Chapter+1+TPACK


 * 1) Click on edit this page.
 * 2) Use the down arrow on your keyboard to get the cursor underneath the horizontal bar.
 * 3) Type your name, highlight your name and then select Heading 3 at the top.
 * 4) Copy and paste your reflection underneath your name.
 * 5) Insert a horizontal bar under your reflection.
 * 6) Click save.

toc

Abstract
This chapter explains that technology must be as integral a part of a modern teacher's classroom as pedagogy and content knowledge. Teaching is highly complex and multifaceted, a "wicked problem," and the inclusion of technology is a major part of this. Teachers have been dealing with using new advances in technology for centuries, whether they are "analog" technologies like a pencil or "digital" technologies like computers. Constantly changing technology is challenge for many educators. Trying to find the "balance" between content, pedagogy, and technology is a difficult task in an already demanding profession. Time, integration, training and adequate funding are all issues educators take into account when making technology a priority in their classrooms. TPACK is complex and requires us as educators to find solutions to many wicked problems, causing us to further complicate things when integrating technology. We strive to educate all children with many different learning styles and it is our job to find meaningful, purposeful and creative ways to use technology in our classrooms. TPACK is a complex relationship of three primary forms of knowledge found in schools today. They are defined below in no particular order of importance. The first is content knowledge, this is knowledge about the actual subject matter that is to be learned or taught by the educator. The second part is pedagogy, which is a deep knowledge or understanding about the processes and practices of teaching as well as learning. Technology no how is knowledge about standard technologies such as books and chalk, as well as more advanced technologies such as the Internet, software and hardware as well as gadgets. Pedagogical content knowledge is the core business of teaching, learning, curriculum, assessment, and reporting such as the conditions that promote learning and links among the curriculum, assesment, and pedagogy; it is the knowledge of pedagogy that is applicable to the teaching of specific content (14). Technological content knowledge is the understanding of the manner in which technology and content influence and constrain one another (16). Technological pedagogical knowledge requires a forward-looking, creative, and open-minded seeking of technology for the sake of advancing student learning and understanding (17). Technological pedagogical content knowledge is an understanding that emerges from an interaction of content, pedagogy, and techology knowledge. TPCK is the basis of effective teaching with technology and requires an understanding of the representation of concepts using tecnologies; pedagogical techniques that use technologies in constructive ways to teach content; knowledge of what concepts and how technology can redress some of the issues children face; knowledge of children's prior knowledge and theories of epistemology; and knowledge of how technologies can be used to build on existing knowledge and to develop new epistemologies or strengthen old ones (17-18). Overall, TPACK is very complex and requires knowledge in many areas and our job is then to synthesis these understandings to teach children more effectively.

Reflections
In reading all of the responses to the first chapter of TPCK, I was able to pick out numerous common threads. One of the most common had to do with getting teachers [|"on-board"] with technology. In other words, when we have so much to do already, how do we find the time to integrate technology into our classrooms? Mike Fisher, a technology trainer from NY, says that the one thing he wants teachers to know about technology is that you don't have to be an [|expert]. Remember, whether you are tech-savvy or a technophobe, there are many other teachers like you out there! Through the discussion on the Classroom 2.0 forum, (click on the "on-board" link above) two strategies emerged as being helpful in inspiring faculty to use more technology. One was to showcase student work on the computer using various projects and the other was to offer to help less tech-savvy staff in learning new digital technology that might be useful in their classrooms. This brings us to another common thread...teachers need more [|training] in technology. Many teachers feel resistant to being asked to do more and more with what feels like less and less. And in today's economy, budget cuts are a real threat. So it appears it is up to us. We must be willing to take what we are learning here in our Master's courses and bring that back to our districts to advocate for change. To paraphrase [|Gandhi], we must be the change we wish to see in our schools.
 * Meg's reflection**

Wow...there are so many ideas that I could elaborate on. Here are some of the major issues that were brought up in the reﬂections written about Chapter 1 of the TPACK book.
 * Christine Harrington's Reflection**

Time is one of the biggest concerns among educators concerning technology. How do I ﬁnd the time as an educator to learn more about technology? Where do I ﬁnd the time to take technology courses or workshops? How do I ﬁnd the time in my already busy school day to integrate technology? Not only was that a concern, but making this [|integration meaningful] to their students learning and not just “doing” technology for the sake of “doing” technology! Finding the proper use and forms of [|technology integration] at different grade levels is a challenge.

