You are here:

Scaffolding With and Through Videos: An Example of ICT-TPACK
ARTICLE

, Aalborg University, Denmark ; , , University of Waikato, New Zealand

CITE Journal Volume 12, Number 4, ISSN 1528-5804 Publisher: Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education, Waynesville, NC USA

Abstract

In New Zealand and internationally claims are being made about the potential for information and communication technologies (ICTs) to transform teaching and learning. However, the theoretical underpinnings explaining the complex interplay between the content, pedagogy and technology a teacher needs to consider must be expanded. This article explicates theoretical and practical ideas related to teachers’ application of their ICT technology, pedagogy, and content knowledge (TPACK) in science. The article unpacks the social and technological dimensions of teachers’ use of TPACK when they use digital videos to scaffold learning. It showcases the intricate interplay between teachers’ knowledge about content, digital video technology, and students’ learning needs based on a qualitative study of two science teachers and their students in a New Zealand primary school.

Citation

Otrel-Cass, K., Khoo, E. & Cowie, B. (2012). Scaffolding With and Through Videos: An Example of ICT-TPACK. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 12(4), 369-390. Waynesville, NC USA: Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education. Retrieved March 25, 2019 from .

View References & Citations Map

References

  1. Angeli, C., & Valanides, N. (2008). TPCK in pre-service teacher education: Preparing primary education students to teach with technology. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New York City, NY. Retrieved from http://punya.educ.msu.edu/presentations/AERA2008/AngeliValanides_AERA2008.pdf
  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. Armstrong, V., Barnes, S., Sutherland, R., Curran, S., Mills, S., & Thompson, I. (2005). Collaborative research methodology for investigating teaching and learning: The use of interactive whiteboard technology. Educational Review, 57(4), 457-469.
  4. Banister, S., & Reinhart, R.V. (2011). TPCK for impact: Classroom teaching practices that promote social justice and narrow the digital divide in an urban middle school. Computers in the Schools, 28(1), 5-26. Doi:10.1080/07380569.2011.551086
  5. Buckingham, D., & Willet, R. (2009). Video cultures: Media technology and everyday creativity. London, England: Palgrave Macmillan.
  6. Cole, M., & Engström, Y. (1993). A cultural-historical approach to distributed cognition. In G. Salomon (Ed.), Distributed cognitions (pp. 88-110). New York, NY: Cambridge
  7. Driver, R., Asoko, H., Leach, J., Scott, P., & Mortimer, E. (1994). Constructing scientific knowledge in the classroom. Educational Researcher, 23(7), 5-12.
  8. Ertmer, P.A., Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A.T., Sadik, O., Sendurur, E., & Sendurur, P. (2012). Teacher beliefs and technology integration practices: A critical relationship. Computers& Education, 59(2), 423–435. Doi:10.1016/J.compedu.2012.02.001
  9. Fjuk, A., & Ludvigsen, S. (2001). The complexity of distributed collaborative learning: Unit of analysis. In P. Dillenbourg, A. Eurelings, & K. Hakkarainen, (Eds.), European Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 12(4)
  10. Forbes, D. (2011). Beyond lecture capture: Student-generated podcasts in teacher education. Waikato Journal of Education, 16(1), 53-65.
  11. Graham, C.R. (2011). Theoretical considerations for understanding technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK). Computers& Education, 57(3), 1953-1960.
  12. Hung, H.T. (2009). Learners’ perceived value of video as mediation in foreign language learning. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 18(2), 171-190.
  13. Kearney, M., & Treagust, D.F. (2001). Constructivism as a referent in the design and development of a computer program using interactive digital video to enhance learning in physics. Australian Journal of Educational Technology, 17(1), 64–79.
  14. Koehler, M.J., & Mishra, P. (2008). Introducing TPCK. In AACTE Committee on Innovation and Technology (Ed.), The handbook of technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPCK) for educators (pp. 3-29). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  15. Kress, G., Charalampos, T., Jewitt, C., & Ogborn, J. (2006). Multimodal teaching and learning: The rhetorics of the science classroom. London, England: Continuum.
  16. Lemke, J.L. (1998). Multiplying meaning. Visual and verbal semiotic in scienti?c text. In J.R. Martin& R. Veel (Eds.), Reading science (pp. 87-114). London, England: Routledge.
  17. Lesh, R., & Lehrer, R. (2000). Iterative refinement cycles for videotape analyses of conceptual change. In A.E. Kelly (Ed.), Handbook of research design in mathematics and science education (pp. 665–708). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
  18. Libarkin, J., & Brick, C. (2002). Research methodologies in science education: Visualization and the geosciences. Journal of Geoscience Education, 50(4), 449–455.
  19. Liebenberg, L. (2009). The visual image as discussion point: Increasing validity in boundary crossing research. Qualitative Research, 9(4), 441–467.
  20. Lincoln, Y.S., & Guba, E.G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 12(4)
  21. Linn, M.C, Clark, D. & Slotta, J.D. (2003). WISE Design for knowledge integration. Science Education, 87(4), 517-538.
