An Investigation of Turkish Pre-Service Teachers’ Technological, Pedagogical and Content Knowledge

Abstract

Abstract:The purpose of this study is to investigate pre-service teachers' technological, pedagogical and content knowledge (TPACK) in Turkey. By using the "Survey of Pre-service Teachers' Knowledge of Teaching and Technology" developed by Schmidt et al. (2009), the study sought to determine if significant differences could be found in pre-service teachers' perceptions of TPACK when examined by gender, age, educational program, year of study, kind of instruction (day or night education) and field experience. Regression analysis was also used to examine if technology knowledge (TK), pedagogical knowledge (PK) and content knowledge (CK) significantly contributed to pre-service teachers' TPACK development. Participants of this study were 491 elementary pre-service teachers who attended the summer semester at Pamukkale University. The analysis of the collected data found a significant difference in pre-service teachers' perceptions of the TPACK when examined across gender, program, year of study and field experience, but no significant differences were found regarding age and kind of instruction. Finally, our regression model showed that CK and PK contributed significantly to pre-service teachers' TPACK development, but TK was not a significant predictor.

A comparison of pre-service, in-service and formation program for teachers perceptions of technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) in English language teaching (ELT)

“…Moreover similar to previous studies (Ertmer, 2005;West and Graham, 2007;Goktas et al, 2008;Sahin, 2011;Tondeur et al, 2012;Abera, 2014;Cetin-Berber and Erdem, 2015;Oz, 2015), in-service teachers" TPACK was found to be low despite technology training, as mentioned. That is, teachers applied PCK while teaching English language through technology like the conventional instruction (Kurt and Ciftci, 2012;Abera, 2014); for instance, projector and PowerPoint were used for only showing some pictures and delivering content similar to previous studies (Gulbahar, 2007;Yildirim, 2007;Goktas et al, 2009;Cakir, 2012;Unal and Ozturk, 2012;Kurt, 2013).…”

“…In early models, technology training and the rest of teacher preparation program were disconnected because computer literacy courses were separate from content methods classes and seldom engaged in real collaboration on how teachers could integrate technology into authentic learning experiences (Cetin-Berber and Erdem, 2015).…”

“…Examining the effectiveness of the technology-related courses reported that although PTs had positive attitude for the effectiveness of technology-related courses, they stated that technology training was limited to these two courses and these courses were relying more on theoretical technology education rather than giving PTs practice opportunities, and (Yuksel and Yasin, 2014); for that reason, the knowledge and skills gained from this process remain isolated and unused (Goktas et al, 2008;Cetin-Berber and Erdem, 2015). That is, although PTs might know the basic functions of technology use in the classroom, they might not be prepared to truly integrate these skills into their teaching (Ertmer, 2005;Sahin, 2011;Tondeur et al, 2012); consequently, teacher preparation programs may not prepare PTs to effectively use technology (West and Graham, 2007;Cetin-Berber and Erdem, 2015).…”

“…That is, although PTs might know the basic functions of technology use in the classroom, they might not be prepared to truly integrate these skills into their teaching (Ertmer, 2005;Sahin, 2011;Tondeur et al, 2012); consequently, teacher preparation programs may not prepare PTs to effectively use technology (West and Graham, 2007;Cetin-Berber and Erdem, 2015).…”

“…Websites are often used for one-way communication by teachers through showing video clips and pictures found on relevant sites to help students understand the scientific facts they have learned. However, websites are rarely used for generating class discussions promoting collaborative learning or creating knowledge (Cetin-Berber and Erdem, 2015). Hence, it is revealed that a majority of teachers use technology to support low-level curricular task for assisting traditional teaching and learning, rather than for high-level tasks to engage learners as active contributors to the learning process (Ottenbreit-Leftwich and Brush, 2011;Bang and Luft, 2013).…”