Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge Practices in Higher Education: First Impressions of Preservice Teachers

  • Published:
Technology, Knowledge and Learning Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In this study preservice teachers’ impressions on Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK) practices in higher education were examined. This study was conducted by using case study method among qualitative research designs and with it 7 educators working in teachers college were given TPACK trainings and they were asked to perform practices in accordance with the trainings they received. Observations were made in the lessons of those who conducted TPACK-based lessons and feedback on the lessons was collected from a total of 158 preservice teachers. The data was analysed using content analysis. According to the results of the survey preservice teachers portrayed a positive attitude towards the lessons that were conducted in accordance with TPACK. TPACK practices attracted the attention of preservice teachers and they actively participated in the lessons thanks to these practices. Preservice teachers expressed that traditional teaching methods did not attract their attention anymore and that they wanted novelties which they themselves could use when they became teachers. According to the lesson observations and pre-service teachers’ views, it was decided that the structure of the TPACK was concentrated on the PK structure.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Acar, F. E., Kılıç, A., Ay, Ş., Vardar, O. A. K., & Kara, R. (2010). The need for pedagogical formation of teaching staff. Paper presented at 10th in international conference on new trends in education and their implications, Antalya, Turkey.

  • Ashe, D., & Bibi, S. (2011). Unpacking TPACK and students’ approaches to learning: Applying knowledge in pieces to higher education teaching and learning. In G. Williams, P. Statham, N. Brown, & B. Cleland (Eds.), Changing demands, changing directions. Proceedings of ascilite 2011 conference (pp. 128–132). Hobart: University of Tasmania. Retrieved May 8, 2017, from http://www.ascilite.org/conferences/hobart11/proceedings.php.

  • Avcı, T. (2014). Determining technological pedagogic content knowledge and self-confıdence levels of science teachers (Unpublished Master Dissertation). Celal Bayar University, Manisa.

  • 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.

    Google Scholar 

  • Babacan, T., & Ören, F. Ş. (2017). The effect of technology assisted micro teaching practices on prospective science teachers’ perceptions of technology usage. Educational Technology Theory and Practice, 7(2), 192–214.

    Google Scholar 

  • Balkaş, S. R., & Barış, M. F. (2015). Effect of using interactive smartboard on teachers’ roles, classroom interaction and students’ motivation. Electronic Journal of Education Sciences, 4(8), 206–222.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baran, E., Canbazoglu-Bilici, S., Albayrak-Sari, A., & Tondeur, J. (2017). Investigating the impact of teacher education strategies on preservice teachers’ TPACK. British Journal of Educational Technology, 50(1), 357–370.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bauer, J., & Kenton, J. (2005). Toward technology integration in schools: Why it is not happening. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 13, 519–546.

    Google Scholar 

  • Benson, S. N. K., & Ward, C. L. (2013). Teaching with technology: Using TPACK to understand teaching expertise in online higher education. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 48(2), 153–172.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brinkley-Etzkorn, K. E. (2018). Learning to teach online: Measuring the influence of faculty development training on teaching effectiveness through a TPACK lens. The Internet and Higher Education, 38, 28–35.

    Google Scholar 

  • Çam, Ş. S. & Erdamar Koç, G. (2017). A need analysis study on educators’ technological pedagogical content knowledge. Paper presented at 26th International Conference on Educational Sciences, 20–23 April, Antalya/Turkey.

  • Canbazoğlu Bilici, S. (2012). The pre-service science teachers? technological pedagogical content knowledge and their self-efficacy (Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation). Gazi University, Ankara.

  • Collis, B., & Moonen, J. (2008). Web 2.0 tools and processes in higher education: Quality perspectives. Educational Media International, 45(2), 93–106.

    Google Scholar 

  • Creswell, J. W. (2013). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Thousand Oaks: Sage publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dey, I. (2003). Qualitative data analysis: A user friendly guide for social scientists. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Doering, A., Veletsianos, G., Scharber, C., & Miller, C. (2009). Using the technological, pedagogical, and content knowledge framework to design online learning environments and professional development. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 41(3), 319–346.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eristi, S. D., Kurt, A. A., & Dindar, M. (2012). Teachers’ views about effective use of technology in classrooms. Turkish Online Journal of Qualitative Inquiry, 3(2), 30–41.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ersoy, M., Yurdakul, I. K., & Ceylan, B. (2016). Investigating preservice teachers’ TPACK competencies through the lenses of ICT skills: An experimental study. Education and Science, 41(186), 119–135.

