CHARACTERIZING MATHEMATICS TEACHERS’ TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL CONTENT KNOWLEDGE
Abstract
Technology integration requires every teacher to become skilled and competent users of computer technology in the delivery of the lesson alongside with their content and pedagogical expertise. Anchored on the Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge Framework (Mishra & Koehler 2006), this cross-sectional correlational study aimed to investigate the technological pedagogical content knowledge of the secondary school mathematics teachers in the Division of Southern Leyte. Using an adapted standardized instrument, this study found out that mathematics teacher equipped with the necessary technological pedagogical content knowledge are generally novice, young and single female teacher who are knowledgeable in technology and technology integration and very knowledgeable in content and pedagogy. Regression analysis determines technological knowledge and technological content knowledge significantly predicts Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge among mathematics teachers. The study concludes that strong and significant knowledge on technology, pedagogy and content and their interrelatedness defines teachers’ creativeness and effectiveness in developing and delivering new mode of representations and solutions of mathematical content and problems making them responsive to the 21st century learners, and thereby recommends to strengthen mathematics teachers’ knowledge through continuous attendance to conferences and/or workshops on technology-integration in mathematics classroom.
Article visualizations:
Keywords
Full Text:
PDFReferences
Adediwura, A. A. & Tayo, T. (2007). Perceptions of Teacher Knowledge, Attitude and Teaching Skills as Predictor of Academic Performance in Nigerian Secondary Schools. Educational Research and Review, 2(7): 165-171.
Angeli, C., & Valanides, N. (2005). Preservice elementary teachers as information and communication technology designers: An instructional systems design model based on an expanded view of pedagogical content knowledge. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 21(4), 292–302.
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.
Arlington, VA: National Science Teachers Association Press. Keating, T., & Evans, E. (2001). Three computers in the back of the classroom: Pre-service teachers’ conceptions of technology integration.
Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, May 2008
Australian Association of Mathematics Teachers (AAMT) (2002). Standards for excellence in teaching mathematics in Australian schools. Adelaide: AAMT.
Australian Association of Mathematics Teachers. (2006). AAMT standards for excellence in teaching mathematics in Australian schools. Retrieved 3 April, 2009 from http://www.aamt.edu.au/Standards/Standards-document/AAMT-Standards-2006-edition
Baek, Y.G., Jong, J., & Kim, B. (2008). What makes teachers use of technology in the classroom? Exploring the factors affecting facilitation of technology with a Korean sample. Computers and Education, vol.50, no. 8, pp. 224-234.
Ball, D.L., Bass, H., 2000. «Interweaving content and pedagogy in teaching and learning to teach: Knowing and using mathematics». In: J. Boaler, éd. Multiple perspectives on the teaching and Learning of mathematics. Ablex, p. 83-104, Westport (CT).
Ball, D.L., Hill, H.C. & Bass, H., 2005. «Knowing Mathematics for Teaching: Who knows mathematics well enough to teach third grade, and how can we decide?» American Educator, n° 29, vol. 1, p. 14-46.
Bamidele, 2015, “Influence of Cognitive Performance on Mathematics Students Level of Achievement”, Vol. 1, No. 2 Issue, March 2003 Baran, et. al., 2011 “Tpack: An Emerging Research And Development Tool For Teacher Educators”, TOJET: The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology – October 2011, volume 10 Issue 4
Becta. (2003). What the Research Says about Using ICT in Maths. UK: Becta ICT Research.
Bingimlas, 2009.Barriers to the Successful Integration of ICT in Teaching and Learning Environment.
Blömeke, S., Paine, L., Houang, R.T., Hsieh, F.-J., Schmidt, W.H., Tatto, M.T., Bankov, K., et al. (2008). Future teachers’ competence to plan a lesson: First results of a six-country study on the efficiency of teacher education. ZDM Mathematics Education, 40, 749–762.
Blömeke, S. & Delaney, S. (2012). Assessment of teacher knowledge across countries: A review of the state of research. ZDM Mathematics Education, 44, 223-247.
Cajilig N., 2009. ”Integration of Information and Communication Technology in Mathematics Teaching in Metro Manila Public Secondary Schools”.
Darling-Hammond, L., Berry, B., & Thoreson, A. (2001) Does Teacher Certification
Matter? Evaluating the Evidence. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis. 23
(1), 57-77.
Dep.ed Order 37, series of 1997, ”Computer Literacy as a Basic Requirement for New Teachers”.
Dep.ed Order 28, series of 2009, “Guidelines in Accepting Information and Communication Technology (ICT) Equipment and Internet Access Services for Classroom Instruction and Administrative Use”.
Dep.ed Order 62, series of 2009, “Guidelines in Managing Existing Multimedia Materials in Schools”.
Dep.ed Order 78, series of 2009,” Guidelines on the Implementation and Operationalization of the Regional ICT TECH-VOC High Schools Effective School Year 2009-2010”.
Dep.ed Order 105, series of 2009, ”Guidelines in Managing the Proper Use of Internet Services in all Administrative Offices and Schools”.
