TPCK Notes
TPCK: Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge
Introduction to TPCK
Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPCK) is a framework for teacher knowledge for technology integration, building on Shulman's Pedagogical Content Knowledge (PCK). TPCK emphasizes the connections between technology, pedagogy, and content, recognizing that effective teaching with technology requires understanding and negotiating the relationships between these three elements.
Effective teaching with technology requires the development of TPCK by teachers, viewing them as autonomous agents who can influence technology integration. Teachers need to be able to critically evaluate and adapt technologies for their specific teaching contexts, rather than simply adopting them without careful consideration.
TPCK is explored within and between multiple curriculum areas and in varying teaching and learning contexts to situate it in teacher education and professional development. This exploration helps to understand how TPCK can be applied across different subjects and grade levels, and how it can be fostered through teacher training programs.
Teaching as a Complex Domain
Teaching is an ill-structured domain with complex concepts and cases, demanding flexible access to organized knowledge systems. Ill-structured problems are those that lack clear goals, solution paths, or evaluation criteria. Teaching involves constantly adapting to new situations and making decisions based on incomplete information.
Teachers integrate knowledge of student thinking, subject matter, and technology in a dynamic environment. This integration requires teachers to be able to think on their feet and respond effectively to the needs of their students.
Teaching is akin to other real-world problems that are ill-structured, lacking information and having no known best solution. These types of problems require creative problem-solving and critical thinking skills.
Examples of ill-structured domains include biomedicine, literary analysis, and law. These fields also involve complex, open-ended problems that require integrating knowledge from multiple sources.
Even well-structured domains like mathematics and physics can be ill-structured at advanced levels or when applied to real-world situations. For instance, applying mathematical models to predict real-world phenomena often involves dealing with uncertainty and approximations.
Integrating technology in teaching further complicates matters by introducing technology knowledge. Teachers need to understand not only how to use technology, but also how it can be used to enhance teaching and learning.
Understanding Technology
Technology is defined as the tools created by human knowledge to combine resources for desired products, problem-solving, or needs fulfillment. This broad definition includes both physical tools and conceptual tools.
"Technology" can refer to individual tools (e.g., Internet technology) or the sum of tools and knowledge applicable to education (educational technology). Educational technology encompasses a wide range of resources, from traditional textbooks to interactive simulations.
This includes both analog (e.g., chalkboard, pencil) and digital technologies (e.g., computer, blogging). The choice of technology should depend on the specific learning goals and the needs of the students.
Technologies have specific affordances (properties that allow certain actions) and constraints, making them suitable for certain tasks. Understanding these affordances and constraints is crucial for selecting the right technology for a given task.
Technologies are not neutral; they have inherent biases that influence their use. For example, social media platforms can promote certain types of communication and interaction while discouraging others.
Affordances in educational technology encourage specific learner behavior, such as asynchronous communication with email. Asynchronous communication allows students to participate at their own pace and on their own schedule.
It's important to distinguish between inherent affordances/constraints and those imposed by the user's biases. Users' preconceived notions can limit how they use technology, preventing them from fully realizing its potential.
"Functional fixedness" describes how preconceived notions about an object's function can inhibit alternative uses. Overcoming functional fixedness requires creativity and a willingness to experiment.
Creative uses of technology require overcoming functional fixedness to repurpose tools for pedagogical ends; excellent examples can be found in Chapter 13 by Bull, Bell, and Hammond which describes a range of different uses for a spreadsheet program. Spreadsheets, for example, can be used for data analysis, but also for creating interactive simulations or games.
Technology's Role in Teaching
Technology integration is not new; writing was once considered an alien technology. Throughout history, new technologies have been integrated into education, transforming how teaching and learning take place.
Introducing technology complicates teaching due to social contexts, inadequate training, and the lack of a one-size-fits-all solution. Successful technology integration requires careful planning, ongoing professional development, and a focus on the specific needs of the students.
Technology introduces affordances and constraints for teaching content and engaging learners. Teachers need to be aware of these affordances and constraints in order to use technology effectively.
