Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.7468/jksmee.2018.32.4.455

Analysis of pre-service teachers' cognition on a teacher education program in technology-friendly flipped classroom  

Kim, Dong-Joong (Korea University)
Kim, Daesang (Valdosta State University)
Choi, Sang-Ho (Korea University)
Publication Information
Communications of Mathematical Education / v.32, no.4, 2018 , pp. 455-475 More about this Journal
Abstract
The purpose of this study is to investigate characteristics of pre-service teachers' cognition about learning through the use of technology by employing a teacher education program in the use of technology-friendly flipped classroom. For this purpose, 45 pre-service teachers participated in the study and they completed both pre- and post-surveys including questions about Technology Adopter Category Index(TACI) and Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge(TPACK). They were also asked to write self-reflections on mathematics softwares(Geometer's Sketch Pad(GSP), Geogebra, Cabri 3D). Results show that the teacher education program in the use of technology-friendly flipped classroom affected pre-service teachers' cognitions of TACI and TPACK, and they perceived that technology integration helped students' mathematics learning process. Findings from this study indicate that ideas about how to develop a technology-friendly teacher education program are more specified..
Keywords
Technology; Flipped Classroom; Technology Adopter Category Index; Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge;
Citations & Related Records
Times Cited By KSCI : 1  (Citation Analysis)
연도 인용수 순위
1 Ko, J., & Park, M. (2018). A case study of flipped learning class in pre-service teacher education, Education of Primary School Mathematics, 21(1), 1-17.   DOI
2 Ministry of Education (2015). 2015 revised school curriculum, Ministry of Education announcement 2015-80.
3 Kwak, Y. (2016). The awareness of early childhood teachers about TPACK(Technology Pedagogical And Content Knowledge), The Journal of Early Childhood Education, 36(6), 245-276.   DOI
4 Kwon, S., Kim, N., Ryu, S., & Park, S. (2009). Mathematics education with technology, Seoul, Korea: Kyungmoonsa.
5 Kim, N., & Park, K. (2008). The use of computer in mathematics education, Seoul, Korea: Kyungmoonsa.
6 Kim, D.-J., Kim, D., & Choi, S. (2016). Exploring the possibility of application of the flipped classroom of the technology friendly mathematics teacher education program, Studies in Mathematical Education, 2016(3), 164-166.
7 Kim, S. (2012). Teachers' perspectives on the future mathematics classroom, Journal of Research in Curriculum Instruction, 16(1), 285-324.   DOI
8 Ryu, K., & Lee, Y. (2017). Effects of online teacher learning community activities linked with internship course for the improvement of elementary pre-service teacher's TPACK, The Journal of Korean Teacher Education, 34(2), 417-437.
9 Lew, H., & Shin, D. (1998). Mathematics education and computers, Seoul, Korea: Kyungmoonsa.
10 Park, S. (2015). Development of the revised model of flipped classroom and analysis of Its educational effects, Research in Social Studies Education, 22(2), 1-21.
11 Bong, M., & Song, G. (2004). Korean middle school teachers' and students' perceptions and attitudes toward ICT use in mathematics classroom, Journal of Research in Curriculum Instruction, 8(2), 147-165.
12 So, Y. (2013). Analysis of the structural relations between TPACK(Technology, Pedagogy and Content Knowledge), teaching efficacy, and perceived teaching professionalism in primary school teachers, Asian Journal of Education, 14(4), 125-147.   DOI
13 Son, H. (2011). Trend and prospect on using technology in mathematics education in Korea, School Mathematics, 13(3), 525-542.
14 Sohng, H., & Seo, S. (2016). Effects of project-based flipped classroom on the affective attitude and metacognitive learning strategies of pre-service teachers of English, English Language & Literature Teaching, 22(2), 167-192.
15 Shin, T. (2013). A relation between pre-service teachers' fixed mindsets regarding their abilities to teach with technology and their perceived TPACK, The Journal of Educational Studies, 44(2), 21-45.
