Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education (한국과학교육학회지)

The Korean Association for Science Education (한국과학교육학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

The difference of measurement results between the questionnaire and performance assessment of Pre-service teacher's TPACK competency

예비교사의 TPACK 역량 측정 설문과 수행평가 결과의 차이

  • Received : 2020.04.28
  • Accepted : 2020.07.16
  • Published : 2020.08.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to compare the results of the developed questionnaire and performance assessment for measuring TPACK competency of pre-service teachers. For this purpose, we developed the TPACK questionnaire for pre-service teachers. Then, through the performance assessment task and interview data related to the 'change of the moon and the celestial bodies', the TPACK competency of the pre-service teachers was analyzed and compared with the questionnaire results. The results of the questionnaire showed that PCK and TPK of the pre-service teachers were high, and the TCK and TPACK were relatively low. However, as a result of analyzing the performance assessment of pre-service teachers who showed low TPK in the questionnaire, it was found that the TPK was high. Conversely, as a result of analyzing the performance assessment of pre-service teachers who showed high TPK in the questionnaire, it was found that the TPK was low. In addition, as a result of analyzing the performance assessment of pre-service teachers who showed low TCK in the questionnaire, it was found that the TCK was very high. Conversely, as a result of analyzing the performance assessment of pre-service teachers who showed high TCK in the questionnaire, the actual TCK competency was found to be low. Although TPCK was high in the questionnaire, TPCK was found to be low through actual results of performance assessment. Through these results, it was confirmed that TPACK measurement tools measure self-efficacy rather than actual capability.

이 연구에서는 예비 교사들이 갖고 있는 TPACK의 실천적 역량을 측정하기 위하여 기존의 연구들에서 사용한 TPACK 측정 설문지와 수행평가를 통해 드러난 TPACK 역량의 관계를 비교하였다. 이를 위하여 이 연구에서는 예비 교사의 TPACK 설문지를 개발하였다. 또한 '달과 천체의 변화'에 관련된 수행평가 과제 및 면담을 통해 예비 교사의 TPACK 역량의 실제를 분석하였다. 설문 분석 결과에서는 예비교사들의 PCK와 TPK이 높게 나타났고, 상대적으로 TCK와 TPACK이 낮은 것으로 나타났다. 그러나 설문에서는 TPK가 낮은 것으로 나타난 예비교사의 수행평가를 분석한 결과 TPK가 높은 것으로 나타났다. 반대로 설문에서는 TPK가 높은 것으로 나타난 예비교사의 수행평가를 분석한 결과 TPK는 낮은 것으로 나타났다. 또한 설문에서 TCK가 낮은 것으로 나타난 예비교사의 수행평가를 분석한 결과, 반대로 TCK가 매우 높은 것으로 나타났다. 반대로 설문에서 TCK가 높은 것으로 나타난 예비교사의 수행평가를 분석한 결과, 실제 TCK 역량은 낮은 것으로 나타났다. TPACK가 설문에서는 높게 나타난 경우에도 수행평가의 실제 결과를 통해서는 TPACK가 낮은 것으로 나타났다. 이를 통해 TPACK 측정 도구들이 실행 역량 보다는 자기효능감을 측정하는 것임을 확인하였다.

