Chapter+11+TPACK


 * Abstract**

In this chapter, Ms. Niess highlights the importance of developing TPCK within the curriculum framework of current methods classes and underscores the necessity for teachers to be able to “rethink, unlearn and relearn, change, revise, and adapt.” She addresses the need to understand the [|technology] in such a way as to be able to bend it to the ultimate purpose of motivating students and providing them with opportunities that “effectively guide students in learning”. Knowing that change is inevitable, she encourages preservice teachers to develop research groups to best determine what works and why, and more importantly what does not work and why not. She encourages the use of the Understanding by Design method developed by Wiggins and McTighe and makes a strong argument that critical reflection is crucial to understanding what makes good TPCK.

**Synthesis**

If our Cohort was not on board and supporting [|technology integration] by now – they were by this chapter! We all support the belief that technology is important and must be used in a manner that supports content. We agreed that it is imperative to consider the content when using technology and also the different students that we work with. The other aspects that need to be considered when using technology is the proper monitoring of students while using computers and the ‘wicked problem’ of affordances and constraints that are usually linked to technology usage. Overall, we agree that we must be open and flexible when it comes to learning about technology, willing to relearn, and be provided adequate time and support for technology integration.

In addition, TPCK must be an important role in any education program and cannot be ignored. Technology is a huge part of what today’s students are expected to have mastered by the time they enter post-secondary education and the workforce. However, many teachers are not ready to educate their students in technology. Many teachers teach their students as they were taught when they were younger. Specifically, in our cohort, several districts have veteran teachers who add to the “wickedness” of the problem while the preservice teachers tend to bring more technology into the classroom. This problem needs to be addressed, as the only people who are losing are the students. This will take time, but needs to happen. There was also concern that placing too much effort on technology and not enough on PCK will cost our students their education. Although it was agreed that technology is an important aspect, [|it is not the only one]. Teachers need to remember to focus on Knowledge, Content, and Pedagogy. Without the other aspects, education would be “robbing the children of tomorrow.” (223) One thing most people agree with is teachers need to be “prepared to [|rethink, unlearn and relearn, change, revise, and adapt](225)” To have effective teachers you need to have effective teaching. By constantly reflecting on your individual TPCK, this can be achieved. toc

Jen F
The first theme of this chapter that caught my interest was the idea that preservice teachers do not need methods courses as much as they need courses that teach them how to think, learn and be open to new ways of thinking. The idea is that teachers who own these qualities will be able to master the content and classroom management skills while engaging children in higher thinking level activities. I agree that it is more important for teachers to be life long learners who are resourceful and open to technologies and pedagogies. But I wonder if they would be missing the basic information if there is a lack of focus on the method of teaching? I hear practicing teachers talk about the fact that the young students of today are missing some of the basic knowledge skills we assume they should know, like grammar, spelling and number sense. We often wonder if it is because we are pressured to teach children more advanced skills at an early age, therefore ending up skipping the basics and assuming that children will pick it up. Is this the same kind of approach?

I liked the way this author focused on the idea that preservice teachers need to be aware of the proper way to integrate technology. Technology should be integrated, understood and supportive of the content, versus being tacked on to a project in an attempt to meet a requirement. Preschool teachers wrangle with the idea of how to effectively incorporate appropriate technology. What should the average four year old be able to do with technology? How do we add it into the classroom without taking away more tangible activities? While there are concrete standards for content knowledge, we are currently bumbling around to determine this pedagogy. As with all teaching, it should be individualized and important to the student. We are working with digital cameras, gaming software and basic computer skills, such as use of a mouse or keypad and cursor control. I think we are on the right track, but the future will tell. Like this author discusses, I need to be open to changing expectations and learn along with my students.

Abby
As teachers we know how much goes into everyday especially the planning and organizing to have a successful lesson or school day. Pre-service teachers need to learn this as they progress through college and during student teaching. Unfortunately it is not really possible to learn everything before you get to a classroom of your own and the students walk in the first day. Adding to the pressure now is the tool of technology. Technology is a great addition but it does add some stress to the day. This stress is worth it though in my opinion as I have witnessed students learning greatly improve with the addition of technology.

