Developmental Studies for ICT Comptency Training Program in Graduate Schools of Teacher Education
Author(s):
Wakio Oyanagi (presenting / submitting)
Conference:
ECER 2017
Format:
Paper

Session Information

16 SES 08 B, Teacher Competency, Designing Learning Materials, and Music Production

Paper Session

Time:
2017-08-24
09:00-10:30
Room:
W4.21
Chair:
Jo Tondeur

Contribution

The aim of this study is to develop and evaluate a training program informed by the thinking of Technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) (Koehler and Mishra 2008, Matthew, Koehler and Mishra 2015) in order to impart and train the graduate students with the specialized knowledge of teachers who are able to respond to the call for, and be intimately involved with, designing activities and environments for “active learning” and “learner-centric classes,” and are able to take leadership in effectively utilizing ICT and new environments (Fullan and Langworthy 2014, Puenterdura 2006).

The participants of the program were the 27 students attending a Graduate School of Teacher Education, 7 of which are current teachers attending as graduate students and 20 graduate students who entered the program directly after graduating college. (The breakdown for teacher certifications were: 3 were for high school, 7 were for junior high school, and 17 were for elementary school). The trial program conducted consisted of 180 minutes × 8 classes.

In regards to evaluating the trial program, the following two approaches were taken. The reason for this set up is because it was thought that after participating in this program, the participants would have had a new mindset especially after engaging in designing lessons and learning environments which use ICT, and that it would be important for them to be able to organize what they had learned in order to utilize the specialized knowledge in designing learning activities and environments.

   1) At the beginning and at the end of the program, a questionnaire survey on awareness in relation to designing lessons and learning environment which utilizes ICT and to see their change (an indirect evaluation measuring change in awareness)

   2) The participants were asked to draw mind-maps at the end of the fourth and eighth week of the program regarding certain specialized knowledge they were expected to have gained by participating in the program, and the two mind maps were compared for each of the participants (Buzan and Buzan,1996). Then, the TPACK framework was used to detect the changes and see the degree of the organization of the specialized knowledge, as well as its breadth and depth, was examined (a direct evaluation method to evaluate changes in specialized knowledge). The operation of the program was evaluated based on the findings of these two evaluations and used to develop the program further.

As a result, it was found that in relation to “active learning,” this program was able to contribute to the participant’s ability to select and utilize ICT based on the purpose and content of activities and to increase their intention to draw out its effects, and to their overall expansion and deepening of their specialized knowledge.However, when it came to designing “learner-centric classes” which uses ICT effectively, it became clear that there are still several challenges relating to the content of the program.

Method

As to the items asked at the beginning and the end of the program, the participants were asked questions about their awareness regarding lesson designs and learning environment utilizing ICT. In creating these question items, the 55 question items from the questionnaire prepared by Schmidt, Bara, Thompson, Mishra, Koehler, & Shin (2009) which is used most often to ask a student who is in their process of teacher training about their awareness and attitude regarding classes using technology were referenced. The question items are the 19 items, and the answers were to be responded on the following four-point scale: “4: Strong Agree, 3: Agree, 2: Disagree, 1: Strong disagree.” For the analysis, as there is a need to compare at the before and after changes for the 27 individual participants, only replies from 24 who submitted their replies on both occasions were used. Next, to find out the understanding of the participants regarding the relation ICT utilization has to “active learning” and “learner-centric classes,” the eight items that were independently developed, and the answers were to be responded on the following four-point scale: “4: Strong Agree, 3: Agree, 2: Disagree, 1: Strong disagree.” Finally, in order to make further connections between the “the awareness regarding utilization of ICT in classes” to designing “active learning” and “child-centric classes” in relation to the above two results, the line “It is necessary for children to have the ability to utilize ICT” was evaluated based on the attitude level against its changes between before and after the program. Based on the results stated above, we able to see the change in the degree of awareness the participants had by participating in the program. However, the question is, what meaning in themselves did the participants assign to the knowledge they obtained and the thoughts they had organized? It is important to see whether or not they had categorized and assigned them as useful knowledge. For this reason, the participants were asked to draw mind-maps at the end of the fourth and eighth week of the program regarding certain specialized knowledge they were expected to have gained by participating in the program, and the two mind maps were compared for each of the participants. Then, the TPACK framework was used to detect the changes and see the degree of the organization of the specialized knowledge, as well as its breadth and depths, was examined.

