CHAPTER 2 THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK AND LITERATURE REVIEW
To place this study in perspective, a literature survey was conducted to present issues on the technological and pedagogical content knowledge (TPCK) framework as well as teaching of school electricity specifically. The TPCK framework, as introduced by (Mishra & Koehler, 2006), is the theoretical framework used in this study.
TPCK Theoretical framework
The “Technological, Pedagogical, and Content Knowledge (TPCK)” is a model that describes a framework consisting of different knowledge domains teachers need to acquire to become competent in successfully integrating technology in the teaching and learning processes in their various classrooms (Koehler, Mishra, Kereluik, Shin, & Graham, 2014). The Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPCK) framework is based on Shulman’s work (Shulman,1986,1987) which states that Technological Aspects of Knowledge (TK) need to be considered as an integrated part of other relevant aspects of teacher knowledge, namely Content Knowledge (CK), Pedagogical Knowledge (PK), and their intersections (see Figure 1) below (Krauskopf, Zahn & Hesse, 2012).
Since its proposal by Mishra and Koehler (2006), the TPCK has become a leading conceptual framework. Researchers have used it and are continuing to use it in two ways (i) to research and develop teachers’ integration of digital technologies in teaching and learning and (ii) to define the competences pre – service and in – service teachers should develop in order to integrate technology in the 21st century education, (Kopcha, Ottenbreit-Leftwich, Jung, & Baser, 2014). Therefore, the TPCK framework has “influenced theory, research, and practice in teacher education and teacher professional development” (Kopcha et al., 2014, p. 101).
This study will essentially focus on the Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPCK), and its constructs – Content Knowledge (CK), Pedagogical Knowledge (PK), Technological Knowledge (TK), Pedagogical Content Knowledge (PCK), Technological Pedagogical Knowledge (TPK) and Technological Content Knowledge (TCK).
Technological pedagogical content knowledge was introduced to the educational research field as a theoretical framework for understanding teacher knowledge required for effective technology integration (Mishra & Koehler, 2006). The TPCK framework abbreviation is sometimes referred to as TPACK to make it easier to remember and to form a more integrated whole of the three basic components of knowledge addressed: technology, pedagogy, and content (Thompson & Mishra, 2007). In figure 1, an essential understanding of teaching content with appropriate pedagogical methods and technologies are at the intersection of these three knowledge types. They were defined by (Schmidt, Baran, Thompson, Mishra, Koeler & Shin, 2009) as:
Technology Knowledge (TK):
Technology knowledge refers to the knowledge about various technologies, ranging from low-tech technologies such as pencil and paper, to digital technologies such as the Internet, digital video, interactive whiteboards, and software programmes.
Technology knowledge is always changing, because technology itself is changing daily. This make defining it difficult compared to knowledge domains in the TPACK framework such as pedagogy and content knowledge (Koehler and Mishra 2009). The definition of Technology knowledge can become obsolete in a short time. Hence acquiring TK can only be on going and a lifelong developmental process. TK enables teachers to complete different teaching tasks using technology and to develop different ways of teaching various topics for instance.
Content Knowledge (CK):
Content knowledge is the “knowledge about actual subject matter that is to be learned or taught” (Mishra & Koehler, 2006, p. 1026). Teachers must know the content they are teaching. They also have to know how the nature of knowledge is different for various content areas.
Content knowledge (CK) is teachers’ knowledge about the subject matter to be learned or taught in a specific subject like physics, chemistry or mathematics to mention a few and at the right level. This knowledge domain is vast, and so Shulman (1986) listed as components of CK to include knowledge of concepts, theories, ideas, organizational frameworks, knowledge of evidence and proof, as well as established practices and approaches toward developing such knowledge. For instance, a physics teacher, not having comprehensive content knowledge, will lack knowledge of scientific facts and theories, the scientific method, and evidence-based reasoning.
Pedagogical Knowledge (PK):
Pedagogical knowledge refers to the methods and processes of teaching and includes knowledge in classroom management, assessment, lesson plan development and student learning.
It is teachers’ deep knowledge about the processes and practices of teaching and learning.
They include, but not limited to, overall educational purposes, values, and aims. This broad form of knowledge pertains to understanding of how learners learn, general classroom management skills, lesson planning, and learner assessment. A teacher with deep pedagogical knowledge understands how learners construct knowledge and acquire skills. As such, pedagogical knowledge requires an understanding of cognitive, social, and developmental theories of learning and how they apply to learners in the classroom (Koehler and Mishra 2009).
Pedagogical Content Knowledge (PCK)
Pedagogical content knowledge refers to the content knowledge that deals with the teaching process (Shulman, 1986). Pedagogical content knowledge is different for various content areas as it blends both content and pedagogy with the goal of developing better teaching practices in the content areas.
PCK is a combination of a teacher’s content and pedagogical knowledge. It is what curriculum, assessment, teaching, learning, and reporting. In addition, knowledge of the learner such as common misconceptions and ways of looking at them, how learners are forging connections among different content-based ideas, learners’ previous knowledge, alternative teaching strategies that help different learners to grasp the content, and the capability to explore different ways of looking at the same idea are some of the main ingredients that make teaching effective (Tambara, 2015).
PCK was defined recently at an international summit on science PCK as the knowledge of, rationale behind, planning for, and act of teaching a specific piece of subject matter, in a specific context, to support learner learning of the material (Gess-Newsome, 2015). Since its conception of PCK as a construct, research has been conducted within various education disciplines and many frameworks have evolved in an attempt to explain the complex nature of PCK (Gess-Newsome, 2015; Lee, 2011; Loughran, Berry, & Mulhall, 2012). Notwithstanding the attention, PCK has received through research in teaching and learning, various studies across the educational spectrum have indicated that teachers are still grappling with development of this knowledge base and its applications in the teaching and learning process (Rice and Kitchel, 2016). Hence, Hashweh, (2005) and Nilsson, (2008) ague that years of experience in teaching and a framework are the most effective ways to develop teachers PCK.
CHAPTER 1 ORIENTATION OF THE STUDY
1.1. BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY
1.2 CONTEXT AND PROBLEM OF THE STUDY
1.3 RATIONALE OF THE STUDY
1.4 AIM OF THE STUDY.
1.5 RESEARCH QUESTIONS
1.6 LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY
CHAPTER 2 THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK AND LITERATURE REVIEW
2.2 TPCK THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
2.3 A FEW EPISTEMOLOGICAL ISSUES/ CURRENT CHALLENGES FOR THE TPCK FRAMEWORK
2.4 HYPOTHETICAL RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN TPCK, ITS CONSTRUCTS AND LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT
2.5 LEARNER ACHIEVEMENT
2.6 TPCK IN THE TEACHING CONTEXT
2.7 SUMMARY OF CHAPTER
CHAPTER 3 RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS
3.2 RESEARCH DESIGN
3.3 RESEARCH METHODS
3.4 METHODOLOGICAL NORMS (VALIDITY AND RELIABILITY ISSUES)
3.5 RESEARCH PROCEDURES
3.6 DATA ANALYSIS
3.7 ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS
3.8 SUMMARY OF CHAPTER
CHAPTER 4 RESULTS
4.2 QUANTITATIVE DATA ANALYSIS
4.3 ANSWERING THE RESEARCH QUESTIONS.
4.4 SUMMARY OF CHAPTER
CHAPTER 5 DISCUSSION OF FINDINGS
5.2 DISCUSSION OF THE FINDINGS
5.3 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
CHAPTER 6 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
6.5 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH
GET THE COMPLETE PROJECT