    Google Scholar 

  • Espinoza, C., & Olmedo, F. (2018). Ecuadorian high school teachers’ perceptions on ICT use in their EFL classes (Bachelor thesis). New York: Centro Universitario.

    Google Scholar 

  • Graham, C. R. (2011). Theoretical considerations for understanding technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK). Computers & Education, 57(3), 1953–1960.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gülbahar, Y., & Güven, İ. (2008). A Survey on ICT Usage and the perceptions of social studies teachers in Turkey. Educational Technology and Society, 11(3), 37–51.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harris, J., Grandgenett, N. & Hofer, M. (2010). Testing a TPACK-Based Technology Integration Assessment Rubric. In D. Gibson & B. Dodge (Eds.), Proceedings of SITE 2010--Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference (pp. 3833–3840). San Diego, CA, USA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved April 11, 2017 from https://www.learntechlib.org/primary/p/33978/.

  • Harris, J. & Hofer, M. (2009). Instructional Planning Activity Types as Vehicles for Curriculum-Based TPACK Development. In I. Gibson, R. Weber, K. McFerrin, R. Carlsen & D. Willis (Eds.), Proceedings of SITE 2009--Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference (pp. 4087–4095). Charleston, SC, USA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved May 11, 2017 from https://www.learntechlib.org/primary/p/31298/.

  • Harris, J. B., & Hofer, M. J. (2011). Technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) in action: A descriptive study of secondary teachers’ curriculum-based, technology-related instructional planning. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 43(3), 211–229.

    Google Scholar 

  • Herring, M. C., Meacham, S., & Mourlam, D. (2016). TPACK development in higher education. In M. C. Herring, M. J. Koehler, & P. Mishra (Eds.), Handbook of technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) for educators (pp. 207–223). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huberman, M., & Miles, M. B. (2002). The qualitative researcher’s companion. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • İlhan, E., & Kalaycı, N. (2018). Evaluating core curricula implemented at undergraduate programs of universities. Journal of Higher Education, 8(3), 264–281.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jaipal-Jamani, K., Figg, C., Collier, D., Gallagher, T., Winters, K. L., & Ciampa, K. (2018). Developing TPACK of university faculty through technology leadership roles. Italian Journal of Educational Technology, 26(1), 39–55.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jang, S. J. (2010). Integrating the interactive whiteboard and peer coaching to develop the TPACK of secondary science teachers. Computers & Education, 55(4), 1744–1751.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jang, S. J., & Tsai, M. F. (2012). Exploring the TPACK of Taiwanese elementary mathematics and science teachers with respect to use of interactive whiteboards. Computers & Education, 59(2), 327–338.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaleli Yılmaz, G. (2015). Analysis of technological pedagogical content knowledge studies in Turkey: A metasynthesis study. Education and Science, 40(178), 103–122.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koç, M., Demirbilek, M., & Yılmaz İnce, E. (2015). A needs assesment for academicians’ Professional development. Education and Science, 40(177), 297–311.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koehler, M. J., Mishra, P., Akcaoglu, M., & Rosenberg, J. M. (2013). The technological pedagogical content knowledge framework for teachers and teacher educators. ICT integrated teacher education models (pp. 1-8). New Delhi, India: Commonwealth Educational Media Center For Asia

  • Koh, J. H., & Divaharan, H. (2011). Developing pre-service teachers’ technology integration expertise through the TPACK-developing instructional model. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 44(1), 35–58.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koh, J. H. L., & Chai, C. S. (2014). Teacher clusters and their perceptions of technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) development through ICT lesson design. Computers and Education, 70, 222–232.

    Google Scholar 

  • Konokman, G. Y., & Yelken, T. Y. (2014). The perceptions of academicians in education faculties on their lifelong learning competencies. Hacettepe University Journal of Education, 29(2), 267–281.

