You are here:

Blending Pedagogical Examinations and Discourse with Teachers’ Practical Experiences for TPACK Transformation

, , Oregon State University, United States

Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference, in Savannah, GA, United States ISBN 978-1-939797-13-1 Publisher: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), Chesapeake, VA


To assist in-service teachers in integrating technologies as mathematics learning tools, different course designs frame the relationship among the content, pedagogy, and technology. This study examined the influence of an online course on teachers’ technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) for teaching mathematics with technology. An online instructional strategies course blends community-of-learners’ inquiries and collaborations with teachers’ practice and reflections as they design, implement, and assess the impact of teaching with technologies in their classrooms. The examination reveals nine mathematics in-service teachers’ TPACK transformations as they compiled Scoop Notebooks of their teaching and also engaged in community-of-learners’ explorations, discourse, and reflective examinations of reform-based, student-centered instructional strategies. Implications highlight strategies for teacher professional development that influences transformations in their TPACK.


Niess, M. & Gillow-Wiles, H. (2016). Blending Pedagogical Examinations and Discourse with Teachers’ Practical Experiences for TPACK Transformation. In G. Chamblee & L. Langub (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference (pp. 2989-2995). Savannah, GA, United States: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved March 22, 2019 from .

View References & Citations Map


  1. Akyol, Z., & Garrison, D.R. (2008). The development of a community of inquiry over time in an online course: Understanding the progression and integration of social, cognitive, and teaching presence. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 12(3-4), 3-22.
  2. Borko, H., Stecher, B., & Kuffner, K. (2007). Using artifacts to characterize reform-oriented instruction: The Scoop Notebook and rating guide. (Technical Report 707). Los Angeles: CA: National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED495853)
  3. Chiu, M.M., & Kuo, S.W. (2010). From metacognition to social metacognition: Similarities, differences and learning. Journal of Education Research, 3(4), 321–338.
  4. Cochran-Smith, M. & Lytle, S.L. (1999). Relationships of knowledge and practice: Teacher learning in communities. Review of Research in Education, 24, pp. 249-305.
  5. Conrad, D.L. (2008). From community to community of practice: Exploring the connection of online learners to informal learning in the workplace. American Journal of Distance Education, 22(1), 3-23.
  6. Dieker, L.A., & Monda-Amaya, L.E. (1995). Reflective teaching: A process for analyzing journals of preservice educators. Teacher Education and Special Education, 18, 240-252.
  7. Erickson, F. (2006). Definition and analysis of data from videotape: Some research procedures and their rationales. In J.L. Green, G. Camilli & P.B. Elmore (Eds.), Handbook of complementary methods in educational research (pp. 177-191). Washington, D.C.: American Educational Research Association.
  8. Garrison, D.R., & Cleveland-Innes, M. (2005). Facilitating cognitive presence in online learning: Interaction is not enough. American Journal of Distance Education, 19(3), 133-148
  9. Greeno, J.G., Collins, A., & Resnick, L.B. (1996). Cognition and learning. In D.C. Berliner & R.C. Calfee (Eds.), Handbook of Educational Psychology. New York: Macmillan.
  10. Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge University Press, 138.
  11. Loughran, J. (2002). Effective reflective practice: In search of meaning in learning about teaching. Journal of Teacher Education, 53, 33-43.
  12. Meyers, J.D., Chappell, A., Elder, M., Geist, A., & Schwidder, L. (2003). Re-Integrating the research record. Computing in Science and Engineering, 5(3), 44-50.
  13. Mishra, P. & Koehler, M.J. (2006) Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108, pp. 1017-1054.
  14. Moon, J., Passmore, C., Reiser, B.J., & Michaels, S. (2013). Beyond comparisons of online versus face-to-face pd: Commentary in response to Fishman et al., comparing the impact of online and face-toface professional development in the context of curriculum implementation. Journal of Teacher Education, 65(2), 172–176.
  15. Niess, M.L. (2005). Preparing teachers to teach science and mathematics with technology: Developing a technology pedagogical content knowledge. Teaching and Teacher Education, 21(5), 509-523.Papert, S. (1980). Mindstorms: Children, Computers, and Powerful Ideas. New York, NY: Basic Books.
  16. Papert, S. (2005). You can’t think about thinking without thinking about thinking about something. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 5(3/4), 366-367.
  17. Sztajn, P., Confrey, J., Holt Wilson, P. & Edgington, C. (2012). Learning trajectory based instruction: Toward a theory of teaching. Educational Researcher, 41(5), 147-156.
  18. Schön. D.A. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. New York, NY: Basic Books.
  19. Shreiter, B, & Ammon, P. (1989). Teachers’ Thinking and Their Use of Reading Contracts. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, California.
  20. Staus, N., Gillow-Wiles, H., & Niess, M.L. (2014). TPACK development in a three-year online masters program: How do teacher perceptions align with classroom practice? Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 22(3), 333–360. Stobaugh, R.R., & Tassell, J.L. (2011). Analyzing the degree of technology use occurring in pre-service teacher education. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 23(2), 143–157.
  21. Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of Practice: Learning as a Social System. Cambridge University.

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