Several concerns were made about funding and equity throughout school districts. How do some schools acquire more sophisticated technology while others struggle to receive the very little that they do get? How do we ﬁnd the time and money to train educators with technology? Where can we ﬁnd the [|funding] to continue to support technology integrators in our schools?

Being an educator requires us to be a life long learners. It continues to keep us up to date on current trends, curriculum, technologies, and assessments. We are all doing our best to provide the most supportive, caring, and educational learning environments for our students. Teacher overload and burnout was another concern in the responses to Chapter 1. How do I teach all that I am required to teach, make sure that my students are learning and understanding, attend mandated classes and meetings, and add technology to the mix? It is a concern for many educators. How much more can I do? How do I “balance” content, pedagogy, and technology?

I want you all to know that you are highly respected and valuable educators. Teaching can be such a rewarding and encouraging career. We do not hear enough all the good things that we are doing for our children. Just know that in the midst of all of this integration, curriculum, assessment, behavior, and teaching, you are, in fact, [|impacting the lives] of your students. You are [|making a difference]. Keep up the good work!

**James Reflection: TPACK CH1**
There seems to be a several recurring issues found throughout most of the chapter 1 summaries. Most had concerns with [|funding], time constraints and the ability to keep up with the ever-changing [|tech based] software. Another major issue for a majority of the class was the ability to successfully organize technology with pedagogy and content. These areas of study can be confusing enough alone but when combined in integrated study forms they can be a challenge for any professional.

Lack of preparation time in schools is not a new issue but it does seem to be getting progressively worst with the integration of technology to users who are part of the baby boom generation. These educators in general are less familiar with the use of technology. They did not grow up playing video games or using computers to communicate with friends. It has been my personal experience that when technological initiatives are forced onto this generation of teacher’s, resistance becomes almost immediate. In order to help curb these problems administrators need to allow adequate time for all levels of learners to master the skills. Key to this transfer of knowledge is a technology integrationist who can relate to all levels of learners and works well with the staff.

Technological Pedagogical Content knowledge is a very useful but complex notion. In order for this to really be accepted and gain understanding in schools it will take proper planning and integration. This is not a topic that can be thrown at teachers in a faculty meeting or in small groups. It will take in service training along with professional development classes in order for this to become a successful part of school curricula. Below are several resources that can offer assistance with some of the above stated issues. [|Finding Time:] [|Understanding TPACK:]

Stacey's Reflection I am not surprised of the range of technological knowledge within our cohort, the same can most likely be seen in each of our school districts. After reading all the reflections it occurred to me that all of us have our own personal and professional stories that has lead us to our own understanding of technology, how we use it, what it looks like, and how we balance all the requirements and demands placed on us as teachers. As I was reading, I noticed many common themes around the idea of TPACK. Most of us have concerns regarding professional development, funding, time, resources, and the balance to provide equitable education to all. I feel we as educators understand the importance of technology and how it is another tool for teachers to engage students, but some of us feel inadequate integrate techonology effectively. I do think that TPACK is grounded in a constructivist approach and we must collaborate and support one another to use technology with purpose and meaning to teaching the children in our classrooms. As the authors of the book stated, Teaching and learning with technology exist in a dynamic transitional relationship between the three components.” (AACTE, p. 18) I leave feeling that we need to value the idea of [|teaching and learning] simultaneously and maybe we can support each other and provide children with the opportunity to teach us some of their skills and knowledge. Teaching is complex and evolving and adding new technologies in the mix further complicates things. I found this link that maybe helpful for elementary teachers when using [|technology] in their classroom.

**Cindy**
TPCK - Chapter 1 Reflection

I believe that I come to reading and reflecting on this book from a unique perspective. I was a classroom teacher, of grades Pre-First to 3, for twenty-four years before accepting a K-3 Technology Integrator position. Due to budget constraints I am now back in the classroom teaching second grade. Having a “ foot in both worlds” triggered many thoughts as I read this chapter. I was originally hired, by MSAD9, because I was an early elementary teacher who was attempting to integrate technology use into my first grade classroom. They wanted an educator in this role to better encourage and support other elementary teachers in technology integration. The department’s philosophy, at this time, was that the teachers were the content specials. The Technology Integrator’s job was to provide them with technology tools for their application. At this time I also served as a Learning Leader for SEED. This, grant supported, group offered training, awards and celebration to Maine educators integrating technology into their curriculum. SEED’s philosophy was very similar to the authors of TPCK. Teacher training opportunities were designed combining technological tools, content, and pedagogy. Understanding By Design elements were infused in these sessions. Often we had discussions about the difficulties we experienced from teachers who complained that they had “come to learn technology ... they didn’t need to know how to teach.” This same conversation replayed often in MSAD9 department meetings. A new technology manager was hired and a philosophical shift was made to supporting teachers in connecting technological tools, content, and pedagogy. Even with this shift, discussions of how to connect technology to teaching, still occurred. As Technology Integrators we often met to create continuums of integration, rubrics, training materials and to express our concern over budget, and our time spent as technicians rather than as integrators. Our greatest dilemma was our conflicting empathy for overwhelmed teachers (overwhelmed with all the demands that are being placed on teachers) and the perception that technology integration was one more of these demands that we were enforcing. I often was met, by teachers, with the comment: “ I don’t have time for this. Why can’t you just teach my kids if I drop them off?” Now that I have returned to classroom teaching I am struggling with the balance of content, pedagogy, and use of appropriate technological tools. I recognize myself as a teacher with a constructivist philosophy. Possibly this is why I have felt that it is essential that technology play a central role in my classroom. I have identified three goals for myself this year.

