You are here:

A rubric for assessing teachers' lesson activities with respect to TPACK for meaningful learning with ICT

, National Institute of Education, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore

Australasian Journal of Educational Technology Volume 29, Number 6, ISSN 0814-673X Publisher: Australasian Society for Computers in Learning in Tertiary Education


Teachers' technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) for meaningful learning with ICT describes their knowledge for designing ICT lesson activities with respect to five dimensions: active, constructive, authentic, intentional, and cooperative. The ICT lesson activities designed by teachers can be assessed to determine the strengths and weaknesses of their TPACK for meaningful learning with ICT in practice. This study describes the conception, validation, and implementation of a rubric for assessing ICT lesson activities with respect to the dimensions of meaningful learning with ICT. It was conducted with 55 Singaporean pre-service teachers trained to teach Chinese as a second language. The 217 lesson activities they designed during a compulsory ICT module were rated using the rubric. High ratings were obtained for the active dimension because the activities involved students using and manipulating ICT tools. However, the ratings for the other dimensions were lower because opportunities for students' personal meaning-making, exploration of real-world phenomena, collaboration through divergent knowledge construction, as well as self-diagnosis and management of learning gaps were not as well supported in these activities. The uses of this rubric for enhancing TPACK assessment, ICT course design and the development of TPACK activity types will be discussed in the paper.


Koh, J. (2013). A rubric for assessing teachers' lesson activities with respect to TPACK for meaningful learning with ICT. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 29(6),. Australasian Society for Computers in Learning in Tertiary Education. Retrieved March 25, 2019 from .

