Content Analysis of Articles on the Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge of Secondary School Science Teachers in Türkiye

Öz

In this study, it is aimed to examine the trends of the studies on technological pedagogical content competencies and technology integration of science teachers in Türkiye in the last 10 years in terms of purpose, year of publication, journal of publication, method, sample selection, data collection tools, data analysis and remarkable results of the studies. In this direction, content analysis method was used in the research. A total of twenty-one academic articles accessed from Web of Science, EBSCOHOST and Google Scholar databases including Türkiye index were analyzed in August 2023. The data were analyzed by content analysis. The analyzed data were presented in the form of tables and graphs with the help of percentages and frequencies. As a result of the research, it was determined that the most common purpose of the studies was "determining TPACK levels and examining them in terms of various variables", the most publications were in 2016 and 2019, the related studies were mostly published in "Education and Science", "Education and Information Technologies" and "Gazi University Journal of Gazi Educational Faculty" journals, the most frequently used method was quantitative, the most frequently used sample group was convenient sampling / easily accessible sampling, the most frequently used data collection tool was scale and the most frequently used data analysis was Anavo-Ancova. Among the remarkable results of the studies, it was determined that "Teachers' TPACK levels are high". It is recommended that more in-depth and detailed qualitative research be conducted on TPACK for science teachers.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Technological pedagogy
• technology integration
• technological pedagogical content knowledge
• science teachers
• content analysis

Kaynakça

1. Açıkgül, K., & Aslaner, R. (2015). Investigation of TPACK confidence perception of prospective elementary mathematics teachers. Erzincan University Journal of Education Faculty, 17(1), 118-152.
2. Adedokun, O. A., Hetzel, K., Parker, L. C., Loizzo, J., Burgess, W. D., & Robinson, J. P. (2012). Using virtual field trips to connect students with university scientists: Core elements and evaluation of zip Trips. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 21, 607–618.
3. *Akgündüz, D., & Bağdiken, P. (2018). An investigation of science teachers' technological pedagogical content knowledge self confidence levels. Gazi University Journal of Gazi Educational Faculty, 38(2), 535-566.
4. Akgündüz, D., & Bağdiken, P. (2018). An investigation of science teachers' technological pedagogical content knowledge self confidence levels. Gazi University Journal of Gazi Educational Faculty, 38(2), 535-566.
5. Akyıldız, S., & Altun, T. (2018). Examining technological pedagogical and content knowledge (TPACK) levels of primary pre-service teachers based on some variables. Trakya University Journal of Education Faculty, 8(2), 318-333.
6. *Albayrak Sarı, A., Canbazoğlu Bilici, S., Baran, E., & Özbay, U. (2016). Investigating the relationship between teachers’ technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) competencies and attitudes towards information and communication technologies. Journal of Educational Technology Theory and Practice, 6(1), 1-21.
7. *Altunoğlu, A., & Hançer, A. H. (2017). Science teachers’ level of technological pedagogical content knowledge and research of their attitudes toward to the technology. International Journal of Social Humanities Sciences Research, 4(13), 1536-1546.
8. Anderson, J. L., & Barnett, M. (2013). Learning physics with digital game simulations in middle school science. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 22, 914–926.