Keywords

References

  1. Abbitt, J. T. (2011). Measuring Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge in Preservice Teacher Education. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 43(4), 281-300. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2011.10782573
  2. Archambault, L. M., & Barnett, J. H. (2010). Revisiting technological pedagogical content knowledge: Exploring the TPACK framework. Computers & Education, 55(4), 1656-1662. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2010.07.009
  3. Bell, R. L., & Trundle, K. C. (2008). The use of a computer simulation to promote scientific conceptions of moon phases. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45, 346-372. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20227
  4. Biswas, G., Leelawong, K., Schwartz, D., & Vye, N. (2005). TTAG at Vanderbilt Learning by teaching: A new agent paradigm for educational software. Applied Artificial Intelligence, 19(3-4), 363-392. https://doi.org/10.1080/08839510590910200
  5. Carr, A. A., Jonassen, D. H., Litzinger, M. E., & Marra, R. M. (1998). Good ideas to foment educational revolution: The role of systematic change in advancing situated learning, constructivism, and feminist pedagogy. Educational Technology, 38(1), 5-14.
  6. Chai, C. S., Koh, J. H. L., Tsai, C. C., & Tan, L. L. W. (2011). Modeling primary school pre-service teachers' Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK) for meaningful learning with information and communication technology (ICT). Computers & Education, 57(1), 1184-1193. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2011.01.007
  7. Choe, H., & Lee, T. (2015). Implementation and Analysis about Technology Knowledge Education Program for Pre-service Teacher based on the TPACK Model. Journal of The Korea Society of Computer and Information, 20(2), 231-239. https://doi.org/10.9708/jksci.2015.20.2.231
  8. Choi, E. S., Lee, Y., & Paik, S. H. (2017). The effects of programming-based lessons on science teachers' perceptions related to TPACK. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education. 37(4), 693-703. https://doi.org/10.14697/jkase.2017.37.4.693
  9. Daniel, C. E., Douglas, N. G. & Roy, D. P. (1999). Addressing the challenges of inquiry-based learning through technology and curriculum design. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 8(3&4), 391-450. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327809jls0803&4_3
  10. Duke, N. K., & Mallette, M. H. (Eds.). (2004). Literacy research methodologies. New York, NY: The Guilford Press.
  11. Ertmer, P. A., & Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. T. (2010). Teacher technology change: How knowledge, confidence, beliefs, and culture intersect. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 42(3), 255-284. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2010.10782551
  12. Gall, M. D., Gall, J. P., & Borg, W. R. (2007). Educational research: An introduction (8th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson Education.
  13. Graham, C. R., Burgoyne, N., Cantrel, P., Smith, L., Clair, L.S. & Haris, R. (2009). TPACK development in science teaching: Measuring the TPACK confidence of inservice science teachers. TechTrends 53(5), 70-79. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-009-0328-0
  14. Guzey, S. S., & Roehrig, G. (2009). Teaching Science with Technology: Case Studies of Science Teachers' Development of Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 9(1), 25-45.
  15. Higgins, T. E., & Spitulnik, M. W. (2008). Supporting teachers' use of technology in science instruction through professional development: A literature review. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 17, 511-521. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-008-9118-2
  16. Jang, S. J., & Tsai, M. F. (2012). Exploring the TPACK of Taiwanese elementary math ematics and science teachers with respect to use of interactive whiteboards. Computers & Education, 59(2), 327-338 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.02.003
  17. Jung, J., & Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. (2020). Course-level modeling of pre-service teacher learning of technology integration. British Journal of Educational Technology, 51(2), 555-571. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12840
  18. Kang, S., & Jang M. (2016). On secondary mathematics teachers' technology integration. Journal of Korean Society of Mathematics Education Series A: The Mathematical Education, 55(4), 523-538.
  19. Kim, M. C., Hannafin, M. J., & Bryan, L. A. (2007). Technology-enhanced inquiry tools in science education; An emerging pedagogical framework for classroom practice. Science Education, 91, 1010-1030. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20219
  20. Koehler, M. J., & Mishra, P. (2005). What Happens When Teachers Design Educational Technology? The Development of Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 32(2), 131-152. https://doi.org/10.2190/0EW7-01WB-BKHL-QDYV
  21. Koehler, M. J., Mishra, P., Hershey, K., & Peruski, L. (2004). With a little help from your students: A new model for faculty development and online course design. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 12(1), 25-55.
  22. Koehler, M. J., Shin, T. S., & Mishra, P. (2012). How do we measure TPACK? Let me count the ways. In Educational technology, teacher knowledge, and classroom impact: A research handbook on frameworks and approaches (pp 16-31). IGI Global.
  23. Koh, J . H. L ., & Chai, C. S. (2015). Towards a Web 2.0 TPACK lesson design framework: Applications of a Web 2.0 TPACK survey of Singapore preservice teachers. In T. B. Lin, V. Chen, & C. Chai (Eds.), New media and learning in the 21st century (pp. 161-180). Singapore: Springer.
