Technology Integration in Science Content and Pedagogy Courses With Preservice Teachers
Listen and learn : Research paper
Thursday, December 3, 12:30–1:15 pm PST (Pacific Standard Time)
Presentation 1 of 3
Inside the Black Box: Understanding Communicative Exchanges in Online Learning Environments
Is UDL a Practical Tool for Improving Undergraduate Online Courses?
Dr. Diana Fenton Terry Johnson
We'll share the approach taken by one teacher education program to integrate technology in science content and pedagogy courses over a three-year period. Our hope is that this model will help other institutions develop similar experiences to prepare future teachers.
|Audience:||Teacher education/higher ed faculty, Technology coordinators/facilitators|
|Attendee devices:||Devices not needed|
|Grade level:||Community college/university|
|Subject area:||Higher education, Preservice teacher education|
|ISTE Standards:||For Educators:
|Additional detail:||Session recorded for video-on-demand|
This work builds on research examining the role of beliefs in teachers’ pedagogical uses of technology and the most appropriate ways to prepare pre-service teachers to teach with digital tools.
Elementary teachers’ confidence and ability to integrate technology in classroom settings is a concern. As new digital tools are introduced into classrooms, research suggests that the level of technology integration differs among teachers. A number of factors impact teacher use of technology. Ottenbreit-Leftwich, Glazewski, Newby, and Ertmer (2010) have identified a number of factors that impact teachers’ pedagogical uses of technology, including time, resources, and teacher ability. In their work they also found that the most important variable shaping teachers’ use of digital tools are their beliefs about how technology can help them do their jobs and support student learning.
Preparing future teachers who can integrate technology in PK-12 instruction is valued (Pierson & Thompson, 2005; Shapely, Benner, Pieper, Way, 2003; Tonduer, van Braak, Sang, Voogt, Fisser & Ottenbreit-Leftwich, 2012). Existing literature suggests that technology-infused courses are usually more effective than standalone technology courses in teacher preparation programs (Niess, 2005; Wetzel, Buss, Foulger, & Lindsey, 2014). Recommendations for technology infused methods courses include providing future teachers with opportunities to teach in P-12 learners in authentic contexts athentic situations (Lux, 2013; Wetzel, Buss, Foulger, & Lindsey, 2014).
To determine the impact of changing the courses from discipline specific science courses to multidisciplinary content course with a technology embedded field experience.
The TPACK survey consists of Likert-scaled statements about technology knowledge (TK), content knowledge (CK), pedagogical knowledge (PK) pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) , technological content knowledge (TCK), technological pedagogical knowledge (TPK), and technological pedagogy and content knowledge (TPACK). Response categories were “strongly agree,” “agree,” “uncertain,” disagree,” and “strongly disagree. In addition, open-ended questions on confidence and ability to teach with technology and examples of evidence of effective technology integration with content were included.
Descriptive statistics were calculated to obtain the mean scores by years for the TK, CK, PK, PCK, TCK, TPK, and TPACK. For CK, TCK.
Open-ended questions were coded for similarities for comparison with the quantitative data.
Analysis shows a significant difference in all areas of the TPACK from students who took discipline specific courses compared to the newly designed multidisciplinary course, except the pedagogical knowledge. Overall confidence in the ability to combine content and technology in teaching a classroom lesson was higher with the new course, however students were not able to effectively describe specific episodes that indicate a high level inquiry based teaching, but did describe overall knowledge of technological pedagogical knowledge.
Preparing new teachers to integrate technology in effective ways is essential in teacher preparation programs. Examining ways teacher education programs embed technology, pedagogy and content in their courses is of great interest because no one model has been developed. Our paper will showcase our approach to preparing teacher candidates to teach with technology. Our hope that this model will help other institutions develop similar experience to prepare future teachers.
Anderson, S. E., Groulx, J. G., & Maninger, R. M. (2011). Relationships among preservice teachers’ technology-related abilities, beliefs, and intentions to use technology in their future classrooms. Journal of Educational Computing Research,
Avery, L. M., & Meyer, D. Z. (2012). Teaching science as science is practiced: Opportunities and limits for enhancing preservice elementary teachers’ self-efficacy for science and science teaching. School Science and Mathematics, 112, 395–409. doi:10.1111/j.1949-8594.2012.00159.x
Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84(2), 191–215. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.8
Bergman, D. J., & Morphew, J. (2015). Effects of a science content course on elementary preservice teachers' self-efficacy of teaching science. Journal of College Science Teaching, 44(3), 73-81.