9. *Avcı, T., & Ateş, Ö. (2017). A research on science teachers’ perceptions of technological pedagogical content knowledge. Journal of Uludag University Faculty of Education, 30(1), 19-42
10. *Avcı, T., & Ateş, Ö. (2018). Investigating science teachers’ self-confidence perceptions of technological pedagogical content knowledge in terms of some variables. Journal of Social Sciences of Mus Alparslan University, 6(3), 343-352.
11. Balçın, M., & Ergün, A. (2018). Determinations of technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) self-efficacy of science teacher candidates and analysis of them according to various variables. Mehmet Akif Ersoy University Journal of Education Faculty, 45, 23-47.
12. Banta, D. (2009). What is technology assessment? International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, 25(S1), 7-9.
13. *Bayrak, N., & Bayrak, G. (2021). The effects of in-service training courses about the use of technology on teachers' technological pedagogical content knowledge self-confidence. VanYüzüncü Yıl University Journal of Education, 18(1), 1009-1041.
14. Bıçak, E., & Şeker, M. (2022). An overview of social science teachers' technological pedagogic field knowledge (TPACK). Türkiye Education Journal, 7(2), 472-487.
15. *Bilici, S., & Güler, Ç. (2016). Investigation of teachers’ TPACK levels with respect to use of instructional technologies. Elementary Education Online, 15(3), 898-921.
16. *Canbazoglu Bilici, S., & Baran, E. (2015). The investigation of science teachers’ self-efficacy toward technological pedagogical content knowledge: A longitudinal study. Gazi University Journal of Gazi Educational Faculty, 35(2), 285-306.
17. Cesur Özkara, E., Yavuz Konokman, G., & Yanpar Yelken, T. (2018). The examination of teachers' self-confidence on TPCK, participating in inservice education on "technology use in education" in the scope of Fatih project. Amasya Education Journal, 7(2), 371-412.
18. Devran, P., Öztay, E. S., & Tarkın-Çelikkıran, A. (2021). Content analysis of research on teachers’ technology integration in science education in Turkey. Cumhuriyet International Journal of Education, 10(4), 1789-1825. http://dx.doi.org/10.30703/cije.938487
19. Dikmen, C. H., & 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.
20. Dixon-Woods, M. (2011). Systematic reviews and qualitative methods. In D. Silverman (Ed.), Qualitative research. Sage.
21. Doğru, E., & Aydın, F. (2018). Geography teachers thoughts about technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) and their use attitude. The Journal of Education, Theory and Practical Research, 4(2), 88-100.
22. Dündar, E., & Ünaldı, Ü. E. (2023). Technopedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) education in geography: Opportunities and challenges from teachers’ perspectives. International Journal of Geography and Geography Education, 49, 22-40.
23. *Gençosman, T., Aydoğdu, M., & Doğru, M. (2019). Investigation of science teachers' technological pedagogical content knowledge according to activity theory. Trakya Journal of Education, 9(2), 222-243.
24. Gershon, I. (2017). Language and the newness of media. Annual Review of Anthropology, 46, 15–31.
25. Güler, Ç., & Bilici, S. (2016). Investigation of teachers’ TPACK levels with respect to use of instructional technologies. Elementary Education Online, 15(3), 898-921.
26. Jen, T. H., Yeh, Y. F., Hsu, Y. S., Wu, H. K. & Chen, K. M. (2016). Science teachers' TPACK-Practical: Standard-setting using an evidence-based approach. Computers & Education, 95, 45-62.
27. Kaleli Yılmaz, G. (2015). Analysis of technological pedagogical content knowledge studies in Turkey: A meta-synthesis study. Education and Science, 40(178).
28. Kalogiannakis, M., Papadakis, S., & Zourmpakis, A-I. (2021). Gamification in science education. A systematic review of the literature. Education Sciences, 11(1), 22. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11010022
29. Karaçam, Z. (2013). Systematic review methodology: A guide for preparation of systematic review. E-Journal of Dokuz Eylul University Nursing Faculty, 6(1), 26-33.
30. *Karadeniz, Ş., & Vatanartıran, S. (2013). Adaptation of a TPACK survey to Turkish for secondary school teachers. Journal of Human Sciences, 10(2), 34-47.
31. *Karakaya, F., & Avgin, S. S. (2016). Investigation of teacher science discipline self-confidence about their technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK). European Journal of Education Studies, 2(9), 1-20.
32. Karakuyu, Y., & Karakuyu, A. (2016). The contribution of motivation and self-efficacy on pre-service primary school teachers' technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPCK). Usak University Journal of Educational Research, 2(1), 89-100.
33. *Kıray, S. A., Çelik, İ., & Çolakoğlu, M. H. (2018). TPACK self-efficacy perceptions of science teachers: a structural equation modeling study. Education and Science, 43(195), 253-268.
34. *Kırındı, T., & Durmuş, G. (2019). Investigation of technological pedagogical field knowledge of science teachers. Ahi Evran University Journal of Kırşehir Education Faculty, 20(3), 1340-1375.
35. Kırındı, T., & Durmuş, G. (2019). Investigation of technological pedagogical field knowledge of science teachers. Ahi Evran University Journal of Kırşehir Education Faculty, 20(3), 1340-1375.
36. Korucu, A. T., Usta, E., & Atun, H. (2017). TPACK related research trends: The content analysis of articles between 2010-2016 period. Amasya Education Journal, 6(1), 104-133.
37. *Kulaksız, T. & Karaca, F. (2023). A path model of contextual factors influencing science teachers’ Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge. Education and Information Technologies, 28(3), 3001-3026.
38. Lee, S. W. Y., Tsai, C. C., Wu, Y. T., Tsai, M. J., Liu, T. C., Hwang, F. K., Lai, C. H., Liang, J.C., Wu, H. C., & Chang, C. Y. (2011). Internet‐based science learning: A review of journal publications. International Journal of Science Education, 33(14), 1893-1925. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2010.536998
