You are here:

Mathematics Teacher TPACK Standards and Development Model
Article

, Oregon State University, United States ; , University of Louisville, United States ; , Ball State University, United States ; , University of Dayton, United States ; , Miami University, United States ; , George Mason University, United States ; , Western Michigan University, United States ; , Wayne State University, United States ; , University of South Florida, United States

CITE Journal Volume 9, Number 1, ISSN 1528-5804 Publisher: Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education, Waynesville, NC USA

Abstract

What knowledge is needed to teach mathematics with digital technologies? The overarching construct, called technology, pedagogy, and content knowledge (TPACK), has been proposed as the interconnection and intersection of technology, pedagogy, and content knowledge. Mathematics Teacher TPACK Standards offer guidelines for thinking about this construct. A Mathematics Teacher Development Model describes the development of TPACK toward meeting these standards. The standards and model provide structured detail to further the work of various groups. The proposals may guide teachers, researchers, teacher educators, professional development consultants, and school administrators in the development and evaluation of professional development activities, mathematics education programs, and school mathematics programs.

Citation

Niess, M.L., Ronau, R.N., Shafer, K.G., Driskell, S.O., Harper, S.R., Johnston, C., Browning, C., Özgün-Koca, S.A. & Kersaint, G. (2009). Mathematics Teacher TPACK Standards and Development Model. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 9(1), 4-24. Waynesville, NC USA: Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education. Retrieved March 18, 2019 from .

Keywords

View References & Citations Map

References

  1. AACTE Committee on Innovation and Technology (Eds). (2008). Handbook of
  2. Association of Mathematics Teacher Educators. (2006). Preparing teachers to use technology to enhance the learning of mathematics. Retrieved from http://www.amte.net/
  3. Ball, D. L. (1988). Knowledge and reasoning in mathematical pedagogy: Examining what prospective teachers bring to teacher education. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Michigan State University, East Lansing.
  4. Borko, H., & Putnam, T. (1996). Learning to teach. In D. C. Berliner & R. C. Calfee (Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology (pp. 673-708), New York: Simon & Schuster Macmillan.
  5. Civil, M. (1992, April). Prospective elementary teachers’ thinking about mathematics. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA.
  6. Earle, R.S. (2002). The integration of instructional technology into public education: Promises and challenges. ET Magazine, 42(1), 5-13.
  7. Ferrini-Mundy, J., & Breaux, G. A. (2008). Perspectives on research, policy, and the use of technology in mathematics teaching and learning in the United States. In G. W. Blume & M. K. Heid (Eds.), Research on technology and the teaching and learning of mathematics: Volume 2. Cases and perspectives (pp. 427-448). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.
  8. Grossman, P. L. (1989). A study in contrast: Sources of pedagogical content knowledge for secondary English. Journal of Teacher Education, 40(5), 24-31.
  9. Grossman, P. L. (1990). The making of a teacher: Teacher knowledge and teacher education. New York: Teachers College Press.
  10. Grossman, P. L. (1991). Overcoming the apprenticeship of observation in teacher education coursework. Teaching and Teacher Education, 7, 245-257.
  11. International Society for Technology in Education. (2000). National educational
  12. International Society for Technology in Education. (2002). National educational
  13. International Society for Technology in Education. (2007). National educational technology standards and performance indicators for students. Eugene, OR: International Society for Technology in Education.
  14. International Society for Technology in Education. (2008). National educational technology standards and performance indicators for teachers. Eugene, OR: International Society for Technology in Education.
  15. Kaput, J. (1992). Technology and mathematics education. In. D. Grouws (Ed.), Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 515-556). New York: MacMillan Publishing.
  16. Kastberg, S., & Leatham, K. (2005). Research on graphing calculators at the secondary level: Implications for mathematics teacher education. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 5(1). Retrieved from http://www.citejournal.org/vol5/iss1/mathematics/article1.cfm
  17. Koehler, M. J. & Mishra, P. (2008). Introducing technological pedagogical content knowledge. In AACTE Committee on Innovation and Technology (Eds)., Handbook of
  18. Margerum-Leys, J., & Marx, R. W. (2002). Teacher knowledge of educational technology: A study of student teacher/mentor teacher pairs. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 26(4), 427-462.
  19. McDiarmid, G. W. (1990). Challenging prospective teachers’ beliefs during early field experience: A quixotic undertaking? Journal of Teacher Education, 41(3), 12-20.
  20. Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017-1054.
  21. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.
  22. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2007). Mathematics teaching today: Improving practice, improving student learning (2nd ed.). Reston, VA: Author.
  23. Niess, M. L. (2001). Research into practice: A model for integrating technology in
  24. Niess, M. L. (2005). Preparing teachers to teach science and mathematics with
  25. Niess, M. L. (2007, June). Mathematics teachers developing technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPCK). Paper presented at IMICT2007, Boston, MA.
  26. Niess, M. L. (2008). Knowledge needed for teaching with technologies – Call it TPACK. AMTE Connections, 17(2), 9-10.
  27. Niess, M. L., Sadri, P., & Lee, K. (2007, April). Dynamic spreadsheets as learning technology tools: Developing teachers’ technology pedagogical content knowledge (TPCK). Paper presented at the meeting of the American Educational Research Association Annual Conference, Chicago, IL.
  28. Pierson, M. E. (2001). Technology integration practices as a function of pedagogical expertise. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 33(4), 413-429.
  29. Rogers, E. M. (1995). Diffusion of innovations. New York, Free Press.
  30. Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15, 4-14.
  31. Shulman, L. S. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57, 1-22.
  32. Simon, M. A., & Brobeck, S. (1993, March). Changing views of mathematics learning: A
  33. Simon, M. A., & Mazza, W. (1993, October). From learning mathematics to teaching
  34. Thompson, A. D., & Mishra, P. (2007). Breaking news: TPCK becomes TPACK! Journal of Computing in Teacher Education, 24(2), 38, 64.
  35. Walen, S. B., Williams, S. R., & Garner, B. E. (2003). Pre-service teachers learning mathematics using calculators: A failure to connect current and future practice. Teaching and Teacher Education, 19, 445-462.
  36. Wilson, S. M., Shulman, L. S., & Richert, A. E. (1987). '150 different ways' of knowing: Representation of knowledge in teaching. In J. Calderhead (Ed.), Exploring teachers' thinking (pp. 104-124). London: Cassell.
  37. Yoder, A. J. (2000, October). The relationship between graphing calculator use and

