation in the questionnaire. In addition, the results of CFA suggested a good model fit; NNFI .98, NFI .97, CFI .98, IFI .98, RMR .06, and RMSEA .07. Cronbach’s Alpha (α) internal consistency and total item correlations were calculated to establish reliability. The internal consistency (α) for the whole questionnaire was calculated as .97. The α levels for each subscale was; .96 for TPACK, .94 for PCK, .89 for CK, and .91 for TK and total item correlation coefficients were higher than .30. Evaluation of these results suggests that a valid and reliable Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge questionnaire, which consists of 47 items under four subscales (KTMT, KTM, CKM, and TK), was developed.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• teknolojik pedagojik alan bilgisi,TPAB,teknoloji,ilkokul matematik,sınıf öğretmeni

Kaynakça

1. Akkoç, H., & Yeşildere-İmre, S. (2015). Teknolojik pedagojik alan bilgisi temelli olasılık ve istatistik öğretimi (1. ed.): Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
2. Alpar, R. (2014). Spor, sağlık ve eğitim bilimlerinde uygulamalı istatistik ve geçerlik-güvenirlik. (Üçüncü Baskı). Ankara: Detay Yayıncılık.
3. Angeli, C., & Valanides, N. (2009). Epistemological and methodological issues for conceptualization, development, and assessment of ICT-PCK: Advances in technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPCK). Computers & Education, 52(1), 154-168.
4. Archambault, L. M., & Barnett, J. H. (2010). Revisiting technological pedagogical content knowledge: Exploring the TPACK framework. Computers & Education, 55, 1656-1662.
5. Baser, D., Kopcha, T. J., & Ozden, M. Y. (2016). Developing a technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) assessment for preservice teachers learning to teach English as a foreign language. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 29(4), 749-764.
6. Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2010). Sosyal bilimler için veri analiz el kitabı. Ankara: Pegem A. Yayıncılık.
7. Büyüköztürk, Ş., Çakmak, E.K., Akgün, Ö.E., Karadeniz, Ş., & Demirel, F. (2008). Bilimsel araştırma yöntemleri. (4.Baskı) Ankara: Pegem A Yayıncılık.
8. Canbazoğlu-Bilici, S., Yamak, H., Kavak, N., & Guzey, S. S. (2013). Technological pedagogical content knowledge self-efficacy scale (TPACK-SeS) for pre-service science teachers: Construction, validation, and reliability. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 52, 37-60.