Dep.ed Order 113, series of 2009,” Guidelines for the Transfer of Funds for the DepEd Internet Connectivity Project (DICP)”.
Dep.ed Order 121, series of 2010, “Updating the Technical Specifications of ICT Equipment and Internet Access Services”.
Dick, T. P., & Hollebrands, K. F. (2011). Focus in high school mathematics: Technology to support reasoning and sense making. Reston, VA: NCTM.
Donald, J. (1998). Technology in Mathematics Education. August 25, 1998, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State
University, Blackburg, USA, Unpublished dissertation.
D’Sousa, Sabita, M. and Woods, L. (2003). Secondary Students’ Resistance toward Incorporating Computer Technology into Mathematics Learning. Mathematics and Computer Education, Fall2003, http://www.findarticles.com
Franklin, C. (2004). Teacher preparation as a critical factor in elementary teachers: Use of computers. In R. Carlsen, N. Davis, J. Price, R. Weber, & D. Willis (Eds.), Society for Information Technology and Teacher Education Annual, 2004 (pp. 4994–4999). Norfolk, VA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education.
Forgasz, H.J. & Prince, N. (2002). Software used for mathematics learning – reporting on a survey. Vinculum, 39(1), 18-19.
Forgaz, H., (2006). Factors that Encourage or Inhibit Computer Use for Secondary Mathematics Teaching. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 25(1), 77-93.
Gadanidis, G., & Geiger, V. (2010). A social perspective on technology enhanced mathematical learning - from collaboration to performance. ZDM, 42(1), 91–104.
Gorder, L. M. (2008). A study of teacher perceptions of instructional technology integration in the classroom. Delta Pi Epsilon Journal, vol. 50, no. 2, pp. 63-76.
Hew & Brush, 2006, “Integrating Technology into K-12 Teaching”, Association for Educational Communication & Technology, p.226
Hew, K. F., & Brush, T. (2007). Integrating technology into K-12 teaching and learning: Current knowledge gaps and recommendations for future research. Educational Technology Research and Development, 55(3), 223-252.
Hudson, R., Porter, A. L. & Nelson, M. I. (2008). Barriers to using ICT in mathematics teaching: issues in methodology. In J. Luca & E. Weippl (Eds.), ed-Media 2008 World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia and Telecommunications (pp. 5765-5776).
Hughes, J. (2004). Technology learning principles for preservice and in-service teacher education. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 4(3), 345–362.
Irving, K. E. (2006). The impact of technology on the 21st-century classroom.
Isiksal, M.; Askar, P. (2005) The effect of spreadsheet and dynamic geometry software on the achievement and self-efficacy of 7th-grade students. Educational Research, 47 (3), 333-350.
Ittigson, R.J. & Zewe, J.G. (2003). Technology in the mathematics classroom. In Tomei, L.A. (Ed.) Challenges of Teaching with Technology Across the Curriculum: Issues and Solutions. Hershey: Information Science Publishing,114-133.
Jadama, 2014, “Impact of Subject-Matter Knowledge of a Teacher in Teaching and Learning Process”
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), 25–37.
Keong, Horain & David, 2005.A Study on the Use of ICT in Mathematics Teaching. Faculty of Information Technology, Malaysia.
Koehler, M. J., Mishra, P., & Yahya, K. (2007). Tracing the development of teacher knowledge in a design seminar: Integrating content, pedagogy, and technology. Computers and Education, 49(3), 740–762.
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.
Lai, K-W. (2008). ICT supporting the learning process: The premise, reality, and promise. In J. Voogt & G. Knezek (Eds), International Handbook of Information Technology in Primary and Secondary Education (pp. 215-230). New York: Springer.
Law, N. (2008). Teacher learning beyond knowledge for pedagogical innovations with ICT. In J. Voogt & G. Knezek (Eds), International Handbook of Information Technology in Primary and Secondary Education (pp. 425-434). New York: Springer.
Lawless, K. A., & Pellegrino, J. W. (2007). Professional development in integrating technology into teaching and learning: Knowns, unknowns, and ways to pursue better questions and answers. Review of Educational Research, 77, 575-614.
McCrory, R. (2004). A framework for understanding teaching with the Internet. American Educational Research Journal, 41(2), 447–488.
Mishra, P. (1998). Flexible learning in the periodic system with multiple representations: The design of a hypertext for learning complex concepts in chemistry. (Doctoral dissertation, University of Illinois at Urbana—Champaign). Dissertation Abstracts International, 59(11), 4057. (AAT 9912322).
Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for integrating technology in teachers’ knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017–1054.
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics, Reston, VA: Author.
Nelson, J., Christopher, A., & Mims, C. (2009). TPACK and web 2.0: Transformation of teaching and learning. Tech Trends, 53(5), 80–85.
Newby, T. et al. (2006). Educational Technology for Teaching and Learning. Merrill Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, New Jersey, USA.