Expected Outcomes

When the efforts were evaluated based on the findings of the questionnaire surveys and the analysis results based on the TPACK framework, it has come to light that this program has the following items to correct. (A) It was observed that after the program, even with those graduate students who had stated at the end of the program that they think “children should have the ability to utilize ICT,” when it came to the statements “(17) I want to think about how to create an environment conducive to using ICT in the classes.” and “(18) I want to think about how to create an environment where it is easier for the children to use ICT in the classes,” did not see much growth towards a positive outcome, which indicates they are still feeling worried. It would be necessary to include methods to incorporate in the program more vivid images and give experiences in relation to “child-centric classes” utilizing ICT. (b) In order to enrich the vision of utilizing ICT in “active learning” environments and in “child-centric classes,” it is necessary to not only provide a vision of teachers who are utilizing ICT in class, but also necessary to provide the vision of children utilizing ICT in class. In fact, with the participants who were active supporters of children utilizing ICT before and after the program showed they had (a breadth of) specialized knowledge regarding (1) pedagogical knowledge (PK), (2) pedagogical content knowledge (PCK), and (3) technological content knowledge (TPK) as well as a (deep) understanding of its categories. Therefore, within this program, it would be necessary to find ways to incorporate the program methods in which the participants can gain a better grasp of (1) pedagogical knowledge (PK), (2) pedagogical content knowledge (PCK), and (3) technological content knowledge (TPK).

References

Buzan,T. and Buzan,B.(1996) The Mind Map Book: How to Use Radiant Thinking to Maximize Your Brain's Untapped Potential. New York: Plume. Fullan,M. and Langworthy,M. (2014) A Rich Seam. Pearson. http://www.michaelfullan.ca/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/3897.Rich_Seam_web.pdf.(accessed 2016.11.10) Harris,J.B.(2016) In-Service Teacher’s TPACK Development. Trends, Models, and Trajectories. In M.C.Herring, m.j. Koehler, and P.Mishra (ed.) Handbook of Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK) for Educators. Second Edition. New York and London: Routledge. Koehler, M. J., and Mishra, P. (2008) Introducing TPCK. In AACTE Committee on Innovation and Technology (ed.)(2008) Handbook of Technological Content Knowledge (TPCK) for Educators. New York and London: Routledge. Matthew, J., Koehler, M.J., and Mishra P. (2015). TPACK (technological pedagogical content knowledge). In J. Spector (Ed.), The SAGE encyclopedia of educational technology. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, pp. 783-786. Mouza,C.(2016) Developing and Assessing TPACK Among Pre-Service Teachers. A Synthesis of Research. In M.C.Herring, m.j. Koehler, and P.Mishra (ed.) Handbook of Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK) for Educators. Second Edition.New York and London: Routledge. Puenterdura,R.R.(2006) Transformation, technology, and education. Retrieved from http://hippasus.com/resources/tte/puentedura_tte.pdf. (accessed 2016.11.10). https://sites.google.com/a/msad60.org/technology-is-learning/samr-model(accessed 2016.11.10). Schmidt,D.A.,Bara,N,E. Thompson,A.D. Mishra,P. Koehler, M.J.,& Shin,T.S. (2009) Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPCK): The development and validation of an assessment instrument for preservice teachers. Journal of Research on Technology in Education,42(2):123-149.

Author Information

Wakio Oyanagi (presenting / submitting)
nara university of education, Japan

Update Modus of this Database

The current conference programme can be browsed in the conference management system (conftool) and, closer to the conference, in the conference app.
This database will be updated with the conference data after ECER. 

Search the ECER Programme

  • Search for keywords and phrases in "Text Search"
  • Restrict in which part of the abstracts to search in "Where to search"
  • Search for authors and in the respective field.
  • For planning your conference attendance, please use the conference app, which will be issued some weeks before the conference and the conference agenda provided in conftool.
  • If you are a session chair, best look up your chairing duties in the conference system (Conftool) or the app.