9. Chai, C.-S., Koh, J. H.-L., & Tsai, C.-C. (2013). A review of technological pedagogical content knowledge. Educational Technology and Society, 16(2), 31-51.
10. Chai, C.-S., Koh, J. H.-L., Tsai, C.-C., & Tan, L. L. W. (2011). Modeling primary school pre-service teachers’ technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) for meaningful learning with information and communication technology (ICT). Computers & Education, 57, 1184-1193.
11. Çokluk, Ö., Şekercioğlu, G., & Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2012). Sosyal bilimler için çok değişkenli istatistik SPSS ve LISREL uygulamaları. (İkinci Baskı). Ankara: Pegem A. Yayıncılık.
12. Cox, S., & Graham, C. R. (2009). Diagramming TPACK in practice: Using an elaborated model of the TPACK framework to analyze and depict teacher knowledge. TechTrends, 53(5), 60-69.
13. Dikkartın-Övez, F. T., & Akyüz, G. (2013). Modelling technological pedagogical content knowledge constructs of preservice elementary mathematics teachers. Education and Science, 38, 321-334.
14. Doering, A., Koseoglu, S., Scharber, C., Henrickson, J., & Lanegran, D. (2014). Technology integration in K–12 geography education using TPACK as a conceptual model. Journal of Geography, 113(6), 223-237.
15. Ely, D. P. (1992). Trends in educational technology: New York: Syracuse. ERIC Document Number: 346850.
16. Erbaş, K., A. (2005). Çoklu gösterimlerle problem çözme ve teknolojinin rolü. TOJET, 4(4), 88-92.
17. Erkuş, A. (2003). Psikometri üzerine yazılar. Ankara: Türk Psikologlar Derneği Yayınları. No:24.
18. FATİH. (no date). Eğitimde FATİH projesi hakkında. Retrieved March 5, 2017, from http://fatihprojesi.meb.gov.tr/proje-hakkinda/ Field, A. (2009). Disccovering statistics using SPSS. London: Sage.
19. 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, 530-546.
20. Gudmundsdottir, S., & Shulman, L. S. (1987). Pedagogical content knowledge in social studies. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 31(2), 59-70. doi: 10.1080/0031383870310201
21. Howey, K. R., & Grossman, P. L. (1989). A study in contrast: Sources of pedagogical content knowledge for secondary English. Journal of Teacher Education, 40(5), 24-31.
22. Koehler, M., 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 (pp. 16-31). Hershey, PA: Information Science Reference.
23. Koh, J. H.-L., Chai, C.-S., & Tsai, C.-C. (2010). Examining technological pedagogical content knowledge of Singapore pre-service teachers with a large-scale survey. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 26(6), 563-573.
24. Koh, J. H. L., Chai, C. S., & Tsai, C. C. (2014). Demographic factors, TPACK constructs, and teachers’ perceptions of constructivist-oriented TPACK. Educational Technology & Society, 17(1), 185–196.
25. Lawless, K. A., & Pellegrino, J. W. (2007). Professional development in integrating technology in teaching and learning: Knowns, unknowns and ways to pursue better questions and answers. Review of Educational Research, 77(4), 575-614.
26. Liu, Q., Zhang, S., & Wang, Q. (2015). Surveying Chinese in-service K12 teachers’ technology, pedagogy, and content knowledge. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 53(1), 55-74.
27. Macaro, E., Handley, Z., & Walter, C. (2012). A systematic review of CALL in English as a second language: Focus on primary and secondary education. Language Teaching, 45(1), 1-43.
28. Marks, R. (1990). Pedagogical content knowledge: From a mathematical case to a modified conception. Journal of Teacher Education, 41(3), 3-11.
29. McEwan, H., & Bull, B. (1991). The pedagogic nature of subject matter knowledge. American Educational Research Journal, 28(2), 316-334.
30. MEB. (2009a). İlköğretim matematik dersi (1-5. sınıflar) öğretim programı, Ankara: Devlet Kitapları Müdürlüğü.
31. MEB. (2009b). İlköğretim matematik dersi (6-8. sınıflar) öğretim programı ve kılavuzu, Ankara: Devlet Kitapları Müdürlüğü Basımevi.
32. MEB. (2011). Ortaöğretim matematik (9-12. sınıflar) dersi öğretim programı, Ankara: Devlet Kitapları Müdürlüğü Basımevi.
33. MEB. (2015). İlkokul matematik dersi 1-4. sınıflar öğretim programı. Ankara: MEB –Talim Terbiye Kurulu Başkanlığı Yayıncılık.
34. Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017-1054.
35. Özgelen, S. (2013). Fen ve matematik eğitiminde teknolojik pedagojik alan bilgisi temelli öğretim tasarımları. In T. Yanpar-Yelken, H. Sancar-Tokmak, S. Özgelen & L. İncikabı (Eds.), Fen ve teknoloji öğretmen adaylarının teknolojik pedagojik alan bilgilerinin bloglar yardımıyla tasarlanan bilimin doğası dersinde geliştirilmesi (1. Baskı): Ankara: Anı Yayıncılık.
36. Öztürk , E., & Horzum, M. B. (2011). Adaptation of technological pedagogical content knowledge scale to Turkish. Ahi Evran Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 12 (3), 255-278.
37. Powers, R., & Blubaugh, W. (2005). Technology in mathematics education: Preparing teachers for the future. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 5(3/4), 254-270.
38. Sang, G., Tondeur, J., Chai, C.-S., & Y., D. (2016). Validation and profile of Chinese pre-service teachers’ technological pedagogical content knowledge scale. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 44(1), 49-65.
39. Sarı, M.H., & Özerbaş, M.A. (2013). Sınıf öğretmenlerinin ilkokul matematik öğretiminde teknoloji kullanımına ilişkin algılarının belirlenmesi. 12. Ulusal Sınıf Öğretmenliği Sempozyumu [Tam Metin Basım], 23-25 Mayıs 2013 Adnan Menderes Üniversitesi, Aydın.
40. Sarı, M.H., & Akbaba-Altun, S. (2015). Sınıf öğretmenlerinin matematik öğretiminde teknoloji kullanımı üzerine nitel bir araştırma. International Journal of Eurasia Social Sciences, 6(19), 24-49.
41. 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 assesment instrument for pre-service teachers. Journal of Research Technology in Education, 42(2), 123-149.
42. Segall, A. (2004). Revisiting pedagogical content knowledge: The pedagogy of content/the content of pedagogy. Teaching and Teacher Education, 20(5), 489-504.
43. Shinas, V. H., Yilmaz-Ozden, S., Mouza, M., Karchmer-Klein, M., & Glutting, J. J. (2013). Examining domains of technological pedagogical content knowledge using factor analysis. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 45(4), 339-360.
44. Shulman, L. S. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57(1), 1-21.
45. Simon, R. I. (1992). Teaching against the grain: Texts for a pedagogy of possibility. New York: Bergin & Garve.
46. Smith, D. C., & Neale, D. C. (1989). The construction of subject matter knowledge in primary science teaching. Teaching & Teacher Education, 5(1), 1-20.
47. Su, X., Huang, X., Zhou, C., & Chang, M. (in press). A technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) scale for geography teachers in senior high school. Science and Education, Early release, 1-17. doi: 10.15390/EB.2017.6849
48. Şencan, H. (2005). Sosyal ve davranışsal ölçümlerde güvenirlik ve geçerlilik. (Birinci Baskı). Ankara: Seçkin Yayıncılık.
49. Şimşek, Ö.F. (2007). Yapısal eşitlik modellemesine giriş, temel ilkeler ve LİSREL uygulamaları. Ankara: Ekinoks Yayınları.
50. Tavşancıl, E. (2005). Tutumların ölçülmesi ve spss ile veri analizi. (Üçüncü Baskı). Ankara: Nobel Yayıncılık.
51. Tezci, E., & Perkmen, S. (2013). Oluşturmacı perspektiften teknolojinin öğrenme-öğretme sürecine entegrasyonu. In K. Çağıltay & Y. Göktaş (Eds.), Öğretim teknolojilerinin temelleri: Teoriler, araştırmalar, eğilimler (1. Baskı): Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
52. Turkish Board of Educcation. (no date). Öğretim programları Retrieved April 1, 2017, from http://ttkb.meb.gov.tr/program2.aspx
53. Voogt, J., Fisser, P., Roblin, N. P., Tondeur, J., & van Braak, J. (2012). Technological pedagogical content knowledge- a review of literature. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 29, 109-121.
54. Zelkowski, J., Gleason, J., Cox, D. C., & Bismarck, S. (2013). Developing and validating a reliable TPACK instrument for secondary mathematics preservice teachers. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 46(2), 173-206.