Issues of technology integration apply to both analog and digital technologies, though current literature focuses on newer, digital technologies. While digital technologies offer many new possibilities, analog technologies still have value in education.
Newer digital technologies have properties that make straightforward application difficult for teachers. These technologies are often complex, rapidly changing, and require new skills and knowledge.
Traditional pedagogical technologies are specific, stable, and transparent in function. In contrast, digital technologies are often more versatile, but also more opaque.
Digital technologies are protean (usable in many ways), unstable (rapidly changing), and opaque (inner workings hidden).
Protean Nature of Digital Technologies
Digital computers store, deliver, and manipulate visual, acoustic, textual, and numerical symbol systems. This versatility makes them powerful tools for education.
Computers provide new abilities and greater power, allowing people to do things they could not do before. For example, students can now access vast amounts of information online and collaborate with others from around the world.
Digital technologies are meta-mediums with degrees of freedom for representation and expression. They can be used to create a wide variety of learning experiences, from simulations and games to multimedia presentations and interactive tutorials.
Digital computers can be tools for communication, design, inquiry, and artistic expression. They can be used to foster creativity, problem-solving, and critical thinking skills.
This protean nature increases complexity, making digital technologies difficult to learn and use. Teachers need to develop the skills and knowledge necessary to effectively use these technologies in their classrooms.
Functional Opacity of Digital Technologies
The inner workings of contemporary technologies are hidden from users. This opacity can make it difficult for teachers to understand how technology works and how it can be used to enhance teaching and learning.
Computers become virtual domains where cause and effect are divorced from everyday rules. This separation can make it challenging for students to connect their learning experiences with the real world.
This separation makes learning to work with computers difficult, akin to learning a new language or culture. Teachers need to provide students with opportunities to explore and experiment with technology in order to develop a deeper understanding of how it works.
Software tools designed for business, not education, contribute to this opacity. These tools are often not designed with the needs of teachers and students in mind.
Adapting general-purpose tools requires reconfiguring and repurposing them for pedagogical purposes, working through opacity and functional fixedness. This adaptation requires creativity, problem-solving skills, and a deep understanding of both technology and pedagogy.
Instability of Digital Technologies
The knowledge required to use digital technologies is never fixed. Technology is constantly evolving, so teachers need to be lifelong learners.
Technology changes rapidly, causing hardware and software to become outdated. This rapid change can make it difficult for teachers to keep up with the latest trends.
Users must continually keep up with new technologies (e.g., Hypercard, Logo, web pages, AJAX, blogs). This ongoing learning requires time, effort, and a willingness to experiment.
Rapid changes often happen piecemeal, leading to incompatible software and hardware versions. This incompatibility can create frustration and make it difficult for teachers to use technology effectively.
Software programs are often error-prone, and hardware evolution leads to imperfect work environments. Teachers need to be prepared to troubleshoot problems and find creative solutions.
Learning to use technologies is not a one-shot deal; teachers must become lifelong learners who are willing to contend with ambiguities and change. This ongoing learning is essential for effective technology integration.
Barriers to Technology Integration
Teachers often lack experience using digital technologies for teaching, having earned degrees when educational technology was less developed. This lack of experience can make it difficult for teachers to integrate technology into their classrooms.
Teachers may not consider themselves sufficiently prepared to use technology, or appreciate its value. This lack of confidence can be a major barrier to technology integration.
Acquiring new skills can be challenging, especially with a busy schedule. Teachers need to be given the time and resources necessary to develop their technology skills.
Innovations are less likely to be adopted if they deviate from prevailing values and pedagogical beliefs. Teachers need to be convinced that technology can enhance teaching and learning before they will be willing to adopt it.
Becoming flexible, creative educators requires transcending functional fixedness and other barriers at pre- and in-service levels, which Niess and Harris discuss in Chapters 11 and 12. Teacher education programs need to focus on helping teachers develop the skills and dispositions necessary to use technology effectively.