16 Jeon, S., & Cho, C. (2014). An exploratory study with grounded theory on secondary mathematics teachers' difficulties of technology in geometry class, Journal of Educational Research in Mathematics, 24(3), 387-407.
17 Eom, M., Shin, W., & Han, I. (2011). A survey on the differences of pre-service teachers' perception of the technology, pedagogy, and content knowledge(TPACK), The Journal of Korean Teahcer Education, 28(4), 141-165.
18 Rim, H. (2009). Study on the effectiveness of team project to improve TPACK of preservice mathematics teachers, Journal of Educational Research in Mathematics, 19(4), 545-564.
19 Rim, H., & Choi, I. (2012). A case study on the effect of designing instruction according to the ASSURE model to mathematics teacher's TPACK and teaching efficacy, Journal of Educational Research in Mathematics, 22(2), 179-202.
20 Huh, N. (2015). Investigation into pre-math teachers' awareness of flipped learning, Journal of the Korean School Mathematics Society, 18(4), 449-470.
21 Huh, B., Choi, D., Kim, D., Kim, M., Kim, H., Pak, B., Son, J., Cha, W., Lee, S., & Cho, S. (2009). Designing the general framework for developing classroom-friendly teachers, Korean Journal of Teacher Education, 25(2), 1-23.
22 Whang, W., & Cha, S. (2002). A study on the effectiveness of dynamic geometry software in solving high school analytic geometry problems, The Mathematics Education, 41(3), 341-360.
23 Hwang, I. (2017). An analysis on the effects of flipped learning in a university mathematics clinic program, Teacher Education Research, 56(3), 227-246.   DOI
24 Bergmann, J., & Sams, A. (2015). Flipped learning[거꾸로 교실](Translated into Korean by C. P. Jeong & S. H. Lim), Seoul, South Korea: Eduniety. (Original work published 2014)
25 Kilpatrick, J., Swafford, J., & Findell, B. (Eds.). (2001). Adding It Up: Helping Children Learn Mathematics, Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
26 Dugas, C. A. (2005). Adopter characteristics and teaching styles of faculty adopters and nonadopters of a course management system, Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Indiana State University, Terre Haute, IN.
27 Geiger, V., & Faragher, R. (2010). CAS-enabled technologies as 'Agents Provocateurs' in teaching and learning mathematical modelling in secondary school classrooms, Mathematics Education Research Journal, 22(2), 48-68.   DOI
28 Heinich, R., Molenda, M., & Russell, J. (1989). Instructional media and the new technologies of instruction, New York: Macmillan Publishing.
29 Koehler, M. J., & Mishra, P. (2008). Introducing TPCK, AACTE Committee on Innovation and Technology(Ed.), The handbook of technological pedagogical content knowledge(TPCK) for educators(pp. 3-29), New York: Routledge.
30 Koehler, M. J., & Mishra, P. (2009). What is technological pedagogical content knowledge? Contemporary Issue in Technology and Teacher Education, 9(1), 60-70.
31 Lobato, J., Rhodehamel, B., & Hohensee, C. (2012). "Noticing" as an alternative transfer of learning process, Journal of the Learning Sciences, 21, 433-482.   DOI
32 Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for integrating technology in teachers' knowledge, Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017-1054.   DOI
33 NCTM(2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics, Reston, VA: NCTM.
34 Yeh, Y., Hsu, Y, Wu, H., Hwang, F., & Lin, T. (2014). Developing and validating technological pedagogical content knowledge-practical(TPACK- practical) through the Delphi survey technique, British Journal of Educational Technology, 45(4), 707-722.   DOI
35 Olofson, M. W., Swallow, M. J., & Neumann, M. D. (2016). TPACKing: A constructivist framing of TPACK to analyze teachers' construction of knowledge, Computers and Education, 95, 188-201.   DOI
36 Schmidt, D., Baran, E., Thompson, A., Mishra, P., Koehler, M., & Shin, T. (2009). Technological pedagogical content knowledge(TPACK): The development and validation of an assessment instrument for preservice teachers, Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 42(2), 123-149.   DOI