View References & Citations Map


  1. Abbitt, J.T. (2011). Measuring technological pedagogical content knowledge in preservice teacher education: A review of current methods and instruments. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 43(4), 281.
  2. Angeli, C., & Valanides, N. (2009). Epistemological and methodological issues for the conceptualization, development, and assessment of ICT-TPCK: Advances in technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPCK). Computers& Education, 52(1), 154-168.
  3. Archambault, L.M., & Barnett, J.H. (2010). Revisiting technological pedagogical content knowledge: Exploring the TPACK framework. Computers& Education, 55(4), 1656–1662.
  4. Archambault, L.M., & Crippen, K. (2009). Examining TPACK among K-12 online distance educators in the United States. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 9(1). Retrieved from
  5. Arter, J., & McTighe, J. (2001). Scoring rubrics in the classroom. Thousand Oaks: Corwin Press Inc.
  6. Ausubel, D.P. (1960). The use of advance organizers in learning and retention of meaningfu material. Journal of Educational Psychology, 51, 262-272.
  7. Brown, J., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18(4), 32-42.
  8. Chai, C.S., Koh, J.H.L., & Tsai, C.C. (2010). Facilitating preservice teachers' development of technological, pedagogical, and content knowledge (TPACK). Educational Technology and Society, 13(4), 63-73.
  9. Chai, C.S., Koh, J.H.L., & Tsai, C.C. (2011). Exploring the factor structure of the constructs of technological, pedagogical, content knowledge (TPACK). The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 20(3), 595-603.
  10. Chai, C.S., Koh, J.H.L., & Tsai, C.-C. (2013). A review of technological pedagogical content knowledge. Education Technology and Society, 16(2), 31-51.
  11. Cox, S., & Graham, C.R. (2009). Diagramming TPACK in practice: Using and elaborated model of the TPACK framework to analyse and depict teacher knowledge. TechTrends, 53(5), 60-69.
  12. Ellis, R.A., Barrett, B.F.D., Higa, C., & Bliuc, A.M. (2011). Student experiences of learning technologies across the AsiaPacific region. Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 20(1), 103-117.
  13. Everson, M.E. (1994). Toward a process view of teaching reading in the second language Chinese curriculum. Theory into Practice, 33(1), 4-9.
  14. Gao, P., Choy, D., Wong, A.F.L., & Wu, J. (2009). Developing a better understanding of technology based pedagogy. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 25(5), 714-730. Retrieved from
  15. Harris, J., Grandgenett, N., & Hofer, M. (2010, March). Testing a TPACK-based technology integration assessment rubric. In D. Gibson& B. Dodge (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology& Teacher Education International Conference 2010 (pp. 3833-3840).
  16. Harris, J., & Hofer, M. (2012). Learning activity types wiki. Retrieved from
  17. Harris, J., Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. (2009). Teachers' technological pedagogical content knowledge and learning activity types: Curriculum-based technology integration reframed. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 41(4), 393-416.
  18. Hayes, D.N.A. (2007). ICT and learning: Lessons from Australian classrooms. Computers& Education, 49(2), 385-395.
  19. Hennessy, S., Ruthven, K., & Brindley, S. (2005). Teacher perspectives on integrating ICT into subject teaching: commitment, constraints, caution, and change. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 37(2), 155-192.
  20. Hogan, D., & Gopinathan, S. (2008). Knowledge management, sustainable innovation, and pre-service teacher education in Singapore. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 14(4), 369-384.
  21. Howland, J.L., Jonassen, D., & Marra, R.M. (2012). Meaningful learning with technology (4th ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
  22. Jedeskog, G., & Nissen, J. (2004). ICT in the classroom: Is doing more important than knowing? Education and Information Technologies, 9(1), 37-45.
  23. Jonsson, A., & Svingby, G. (2007). The use of scoring rubrics: Reliability, validity and educational consequences. Educational Research Review, 2(2), 130-144.
  24. Koh, J.H.L., Chai, C.S., & Tsai, C.C. (2010). Examining the technology pedagogical content knowledge of Singapore pre-service teachers with a large-scale survey. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 26(6), 563-573.
  25. Krippendorff, K. (2004). Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology. Thousand Oaks, California: SAGE Publications.
  26. Lee, M.H., & Tsai, C.C. (2010). Exploring teachers' perceived self efficacy and technological pedagogical content knowledge with respect to educational use of the WorldWide Web. Instructional Science, 38, 1-21.
  27. Lim, C.P., & Chai, C.S. (2008). Teachers' pedagogical beliefs and their planning and conduct of computermediated classroom lessons. British Journal of Educational Technology, 39(5), 807-828.
  28. Mayer, R.E. (2002). Rote versus meaningful learning. Theory into practice, 41(4), 226-232.
  29. Mayer, R.E., & Wittrock, M.C. (1996). Problem-solving transfer. In D.C. Berliner & R.C. Calfee (Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology (pp. 47-62). New York: Macmillan.
  30. Merrill, M.D. (2002). First principles of instruction. Educational Technology Research and Development, 50(3), 43-59.
  31. Mishra, P., & Koehler, M.J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017-1054.
  32. Ruthven, K., Hennessy, S., & Brindley, S. (2004). Teacher representations of the successful use of computerbased tools and resources in secondary-school English, Mathematics and Science. Teaching and Teacher Education, 20(3), 259-275.
  33. Schank, R.C. (1994). Active learning through multimedia. IEEE Multimedia, Spring, 69-77.
  34. Schmidt, D.A., Baran, E., Thompson, A.D., Mishra, P., Koehler, M.J., & Shin, T.S. (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.
  35. Shulman, L.S. (1999). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. In J. Leach& B. Moon (Eds.), Learners and pedagogy (pp. 61–77). London: Paul Chapman Publishing Ltd.
  36. Smeets, E., & Mooij, T. (2001). Pupil-­‐centred learning, ICT, and teacher behaviour: observations in educational
  37. Smeets, E. (2005). Does ICT contribute to powerful learning environments in primary education? Computers& Education, 44(3), 343-355.
  38. Teo, Y.H., & Ting, B.H. (2010). Singapore education ICT masterplans (1997-2004). In C.S. Chai& Q.Y. Wang (Eds.), ICT for self-directed and collaborative learning (pp. 2-14). Singapore: Pearson Education
  39. Ward, L., & Parr, J.M. (2010). Revisiting and reframing use: Implications for the integration of ICT. Computers& Education, 54(1), 113-122.
  40. Weber, R.P. (1990). Basic content analysis. Newbury Park, California: SAGE Publications.
  41. Windschitl, M. (2002). Framing constructivism in practice as the negotiation of dilemmas: An analysis of the conceptual, pedagogical, cultural, and political challenges facing teachers. Review of Educational Research, 72(2), 131-175.
  42. Windschitl, M. (2004). What types of knowledge do teachers use to engage learners in "doing science?". Paper commissioned by the National Academy of Sciences. Washington, DC: Board of Science Education. Retrieved February, 20, 2007.
  43. Zimmerman, B.J., & Campillo, M. (2003). Motivating self-regulated problem solvers. In J.E. Davidson& R.J. Sternberg (Eds.), The nature of problem-solving (pp. 233-262). New York: Cambridge University Press.

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. If you see a mistake in the references above, please contact

View References & Citations Map

Cited By

  1. TPACK Assessment in English Language Arts for Teachers of English as a Foreign Language

    Amber Yayin Wang, National Taichung University of Education, Taiwan

    EdMedia + Innovate Learning 2016 (Jun 28, 2016) pp. 1082–1087

  2. Designed for Success: Exploring Pre-service Teachers’ Growth in TPACK after Taking a Redesigned Blended Technology Integration Course

    Yi Jin, Alicia Jenner, Ozlem Karakaya, Erin Kramer & Denise Schmidt-Crawford, Iowa State University, United States

    Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference 2015 (Mar 02, 2015) pp. 3272–3275

These links are based on references which have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. If you see a mistake, please contact