The "Somebody Else's Problem" Syndrome
Technology integration is complex due to the "somebody else's problem" (SEP) syndrome. This syndrome occurs when different groups within a school or district are responsible for different aspects of technology integration, leading to a lack of coordination and communication.
Technology and pedagogy are often ruled by different groups (teachers/instructors and technologists). This division can create a disconnect between the technology being used and the pedagogical goals of the classroom.
Teachers and techies live in different worlds and hold distorted images of each other. This lack of understanding can make it difficult for these groups to work together effectively.
Technologists view non-technologists as resistant to change, while non-technologists see technologists as ignorant of education theories. These stereotypes can create tension and undermine collaboration.
These groups attend different conferences and have different visions of technology's role. This lack of communication can lead to conflicting priorities and a lack of shared understanding.
The chasm between these groups is not unbridgeable, as teachers use technology, and technologists know something about teaching, but the phenomenon of two worlds is sociologically and psychologically real. Bridging this gap requires building relationships, fostering communication, and creating opportunities for collaboration.
Navigating these two worlds is not easy for teachers, complicating their role and discouraging technology integration; Bull, Bell, and Hammond offer insight on reducing these barriers in Chapter 13. Schools and district should provide teachers with support and resources necessary to navigate these complex issues.
Varied and Diverse Classroom Contexts
Teachers should know about technologies and how to use them in their classrooms. This knowledge should include not only how to operate the technology, but also how to use it effectively to enhance teaching and learning.
There is no "perfect solution" to integrating technology into a curriculum; efforts should be custom-designed for specific subject matter ideas in specific classroom contexts. Technology integration should be tailored to the specific needs of the students and the learning goals of the curriculum.
Contexts of teaching reflect divides, complicating technology integration. These divides can include differences in access to technology, levels of technology skills, and cultural attitudes towards technology.
One divide is between digital natives (students who grew up with digital technology) and digital immigrants (teachers who migrated to technology later in life). These differences can create challenges in the classroom, as digital natives may have different expectations and learning styles than digital immigrants.
Differences in comfort levels and knowledge of technology between natives and immigrants cause a clash of culture, language, and values. Bridging this divide requires understanding and respecting different perspectives and creating opportunities for collaboration.
Another divide is the digital divide that separates those who have access to the latest technology and those who do not (see Digital Divide.org, 2006). This divide can create inequities in education, as students without access to technology may be at a disadvantage.
Teaching with Technology as a Wicked Problem
Technology integration has been considered problem-solving, but integrating technology is a complex problem involving the interaction of multiple factors. This complexity means that there is no simple solution to technology integration.
Thinking of teaching with technology as a "wicked problem" (Rittel & Webber, 1973) is fruitful, in contrast to "tame" problems. Wicked problems are characterized by their complexity, uncertainty, and lack of clear solutions.
Wicked problems have incomplete, contradictory, and changing requirements. This means that the goals and constraints of technology integration are constantly evolving.
Solutions to wicked problems are difficult to realize, due to complex interdependencies among contextually bound variables. Technology integration is influenced by a wide range of factors, including the specific technology being used, the subject matter being taught, the students being taught, and the school context.
Wicked problems cannot be solved linearly, because the problem definition evolves as solutions are considered. As teachers try different approaches to technology integration, they learn more about the problem and refine their solutions.
Attempting to solve a wicked problem may reveal or create another, more complex problem. This means that technology integration is an ongoing process of learning and adaptation.
Wicked problems have no stopping rule, and solutions are not right or wrong, just "better," or "worse." There is no perfect solution to technology integration, only solutions that are more or less effective in a given context.
Every wicked problem is unique, and solutions are always custom-designed. This means that technology integration must be tailored to the specific needs of the students and the learning goals of the curriculum.
There is no definitive solution to a technology integration problem; each issue presents an evolving set of interlocking issues and constraints. This means that technology integration is an ongoing process of experimentation and refinement.
The biggest mistake is to think of a wicked problem as a "normal" problem that can be tackled in conventional ways. Approaching technology integration as a complex, ill-defined problem is essential for success.