    Google Scholar 

  • Li, Y., Garza, V., Keicher, A., & Popov, V. (2019). Predicting high school teacher use of technology: Pedagogical beliefs, technological beliefs and attitudes, and teacher training. Technology, Knowledge and Learning, 24(3), 501–518. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-018-9355-2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liu, M. H., & Kleinsasser, R. C. (2015). Exploring efl teachers’ call knowledge and competencies: In-service program perspectives. Language Learning and Technology, 19(1), 119–138.

    Google Scholar 

  • Loughran, J., Mulhall, P., & Berry, A. (2004). In search of pedagogical content knowledge in science: Developing ways of articulating and documenting professional practice. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(4), 370–391.

    Google Scholar 

  • Matherson, H. L. (2012). A case study of how and if a professional development program builds teachers’ TPACK model of instruction, Doctoral dissertation, The University of Alabama Department of Secondary Education, Alabama.

  • Ministry of Developent. (2014). 10th development plan. Turkish Republic Ministry of Development.

  • Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: a framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017–1054.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2008). Introducing technological pedagogical content knowledge. Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New York (pp. 1–16).

  • Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2009). What is technological pedagogical content knowledge? Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 9(1), 60–70.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mouza, C., Karchmer-Klein, R., Nandakumar, R., Ozden, S. Y., & Hu, L. (2014). Investigating the impact of an integrated approach to the development of preservice teachers’ technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK). Computers and Education, 71, 206–221.

    Google Scholar 

  • Namdar, B., & Salih, E. (2017). Preservice science teachers’ views of technology-supported argumentation. Abant Izzet Baysal University Journal of Faculty of Education, 17(3), 1384–1410.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nawaz, A., Awan, Z., & Ahmad, B. (2011). Integrating educational technologies in higher education of the developing countries. Journal of Education and Practice, 2(2), 1–13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Niess, M. L. (2005). Preparing teachers to teach science and mathematics with technology: Developing a technology pedagogical content knowledge. Teaching and Teacher Education, 21(5), 509–523.

    Google Scholar 

  • Niess, M. L. (2011). Investigating TPACK: Knowledge growth in teaching with technology. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 44(3), 299–317.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pamuk, S., Çakır, R., Ergun, M., Yılmaz, H. B., & Ayas, C. (2013). The use of tablet pc and ınteractive board from the perspectives of teachers and students: Evaluation of the FATİH Project. Educational Sciences: Theory and Practice, 13(3), 1815–1822.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rienties, B., Brouwer, N., Bohle Carbonell, K., Townsend, D., Rozendal, A. P., Loo, J., et al. (2013). Online training of TPACK skills of higher education scholars: a cross-institutional impact study. European Journal of Teacher Education, 36(4), 480–495.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt, D., Sahin, E. B., Thompson, A., & Seymour, J. (2008). Developing effective technological pedagogical and content knowledge (TPACK) in PreK-6 teachers. In Society for information technology and teacher education international conference (pp. 5313–5317). Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE).

  • Shonfeld, M., & Magen-Nagar, N. (2017). The impact of an online collaborative program on intrinsic motivation, satisfaction and attitudes towards technology. Technology, Knowledge and Learning. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-017-9347-7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4–14.

    Google Scholar 

  • Soran, H., Akkoyunlu, B., & Kavak, Y. (2006). Life-long learning skills and trainıng faculty members: A project at Hacettepe universıty. Hacettepe University Journal of Education, 30(30), 201–210.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tatli, Z., Akbulut, Hİ., & Altinisik, D. (2016). The impact of web20 tools on pre-service teachers’ self confidence levels about TPCK. Turkish Journal of Computer and Mathematics Education, 7(3), 659–678.