Bursal, M., & Paznokas, L. (2006). Mathematics anxiety and preservice elementary teachers’ confidence to teach mathematics and science. School Science and Mathematics, 106(4), 173–179.
Buss, R. R., Foulger, T. S., Wetzel, K., & Lindsey, L. (2018). Preparing teachers to integrate technology into K–12 instruction II: Examining the effects of technology-infused methods courses and student teaching. Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education, 34(3), 134-150.
DeCoito, I., & Richardson, T. (2018). Teachers and technology: Present practice and future directions. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 18(2), 362-378.
Gronseth, S., Brush, T., Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A., Strycker, J., Abaci, S., Easterling, W., ... & Leusen, P. V. (2010). Equipping the next generation of teachers: Technology preparation and practice. Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education, 27(1), 30-36.
Hashweh, M. (2013). Pedagogical content knowledge: Twenty-five years later. In C. C. Craig, P. C. Meijer, & J. Broeckmans (Eds.), Teacher thinking to teachers and teaching: The evolution of a research community, (pp. 115-140). Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
Kirst, S., & Flood, T. (2017). Research and teaching: Connecting science content and science methods for preservice elementary school teachers. Journal of College Science Teaching, 46(5), 49–55
Kazempur, M & Sadler, T.D. (2015). preservice teachers’ beliefs, attitudes and self-efficacy. A multi-case study, Teaching Education, 26, 247-271.
Knaggs, C., & Sondergeld, T. (2015). Science as a learner and as a teacher: Measuring science self efficacy of elementary preservice teachers. School Science and Mathematics, 115(3), 117–128.
Koehler, M. J., & Mishra, P. (2009). What is technological pedagogical content knowledge? Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 9(1), 60-70.
Kurt, S. (2018, May 12). TPACK: Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge Framework. Educational Technology. https://educationaltechnology.net/technological-pedagogical-content-knowledge-tpack-framework/
Long, C. S. (2019). The Effect of Science Education Classes on Preservice Elementary Teachers’ Attitudes About Science. Journal of College Science Teaching, 48(6), 77–83.
Menon, D., & Sadler, T. D. (2016). preservice elementary teachers’ science self-efficacy beliefs and science content knowledge. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 27(6), 649-673.
Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (1996). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers college record, 108(6), 1017-1054
Mouza, C., & Karchmer-Klein, R. (2013). Promoting and assessing pre-service teachers' technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) in the context of case development. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 48(2), 127-152.
National Research Council. (2007). Taking Science to School: Learning and Teaching Science in Grades K-8. Committee on Science Learning, Kindergarten Through Eighth Grade. R. A. Duschl, H. A. Schweingruber, and A. W. Shouse, Editors. Board on Science Education, Center for Education. Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press
NGSS Lead States. 2013. Next Generation Science Standards: For States, By States. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. T., Glazewski, K. D., Newby, T. J.,; Ertmer, P. A. (2010).
Teacher value beliefs associated with using technology: Addressing professional
and student needs. Computers & Education, 55(3), 1321-1335.
Polly, D. & Binns, I. (2018). Elementary Education Candidates’ Integration of Technology in Science Units. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 18(4), 631-647. Waynesville, NC USA: Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education. Retrieved October 11, 2020 from https://www.learntechlib.org/primary/p/181127/.
Schmidt, D. A., Baran, E., Thompson A. D., Koehler, M. J., Mishra, P.; Shin, T. (2009-
10). Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK): The Development
and Validation of an Assessment Instrument for Preservice Teachers. Journal of
Research on Technology in Education, 42(2), 123-149.
Shapley, K. S., Benner, A. D., Pieper, A. M., Way, P. J., Snider, S. L., & Gershner, V. T.
(2003, April). Integrating technology into teacher education: Navigating the
complexity of institutional change. In annual meeting of the American Educational
Shulman, L. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teachers. Educational researcher, 15(2), 4-14.