Wicked problems occur in social contexts (e.g., classrooms); teachers, students, and technology coordinators bring different goals, objectives, and beliefs. These different perspectives can create tension and conflict, but they can also be a source of creativity and innovation.
The social, psychological complexity of these problems overwhelms standard problem-solving approaches, becoming a source for learning and leading to more wicked problems and knowledge in a continuous spiral. This spiral of learning and adaptation is essential for effective technology integration.
This process of problem-seeking, problem-solving, and knowledge generation ends when external factors come into play. These factors can include changes in technology, changes in the student population, or changes in school policies.
In such contexts, the best we can hope for is satisficing: achieving a satisfactory solution that is good enough. Given the complexity of technology integration, it is often impossible to find a perfect solution. The goal is to find a solution that meets the most important needs and constraints.
Describing teaching as a wicked problem does not suggest that it lacks structure; ill-structuredness demands understanding complex concepts and contextually defined interactions. Understanding the underlying principles of technology, pedagogy, and content is essential for effective technology integration.
Complexity often emerges from a smaller set of tractable and understandable phenomena that interact. By breaking down the problem into smaller, more manageable parts, teachers can develop a deeper understanding of the challenges and opportunities of technology integration.
The wicked problems of technology integration require new ways of confronting complexity. This requires teachers to be flexible, creative, and willing to experiment.
Good teaching with technology requires content, pedagogy, and technology, and the relationships between them. These three elements are interdependent and must be considered together in order to effectively integrate technology into the classroom.
These interactions account for variations in educational technology integration; these three knowledge bases (content, pedagogy, and technology) form the core of the TPCK framework. The TPCK framework provides a useful way to think about the complex relationships between these three elements.
This perspective is consistent with researchers extending Shulman's idea of PCK.
The TPCK Model
The TPCK framework builds on Shulman's descriptions of PCK to describe how teachers' understanding of technologies and pedagogical content knowledge interact. By understanding these interactions, teachers can develop more effective ways to use technology in their classrooms.
There are three main components of knowledge: content, pedagogy, and technology. These three components are essential for effective teaching with technology.
Equally important are the interactions among these bodies of knowledge: PCK, technological content knowledge (TCK), technological pedagogical knowledge (TPK), and TPCK. These interactions are what make the TPCK framework so powerful.
Usable Knowledge
The goal of describing knowledge is not philosophical discussion but a pragmatic definition influenced by scholars such as Dewey, Schon, and Perkins. The focus is on how knowledge can be used to solve real-world problems.
Perkins poses a metaphor: that of "knowledge as design." This metaphor emphasizes the importance of creating knowledge that is useful and relevant.
In this view, the truth-value of knowledge is less important than what you can do with that knowledge, what has also been called usable knowledge (Kelly, 2003; Lagemann, 2002; National Research Council
.
[NRC], 2002).
Content Knowledge (CK)
Content knowledge is knowledge about the actual subject matter to be learned or taught. This knowledge includes facts, concepts, theories, and procedures.
Content differs between middle school science/history, undergraduate art appreciation, and graduate astrophysics. The specific content knowledge required will depend on the subject matter being taught.
This includes: knowledge of concepts, theories, ideas, organizational frameworks, knowledge of evidence and proof, as well as established practices and approaches towards developing such knowledge. Teachers need to understand the structure and organization of their subject matter.
Teachers must understand the deeper knowledge fundamentals of their disciplines. This understanding includes not only the facts and concepts of the discipline, but also the underlying principles and assumptions.
In science, for example, it included knowledge of scientific facts and theories, the scientific method, and evidence-based reasoning. Science teachers need to be able to design and conduct experiments, analyze data, and draw conclusions based on evidence.
In art appreciation, such knowledge would include knowledge of art history, famous paintings, sculptures, artists and their historical contexts, as well as knowledge of aesthetic and psychological theories for evaluating art. Art appreciation teachers need to be able to help students understand and appreciate different styles and periods of art.