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

View References & Citations Map

Cited By

  1. Teaching Geometry In The 21st Century: Investigating Teachers’ Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge Levels

    Enver Tatar, Atatürk University, Turkey; Ruhşen Aldemir, Kafkas University, Turkey; Margaret Niess, Oregon State University, United States

    Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching Vol. 37, No. 2 (April 2018) pp. 111–129

  2. Development of Social Presence in an Online Masters Degree Program: Engaging a Workbench Dialectic Inquiry Model

    Henry Gillow-Wiles, Southern Oregon University, United States; Margaret Niess, Oregon State University, United States

    Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference 2017 (Mar 05, 2017) pp. 2327–2335

  3. Exploring an Experienced Online Instructor’s Applications of TPACK in a Graduate-level Online Course Through the Online Students’ Perspectives: Design of a Qualitative Case Study

    Fan Ouyang, University of Minnesota, United States

    EdMedia + Innovate Learning 2015 (Jun 22, 2015) pp. 291–299

  4. Engaging Google Docs in Support of an Online Collaborative, Community of Learners Instructional Strategy

    Henry Gillow-Wiles & Margaret Niess, Oregon State University, United States

    Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference 2015 (Mar 02, 2015) pp. 3176–3183

  5. TPACK for Teaching Mathematics and Science and Differentiation of Instruction: Case Study with Pre-service Special Educators

    Nelly Tournaki & Irina Lyublinskaya, CUNY College of Staten Island, United States

    Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference 2015 (Mar 02, 2015) pp. 3004–3011

  6. An Investigation of a Pre-Service Elementary Mathematics Teacher’s Techno- Pedagogical Content Knowledge within the Context of Teaching Practices

    Esra Balgalmis, Turkey; Erdinç Cakiroglu, Middle East Technical University, Turkey; Kathryn Shafer, Ball State University, United States

    Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference 2014 (Mar 17, 2014) pp. 2210–2217

  7. Teaching Geometry with Technology: A Case Study of One Teacher’s Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge

    Ewelina McBroom, Southeast Missouri State University, United States

    Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference 2013 (Mar 25, 2013) pp. 4828–4836

  8. E.L.I.T.E: Enlisting Leaders in Technology Education Training Model

    Jason Beach & Jeremy Wendt, Tennessee Technological University, United States

    Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference 2013 (Mar 25, 2013) pp. 3580–3583

  9. A Comparative Study of Mathematical Content, Pedagogy and Technology using a Paired T-Test of the means of Seven Domains

    Maria Mitchell, Central Connecticut State University, United States

    Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference 2013 (Mar 25, 2013) pp. 2273–2278

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