99 ERC SES 03 I, Teacher Education Research
The world undergoes a significant change with the effects of technological transformation occurring at the global level since the last quarter of the twentieth century. This technological transformation affects not only macro level structures like economy, military and society but also micro level structures such as schools, classrooms or students and teachers. The technological tools in the classrooms are increasing day by day. Similarly, Brenner (2015) stated that technology is turning into an undeniably vital piece of the classroom, with 93 percent of educators now utilizing some kind of technological tools to lead instruction. However, increasing the technological tools in classrooms does not guarantee that the effectiveness of teaching and learning will increase. In other words, technological tools in the classroom are not enough by itself to be an effective learning environment. Effectiveness of teaching with technology still depends on teachers (Koehler & Mishra, 2008). Thus, teachers have a great responsibility in developing and updating their technology knowledge and competences, because in an environment where technology affects education so much, the way to achieve the desired objectives in lessons is to integrate technology into the classroom environment effectively.
The way to bring technology and classroom environment together effectively is to train teachers with technology integration competencies. Similarly, Hofer and Grandgenett (2012) indicate that teacher education courses are often considered as the key solution in terms of preparation of pre-service teachers to integrate technology into their educational practices. Thus, universities need to offer technology courses which aim to train teachers constructing technology-mediated science lessons in addition to courses aiming to construct technological skills. These courses should combine all components of teachers’ knowledge which are subject matter knowledge, pedagogy skills and technology skills (Angeli & Valanides, 2009).
In order to describe the interplay and intersections among “pedagogical knowledge”, “content knowledge of teachers” and how to integrate technology into teaching, “Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK)” was developed from Shulman’s (1987) “pedagogical content knowledge (PCK)” model (Koehler & Mishra, 2008). TPACK framework provides a guideline for understanding how teachers might use their technological knowledge and mediate effective technology integration into classrooms (Harris, Mishra & Koehler, 2009). Additionally, the framework promises a solid base for researchers making studies in the area of technology integration.
In the current study an instructional design model based on TPACKwhich is called as “TPACK-IDDIRR (Introduce, Demonstrate, Develop, Implement, Reflect, and Revise)” is embedded into science methods course in pre-service teacher education program, because teachers are the most important agent that will place educational technologies into the classroom environment. This means that graduating pre-service teachers with high TPACK qualifications from universities will make it easier to reach the desired achievements. The way to train teachers with the required competencies is through the development of well-planned courses and appropriate development models. TPACK-IDDIRR Model serves as an applicable framework and represents applicable strategies that can be utilized as a part of technology integration lessons with a purpose to develop pre-service teachers TPACK (Lee & Kim, 2014).
Under the consideration of study necessity in this area and on the basis of TPACK-IDDIRR model the current study specifically is aiming to investigate technology integration quality of pre-service science teachers who enrolled in science methods course enhanced by the integration TPACK development model. In this regard the current study designed to examine the following research questions:
What is the quality of technology integration of lesson plans prepared by pre-service science teachers with respect to different teaching methods of science?
What is the effect of Science Methods Course enhanced by the application of TPACK-IDDIRR Model on pre-service science teachers’ quality of technology integration in their lesson plans?
Methodology In the present study quantitative research approach was used. The study was carried out according to one group pretest-posttest design which “generally used to investigate the impact of an independent variable (invention or treatment) on a specific group” (Allen, 2017). Fifty-seven 3rd grade pre-service teachers from the science methods course participated in the study. The reason why they were studied with them was that they had already completed two courses aiming to improve their technological competence by focusing on gaining basic computer skills, different material development strategies via office programs and Web 2.0 tools. In addition, they have already gained lesson plan preparation skills via previous years courses. In the setting of the study the TPACK-IDDIRR model has been integrated to enrich the content of science methods course in terms of developing TPACK and technology integration quality and tried to create technologically rich learning environments. Through 12 week of the semester within the enriched course the pre-service teachers were taught about different science teaching methods (demonstration, inquiry, argumentation, field trip, lap approaches, project & problem based learning, analogy and role playing) and how to integrate ICT tools effectively into such teaching methods. Along this process participants were asked to form groups and prepare lesson plans and lesson plans evaluated by the first researcher and course assistants and feedback was given to the participants. At the end of the semester they were also asked to revise their lesson plans according to feedback as final draft. The data obtained from lesson plans evaluated via “Technology Integration Assessment Rubric (Harris, Grandgenett & Hofer, 2010)”. From the scores of the rubric the descriptive statistics were calculated to examine technology integration quality in different teaching methods and Wilcoxon-Sign-Rank Test was applied to evaluate effectiveness of the training on technology integration quality.