The cost of not having a comprehensive base of content knowledge can be quite prohibitive; students can receive incorrect information and develop misconceptions about the content area (National Research Council, 2000; Pfundt & Duit, 2000). Teachers need to be experts in their subject matter in order to effectively teach it.
Content knowledge, in and of itself, is an ill-structured domain. This means that there is no single right way to understand or teach a particular subject.
Pedagogical Knowledge (PK)
Pedagogical knowledge is deep knowledge about the processes and practices or methods of teaching and learning and encompasses overall educational purposes, values, and aims. This knowledge includes an understanding of how students learn, how to design effective instruction, and how to assess student learning.
This generic form of knowledge applies to student learning, classroom management, lesson plan development and implementation, and student evaluation. Pedagogical knowledge is essential for effective teaching, regardless of the subject matter.
It includes knowledge about techniques or methods used in the classroom, the nature of the target audience, and strategies for evaluating student understanding. Teachers need to be able to select and implement appropriate teaching strategies for their students.
A teacher with deep pedagogical knowledge understands how students construct knowledge and acquire skills, and how they develop habits of mind and positive dispositions towards learning. This understanding allows teachers to create learning environments that are engaging, challenging, and supportive.
Pedagogical knowledge requires an understanding of cognitive, social, and developmental theories of learning and how they apply to students in the classroom. These theories provide a framework for understanding how students learn and how to best support their learning.
Pedagogical Content Knowledge (PCK)
Pedagogical content knowledge is consistent with Shulman's idea of knowledge of pedagogy applicable to teaching specific content. PCK is the knowledge that teachers use to transform their subject matter knowledge into forms that are accessible to students.
PCK covers core business of teaching, learning, curriculum, assessment, and reporting (e.g., conditions that promote learning, links among curriculum, assessment, and pedagogy). PCK is essential for effective teaching, as it allows teachers to connect their subject matter knowledge with their pedagogical knowledge.
An awareness of common misconceptions and ways of looking at them, the importance of forging links and connections between different content ideas, students' prior knowledge, alternative teaching strategies, and the flexibility that comes from exploring alternative ways of looking at the same idea or problem are all essential for effective teaching. Teachers need to be able to anticipate and address common student misconceptions, connect new learning to students' prior knowledge, and use a variety of teaching strategies to meet the needs of all learners.
Central to Shulman's conceptualization of PCK is the notion of the transformation of the subject matter for teaching. This transformation involves adapting the subject matter to the specific needs and abilities of the students.
Transformation occurs as the teacher interprets the subject matter, finds multiple ways to represent it, and adapts and tailors the instructional materials to alternative conceptions and students' prior knowledge. Teachers need to be able to represent their subject matter in a variety of ways, using different examples, analogies, and metaphors.
Technology Knowledge (TK)
Technology knowledge is always in a state of flux. This means that teachers need to be lifelong learners in order to keep up with the latest technological advancements.
Defining it is difficult because technology continually changes, and keeping up-to-date can become a full-time job. Despite this challenge, it is essential for teachers to stay informed about new technologies and how they can be used to enhance teaching and learning.
There are ways of thinking about and working with technology that apply to all technology tools; this definition is close to fluency of information technology (FITness) as proposed by the National Research Council. These ways of thinking include understanding the basic principles of how technology works, how to troubleshoot problems, and how to evaluate the effectiveness of technology.
FITness goes beyond computer literacy to require understanding information technology broadly enough to apply it productively and to recognize when it can assist or impede a goal. FITness requires teachers to be able to use technology effectively for a variety of purposes, including communication, collaboration, and problem-solving.
FITness requires a deeper understanding of information technology for information processing, communication, and problem-solving. This understanding includes the ability to use technology to access, evaluate, and synthesize information, as well as the ability to communicate and collaborate effectively using technology.
TK development is evolving over a lifetime of generative interaction with technology. This means that teachers need to have opportunities to experiment with technology and to learn from their experiences.
Technological Content Knowledge (TCK)
Technology and knowledge have a deep historical relationship. Throughout history, new technologies have been developed that have transformed the way we create, share, and use knowledge.