The first is to use technology equipment as everyday tools rather than novelty items or once a week “to do technology.”

The second is to integrate technology across a spectrum from supporting curriculum to enhancing and transforming learning.

Lastly, to use web tools for student communication of learning to a variety of audiences; promoting individual and collaborative growth.

I believe in the importance of technology integration, not for its own sake, but as a vital part of “good” teaching. Recognizing and maintaining the TPCK balance is difficult, especially as support services to teachers are being increasingly cut. I believe that there are many ways that teachers can support each other in this struggle, both formally and informally, but it is not a priority item at this time; at least not at the elementary level and not, I feel, at the administrative level. I wish that this book had been part of the Technology Department’s reading when I served in that role. _

Amity
Knowledge is an implement (tool) one constructs and wields. This is different than the connectivist approach--it is constructivist. It suggests knowledge is dynamic however and not “acquired” but “created”. I like that. This creation allows for a “kinesthetic imagery”--I like that too! Reminds me of Martha Graham and her theory that the body never lies.

This TPCK idea came into my brain last summer for Sue’s course. When I found it online my brain exploded. “This is IT, something to explain ME.” It was like when I discovered Loris Malaguzzi and Reggio Emilia practices. “I am not alone!” The breakdown of what each letter stands for helped me to understand why I do what I do, why I am good at what I do, and essentially, how to name what I do. The naming of things gives me power.

For me, content knowledge is (broadly) the humanities and more specifically modern languages (French, English, Spanish). I am not a master of the content (there is so much to learn) but I do have a very good grasp of the concepts, theories, ideas, organizational framework, knowledge of evidence and proof, and established practices and approaches. Content knowledge is an ill-structured domain which means it is dynamic, infinite. I love that!!

The pedagogical knowledge part is something I think I was born with. I’ve never not known how to relate to learners. Even as a chld I was picked to teach lessons to younger kids in Sunday School and I remember my first lesson, planning it meticulously, arranging the elements over and over in my mind, wondering how to engage and keep motivated my unruly group of seven year olds. I occasionally have dreams of an unruly class (doesn’t everyone?) but in general, I am able to manage my classes effectively. It’s just the way I am. I have a plan, I am flexible, I relate to the kids, and I take no crap.

So a highly effective teacher has both C and P....I think I have both C and P....I also think I am effective. There should be no divide between instructor and technologist. AMEN TO THAT. Technology tools are TOOLS and as a teacher I use a variety of TOOLS. I fear no technology because I have been exposed since the age of 3 (more on that when I discuss the digital divides.)

Teaching is a WICKED PROBLEM. I love this!!! No stopping rule, no right or wrong, only degrees of usefulness, good, bad. The solution must always be custom-designed. (Oh, I wish that kids were seen as wicked problems instead of grouped into lumps to process). Solutions often lead to new wicked problems, and have social and psychological complexity but rarely technological complexity. True that!

Ask essential questions!

Teach problem solving! Teach with inquiry! This is so like my restaurant unit that went over in December. The problem: you are opening a Spanish restaurant. It was a wicked problem indeed and they kids solved it in amazing ways. I tood back, guided...but they had to do so much work.

Teachers need more PRE-SERVICE and IN-SERVICE training. It is a tragedy that UMF does not require pre-teachers to get Macs like the ones the students have in MLTI.

A wee bit more and I am done. Technology knowledge is always in a state of flux. What really matters is the fluency of information technology. Teachers need to evolve over a lifetime with generative, open-ended technology. I feel this all the time, I am hungry for new tools and rush to learn them.

