As a Technology Integration Specialist, I spend much of my time helping teachers “to reason soundly about their teaching as well as perform skillfully” (Shulman, 1987, p. 13). The process of reasoning is collaborative as teachers must have a stronger concept of pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) and I usually have stronger concept of technological pedagogical knowledge (TPK). Thus, teachers have a better sense of “what makes the learning of specific topics easy or difficult” (Shulman, 1986, p. 9), and I have better “knowledge of the existence, components, and capabilities of various technologies as they are used in teaching and learning settings” (Mishra & Koehler, 2006, p. 1028).
A typical exchange with a teacher would start with a meeting where we discuss lesson plans and/or curriculum maps; we would go over the learning outcomes and discuss pedagogical practices that have been effective in developing student thinking and knowledge. For instance, one of my Math teachers discussed using the Harkness method and how it helped students work through more difficult problems collaboratively. From my previous interactions with the English Department, I suggested a new application called “Parlay Ideas” which facilitates Harkness style learning; with this application, students feel more comfortable sharing ideas and teachers can quickly track student learning with visual snapshots of each student’s participation/performance. After the implementation and trial period, several follow-up meetings were conducted to refine the use of the technology.
In a perfect TPACK world, every teacher would understand their content, what strategies are useful in helping students learn that content, and which technologies can provide effective enhancement to the learning process. One might argue that this framework sounds awfully teacher-centered; there is a huge push for teachers to fall into the background and allow the “human learner (to be) involved in learning and ultimately the construction of knowledge” (Jonassen et al., 1994, p. 31). Is TPACK the best model to promote student learning? How far should the pendulum swing between teacher-centered and student-centered learning?
Jonassen, D. H., Campbell, J. P., & Davidson, M. E. (1994). Learning with media: Restructuring the debate. Educational technology research and development, 42(2), 31-39.
Shulman, L.S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4-14.
Shulman, L.S. (1987). Knowledge and teaching. The foundations of a new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57(1)1-23.
Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. The Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017-1054.
Hi Gordon,
thanks for your post!
You post made me think of whether the role of Technology Integration specialist also exists in schools in Austra or Germany – I never heard of this. But how can a teacher develop and use TPCK without support?
Okay, PCK is hopefully something the teacher is able to show (but even here I am not sure, when looking at the teachers of my son :-). Yet, how can a “normal” teacher without support by a technology specialist develop TPK? A few days of professional development each year are obviously not sufficient for this.
Teachers need good support in their school – and at least in the K12 schools that I know of in Germany and Austria, there is no TPK support at all. So will TPCK stay a unreachable vision in many countries?
Elske
Hi Elske,
The TPK role grew somewhat gradually in Canada. In some cases, technology-inclined teachers initially took on the role of mentor for other teachers, and in others, people were hired specifically for the role. In my case, I started as an IT support person and I convinced school management that a role was necessary to help teachers incorporate TPK. For “normal” teachers, I would say teacher networks are one way my teachers have grown in that capacity. Also, a divide and share mentality from school management has been helpful; each teacher chooses a technology they want to learn about, then they become lead teachers on the technology and help others use it. I certainly do not think it is unreachable by any means, it just requires school leadership to make it a priority and teachers willing to be teachable (gasp).
Good questions, Gordon.
I don’t know that TPACK is bound to teacher-centered strategies, or any in particular, but rather that the teacher is skilled in knowing which methods are the most effective for understanding the content. They could very well be student-centered simulations for example.
Dave
Hi David,
I agree that TPACK is not bound to teacher-centered strategies, but the focus of the original article by Mishra & Koehler is significantly more teacher-centered than say Jonassen’s (1994) article that explicitly asks the read to “shift the debate and the practice of instructional design from instruction- and media-centered to a learner-centered conception of learning” (p. 31); one would have to implicitly pull out student-centered applications out of the original TPACK framework.
Cheers!
Gordon