39. Leonard, J., Buss, A., Gamboa, R., Mitchell, M., Fashola, O., Hubert, T., & Almughyirah, S. (2016). Using robotics and game design to enhance children's self-efficacy, STEM attitudes, and computational thinking skills. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 25, 860–876.
40. Meriç, G. (2014). Determining science teacher candidates' self-reliance levels with regard to their technological pedagogical content knowledge. Journal of Theory & Practice in Education, 10(2), 352-367.
41. Minner, D. D., Levy, A. J., & Century, J. (2010). Inquiry-based science instruction—what is it and does it matter? Results from a research synthesis years 1984 to 2002. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(4), 474-496.
42. Pierson, A. E., & Clark, D. B. (2018). Engaging students in computational modeling: The role of an external audience in shaping conceptual learning, model quality, and classroom discourse. Science Education, 102, 1336–1362
43. Pringle, R. M., Dawson, K., & Ritzhaupt, A. D. (2015). Integrating science and technology: Using technological pedagogical content knowledge as a framework to study the practices of science teachers. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 24(5), 648-662.
44. Rosenberg, J. M., & Koehler, M. J. (2015). Context and technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK): A systematic review. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 47(3), 186-210. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2015.1052663
45. *Sakin, A. N. & Yıldırım, H. İ. (2019). A study on technological pedagogical content knowledge self-efficacy belief levels of science teachers. Necatibey Faculty of Education, Electronic Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 13(2), 1111-1140.
46. Saykal, A., & Uluçınar Sağır, Ş. (2021). Teacher competences and technological pedagogical content knowledge researches in Turkey. Gazi Journal of Education Sciences, 7(2), 115-137. https://dx.doi.org/10.30855/gjes.2021.07.02.001
47. Scalise, K., & Clarke-Midura, J. (2018). The many faces of scientific inquiry: Effectively measuring what students do and not only what they say. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 55(10), 1469–1496.
48. Scalise, K., Timms, M., Moorjani, A., Clark, L., Holtermann, K., & Irvin, P. S. (2011). Student learning in science simulations: Design features that promote learning gains. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48(9), 1050–1078.
49. Sudarsana, I. K., Pusparani, K., Selasih, N. N., Juliantari, N. K., & Renawati, P. W. (2019, March). Expectations and challenges of using technology in education. In Journal of Physics: Conference Series (Vol. 1175, No. 1, p. 012160). IOP Publishing.
50. Taskin Ekici, F., & Dereli, F. (2022). The effect of distance education activities conducted during the Covid-19 pandemic on technological pedagogical content knowledge self-efficacy of science teacher candidates. Journal of Science Mathematics Entrepreneurship and Technology Education, 5(3), 237-253.
51. Tatlı, Z., Akbulut, H. İ., & Altınışık, D. (2016). The impact of Web 2.0 tools on pre-service teachers’ self confidence levels about TPCK. Turkish Journal of Computer and Mathematics Education, 7(3), 659-678.
52. *Timur, B., & Erzengin, N. (2019). Examining science teachers’ technological pedagogical knowledge. Turkish Scientific Researches Journal, 4(2), 101-129.
53. Timur, B., & Erzengin, N. (2019). Examining science teachers’ technological pedagogical knowledge. Turkish Scientific Researches Journal, 4(2), 101-129.
54. *Ünal Çoban, G., Akpınar, E., Baran, B., Kocagül Sağlam, M., Özcan, E., & Kahyaoğlu, Y. (2016). The evaluation of “technological pedagogical content knowledge based argumentation practices” training for science teachers. Education and Science, 41(188), 1-33.
55. *Ünal Çoban, G., Kocagül, M., Akpınar, E., & Baran, B. (2022). Examining science teachers’ performances at planning geology lesson through TPACK-based argumentation practices. The Journal of Theoretical Educational Science, 15(4), 907-937.
56. Ünal Çoban, G., Kocagül, M., Akpınar, E., & Baran, B. (2022). Examining science teachers’ performances at planning geology lesson through TPACK-based argumentation practices. The Journal of Theoretical Educational Science, 15(4), 907-937.
57. *Ünal Çoban, G., Kocagül, M., Büber, A., & Özcan, E. (2022). The effect of TPACK-based argumentation training on understanding about scientific knowledge. Educational Academic Research, 47, 11-25.
58. Verbeek, P. P. (2001). Don Ihde: The technological lifeworld). In H. Achterhuis (Ed.), American philosophy of technology: The empirical turn (pp. 119–146). Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
59. Voyles, M. M., Fossum, T., & Haller, S. (2008). Teachers respond functionally to student gender differences in a technology course. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45(3), 322–345.
60. Weintrop, D., Beheshti, E., Horn, M., Orton, K., Jona, K., Trouille, L., & Wilensky, U. (2016). Defining computational thinking for mathematics and science classrooms. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 25(1), 127–147
61. Yalçın, Z. B., & Kutluca, A. Y. (2023). Validity and reliability study of the technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) scale for preschool teachers. MSKU Journal of Education, 10(1), 1-27.
62. Yıldırım, A., & Simsek, H. (2013). Qualitative research methods in social sciences (11. Edit.). Ankara: Seçkin Publishing
63. *Yıldırım, H. İ. (2022). A study on the science teachers' technological pedagogical content knowledge self-confidence levels. The Journal of Turkish Educational Sciences, 20(1), 256-285. https://doi.org/10.37217/tebd.1035991
64. *Yildiz Durak, H., Atman Uslu, N., Canbazoğlu Bilici, S., & Güler, B. (2023). Examining the predictors of TPACK for integrated STEM: Science teaching self-efficacy, computational thinking, and design thinking. Education and Information Technologies, 28(7), 7927-7954.
65. Yıldızay, Y., & Çetin, G. (2019). Studies related to educational technologies in science education: content analysis. International Journal of Computers in Education, 1(2), 21-33.