This section talks about pre-service teachers being inclined to teach how they were taught. Although the field of education is always changing and technology is changing even faster, today’s new teachers have grown up with technology in the classroom. The first group of students in Maine that had laptops in middle school are now entering the classrooms as teachers. They have had many classes taught with technology and have also grown up using it so they are very familiar with it. I still think it is important for pre-service teachers to learn the optimum ways to teach with technology but I think the “Wickedness” of the problem is disappearing.

I think pre-service teachers have a lot to learn when it comes to creating productive, and effective lessons using technology but I also think every teacher needs to be constantly “prepared to rethink, unlearn and relearn, change, revise, and adapt (225)” their lessons on a regular basis. I feel I learn something new everyday and many times it is the students that are teaching me. Technology is a constantly changing field and I have come to accept that students more times than not are going to know the answer before I do. This chapter reminded me of this fact.

As a closing note, this section had some of the best quotes which made me think beyond what the section was saying about technology. My favorite one was “learning is not a spectator sport.” This is so true. Technology makes this truer than ever and forces students into being more of a player on the field instead of a fan on the sidelines.

Heather
The TPCK book has certainly convinced me that teachers and preservice teachers definitely need substantial education and support for effective technology integration. This particular article offers wonderful examples of ways that teachers can learn about technology during their education programs, which can even be extended to the teachers who are currently working in the profession. It also offers several things to consider when using technology in the classroom. For example it discusses factoring in the constraints and affordances for technology lessons. I found all of this information valuable and I will be considering it while taking my current methods courses for my masters, when sharing with colleagues, and for my own personal technology usage.

Nevertheless, without discrediting the value of this information, I found one of the statements in this chapter a little dramatic. I do not believe that if preservice teachers are lacking effective TPCK they are “robb[ing] the children of tomorrow (223). I think it is most imperative that teacher programs ensure that incoming teachers have solid PCK and that the technology should be the last focus. As a parent and as a current practicing teacher, it is more important to me that teachers are knowledge in their subject area and the various ways that children learn. The technology is of secondary importance. Technology is not the end all and be all of education. Students can still learn without it. In history class, the history has to come first. Students can always learn about technology in technology-focused classes. Plus, let’s not kid ourselves. The students, in general, are more computer competent than all other generations. The majority has the technology skills; we are not robbing them of tomorrow. They get it with or without us.

To clarify, I am not saying that preservice teachers and practicing teachers should not be taught about technology or even use it in their classrooms. I cannot say enough that technology needs to assist or enhance the learning, not be the learning. I was recently working with a student teacher that from all observations was using technology - just to use technology. I would like to think that this is not what he learned in his education program. Technology usage must have pedagogical value. This should be the focus of methods courses in education programs.

The final aspect that I found interesting from this chapter was the discussion about another “wickedness” of technology. This wickedness was based on the belief that it is harder for teachers who did not learn with technology as students themselves to incorporate technology into their lessons. I found this to be a very valuable observation. We tend to teach in ways that we feel comfortable with or experienced ourselves. It is hard for us teachers to come out of this comfort zone. The education programs need to provide students with ideas to incorporate technology as we once learned. This is where the true value lies. It pains me to think that we are teaching them to use technology because it is the Twenty-first Century. This is where I stop supporting TPCK. The technology must have merit for the lesson.

Megan
I could not agree more with the first three pages of this chapter. I kept saying to myself, “Exactly!” However, the problem we face in my school is, of course, money, and a constant administration that is strong enough to support this amongst all staff. I do believe that technology is an important aspect to have the students and teachers involved in but I see this as a difficult problem in my school. I teach in a diverse school with two distinct groups. We have a younger generation of teachers and an older generation of teachers. Many others have come from this same type of problem but we do not have the administration to back up the proper use of technology in the classroom. I also believe that, currently, there is so much on the school's plate, that it is an issue that they do not wish to tackle at this moment. So, until it is tackled, I will do the best I can, with the teachers I work with, bringing as much technology as I can into current classrooms.

