In-Service Science Teachers’ Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge Confidences and Views about Technology-Rich Environments
Keywords:
In-service teachers, Mixed methods research, Teacher confidence, Technological pedagogical content knowledge, Technology-rich environments
Abstract
Today’s computers and related technologies have an important role in enabling visualisations of the workings of various scientific concepts, natural phenomena and mechanisms by creating technology-rich environments (TRE). TRE offer opportunities to science teachers in cases of natural phenomena that might be difficult or impossible to view, dangerous to conduct experiments about, impractical or too expensive to bring into the classroom, or too messy or time consuming to prepare in a school laboratory. However, science teaching cannot and should not be undertaken entirely by TRE. Science teachers need to know how to integrate technology into science classrooms. Measuring science teachers’ confidence in technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPCK) and identifying their views about using TRE in science instruction is an important issue. The present study aims to address challenges faced by in-service science teachers when creating TRE and gives suggestions for successful technology integration into science teaching. The data were gathered through a TPCK confidence survey and subsequent interviews. The results show that in-service science teachers have a low level of confidence in using technology during science teaching. The teachers surveyed stressed their need for professional development activities regarding the effective and meaningful use of TRE in science teaching.Downloads
Download data is not yet available.
References
Angeli, C., & Valanides, N. (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.
Balkı, E., & Saban, E. (2009). Öğretmenlerin Bilişim Teknolojilerine İlişkin Algıları ve Uygulamalar:
Özel Esentepe İlköğretim Okulu (Teachers’ Perceptions and Practices of Information Technologies: The Case of the Esentepe Private Elementary School). İlköğretim Online, 8(3), 771-781.
Creswell, J. W. (1998). Qualitative Inquiry and Research; Choosing Among Five Traditions. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Cüre, F., & Özdener, N. (2008). Öğretmenlerin Bilgi ve İletişim Teknolojileri (BİT) Uygulama
Başarıları ve BİT’e Yönelik Tutumları. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 34(1), 41-53.
Çakır, R., & Yıldırım, S. (2009). Bilgisayar Öğretmenleri Okullardaki Teknoloji Entegrasyonu
Hakkında Ne Düşünürler? Elementary Education Online, 8(3), 952-964.
Erkut, S., Alarcon, O., Garcia Coll, C., Troop, L. R., & Vazguez Garcia, H. A. (1999). The dual-focus
approach to creating bilingual measures. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 30(1), 206-218.
Graham, C. R., Burgoyne, N., Cantrell, P., Smith, L., St. Clair, L., & Harris, R. (2009). TPACK
Development in Science Teaching: Measuring the TPACK Confidence of In-service Science Teachers. TechTrends, 53(5), 70-79.
Guzey, S. S., & Roehrig, G. H. (2009). Teaching science with technology: Case studies of science
teachers’ development of technology, pedagogy, and content knowledge. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 9(1), 25-45.
Hall, E. O., Wilson, M. E., & Frankenfield, J. A. (2003). Translation and Restandardization of an
Instrument: The Early Infant Temperament Questionnaire. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 42(2), 159-168.
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.
Hew, K. F., & Brush. T. (2007). Integrating technology into K-12 teaching and learning: Current
knowledge gaps and recommendations for future research. Education Technology Research
Development, 55(3), 223-252.
Kazu,. İ. Y., & Yavuzalp, N. (2008). Öğretim Yazılımlarının Kullanımına İlişkin Öğretmen Görüşleri
(Teachers’ Opinions on the Use of Instructional Software). Eğitim ve Bilim, 33(150), 110-126.
Koch, J. (2005). Science Stories: Science Methods for Elementary and Middle School Teachers (3rd Ed.). Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Koehler, M., & Mishra, P. (2008). Introducing TPCK. In AACTE Committee on Innovation and
Technology (Eds.), The handbook of technological pedagogical content knowledge for teaching and teacher educators (pp. 3-29). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.
Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for integrating technology in teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017-1054.
Niess, M. L. (2005). Preparing teachers to teach science and mathematics with technology:
Developing technology pedagogical content knowledge. Teaching and Teacher Education, 21(5), 509-523.
Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) (2006). 21st Century Learning Environments. OECD Publishing.
Park, S., & Oliver, J. S. (2008). Revisiting the conceptualisation of pedagogical content knowledge
(PCK): PCK as a conceptual to understand teachers as professionals. Research in Science Education, 38(3), 261-284.
The Science Group (2006). Towards 2020 Science, Microsoft Corporation, Cambridge,
MA. Retrieved 13.09.09 from http://research.microsoft.com/enus/um/cambridge/projects/
towards2020science/downloads/t2020s_reporta4.pdf.
Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational
Researcher, 15(2), 4-14.
Shulman, L. S. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57(1), 1-22.
Sturdivant , R. X., Dunham, P., & Jardine, R. (2009). Preparing Mathematics Teachers for
echnology-Rich Environments. PRIMUS, 19(2), 161-173.
Timur, B., & Taşar, M. F. (2011). Teknolojik Pedagojik Alan Bilgisi Öz Güven Ölçeğinin (TPABÖGÖ)
Türkçeye Uyarlanması (The Adaptation of the Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge
Confidence Survey to Turkish). Gaziantep Ãœniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 10(2), 839-856.
Türk Eğitim Derneği (Turk Education Association) (2009). Öğretmen Yeterlikleri (Teacher
Competences). Ankara: Adım Okan Matbaacılık Basım.
Uzal, G., Erdem, A., & Ersoy, Y. (2009). Bilgisayar Destekli Fen Bilgisi/Fizik Eğitimi: Öğretmenlerin
Genel Eğilimleri ve Gereksinimleri (Computer-Based Science/Physics Education: Teachers’ General Tendencies and Needs). Milli Eğitim, 38(183), 380-390.
Varma, K., Husic, F., & Linn, C. M. (2008). Targeted Support for Using Technology-Enhanced
Science Inquiry Modules. Jounal of Science Education Technology, 17(4), 341-356.
Van Driel, J. H., Verloop, N., & De Vos, W. (1998). Developing science teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35(6), 673-695.
conceptualization, development, and assessment of ICT–TPCK: Advances in technological
pedagogical content knowledge (TPCK). Computers & Education, 52(1), 154-168.
Balkı, E., & Saban, E. (2009). Öğretmenlerin Bilişim Teknolojilerine İlişkin Algıları ve Uygulamalar:
Özel Esentepe İlköğretim Okulu (Teachers’ Perceptions and Practices of Information Technologies: The Case of the Esentepe Private Elementary School). İlköğretim Online, 8(3), 771-781.
Creswell, J. W. (1998). Qualitative Inquiry and Research; Choosing Among Five Traditions. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Cüre, F., & Özdener, N. (2008). Öğretmenlerin Bilgi ve İletişim Teknolojileri (BİT) Uygulama
Başarıları ve BİT’e Yönelik Tutumları. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 34(1), 41-53.
Çakır, R., & Yıldırım, S. (2009). Bilgisayar Öğretmenleri Okullardaki Teknoloji Entegrasyonu
Hakkında Ne Düşünürler? Elementary Education Online, 8(3), 952-964.
Erkut, S., Alarcon, O., Garcia Coll, C., Troop, L. R., & Vazguez Garcia, H. A. (1999). The dual-focus
approach to creating bilingual measures. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 30(1), 206-218.
Graham, C. R., Burgoyne, N., Cantrell, P., Smith, L., St. Clair, L., & Harris, R. (2009). TPACK
Development in Science Teaching: Measuring the TPACK Confidence of In-service Science Teachers. TechTrends, 53(5), 70-79.
Guzey, S. S., & Roehrig, G. H. (2009). Teaching science with technology: Case studies of science
teachers’ development of technology, pedagogy, and content knowledge. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 9(1), 25-45.
Hall, E. O., Wilson, M. E., & Frankenfield, J. A. (2003). Translation and Restandardization of an
Instrument: The Early Infant Temperament Questionnaire. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 42(2), 159-168.
