Reflection (part 2)

Working with TPACK
Context
When I started to work with the TPACK framework I found that my attention was immediately drawn to the three circles in the middle of the model and the way they overlap. It was quite easy to overlook the outer circle that emphasizes the importance of the context. This is why our team at the beginning of the assignment placed the description of the context in the last paragraph of the chapter about TPACK. As described in my last post we soon discovered though, that it is very difficult to design a lesson plan (with our without the help of TPACK) without knowing anything about the context in which the lesson will be implemented.

One of the important things I therefore learned in this assignment is the importance of thinking about the context before thinking about any other parts of the TPACK framework. To emphasize the importance of the context we decided to place our description of the context in the first paragraph of the chapter about TPACK instead of in the last paragraph.

Sequence various parts TPACK
After elaborating the context we started to work on the other parts of TPACK. As displayed in the second figure in my last post we decided in what sequence we would describe the various parts of TPACK before we started. That decision was quite difficult to make. After discussing it we found a sequence that seemed logical to us. Below our reasoning is explained.

Our assignment was to start from the perspective of inquiry learning, or in other words to start from the perspective of Pedagogical Knowledge (PK), so the starting point was set. We all agreed that it seemed logical to end with Technological Pedagogical and Content Knowledge (TPCK), because information about various other parts would come together there, so the end was set as well. But what to do with Technological Knowledge (TK), Content Knowledge (CK), Technological Pedagogical Knowledge (TPK), Technological Content Knowledge (TCK), and Pedagogical Content Knowledge (PCK)?

We decided that after discussing the PK it would be most logical to first describe one of the other circles (i.e. CK or TK), because any other part of TPACK would include information about CK or TK. We chose CK, because in our opinion TK is used to support delivering specific content in a specific pedagogical way to students in our lesson. We thought that for a reader it would be the easiest to understand our decisions if after discussing PK and CK we would first elaborate PCK, since information about PK and CK is combined in that paragraph.

After elaborating on that TK, TPK and TCK were left. Since TPK and TCK both include aspects of TK, we decided to discuss TK first. Afterwards we could not think of good reasons why either TPK or TCK should come first, so we chose one randomly: TPK. By that choice the rest of the sequence was clear as well; TCK would follow and as mentioned before TPACK would become the last paragraph of the chapter.

My experience
My experience when it comes to working with TPACK is that it is difficult to really concentrate on one of the parts of the model. For example I caught myself thinking about technological aspects regularly while I was working on the part about content knowledge. Another example is that I found it hard not to think about the content of the lesson plan we designed while I was elaborating TPK. In the part about TPACK on the other hand it became difficult to think of all the various aspects of the model at the same time. For example I wanted to say something about the way internet search supports the step ‘gathering information’ of the inquiry approach, but then realized that that was ‘only’ TPK and that it did not include any content knowledge (yet).

Although it sometimes felt like a struggle to correctly describe the various parts of the TPACK framework I did find the framework very useful to make sure we had thought of all the important aspects of a lesson plan. The framework structures the design of a lesson plan.

The framework also makes you realize what and how much is expected from teachers. I found elaborating TPACK for the lesson plan a very useful thing to do, before thinking about instructor support. Without TPACK it would have been easy to fall into the trap of designing only technology based support. Consciously thinking about other types of knowledge teachers need for the lesson (e.g. knowledge about the pedagogical approach used and how to support that specific approach with technology) gives direction to the design of instructor support and helps to make sure the teacher will feel fully supported.

Thanks to TPACK it became clear to us that for the implementation of our lesson plan teachers would not only need support in using technology during the lesson (i.e. internet search), but also in how to use technology in such way it actually enriches the pedagogical approach inquiry learning. Therefore inquiry learning is now a subject in the designed workshop for teachers. In the follow-up of the workshop there is attention for the way internet search is implemented by teachers into their inquiry lessons as well.

Another thing that became clear during the reflection on the assignment is that the sequence of TPACK parts that we used in our report might not be so logical as we first thought. In our report we first discussed TK and then elaborated TCK and TPK, but in practice we actually first thought of how technology could support the pedagogical approach (TPK), the content (TCK) and both (TPACK). Therefore it would have made more sense in our report if we had used that sequence. The next question that then arises though is: When should we mention TK? This example shows that we had some difficulties in deciding how exactly we should use the TPACK framework.