You are here:

TPCK and the Wisdom of Practice: The Impact of Field Trials on Digital History Projects Using PrimaryAccess

, , University of Virginia, United States ; , Lehigh University, United States

Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference, in Las Vegas, Nevada, USA ISBN 978-1-880094-64-8 Publisher: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), Chesapeake, VA


In this qualitative study, the investigators examined the changes to their research design after a field trial in which middle school students create historical documentaries using PrimaryAccess, a web-based video editor. Mishra and Koehler's (2005) framework for Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge was the theoretical framework for this study. Using a qualitative participant observation design, the investigators analyzed the iterative process of refining a research design during a field trial to account for a full range of factors influencing student learning. The researchers hope this study will help define conditions for success for future iterations of this research project, as well as establish a framework for successful implementation outside the context of research.


Alexander, C., Broome, J. & Hammond, T. (2008). TPCK and the Wisdom of Practice: The Impact of Field Trials on Digital History Projects Using PrimaryAccess. In K. McFerrin, R. Weber, R. Carlsen & D. Willis (Eds.), Proceedings of SITE 2008--Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference (pp. 5178-5180). Las Vegas, Nevada, USA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved March 26, 2019 from .


View References & Citations Map


  1. Barton, K.C. (2005). Primary sources in history: Breaking through the myths. Phi Delta Kappan, 86(10), 745-753.
  2. Barton, K.C., & Levstik, L.S. (2004). Teaching history for the common good. New York: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  3. Brown, A.L. (1992). Design experiments: Theoretical and methodological challenges in creating complex interventions in classroom settings. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 2(2), 141-178.
  4. Bull, G.L., Knezek, G.A., Roblyer, M.D., Schrum, L. & Thompson, A. (2005). A proactive approach to a research agenda for educational technology. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 37(3), 217-220.
  5. Dede, C., Honan, J.P., & Peters, L.C. (2005). Scaling up success: Lessons from technology-based educational improvement. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
  6. Fishman, B.J. (2005). Adapting innovations to particular contexts of use: A collaborative framework. In C. Dede, J.P. Honan & L.C. Peters (Eds.), Scaling up Success: Lessons from Technology-Based Educational Improvement. (pp. 48-66). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
  7. Hancock, R.H., Knezek, G.A., & Christensen, R. (2007). Cross-validating measures of technology integration: A first step toward examining potential relationships between technology integration and student achievement. Journal of Computing in Teacher Education, 24(1), 15-21.
  8. Johnson, L., Maddux, C., Bull, G., Bell, L., Thompson, A., Schmidt, D., Schrum, L., Sprague, D., Conley, K. & McAnear, A. (2007). Advancing the profession: Facilitating critical research. Learning& Leading with Technology, 34(8), 22-24.
  9. 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.
  10. Lesgold, A. (2003). Detecting technology's effect in complex school environments. In G.D. Haertel, & B. Means (Eds.), Evaluating educational technology: Effective research designs for improving learning. (pp. 33-74).
  11. Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. The Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017-1054.
  12. Roblyer, M.D., & Knezek, G.A. (2003). New millennium research for educational technology: A call for a national research agenda. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 36(1), 60-71.
  13. Strudler, N. (2003). Answering the call: A response to Roblyer and Knezek. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 36(1), 72-76.
  14. Trochim, W.M.K. (2007). Web center for social research methods. Retrieved 10/19/2007 from
  15. VanSledright, B.A. (2002). In search of America's past: Learning to read history in elementary school. New York: Teachers College Press.
  16. Wilson, B.G. (1995). Metaphors for instruction: Why we talk about learning environments. Educational Technology, 35(5), 25-30.
  17. Wineburg, S.S. (1991). On the reading of historical texts: Notes on the breach between school and academy. American Educational Research Journal, 28(3), 495-519.

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