I also wish that more teachers would embrace the idea of “tomorrow's teachers” as proposed in the book. “Tomorrow's teachers must be prepared to rethink, unlearn and relearn, change, revise, and adept.” (p.225) Many of today's teachers are unwilling to do this because they think the it's the students problem and not our own. We are not teaching the same students we were twenty years ago, so we must not teach them that way. Today's students grew up with technology. Most of them have had video games, computers, T.V.'s, and handheld electronics at the tip of their fingertips since they were infants. One has to wonder that because they have grown up so differently from the child of twenty years ago, if their brain might be wired differently. This could be where the disconnect is happening. If teachers were to use more appropriate technology in their classroom, I believe this would increase student learning.

The last aspect that I found interesting in this chapter was the “wickedness” of technology. As I have stated before, teachers who have been teaching the same way for many years do not want to change their current teaching methods to help other students. I understand the importance of the old techniques, such as lecture, but we must embrace this new technology. I believe that an entwinement of the two techniques is the perfect solution for any of today's teachers.

Lindsay
“If we teach today as we taught yesterday, then we rob our children of tomorrow.” -John Dewey

How true! I only graduated from UMF 3 years ago, and I feel already that my education is a tad outdated. Although I feel that UMF has a wonderful undergraduate program and that I was very well prepared pedagogically, my ability to integrate technology in my classroom was somewhat limited. Literacy has been the big push over the past ten years, through which we were shown how to integrate such strategies into our classrooms, but not technology. Technologies are growing exponentially, and it’s hard to keep up! As educators, we will always be students. It’s imperative that we keep up with the changing times, so that we can best help our students. With new technologies emerging every day, we must know how to effectively engage our students with the uses available to us.

The big question when it comes to technology integration for preservice and current teachers alike, is how? This handbook gave great examples throughout, of how to integrate technology in a variety of content areas. Aside from a basic undergraduate course on the use of a mac, this is my first course that really made me think about ways to integrate specifically in math. My undergraduate experience was spent learning and how to learn the content, but not necessarily how to learn the content with technology. Fortunately, being somewhat of a digital native, I pick things up quickly, and don’t hesitate to explore and teach myself. In all honesty, I feel that I haven’t used much Type II technology in my math class, but I am making improvements. Given the time, I enjoy finding new ways to engage my students.

The section on gaining effective classroom management strategies intrigued me. It encouraged teachers to consider motivation and problem prevention as well as how to cope with these problems. A lot of teachers in my building baulk at the use of the laptops in their classrooms because they are afraid of what trouble students can get in to. If students are engaged in what they are doing, and they know your classroom expectations, there will be few instances where students will conduct themselves in inappropriate ways. If you use your classroom management skills, and circulate the room observing and questioning students, they tend to do as they are directed. Of course there will always be that pocketful of students who break the mold, but the majority of students will do their work as it was assigned to them.

Jennah
I must go back to the full plate analogy that someone said to me a few months ago, and I mentioned in a previous reaction. A teacher’s plate is full. If something else gets added to the plate, then that means something has to come off of it. The plate is only so big. This is one big reason that people become overwhelmed with learning technology and how to integrate it into their current teaching styles.

This will only get better when pre-service teachers are trained to have technology as a tool to carry their plate, or as the plate itself, and not as something else on it. This comes with the tool not being an obstacle, and that can only happen with lots of time, practice, and use. I think this is probably evolving, and colleges are giving technology training, but if it’s not used and encouraged when a teacher enters a school district, a lot of that training is lost. Neiss mentions on page 225 that teachers need to be ready to unlearn and relearn. I think this is true, but sounds very difficult, especially when it is so easy to teach as one was taught.

Furthermore, it is also challenging to keep all of this in mind when dealing with the minutia of broken/”forgot at home” laptops, crashed servers, and technical difficulties that come with the territory. One bad experience can leave a bad taste in an experienced teacher’s mouth. This is all the more reason to have teachers entering the workplace prepared. The transition is happening, but there is still a long way to go before everyone sees it see it as a tool, and not just another scoop of potato salad on the teaching plate.