Outcomes Firstly, the results obtained from the assessment instrument were used to evaluate descriptively the technology integration quality of pre-service science teachers in terms of 4 criteria which are “Curriculum Goals and Technologies, Instructional Strategies & Technologies,Technology Selections and Fit (Harris et al., 2010). Each criterion in the rubric is categorized to rate from 1 to 4 and maximum 16 points in total. After the calculation of the means of the total scores for each teaching method it was observed that pre-service science teachers integrated technology effectively into lesson plans. In addition it was observed that technology integration quality was highest in the following teaching methods: Analogy (M=12.13) followed by Field Trip (M=11.93), Role Playing (M=11.86), Argumentation (M=11.80), Lab Approaches (M=11.33) Project and Problem Based Learning (M=11.13 & M=11.07), and the quality was lowest in Demonstration (M=9.80) and Inquiry (M=10.60). In order to determine the impact of the training the scores of unrevised and revised lesson plans were compared. The descriptive results showed that the scores with respect to different teaching methods have increased considerably after training (maximum 1.4 and minimum 0.93 point). In addition to examining the significance of the effect, the results from Wilcoxon-Sign-Rank Test were evaluated. The obtained significance level scores ranged between p=.001 and p=.004 excluding Argumentation (p=.024), showed that there was a significant change with the large effect size (r values varied between 0.58 and 0.85). In conclusion, the science methods course enhanced by the integration TPACK development model had a large effect on the technology integration quality for different teaching methods excluding Argumentation method.
Allen, M. (2017). The sage encyclopedia of communication research methods (Vols. 1-4). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc. DOI: 10.4135/9781483381411 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. Brenner, L., (2015, October 27). 3 ways to increase student engagement in your classroom. ISTE. Retrieved from https://www.iste.org/explore/articleDetail?articleid=590&category =Innovator-solutions&article= Harris, J., Grandgenett, N., & Hofer, M. (2010). Testing a TPACK-based technology integration assessment rubric. In C. D. Maddux (Ed.), Research highlights in technology and teacher education 2010 (pp. 323-331). Chesapeake, VA: Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education (SITE) 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. Koehler, M. J., & Mishra, P. (2008). Introducing TPCK. In Handbook of Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPCK) for Educators (pp. 3-29). New York: Routledge. Lee, C. J., & Kim, C. (2014). An implementation study of a TPACK-based instructional design model in a technology integration course. Educational Technology Research and Development, 62(4), 437-460.
00. Central Events (Keynotes, EERA-Panel, EERJ Round Table, Invited Sessions)
Network 1. Continuing Professional Development: Learning for Individuals, Leaders, and Organisations
Network 2. Vocational Education and Training (VETNET)
Network 3. Curriculum Innovation
Network 4. Inclusive Education
Network 5. Children and Youth at Risk and Urban Education
Network 6. Open Learning: Media, Environments and Cultures
Network 7. Social Justice and Intercultural Education
Network 8. Research on Health Education
Network 9. Assessment, Evaluation, Testing and Measurement
Network 10. Teacher Education Research
Network 11. Educational Effectiveness and Quality Assurance
Network 12. LISnet - Library and Information Science Network
Network 13. Philosophy of Education
Network 14. Communities, Families and Schooling in Educational Research
Network 15. Research Partnerships in Education
Network 16. ICT in Education and Training
Network 17. Histories of Education
Network 18. Research in Sport Pedagogy
Network 19. Ethnography
Network 20. Research in Innovative Intercultural Learning Environments
Network 22. Research in Higher Education
Network 23. Policy Studies and Politics of Education
Network 24. Mathematics Education Research
Network 25. Research on Children's Rights in Education
Network 26. Educational Leadership
Network 27. Didactics – Learning and Teaching
The programme is updated regularly (each day in the morning)
- 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 you may want to use the conference app, which will be issued some weeks before the conference
- If you are a session chair, best look up your chairing duties in the conference system (Conftool) or the app.