Technology content knowledge is an understanding of the manner in which technology and content influence and constrain one another. I love that it is understood that technology constrains the types of representations that be made, but also affords the construction of newer and more varied representations. THINK BIG I say and BE CREATIVE with the use of tech. I use Wordles all the time now to help measure words. I use Webspiration even though it is for business. This leads to TPK--creative flexibility with available tools in order to repurpose them for specific pedagogical purposes.

Technological content knowledge is understaning how teaching and learning change when tech is used to teach. I have a second nature of this already; I know to look, listen, observe my students on computers and check constantly. Not big brother but “I am here, and where are you?” It helps to have projects the kids are interested in.

The whole mash-up of TPCK is understanding through interaction of the domains represented. When wicked problems arise (as they should!) the effective, expert teacher can tap into these domains to help students understand.

I do think I have a handle on TPCK but I am sure there is a lot to learn and reflect on. It is nice to know there is a name for what I do.

James
Ch1 The first chapter begins with a introduction to teaching as a Complex ill-structured domain. The art/science of teaching has many unknowns and is extremely subjective. Some subjects such as math are very structured and can be more easily structured, whereas subjects like psychology, history and Teaching has a high level of objectivity over a large context of material. Technology is defined as tools created by human knowledge of how to combine resources to produce desired products, to solve problems, fulfill needs, or satisfy wants. I think this is much too complicated an prefer a much shorter definition. Technology in the application of scientific knowledge for practical purposes. Technology has both affordances- properties of the system that allow certain actions to be performed and encourage specific types of learner behavior. E-mails affords easy communication and large content storage. Constraints include tone, intent and mood. Restrictions to using technology, social and institutional limitations, Adequate training, lack of funding, Generational gap. Technology is always changing making it hard for people to stay updated. Limited educational technology available. Lack of experience and training. Technology problems are passed on. SEP, Someone else’s problem. Diverse classrooms. Content knowledge: Knowledge about actual subject matter. Pedagogical Knowledge: Knowledge about the process and practices of teaching and learning. Includes educational purpose, values and aims. Technology Knowledge: State of flux, No real definition, What a person knows about all applications of technology. Technological content Knowledge: How technology has changed what we know about the world and how it works. Progress that has been made through technology. Technological pedagogical knowledge: An understanding of how teaching and learning changes when particular technologies are used. Must know constraints and affordances of technologies and the disciplines they are used with. Technological pedagogical content knowledge: Emergent form of knowledge goes beyond all three components. Understanding that comes from an interaction of content, pedagogy and technology.

Jake
Teaching is an ill structured and complex domain. Being able to shift from the stable and transparent traditional pedagogical technologies to protean, unstable and opaque technologies will help prepare students for applying their //designed knowledge// to the real world. By being able to deal with ambiguity, frustration and change in the classroom, teachers will help model for their students how to navigate in the real world. I am interested in exploring how to help students be successful in ambiguous more real-world environments. They are too comfortable in static black and white environments. I have been trying to assign more //design your own labs// for my students in college prep Physics classes. Assigning such labs really challenge my student to organize their investigations and understand the essential concepts.

As a teacher that is continuously working at improving a new Engineering Design course last semester, I love the perspective of "knowledge as design" and "wicked problems". How do I help students accept and work with these paradigms? How do teachers help students be comfortable creating satisificing solutions to wicked problems? And are satisificing solutions acceptable when building a bridge? Is there levels or graduations of satisficing solutions to be used in different contexts?

Creative repurposing is critical to teaching in a low income district and for overcoming the //"Functional Fixedness" discussed in Chapter 1.// A colleague's students used wikispaces to create quizzes in an English class. The students were wonderfully creative in this exercise.Their quizzes were full of personality. The personality in the quizzes made the formative assessment engaging to peers. There is a whole community of creative repurposing emerging and supported by web 2.0 technologies for personal projects at [|www.instructables.com]. I would like to have student's post their design projects to this kind of forum to receive feedback and document their work.

‘Technology integration’ has been at the forefront of my district’s professional learning goals at least since I was hired in 2004. It is the buzz phrase at all of our professional learning days and an essential agenda item of every faculty meeting. I know that it must be a real problem somewhere, but I have never really seen great resistance in my district. It is never “somebody else’s job.” People seem to be fully aware that we live in a digital age with new and continuously changing demands. What I found interesting is the way that the book suggests the small ways in which faculty limit themselves or the technology by the idea of “functional fixedness.” I think that is the real issue in my world.