Olkun, S., Altun, A., Smith, G. (2005). Computers and 2D geometric learning of Turkish fourth and fifth graders. British Journal of Educational Technology, 36(2), 317-326.
Onyeachu A 1996. Relationship between Working Conditions and Teacher Effectiveness in Secondary Schools in Abia Educational Zone of Abia State. M.Ed. Dissertation, Unpublished, Port Harcourt: University of Port Harcourt, Nigeria.
Palmer, C. (2002). Technology to Break Down the Barriers for Students with Vision Impairment, Learning Environment Technology, Selected Papers from LETA 94, Adelaide, South Australia, 25-28 September 1994, edited by James Steele and John Hedberg, AJET Publications Limited, Canberra, Australia.
Peralta, H., Costa, F.A. (2007). Teachers’ competence and confidence regarding the use of ICT. Educational Sciences Journal, vol. 3, pp. 75-84
Pierce, R., & Stacey, K. (2010). Mapping pedagogical opportunities provided by mathematics analysis software. International Journal of Computers for Mathematical Learning. 15(1), 1–20.
Pierson, M. E. (1999). Technology integration practice as a function of pedagogical expertise (Doctoral dissertation, Arizona State University). Dissertation Abstracts International, 60(03), 711. (AAT 9924200).
Pierson, M. E. (2001). Technology integration practice as a function of pedagogical expertise. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 33(4), 413–429.
Project Tomorrow (2011). The new 3 E’s of education: Enabled, engaged, empowered. How today’s students are leveraging emerging technologies for learning. Retrieved from http://www.tomorrow.org/speakup/pdfs/SU10_3EofEducation(Students).pdf
Queensland College of Teachers. (2006). Professional standards for Queensland teachers. Retrieved 3 April, 2009 from http://www.qct.edu.au/standards/index.html
Roschelle, J., Rafanan, K., Bhanot, R., Estrella, G., Penuel, W. R., Nussbaum, M., Claro, S. (2009). Scaffolding group explanation and feedback with handheld technology: Impact on students’ mathematics learning. Educational Technology Research and Development, 58, 399–419.
Roschelle, J., Shechtman, N., Tatar, D., Hegedus, S., Hopkins, B., Empson, S., Knudsen, J., & Gallagher, L. (2010). Integration of technology, curriculum, and professional development for advancing middle school mathematics: Three large-scale studies. American Educational Research Journal, 47(4), 833–878.
Russell, M., O'Dwyer, L. M., Bebell, D., & Tao, W. (2007). How teachers' uses of technology vary by tenure and longevity. Journal of Educational Computing Research, vol. 37, no. 4, pp. 393-417.
Sandholtz, J. H., Ringstaff, C., & Dwyer, D. C. (1997). Teaching with technology: Creating student-centered classrooms. New York: Teachers College Press.
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.
Skolverket. (2000). Skolverkets föreskrifter om kursplaner och betygskriterier för kurser i ämnet matematik i gymnasieskolan. Stockholm, Fritzes.
Slough, S., & Connell, M. (2006). Defining technology and its natural corollary, technological content knowledge (TCK). In C. Crawford, D. Willis, R. Carlsen, I. Gibson, K. McFerrin, J. Price, & R. Weber (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology and Teacher Education International Conference, 2006 (pp. 1053–1059). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.
Suh J., & Moyer, P. S. (2007). Developing students’ representational fluency using virtual and physical algebra balances. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 26(2), 155–173.
Sulia, N. (1998).Winning Teacher Over. National Boards Association. http://www.electronic.school.com, date retrieved, March 18, 2005.
Tallerico, K. (2013). Meet the promise of content standards: The role of technology for teacher and student learning. Oxford, OH: Learning Forward.
U.S. Department of Education. National Center for Education Statistics. (2000). Teachers’ tools for the 21st Century: A Report on teachers’ use of technology.
Zakina & Zineb, 2013, “Integration of ICT in Teaching Mathematics”, University of Abdelmalik Esaadi Faculty of Sciences, Tetouan Morocco.
Zhao, Y. (2003). What teachers should know about technology: Perspectives and practices. Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.
Zemelman, S., Daniels, H., & Hyde, A. (2005). Best practice: Today’s standards for teaching and learning in America’s schools. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.46827/ejes.v0i0.1398
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
Copyright (c) 2018 Jessa Malubay, Marvin S. Daguplo
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Copyright © 2015-2023. European Journal of Education Studies (ISSN 2501 - 1111) is a registered trademark of Open Access Publishing Group. All rights reserved.
This journal is a serial publication uniquely identified by an International Standard Serial Number (ISSN) serial number certificate issued by Romanian National Library (Biblioteca Nationala a Romaniei). All the research works are uniquely identified by a CrossRef DOI digital object identifier supplied by indexing and repository platforms. All authors who send their manuscripts to this journal and whose articles are published on this journal retain full copyright of their articles. All the research works published on this journal are meeting the Open Access Publishing requirements and can be freely accessed, shared, modified, distributed and used in educational, commercial and non-commercial purposes under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0).