Progress in fields has coincided with new technologies that afford the representation and manipulation of data. These technologies have made it possible to collect, analyze, and visualize data in new and powerful ways.
Consider Roentgen's discovery of X-rays or the technique of Carbon-14 dating and the influence of these technologies in the fields of medicine and archeology. These technologies have revolutionized these fields, allowing scientists to make new discoveries and develop new treatments.
Also consider how the advent of the digital computer changed the nature of physics and mathematics, and placed a greater emphasis on the role of simulation in understanding phenomena. Digital computers have made it possible to model and simulate complex systems, providing scientists with new insights into the natural world.
Technological changes have also offered new metaphors for understanding the world. For example, the Internet has been described as a "global brain," suggesting that it is a vast network of interconnected information and knowledge.
Understanding the impact of technology on the practices and knowledge of a given discipline is critical for developing technological tools for educational purposes. This understanding allows developers to create tools that are tailored to the specific needs of the discipline.
The choice of technologies affords and constrains the types of content ideas that can be taught; certain content decisions can limit the types of technologies that can be used. Teachers need to be aware of these affordances and constraints when selecting technologies for their classrooms.
Technology constrains the types of possible representations but conversely affords the construction of newer and more varied representations, while technological tools can provide a greater degree of flexibility in navigating across these representations. This means that technology can both limit and expand the possibilities for representing and understanding content.
There are examples of the manner in which representations are changed with the introduction of technology
Fractals require the computational power of the computer to be created and to be taught; fractals, as we conceive of them now, would not be possible without the computational and visual representational power of the digital computer. The development of fractals was made possible by the advent of the digital computer.
TCK can be defined as an understanding of the manner in which technology and content influence and constrain one another. This understanding is essential for teachers to be able to use technology effectively in their classrooms.
Teachers need to master more than the subject matter they teach, they must also have a deep understanding of the manner in which the subject matter (or the kinds of representations that can be constructed) can be changed by the application of technology. This understanding allows teachers to use technology to enhance student learning and understanding.
Teachers need to understand which specific technologies are best suited for addressing subject-matter learning in their domains and how the content dictates or perhaps even changes the technology--or vice versa. This means that teachers need to be able to select and use technologies that are appropriate for their subject matter and their students.
TCK is the most neglected aspect of the TPCK framework. This neglect is due in part to the fact that it requires teachers to have a deep understanding of both technology and their subject matter.
Teachers' experiences with technology need to be specific to different content areas. This means that teachers need to have opportunities to use technology in the context of their own subject matter.
Technological Pedagogical Knowledge (TPK)
Technological pedagogical knowledge is an understanding of how teaching and learning changes when particular technologies are used. This understanding includes the ability to select and use technologies that are appropriate for the learning goals and the needs of the students.
This includes knowing the pedagogical affordances and constraints of a range of technological tools as they relate to disciplinarily and developmentally appropriate pedagogical designs and strategies. Teachers need to be able to evaluate the pedagogical value of different technologies and to use them in ways that are consistent with best practices in teaching and learning.
This requires getting a deeper understanding of the constraints and affordances of technologies and the disciplinary contexts within which they function. This understanding allows teachers to make informed decisions about which technologies to use and how to use them effectively.
TPK becomes particularly important because most popular software programs are not designed for educational purposes. This means that teachers need to be able to adapt and modify these programs to meet the needs of their students.
Teachers need to reject functional fixedness, and develop skills to look beyond the immediate technology and "reconfigure it" for their own pedagogical purposes. This reconfiguration requires creativity, problem-solving skills, and a deep understanding of both technology and pedagogy.
TPK requires a forward-looking, creative, and open-minded seeking of technology, not for its own sake, but for the sake of advancing student learning and understanding. This means that teachers should not simply use technology because it is new or trendy, but because it can help them to achieve their learning goals.
Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPCK)
TPCK is an emergent form of knowledge that goes beyond content, pedagogy, and technology, representing an understanding that emerges from the interaction of them. TPCK is the knowledge that teachers need to be able to integrate technology effectively into their teaching.