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.
Hew, K. F., & Brush. T. (2007). Integrating technology into K-12 teaching and learning: Current
knowledge gaps and recommendations for future research. Education Technology Research
Development, 55(3), 223-252.
Kazu,. İ. Y., & Yavuzalp, N. (2008). Öğretim Yazılımlarının Kullanımına İlişkin Öğretmen Görüşleri
(Teachers’ Opinions on the Use of Instructional Software). Eğitim ve Bilim, 33(150), 110-126.
Koch, J. (2005). Science Stories: Science Methods for Elementary and Middle School Teachers (3rd Ed.). Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Koehler, M., & Mishra, P. (2008). Introducing TPCK. In AACTE Committee on Innovation and
Technology (Eds.), The handbook of technological pedagogical content knowledge for teaching and teacher educators (pp. 3-29). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.
Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for integrating technology in teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017-1054.
Niess, M. L. (2005). Preparing teachers to teach science and mathematics with technology:
Developing technology pedagogical content knowledge. Teaching and Teacher Education, 21(5), 509-523.
Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) (2006). 21st Century Learning Environments. OECD Publishing.
Park, S., & Oliver, J. S. (2008). Revisiting the conceptualisation of pedagogical content knowledge
(PCK): PCK as a conceptual to understand teachers as professionals. Research in Science Education, 38(3), 261-284.
The Science Group (2006). Towards 2020 Science, Microsoft Corporation, Cambridge,
MA. Retrieved 13.09.09 from http://research.microsoft.com/enus/um/cambridge/projects/
towards2020science/downloads/t2020s_reporta4.pdf.
Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational
Researcher, 15(2), 4-14.
Shulman, L. S. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57(1), 1-22.
Sturdivant , R. X., Dunham, P., & Jardine, R. (2009). Preparing Mathematics Teachers for
echnology-Rich Environments. PRIMUS, 19(2), 161-173.
Timur, B., & Taşar, M. F. (2011). Teknolojik Pedagojik Alan Bilgisi Öz Güven Ölçeğinin (TPABÖGÖ)
Türkçeye Uyarlanması (The Adaptation of the Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge
Confidence Survey to Turkish). Gaziantep Ãœniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 10(2), 839-856.
Türk Eğitim Derneği (Turk Education Association) (2009). Öğretmen Yeterlikleri (Teacher
Competences). Ankara: Adım Okan Matbaacılık Basım.
Uzal, G., Erdem, A., & Ersoy, Y. (2009). Bilgisayar Destekli Fen Bilgisi/Fizik Eğitimi: Öğretmenlerin
Genel Eğilimleri ve Gereksinimleri (Computer-Based Science/Physics Education: Teachers’ General Tendencies and Needs). Milli Eğitim, 38(183), 380-390.
Varma, K., Husic, F., & Linn, C. M. (2008). Targeted Support for Using Technology-Enhanced
Science Inquiry Modules. Jounal of Science Education Technology, 17(4), 341-356.
Van Driel, J. H., Verloop, N., & De Vos, W. (1998). Developing science teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35(6), 673-695.
Published
2011-12-31
How to Cite
Timur, B., & Fatih Taşar, M. (2011). In-Service Science Teachers’ Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge Confidences and Views about Technology-Rich Environments. Center for Educational Policy Studies Journal, 1(4), 11–25. https://doi.org/10.26529/cepsj.403
Section
FOCUS
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors are confirming that they are the authors of the submitted article, which will be published online in the Center for Educational Policy Studies Journal (for short: CEPS Journal) by University of Ljubljana Press (University of Ljubljana, Faculty of Education, Kardeljeva ploščad 16, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia). The Author’s/Authors’ name(s) will be evident in the article in the journal. All decisions regarding layout and distribution of the work are in the hands of the publisher.
- The Authors guarantee that the work is their own original creation and does not infringe any statutory or common-law copyright or any proprietary right of any third party. In case of claims by third parties, authors commit themselves to defend the interests of the publisher, and shall cover any potential costs.
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/deed.en that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.