  24. Landry, G. A. (2010). Creating and Validating an Instrument to measure Middle Mathematics Teachers' Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge(TPACK), Doctoral Dissertation, University of Tennessee.
  25. Lee, D. H., & Whang, W. H. (2017). Development and Validation of TPACK Measurement Tool for Mathematics Teachers. Journal of Korean Society of Mathematics Education Series A: The Mathematical Education, 56(4), 407-434.
  26. Lee, H., Linn, M. C., Varma, K., & Liu, O. L. (2010). How do technology-enhanced inquiry science units impact classroom learning? Journal of Research in Sience Teaching, 47, 71-90. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20304
  27. Lee, M. H., & Tsai, C. C. (2010). Exploring teachers' perceived self efficacy and technological pedagogical content knowledge with respect to educational use of the World Wide Web. Instructional Science, 38(1), 1-21. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-008-9075-4
  28. Linn, M. C., Davis, E. A., Bell, P. (2004). Inquiry and technology. In : Linn, M. C., Davis, E., Bell, P. (eds) Internet environments for science education(pp. 3-28), Routledge.
  29. Lundin, J., Svensson, L., Pareto, L., & Lundh Snis, U. (2009). What makes the skilled, skilled?-Conflicts as analytical tools to describe skills in everyday life, information and socio-cultural theory. In T. Karlsohn (Ed.), Society, technology and learning (Vol. 1, p. 195). Stockholm, Sweden: Carlsson.
  30. Lux, N. J., Bangert, A. W., & Whittier, D. B. (2011). The development of an instrument to assess preservice teacher's technological pedagogical content knowledge. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 45(4), 415-431. https://doi.org/10.2190/EC.45.4.c
  31. Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006a). Designing learning from day one: A first day activity to foster design thinking about educational technology. Teachers College Record.
  32. Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006b). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers college record, 108(6), 1017-1054. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9620.2006.00684.x
  33. Mistler-Jackon, M., & Songer, N. B. (2000). Student motivation and internet technology: Are students empowered to learn science? Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37, 459-479. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-2736(200005)37:5<459::AID-TEA5>3.0.CO;2-C
  34. Niess, M. L. (2011). Investigating TPACK: Knowledge Growth in Teaching with Technology. Journal of Educational Computing Research 4(3), 29-317.
  35. Osborn, J., & Hennessy, S. (2003). Literature review in science education and the role of ICT: Promise, Problems and future directions. Bristol: NESTA Futurelab Series.
  36. Orlikowski, W. J. (2002). Knowing in practice: Enacting a collective capability in dis tributed organizing. Organization Science, 13(3), 249-273. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.13.3.249.2776
  37. Pedersen, J. E., Yerrick, R. K. (2000). Technology in science teacher education: survey of current uses and desired knowledge among science educators. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 11(2), 131-153.
  38. Scherer, R., Tondeur, J., Siddiq, F., & Baran, E. (2018). The importance of attitudes toward technology for pre-service teachers' technological, pedagogical, and content knowledge: Comparing structural equa tion modeling approaches. Computers in Human Behavior, 80, 67-80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.11.003
  39. Schmidt, D. A., Baran, E., Thompson, A. D., Mishra, P., Koehler, M. J., & Shin, T. S. (2009). Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK). Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 42(2), 123-149. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2009.10782544
  40. Schnittka, C. G., & Bell, R. L. (2009). Preservice biology teachers' use of interactive display systems to support reforms-based science instruction. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 9(2).
  41. Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4-14. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X015002004
  42. Shulman, L. S. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57(1), 1-22. https://doi.org/10.17763/haer.57.1.j463w79r56455411
  43. Shin, W., Han, I., & Eom, M. (2012). Influence of Technology Integration Course on Preservice Teachers' Technological Pedagogical and Content Knowledge (TPACK), Journal of The Korean Association of Information Education, 16(1), 71-80.
  44. So, H.-J., & Kim, B. (2009). Learning about problem based learning: Student teachers integrating technology, pedagogy and content knowledge. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 25(1), 101-116. https://doi.org/10.17232/KSET.25.4.101
  45. Songer, N. B., Lee, H. S., Kam, R. (2002). Technology-rich inquiry science in urban classrooms; what are the barriers to inquiry pedagogy? Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(2), 128-150. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.10013
  46. Varma, K., Husic, F., & Linn, M. C. (2008). Targeted support for using technology-enhanced science inquiry models. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 17, 341-356. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-008-9104-8
  47. Willermark, S. (2018). Technological Pedagogical and Content Knowledge: A Review of Empirical Studies Published From 2011 to 2016. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 56(3), 315-343. https://doi.org/10.1177/0735633117713114
  48. Wothke, W. (1993) Nonpositive definite matrices in structural modeling. In K.A. Bollen & J.S. Long (Eds.), Testing Structural Equation Models (Chap. 11, pp. 256-293). Newbury Park NJ: Sage.