    Google Scholar 

  • Türker, P. M., & Pala, F. K. (2018). Teacher candidate’s opinions on presentation programs. Kastamonu Education Journal, 26(6), 1875–1885.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tzavara, A., Komis, V., & Karsenti, T. (2018). A methodological framework for investigating TPACK integration in educational activities using ICT by prospective early childhood teachers. Italian Journal of Educational Technology, 26(1), 71–89.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vannatta, R. A., & Beyerbach, B. (2000). Facilitating a constructivist vision of technology integration among education faculty and preservice teachers. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 33(2), 132–148.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yildirim, A., & Şimşek, H. (2005). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri (Quailitative research methods in social sciences). Ankara: Seçkin Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kabakçı-Yurdakul, I., Çoklar, A. N., Birinci, G. & Kılıçer, K. (2012). Effect on technopedagogical education for preservice teachers and a model suggestion for technopedagogical education. TUBITAK Project. Project Number: 109K191. Retrieved 6 February, 2017, from https://trdizin.gov.tr/publication/project/detail/TVRJeE56YzM=

  • Yurdakul, I. K., Odabaşı, H. F., Kılıçer, K., Çoklar, A. N., Birinci, G., & Kurt, A. A. (2014). Constructing technopedagogical education based on teacher competencies in terms of national standards. Elementary Education Online, 13(4), 1185–1202.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhao, Y., & Bryant, F. L. (2006). Can teacher technology integration training alone lead to high levels of technology integration? A qualitative look at teachers’ technology integration after state mandated technology training. Electronic Journal for the Integration of Technology in Education, 5, 53–62.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Educational Sciences, Faculty of Education, Muş Alparslan University, Muş, Turkey

    Şefika Sümeyye Çam

  2. Department of Educational Sciences, Faculty of Education, Gazi University, Ankara, Turkey

    Gürcü Erdamar Koç

Authors
  1. Şefika Sümeyye Çam
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Gürcü Erdamar Koç
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Şefika Sümeyye Çam.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendix 1: Observation Form on the Practices of the Educators Attending TPACK Trainings in Real Classroom Environment

Appendix 1: Observation Form on the Practices of the Educators Attending TPACK Trainings in Real Classroom Environment

figure a

Reflections of TPACK trainings on classroom

 

4

3

2

1

The aims of the lesson, teaching strategies and technological adaptation

Subject-technology-teaching strategies are strongly aligned

Subject-technology-teaching strategies are compatible with each other

Subject-technology-teaching strategies are poorly aligned

Subject-technology-teaching strategies are not chosen in accordance with each other

Efficient management of education material

Teacher-students managed and maintained the technology/material very well

Teacher-students managed and maintained the technology/material well. At the beginning of the lesson there were minor problems but they were solved immediately

Teacher-students have adequately managed and maintained technology/material. There were some technical problems during the course

Teacher-students were inadequate in managing and managing technology/material. Disruptions during the course disrupted the course

Drawing the students’ attention

Used technologies were very effective in attracting the attention of the students. All the students followed the course carefully

Used technologies were effective in attracting the attention of the students. Except some students, all the students followed the course carefully

Used technologies were less effective in attracting the attention of the students. The students’ participation in the course was low

The students talked among themselves rather than interested in the lesson

Supporting learning

Used technologies were very effective in supporting learning. The students gave feedback that they understood the subject

Used technologies were effective in supporting learning in a part of the course

Used technologies were less effective in supporting learning. Lesson content was often repetitive exercises rather than supporting learning

Used technologies were not effective in supporting learning

In the course, a non-interactive application was realized for visual purposes only

    

Increasing student participation

Used technologies support the student participation at a high level

Used technologies support student participation outside some students.

Used technologies support a small amount of student participation. Less than half of the students attend the course

Used technologies do not support student participation. A few students only attend the class

Enriching content

Used technologies enriched the content. Different applications addressing the five senses were used

Used technologies have enriched the course content. audiovisial materials were used

Used technologies have enriched the course in small amounts. Though it is a visual content, intellectual content is included

Used technologies were ineffective in enriching the course content

Supporting classroom management

Used technologies were very effective in supporting classroom management. It was possible to control all the students with the technologies used and ensure their participation in the course

Used technologies were effective in supporting classroom management

Some of the used applications were effective in supporting classroom management and some did not. In some practices, students’ control was easy and in others it was difficult

Used technologies were not effective in supporting classroom management

  1. Adapted and reorganized from Matherson (2012) and Harris et al. (2010)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Çam, Ş., Erdamar Koç, G. Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge Practices in Higher Education: First Impressions of Preservice Teachers. Tech Know Learn 26, 123–153 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-019-09430-9

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-019-09430-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation