Exploring TPACK Model Practices: Designing, Facilitating, and Evaluating Effectiveness of Technology Experiences Among Pre-service Teachers

  • Shannon Haley-MizeEmail author
  • John Bishop


The study used Technological, Pedagogical, and Content Area Knowledge (TPACK) as a conceptual framework to evaluate the specific ways by which the preservice teacher educators learn technology integration throughout undergraduate coursework. A mixed methodology combined three overlapping phases of data collection and analysis: (1) preservice teacher surveys reporting perceptions, attitudes, and beliefs surrounding notions of “technology,” (2) facilitation and evaluation of “Technology-Enhanced Lessons” (TELs), and (3) case interview and classroom observation of exemplary use of TPACK practices. Findings indicate that many candidates did not articulate a transformative understanding of technology, but individual differences emerged. Pre- and post-survey data supported a quantitative correlation of specific preservice course experiences with technology and TPACK participant skill levels.


TPACK Information and communication technology Elementary teacher education Transformative pedagogy Multimodality Case study methodology Preservice teacher beliefs and perceptions Cultural contexts 


  1. Bai, H., & Ertmer, P. (2008). Teacher educators’ beliefs and technology uses as predictors of pre-service teachers’ beliefs and technology attitudes. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 16(1), 93–112.Google Scholar
  2. Bauer, J., & Kenton, J. (2005). Toward technology integration in the schools: Why it isn’t happening. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 13(4), 519–546.Google Scholar
  3. Belland, B. (2009). Using the theory of habitus to move beyond the study of barriers to technology integration. Computer and Education, 52, 353–364.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Brown, T. (2009). Change by design. New York: Harper Collins.Google Scholar
  5. Chai, C. S., Koh, J. H. L., & Tsai, C. (2010). Facilitating pre-service teachers’ development of technological, pedagogical, and content knowledge (TPACK). Educational Technology & Society, 13(4), 63–73.Google Scholar
  6. Choy, D., Wong, A. F., & Gao, P. (2009). Student teachers’ intentions and actions on integrating technology into their classrooms during student teaching: A Singapore study. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 42(2), 175–195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Coiro, J., Knobel, M., Lankshear, C., & Leu, D. (2008). Handbook of research on new literacies. New York: Taylor and Francis.Google Scholar
  8. Creswell, J. (2007). Qualitative inquiry and research design. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  9. Creswell, J., & Clark, V. (2011). Designing and conducting mixed methods research (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  10. Ertmer, P. A. (2005). Teacher pedagogical beliefs: The final frontier in our quest for technology integration? Educational Technology Research and Development, 53(4), 25–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Ertmer, P., & Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. (2010). Teacher technology change: How knowledge, confidence, beliefs, and culture intersect. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 42(3), 255–284.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Futrell, M. (2010). Transforming teacher education to reform America’s p-20 education system. Journal of Teacher Education, 81(5), 432–440.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of mind: Theories of multiple intelligences. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  14. Gotkas, Y., Yildirim, S., & Yildirim, Z. (2009). Main barriers and possible enablers of ICTs integration into pre-service teacher education programs. Educational Technology & Society, 12(1), 193–204.Google Scholar
  15. Groth, L., Dunlap, K., & Kidd, J. (2007). Becoming technology literate through technology integration in PK-12 pre-service literacy courses: Three case studies. Reading Research Instruction, 46(4), 363–386.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hull, G., & Nelson, M. (2005). Locating the semiotic power of multimodality. Written Communication, 22(2), 224–261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Jenkins, J., Purushotma, R., Weigel, M., Clinton, K., & Robison, A. J. (2009). Confronting the challenges of participatory culture: Media education for the 21st century. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  18. Jewitt, C., & Kress, G. (2003). Multimodal literacy. New York: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
  19. Judge, S., & O’Bannon, B. (2008). Faculty integration of technology in teacher preparation: Outcomes of developmental model. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 17(1), 17–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Judson, E. (2006). How teachers integrate technology and their beliefs about learning: Is there a connection? Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 14(3), 581–597.Google Scholar
  21. Kay, R. (2006). Evaluating strategies used to incorporate technology into pre-service education: A review of literature. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 38(4), 383–408.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Koehler, M. J., & Mishra, P. (2005). Teachers learning technology by design. Journal of Computing in Teacher Education, 21(3), 94–102.Google Scholar
  23. Koh, J., & Divaharan, S. (2011). Developing pre-service teachers’ technology integration expertise through TPACK-developing instructional model. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 44(1), 35–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Kress, G., & van Leeuwen, T. (2001). Multimodal discourse. New York: Oxford Press.Google Scholar
  25. Kress, G., & van Leeuwen, T. (2006). Reading images: The grammar of visual design (2nd ed.). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  26. Lankshear, C., & Knobel, M. (2003). New literacies: Changing knowledge and classroom learning. New York: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  27. Lankshear, C., & Knobel, M. (2007). Sampling “the New” in new literacies. In M. Knobel & C. Lankshear (Eds.), A new literacies sampler (pp. 1–24). New York: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
  28. Leander, K. M. (2007). “You won’t be needing your laptops today”: Wired bodies in the wireless classroom. In M. Knobel & C. Lankshear (Eds.), A new literacies sampler (pp. 25–48). New York: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
  29. Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017–1054.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Mishra, P., Koehler, M. J., & Henriksen, D. (2011). The seven trans-disciplinary habits of mind: Extending the TPACK framework towards 21st century learning. Educational Technology, 11(2), 22–28.Google Scholar
  31. Pahl, K., & Rowsell, J. (2005). Literacy and education: Understanding the new literacy studies in the classroom. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  32. Polly, D., Mims, C., Shepherd, C., & Inan, F. (2010). Evidence of impact: Transforming teacher education with preparing tomorrow’s teachers to teach with technology (PT3) grants. Teaching and Teaching Education, 26, 863–870.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Project Tomorrow (2009). Unleashing the future: educators “speak up” about the use of emerging technologies for learning. Speak Up 2009 National Findings. Retrieved from Speak Up 2009 National Findings website:
  34. Schmidt, D. A., Baran, E., Thompson, A. D., Mishra, P., Koehler, M. J., & Shin, T. S. (2009). Technology, pedagogy and content knowledge (TPACK): The development and validation of an assessment instrument for pre-service teachers. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 42(2), 123–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Shin, T., Koehler, M., Mishra, P., Schmidt, D., Baran, E., & Thompson, A. (2009). Changing technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) through course experiences. In I. Gibson et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of society for information technology & teacher education international conference 2009 (pp. 4152–4159). Chesapeake, VA: AACE. Retrieved from
  36. Shulman, L. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15, 4–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Stake, R. (2005). Qualitative case studies. In N. Denzin & Y. Lincoln (Eds.), The Sage handbook of qualitative research (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  38. Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Elizabethtown CollegeElizabethtownUSA
  2. 2.University of Southern MississippiHattiesburgUSA

Personalised recommendations