Tara
Chapter 11: “Guiding preservice teacher in developing TPCK” by Margaret L. Niess

I would agree with Niess that what preparation teachers need for teaching has changed a lot. I only graduated six years ago and there was no emphasis on using technology in a classroom. I hope that my undergrad school has changed their ways. If not then they will be “robbing the children of tomorrow.” (pg 223)

People that have a hard time with change and adapting to what is to come will have a difficult time educating students and themselves using the TPCK method. Teacher’s today need to be flexible with what is being taught and how students are getting the information.

OHMS has many younger teachers. I do not see the problem coming from educators just out of school, but from the veteran teachers at OHMS. They are the educators that did not grow up with technology as it is today. Many of them do not even check e-mail on a regular basis. That astounds me! There are definitely teachers that are willing to embrace the TPCK method, but there are others that fight it tooth and nail.

This chapter was resourceful in giving “preservice” teachers ideas in how to use TPCK. I think it is also a resource for the teachers that are uncomfortable with technology. The veteran teachers are experts in PCK if we meld our ways together then TPCK could become an epidemic in a school.

Jen B.
Reflection on Chapter 11: “Guiding Preservice Teachers in TPCK” by Margaret L. Niess

This was one of those frustrating chapters in which I felt that, 26 pages later, I was watching reruns of the same program I had just sat through 10 times. First of all, I can’t get past the fact that this book is meant to be some sort of defense or persuasive text promoting technology integration in undergrad teaching programs. None of us in this course are undergrads nor are we going to be teaching them any time soon. Some of the material is relevant, sure, but to be always talked around and never spoken to is supremely annoying. Secondly, the argument is wasted on me. I agree that incorporating technology is important to some extent in the public school curriculum, and if I didn’t at first, by the 11th chapter, my opinions would be worn away to nothing. I’m sorry to rant, but if I was struggling to find use in the content-specific chapters, this one was far worse.

Two things I will comment on in that they dealt to some extent with my own experience in the classroom. First, the idea of “affordances” and “constraints” was refreshing, in that it acknowledged the inherent difficulties that technology involves. Yes, it can provide us with some amazing possibilities, but it also involves teaching new skills and practicing those skills, and can even create new problems through its use. For example, I keep a class wiki in order to post agendas, homework assignments, extra practice, and the like for students in my English 10 course. I had hoped that this would eliminate much of the problem of absences in my school (there is no attendance policy and kids are absent frequently); students could, from home, access the content of the day and only see me if they needed additional help, explanation, etc., thereby freeing me from repeating the lesson – and it provided additional resources to students that they could access from anywhere. However, making sure all students have equal access to the wiki can be a problem (some don’t have internet at home), as well as when new students transfer into the course – my class is now so reliant on this technology and it is so new to transfer students that a learning curve results in which they are initially less productive than with traditional coursework. In addition, making sure that all posted documents are properly formatted in programs kids can open on their machines is also an issue and just the posting of the agendas, attaching the files, and linking the url’s is extremely time-consuming – sometimes it feels like explaining the material to the kids who missed it the first time around would be easier. Finally, they often ignore the resource anyway, still coming to me with the old “What did I miss?” Ah, technology.

The second issue is classroom management. Why oh why does this fall to the wayside when really it’s so critical to a decent learning environment? I went into teaching with no formal training, so I understand my lack of knowledge in behavioral technique, but after taking all of the courses required by the state, I still had no useful strategies and I know other teachers are at a loss as well even after dedicated preservice education. I like the idea of having preservice teachers analyze case studies and identify strategies that may work to eliminate confusion and increase time on task. However, as an inservice teacher, with the hectic pace of my classes, planning, assessing, and dealing with the minutiae of teaching in general, I don’t have time to reflect on what I could have done better before I’m dealing with the next group of kids and hoping it works this time (which, inexplicably, the same lesson often does). I think, perhaps, that whether it flies all depends not on the lesson alone, but how a specific group of students interacts with it.

