Journal of Technology and Teacher Education Volume 18, Number 4, ISSN 1059-7069 Publisher: Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education, Waynesville, NC USA
This qualitative case study explores the potential of technology integration teaching cases to develop preservice mathematics teachers’ Pedagogical Technology Integration Content Knowledge (PTICK). A cohort of eight mathematics education students was enrolled in a technology integration course at a large southeastern university that emphasizes pedagogy. Content analysis was used to examine student data: case responses, case reflections, course reflections, and focus group interviews. Findings of the study indicated the development of PTICK as a whole and individual aspect of PTICK. The researchers observed enhanced pedagogical knowledge and reflective knowledge during the study. The importance of placing the instructional technology course within the preservice teachers’ program of study was recognized in the finding of this study, as the preservice teachers were better able to drawing connections between case concepts and mathematics pedagogy content.
Kinuthia, W., Brantley-Dias, L. & Junor Clarke, P.A. (2010). Development of Pedagogical Technology Integration Content Knowledge in Preparing Mathematics Preservice Teachers: The Role of Instructional Case Analyses and Reflection. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 18(4), 645-669. Waynesville, NC USA: Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education. Retrieved March 21, 2019 from https://www.learntechlib.org/primary/p/30334/.
© 2010 Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education
- AaCte Committee on innovation and technology (2008). Handbook of technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPCK) for educators. New york: routledge.
- Andrews, L. (2002). Preparing general education pre-service teachers for inclusion: Web-enhanced case-based instruction. Journal of Special Education Technology, 17(3), 27-35.
- Angeli, C. (2004). The effects of case-based learning on early childhood pre-service teachers’ beliefs about the pedagogical uses of iCt. Journal of Educational Media, 29(139–151).
- Barnett, C. S., & Tyson, P. A. (1999). Case methods and teacher change: shifting authority to build autonomy. In M. A. Lundeberg, B. B. Levin & H. L. Harrington
- Becker, H. J. (2001). How are teachers using computers in instruction? Paper presented at the annual Meeting of the american research association, seattle, Wa.
- Beijaard, D., Meijer, P. C., & Verloop, N. (2004). Reconsidering research on teachers’ professional identity. Teaching and Teacher Education, 20, 107-128.
- Daehler, K. R., & Shinohara, M. (2001). A complete circuit is a complete circle: exploring the potential of case materials and methods to develop teachers’ content
- Ertmer, P. A. (2005). Teacher pedagogical beliefs: the final frontier in our quest for technology integration? Educational Technology Research and Development, 53(4), 25-39.
- Ertmer, P. A., Conklin, D., Lewandowski, J., & Osika, E. (2003). Increasing preservice teachers’ capacity for technology integration through the use of electronic models. Teacher Education Quarterly, 30(1), 95-112.
- Flores, M. A., & Day, C. (2006). Contexts which shape and reshape new teachers’ identities: a multi-perspective study Teaching and Teacher Education, 22(2), 219-232.
- Graf, D. (1991). A model for instructional design case materials. Educational Technology Research and Development, 39(3), 81-88.
- Grossman, P. L. (1990). The Making of a Teacher. New york: College Press.
- Guerraro, S. M. (2005). Teacher knowledge and a new domain of expertise: Pedagogical technology knowledge. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 33(3), 249 - 267.
- Hewitt, J., Pedretti, E., Bencze, L., Vaillancourt, B. D., & Yoon, S. (2003). New applications for multimedia cases: Promoting reflective practice in preservice
- 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.
- Koehler, M. J., & Mishra, P. (2008). Introducing tPCK American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education (AACTE). Handbook of technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPCK) for educators (pp. 3-29). New york: routledge.
- Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. New york: Cambridge university Press.
- Lee, Y., & Ertmer, P. A. (2006). Examining the impact of small group discussions and question prompts on vicarious learning outcomes. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 39(1), 66-80.
- Levin, B. B. (1995). Use the case method in teacher education: the role of discussion and experience in teachers’ thinking about cases. Teaching and Teacher Education, 11(1), 63-79.
- Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic Inquiry. Beverly hills, Ca: sage Publications.
- Lundeberg, M. A., & Scheurman, G. (1997). Looking twice means seeing more: Developing pedagogical knowledge through case analysis. Teaching and Teacher Education, 13(8), 783-797.
- Merriam, S. B. (1998). Qualitative research and case study applications in education (revised and expanded ed.). San Francisco, Ca: jossey-Bass inc.
- Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: a framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 10171054.
- Niess, M. L. (2005). Preparing teachers to teach science and mathematics with technology: Developing a technology pedagogical content knowledge. . Teaching and Teacher Education, 21(509-523).
- Pierson, M. (2001). Technology integration practice as a function of pedagogical expertise. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 33(4), 413-430.
- Powell, R. (2000). Case-based teaching in homogeneous teacher education contexts: a study of preservice teachers’ situative cognition. Teaching and Teacher Education, 16(3), 389-410.
- Roblyer, M. D. (2004). Educational Technology in Action: Problem-based Exercises for Technology Integration. Upper saddle river, nj: Pearson Prentice hall.
- Rodgers, C. (2002). Defining reflection: another look at john Dewey and reflective thinking. Teachers College Record, 104(4), 842-866.
- Schon, D. A. (1987). Educating the Reflective Practitioner. San Francisco, Ca: jossey-Bass.
- Shulman, J. H. (1992). Tender feelings, hidden thoughts: Confronting bias, innocence, and racism through case discussions. San Francisco, Ca: Far West Laboratory
- Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4-14.
- Shulman, L. S. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57(1), 1-22.
- Shulman, L. S. (1998). Theory, practice, and the education of professionals. The Elementary School Journal, 98(5), 511-526.
- Wright, P. (1996). Simulating reality: the role of the case incident in higher education. Education + Training, 38(6), 20-24.
- Yin, R. (2003). Case study research: Design and methods (3rd ed.). Thousand oaks, Ca: sage Publishing.
These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. If you see a mistake in the references above, please contact email@example.com.
Teacher knowledge for early mathematics education in a technology-rich environment - in the eyes of practitioners
Kam Ling Lao, Open University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong
Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference 2017 (Mar 05, 2017) pp. 68–71
Current Tensions: A Review of Technology Integration Models Utilized by Pre-Service Teacher Educator Programs
Kristin Elwood & Wilhelmina Savenye, Arizona State University, United States
Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference 2015 (Mar 02, 2015) pp. 2295–2300
Petrea Redmond, University of Southern Queensland, Australia; Jennifer Lock, University of Calgary, Canada
Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference 2013 (Mar 25, 2013) pp. 5084–5091
These links are based on references which have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. If you see a mistake, please contact firstname.lastname@example.org.