  22. Linn, M.C., & Hsi, S. (2000). Computers, teachers, and peers: Science learning partners. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  23. Loughran, J. (2006). Developing a pedagogy of teacher education: Understanding teaching and learning about teaching. London, England: Routledge.
  24. Mardis, M.A. (2009). Viewing Michigan’s digital future: Results of a survey of educators’ use of digital video in the USA. Learning, Media and Technology, 34(3), 243–257.
  25. Mishra, P., & Koehler, M.J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017-1054.
  26. Niesyto, H. (2000). Youth research on video self-productions: Reflections on a socialaesthetic approach. Visual Sociology, 15, 135–154.
  27. Norman, D.A. (1988). The psychology of everyday things. New York, NY: Basic Books.
  28. Oliver, R., & Herrington, J. (2000). Using situated learning as a design strategy for webbased learning. In B. Abbey (Ed.), Instructional and cognitive impacts of web-based education (pp. 178-191). Hershey, PA: Idea Publishing group.
  29. Osborne, J., & Hennessy, S. (2003). Literature review in science education and the role of ICT: Promise, problems and future directions. A Report for NESTA Futurelab, 6. Retrieved from http://edutice.archives-ouvertes.fr/docs/00/19/04/41/PDF/osborne-j2003-r6.pdf
  30. Otrel-Cass, K., Cowie, B., & Khoo, E. (2011). Augmenting primary teaching and learning science through ICT. Summary Report. Wellington, NZ: Teaching Learning Research Initiative. Retrieved from http://www.tlri.org.nz/sites/default/files/projects/9271_otrelcass-summaryreport.pdf
  31. Ottestad, G. (2010). Innovative pedagogical practice with ICT in three Nordic countries: Differences and similarities. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 26(6), 478–491.
  32. Papastergiou, M. (2009). Digital game-based learning in high school computer science education: Impact on educational effectiveness and student motivation. Computers& Education, 52(1), 1–12.
  33. Pea, R.D. (2004). The social and technological dimensions of scaffolding and related theoretical concepts for learning, education, and human activity. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(3), 423–451.
  34. Pink, S. (2007). Doing visual ethnography: Images, media and representation in research. London, England: Sage Publications.
  35. Puntambekar, S., & Kolodner, J.L. (2005). Toward implementing distributed scaffolding: Helping students learn science from design. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42(2), 185–217.
  36. Rogoff, B., & Wertsch, J.V. (1984). New directions for child development: No 23: Children's learning in the "zone of proximal development" San Francisco, CA: JosseyBass.
  37. Rosaen, C.L., Lundeberg, M., Cooper, M., Fritzen, A., & Terpstra, M. (2008). Noticing noticing: How does investigation of video records change how teachers reflect on their experiences? Journal of Teacher Education, 59(4), 347-360.
  38. 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 Computing in Education, 42(2), 123-149.
  39. Selwyn, N. (2004). Reconsidering political and popular understandings of the digital divide. New Media& Society, 6(3), 341–362.
  40. Selwyn, N., & Facer, K. (2007). Beyond the digital divide: Rethinking digital inclusion for the 21st century. Futurelab. Retrieved from the Instructional Media+ Magic website: http://www.immagic.com/eLibrary/ARCHIVES/GENERAL/FUTRLBUK/F070530B.pdf
  41. Sherer, P., & Shea, T. (2011). Using online video to support student learning and engagement. College Teaching, 59(2), 56–59. Doi:10.1080/87567555.2010.511313
  42. Shulman, L.S. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57(1), 1–22.
  43. Stake, R.E. (1995). The art of case study research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
  44. Tabak, I. (2004). Synergy: A complement to emerging patterns of distributed scaffolding. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(3), 305–335.
  45. Trautmann, N., & MaKinster, J. (2010). Flexibly adaptive professional development in support of teaching science with geospatial technology. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 21(3), 351–370. in Technology and Teacher Education, 12(4)
  46. Vygotsky, L.S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  47. Wertsch, J.V. (1998). Mind as action. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
  48. Williamson, B. (2006). Elephants can’t jump: creativity, new technology and concept exploration in primary science. In P. Warwick, E. Wilson, & M. Winterbottom (Eds.), Teaching and learning primary science with ICT (pp. 70-92). Berkshire, UK: Open
  49. Yore, L., Bisanz, G.L., & Hand, B.M. (2003). Examining the literacy component of science literacy: 25 years of language arts and science research. International Journal of Science Education, 25(6), 689–725.
  50. Zibidis, D., Chionidou-Moskofoglou, M., & Doukakis, S. (2011). Primary teachers’ embedding educational software of mathematics in their teaching practices. International Journal of Teaching and Case Studies, 3(2), 216–227.
  51. Zollman, D. & Fuller, R. (1994). Teaching and learning physics with interactive video. Physics Today, 47, 41-47.

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. TPACK in Special Education: Preservice Teacher Decision Making While Integrating iPads Into Instruction

    Susan Anderson, Robin Griffith & Lindy Crawford, Texas Christian University, United States

    Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education Vol. 17, No. 1 (March 2017) pp. 97–127

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.