Linnea
 I really like the discussion of metacognition (Shavelson, Ruiz-Primo, Li, and Ayala, 2003) centering on the types of knowledge. Their descriptions, combined with the pedagogy matrices will be useful resources in the future. Embedded in this section is the question (scratch that "How can pre-service teachers gain the experiences . . ." (page 225). This is followed on the same page by ". . . must be able to rethink, unlearn and relearn, change, revise, and adapt." It's pretty well accepted that new teachers teach in the manner in which they were taught. In my experience, it seems to be the manner in which they were taught during high school as well as their preservice training in college that guides their style of teaching. This form of modeling may be underappreciated. How many of us have sat through lectures about active learning, or hands-on activities? Cynicism aside, there appears to be a shift in teaching styles, certainly in high school and even into college. The instructors tend to portray themselves less frequently as the experts, taking on the role of collaborator and leader.

How can I apply preservice principles in my in-service classroom? By rememberin g that learning occurs in reflection. This is true in multiple contexts. For example, the reflection of the preservice teacher (page 247) recognized the value of reviewing core concepts with the class, ". . . but it was an additional chunk of time . . ." If learning occurs in reflection, this time spent reviewing is not wasted. Not all of the students are going to grasp the relationship between the concept and the lesson at the same time. How interesting to see the quotation from Sir Isaac Newton regarding discovering the law of gravitation ". . . by thinking on a continually." (Page 247) Again, learning occurs in reflection, regardless of our role as student or teacher or scientist.

Zach
Please understand that I am not about to speak ill about the system that more than adequately prepared me as a thinking educator, but for the thirteen years I have been involved in pre-service training and actual teaching, something has always bothered me. I can remember as an undergraduate wondering one of the very ideas presented by Niess in this chapter. “How am I expected to go about teaching my students through authentic assessment and authentic learning experiences when the majority of my methodology professors follow the system they dictate as ineffective?” To the benefit of the system, we were assessed authentically through portfolios, essays, projects, and on occasion, through tests, but the information that was delivered on how to think like an assessor and promote discovery was given via lecture with little opportunity for exploration in a realistic setting. Much of the thinking done through the program was done through an educationally utopic bubble devoid of the elements that makes teaching challenging and wonderful. As I stepped into my student teaching experiences, I realized that the classes did not really prepare me for what I was to face, much like my semester of teaching did not prepare me for what I would face as a full-time educator, especially in the realm of classroom management. Classroom management was something to be cultivated through experience, not practiced in theory. The adage is that “teaching is 97 percent perspiration and 3 percent inspiration,” and believe me, I put that to the test. I still do on a daily basis.

I completed my undergraduate program in 2001, just when technology was taking its stride. Having grown up around technology, I had always been exposed to it. My professors were digital immigrants. For the first time, I have found myself at an interesting educational crossroads: the gap between my professors and I in my undergraduate program regarding philosophy and incorporation of pedagogical strategies has come full circle. Even though I spend the time attempting to bridge this generational gap, I still find the remnants of what has worked in the past still very visible in my teaching and planning. I think I can understand where many of my undergraduate professors were coming from.

Enough reminiscing. I have worked to stay up with trends in education. I have advanced my study through post-graduate class work returning myself into that novice category of professional with idealism. I have come full circle, only this time, I have a decade of experience from which to draw connections with my students and content. Having been host to two different student teachers over the past few years, I found that they had been prepared in much of the same ways in which I was prepared, being told what to do over how to do it. As my reflections have stated before, our students are being prepared for an uncertain future. Furthermore, our future teachers are being trained to give students the skills they are going to need for that future’s future. If there has ever been a time to teach people how to think through multi-faceted, complex frameworks, much like the TPACK, it is now.

