Stepping back from TPACK | Learning with New Media. This text is adapted from a longer journal article by the authors: Parr, G., Bellis, N. & Bulfin, S. (2013 in press) Teaching English teachers for the future: Speaking back to TPACK. English in Australia, 48 (1). Introduction Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge - or ‘TPACK’ for short – has emerged over the past five years as a popular conceptual framework for understanding the role of digital technology in educational settings. Largely associated with the work of Mishra and Koehler (2006, 2008), the general principle of TPACK is simple enough – i.e. that there is a “dynamic equilibrium” between (i) subject or content knowledge (CK) (ii) pedagogical knowledge (PK) and (iii) a knowledge of technology (TK). Yet amidst the rush to adopt this ‘new’ understanding, we argue that it is time to step back from the hype, and develop an awareness of the tensions and contradictions implicit in the TPACK model.
Unpacking TPACK The value of adding T to PCK? Conclusions References Ellis, V. (2007). Www.sicet.org/journals/ijttl/issue1101/1_Willis.pdf. Richard Olsen's Blog › The TPACK Framework is fundamentally flawed. Note: This post is in response to three TPACK sessions I have attended during the last six months. After each of the sessions I have been left with doubt about the usefulness of TPACK. I’ve searched for criticisms of TPACK and they are difficult to find. It is a shame that tpack.org does not provide links to them, hopefully this something will see in the future. TPACK’s aim is to enable teachers “to identify the nature of knowledge required by teachers for technology integration in their teaching.”
The TPACK Framework is fundamentally flawed. 1. 2. 3. 4. In the 2006 paper , Mishra and Koehler describe technology as being not just modern technology but also chalkboards, books and presumably tables and chairs. So if everything concrete is technology, what isn’t? This division, pedagogical knowledge from technological pedagogical knowledge is not a necessary and useful, but rather contrieved and confusing. Where is the learner? A TPACK Framework critique | Pedagogical Reflections. The basic premise of the Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK) framework offered by Mishra and Koehler (2006) as a way of understanding and making sense of the ways in which teachers use digital technologies is sound. Mishra and Koehler argue that, in recent times, the over-emphasis on the use of technology, particularly in terms of teacher professional development, has led to an imbalance where teachers lack understanding as to how to effectively use ICT with learners.
The authors suggest that teacher practice which resides at the ‘insersection’ of the three components – technological knowledge, pedagogical knowledge and content knowledge – will be effective in integrating technology. I made a number of interesting anecdotes when reading this article, some of which I may expand upon in future blogs: The point that most stuck with me, however, was the teacher-centredness of the TPACK model. Learner Knowledge – the who. What is UBD (Understanding By Design)? Understanding By Design is a framework and accompanying design process for thinking decisively about unit lesson planning. The concept was developed by Jay McTighe and Grant Wiggins, and as part of their principles they state that UBD “…is not a philosophy of education”. It is not designed to tell teachers what or how to teach; it is a system to help them teach more effectively.
In fact, its flexibility is one reason it has gained so much acclaim. With UBD, the ultimate goal is to think backward, focusing on the big picture: at the end of a unit what is the essential question your students should be able to answer? What are the Stages of UBD? The UBD design process is organized into three stages: Teachers 1) Identify Desired ResultsTeachers 2) Determine Acceptable EvidenceTeachers 3) Create the Learning Plans Stage 1: Identify Desired Results or Outcome: As an educator, you can begin stage one by asking a few key questions. Parts of Stage 1: Stage 1 UBD Template Example Stage 1 Worksheet: TPACK.ORG. Punya.educ.msu.edu/publications/mishra-koehler-l&l-2009.pdf.
The Ecology of Resources (EoR) Design Framework. Eorframework / 00 List EoR Empirical. 21st Century Learning Design (21CLD) Technology Resources. TEI-Intro-to-TPACK. Challenge Based Learning - Welcome to Challenge Based Learning! Is Google Making Us Stupid? - Nicholas Carr. Illustration by Guy Billout "Dave, stop. Stop, will you? Stop, Dave. Will you stop, Dave?” So the supercomputer HAL pleads with the implacable astronaut Dave Bowman in a famous and weirdly poignant scene toward the end of Stanley Kubrick’s 2001: A Space Odyssey. Bowman, having nearly been sent to a deep-space death by the malfunctioning machine, is calmly, coldly disconnecting the memory circuits that control its artificial “ brain.
I can feel it, too. I think I know what’s going on. For me, as for others, the Net is becoming a universal medium, the conduit for most of the information that flows through my eyes and ears and into my mind. I’m not the only one. Bruce Friedman, who blogs regularly about the use of computers in medicine, also has described how the Internet has altered his mental habits. Anecdotes alone don’t prove much. Reading, explains Wolf, is not an instinctive skill for human beings.
But the machine had a subtler effect on his work. Also see: Where does it end? Word - 3 Cs of teamwork.pdf. ITL Research. Microsoft TEI - TEI Home Page. TEI Workshop Resources. TEI UAE 2. Www.educ.ualberta.ca/staff/olenka.bilash/best of bilash/task-based language teaching.pdf.