TPCK is the basis of effective teaching with technology and requires an understanding of:
representation of concepts using technologies
pedagogical techniques that use technologies in constructive ways
knowledge of what makes concepts difficult or easy to learn and how technology can help redress some of the problems that students face
knowledge of students' prior knowledge and theories of epistemology
knowledge of how technologies can be used to build on existing knowledge and to develop new epistemologies or strengthen old ones.
TPCK is a form of knowledge that expert teachers bring into play any time they teach; no single technological solution applies for every teacher, every course, or every view of teaching. This means that teachers need to be able to adapt and modify their use of technology to fit the specific needs of their students and the learning goals of their course.
Solutions lie in the ability of a teacher to flexibly navigate the space defined by content, pedagogy, and technology, and the complex interactions among these elements in specific contexts. This flexibility requires teachers to have a deep understanding of all three elements and how they interact.
Teachers need to develop fluency and cognitive flexibility not just in each of these key domains (T, P, and C) but also in the manner in which these domains interrelate, so that they can effect solutions that are sensitive to specific contexts. This fluency and flexibility allows teachers to use technology in ways that are both effective and engaging for their students.
Whenever a new educational technology suddenly forces teachers to confront basic educational issues and reconstruct the dynamic equilibrium among all three elements. This view inverts the conventional perspective that content simply needs to be converted to fit a new technology—that is, the pedagogical goals and technologies are derived from the content area.
Things are rarely that simple, particularly when newer technologies are employed as the introduction of the Internet (particularly the rise of online learning) is an example of the arrival of a technology that forced educators to think about core pedagogical issues such as how to represent content on the web, and how to connect students with the subject matter and with one another (Peruski & Mishra, 2004).
A good example of how the pedagogical constraints of schools can restrict how technology is designed and used relates to the use of educational computer games. Educational computer games are often designed to be used in a specific way, which can limit their pedagogical value.
Teachers as Curriculum Designers
There is no general solution to a teaching problem for every context, subject matter, technology, or classroom; practitioners have to "learn to see through design-colored glasses" and "be inventive" in approaching problems. This means that teachers need to be able to design their own curriculum and instruction, rather than simply following a prescribed set of steps.
Curricula do not exist independently of teachers; teachers are part of the curriculum. This means that teachers need to be actively involved in the curriculum design process.
Teachers construct curricula through iterative design and refinement, negotiating among existing constraints to create contingent conditions for learning, using bricolage. This iterative process involves trying out different approaches, evaluating their effectiveness, and making adjustments as needed.
Approaches that merely teach skills do not go far enough.
Learning about technology is different than learning what to do with it;
Learning about curriculum content, or general pedagogical skills, will not necessarily help teachers develop an understanding of how to put this knowledge to good use.
The spiral-like development of TPCK emphasizes that teacher educators need to be sensitive to the fact that all technologies come with pedagogical affordances and constraints, and in that sense the TPCK framework can be applied to any technology.
The need for a greater emphasis on the demands of subject matter where the various affordances and constraints of technology differ by curricular subject-matter content or pedagogical approach.
Practice is an important route to learning where educators must find ways to provide preservice teachers multiple opportunities to work through these problems of practice before they enter their first classrooms, whether by internships, case-studies (traditional or video), or problem-based learning scenarios
Context is important for solutions to "wicked problems" require nuanced understanding that goes beyond the general principles of content, technology, and pedagogy.
Conclusion
A major goal of research should be to understand the relationships between teacher thought processes; and teachers' actions and their observable effects. This understanding can help teacher educators to develop more effective ways to prepare teachers for the challenges of technology integration.
Research should extend this tradition of research and scholarship.
We need to develop better techniques for discovering and describing how knowledge is implemented and instantiated in practice, and, just as importantly, how the act of doing influences the nature of knowledge itself. This research can help us to understand how teachers learn to use technology effectively and how we can best support their learning.
This serves as the interaction, bi-directional relationship