Once this thinking has been established, understanding how students learn comes next. This chapter felt that pre-service education, following the framework it proposes, should be much more intensive on psychology, research methods, statistics, management, and technology-based methodology courses. I readily accept and commend Neiss for bringing up the notion that we are going to have to “unthink” (225) what we know to be able to progress and become more able to suit out students. Incorporating the TPACK framework as a method for planning and instructing versus a framework of a set of isolated elements is going to be key, and perhaps this could be the answer for reformatting the pre-service educational system. One “ineffective” teacher (for purposes of this argument a teacher that does not advance or develop methodologies) impacts far more than a handful of students for a year. The devastating effects of one stagnant year hurts everyone. Yes, a massive overhaul of the pre-service training program needs to be conducted to meet the needs of the future teachers who are going to be teaching the next generation of individuals. Knowledge of classroom discipline, effective pedagogical strategies, effective planning through the TPACK framework, application of the 21st Century Skills framework, research methods, and psychology are all going to have to play together with the life experiences of the teacher to make someone who is effective in the classroom.

As with many of the other chapters, an idea is presented regarding how to improve an existing system. The unfortunate reality is that there is not a set way or to overhaul a system, and much like preparing teachers without a wealth of experience for the classroom. Fortunately, the TPACK ideal does provide a philosophy that is rooted in wide interpretation that will be applicable in incorporable in a variety of pre-service education settings. The educational system is being rebuilt to suit the projected needs of our graduating students. The same should go for the educational system that educates the educators.

Myrna
My main reflection on this chapter was simply that this course must have been designed based on the ideas in this chapter. It reiterated the ideas that have been spoken to throughout this book: the importance of pedagogical content knowledge in connection to technological content knowledge. This chapter spoke specifically to the methods classes of preservice teachers and how to adequately prepare them to enter today's classroom equipped to teach their students the knowledge needed to enter tomorrow's world. It addressed the issue of teachers needing to "rethink, unlearn and relearn, change, revise, and adapt." In this changing world, we need to be able to guide students in their learning about content through their learning about technology. It is here that our future resides.

Much of the chapter was reflective of the methods we are using to develop our unit. Understanding the big idea and then getting down to the details of what our students need to accomplish the goal. I thought their ideas of group research projects during their preservice work were very well developed and would be of great benefit to those students looking forward to teaching. The idea of using technology to teach multiculturalism to college students or any student is sound TPCK.

I think the key concept I get from this chapter is that we must be sure that we identify the technological skills students need to enable them to effectively work on the content we want them to learn. To do this, we must be knowledgeable in both.

**Peggy**
At the beginning of this chapter, Neiss reiterates a common theme in this book that teachers need to know much more than content. A focus on only planning, teaching strategies, management and assessment is not sufficient, and quoting Dewey, “rob the children of tomorrow.” Teaching effectively with technology is more than “knowing that” and “knowing how”. Teachers must dig deeper and “know why, know when, and know where”. Preparing new teachers does need to change to successfully incorporate 21st century skills. On page 225, the author reminds us that “Tomorrow’s teachers must be prepared to rethink, unlearn and relearn, change, revise and adapt.” While I think this has always been true to a certain extent, integrating these new “required skills” and rapidly changing technological tools into the classroom add to the complexity, and the need to be flexible.

It makes sense that developing the kind of thinking required for TPCK should begin early for preservice teachers. Neiss noted (p. 224) that how a person learns and the situation in which a person learns affects an important part of what is learned. Practicum and student teaching are important learning experiences. But I have to wonder about some teachers who resist change, especially using technology, yet regularly have preservice teachers in their classroom. What effect might this have on practicum students and student teachers who are going to need to teach differently for the 21st century?

A couple of points made in this chapter included the idea that preservice teachers must learn their content with new technologies, be more than spectators and have plenty of opportunities to apply this knowledge. They must be actively involved in using technology early, not just players in teaching with technology. So how is it possible to encourage the growth of TPCK skills in pre-service teachers? While integrating technology more meaningfully in undergraduate programs is certainly needed, it will not be easy to accomplish. One final thought I have is about the role that reflection plays in this whole process of developing the strategic thinking of TPCK. In my own experience, and in working with practicum students and student teachers, time and experience are often needed to build the habit of reflection that helps one make important connections and create meaning.