We try to categorize the new technology in the same ways that we departmentalize all other tools. We try to identify their function and put them in the right place. The smartboard quickly became the math department’s toy, while the digital video cameras were reserved for the humanities folks. Just as the white board was said to be limited in its use only by teachers, we started limiting or technologies by their use in one department. That is slowly falling by the wayside, but we are still trapped by those subconscious constraints.

My district’s attempt to integrate technology effectively makes me so proud. We have one-to-one laptops 5-12 with a cart of brand new macbooks K-4. Our district sports strong administrative support and a great technology department. At times, I worry that our district’s focus on technology has caused a technology overload. Some assignments and tasks that could be done more efficiently by a more traditional means are forced awkwardly into the digital age in the name of technology integration. That focus on the TPCK model is the struggle in our lives. How do we achieve that balance of content, pedagogy and technology without tipping in the name of integration?

So much of what the chapter mentioned hit home with me, especially the need to integrate technology not as a stagnant content but as a complex skill base. Our school’s focus on literacy needs has also forced the staff to look at the technology literacy, what the authors refer to as technology knowledge, that the students must have to be successful in post-secondary ventures. Each student must learn the ways in which to incorporate these new technologies into their daily lives effectively. Students must become savvy in the interpretation of the vast amounts of knowledge that wash over them on a daily basis through those technological advances. Technology has changed the way the world works. Most everything is connected and available at the click of a button. Ultimately, we are trying to prepare students for a world that hasn’t even been imagined yet.

Charmaine
My reflection on chapter 1 further validated the concept of “functional fixedness” that still remains in my mind. The push toward higher levels of technology when one is still trying to wrap their mind around the idea that commonly used objects in the classroom are objects of technology that are usable in many different forms is a challenge. Education, in its own right is continually changing from one method, one strategy, or what have you, and now to gain understanding that each teacher must bring each student to a level of expertise that will enhance and promote learning in teacher and student alike. It is an absolute certainty that teachers must be life long learners in all aspects of technology and this is doubly true when it comes to technology. You talk about inequities for students in technology, think and feel the frustration of the classroom teacher who has never been given adequate training in technology, and therefore lacks experience and is not sufficiently prepared to teach students higher level use of technology. Personally, even in the masters level course in general, I am required to do computer work that I have not been trained in. This situation creates anxiety in me as to whether I am doing things correctly, will my materials be lost somewhere in cyberspace (whatever that really is), or will I ever finish this assignment on time? As for the impact on my classroom, the laptops are old and shared between nine classes, so if my students are fortunate they will get to use the laptops at least once a week. In conclusion, I’ve never been offered training in trouble shooting with these old laptops the students have access to. Experience and values determine acceptance of technology. Teacher’s knowledge must increase if student knowledge is to increase.

Keith
After reading chapter one in TPCK my head is spinning. I always knew and felt the complexities of teaching, but I guess I never really contemplated all of the moving parts. I agree that teaching is a “wicked problem”. The role of a teacher in education is constantly changing and thousands of decisions have to be made daily. The tough thing is that, as the book described, the solution to one problem often leads to the creation of others. There also are few clearly defined answers that can be established.

The role of technology has definitely added more layers to decision making. Though technology can be a benefit it can also be an issue. It is really difficult as a practicing teacher to stay up to date on the new digital forms of technology. Things are constantly changing and being updated; it becomes a full time job. This instability makes it challenging as a teacher to utilize technology to its full potential. This is true even for a teacher who is interested and not resistant to it like me!

The fact that technology use is so closely tied to content and pedagogy makes it even more challenging. The book stated that these three areas are interconnected and the relationships among them are the key to beneficial technology use. While I understand the importance, the practice is difficult. The use of technology is so varied depending on the content area being taught. It serves as a powerful tool, but as an elementary teacher I am responsible for all subject areas. That means that I need to understand the relationship between technology use, pedagogy, and five separate content areas. That is a truly difficult and time consuming feat. One in which little to no training is provided to practicing teachers.

The training for teachers that has been provided is often very skill specific rather than on the integration of technology in a classroom. As the book suggests, “teaching technology skills alone does little to help teachers develop knowledge about how to use digital tools to teach more effectively, navigate the relationships..., or use technology to help students learn a particular topic.”(21) This implication is important in the classroom and to practicing and preservice teachers. More real life, content based opportunities must be provided for content integration if technology’s true value is to be realized by students.

I do notice the benefits of technology use in the classroom, and I enjoy using it. Technology does promote engagement and allow for study that might not be possible otherwise. In my class we have access to computers and SMART boards. My class has attempted to create a wiki space as a presentation site and communication tool for our writing. We access many websites that provide video and images of places where we’ll never be able to go such as inside the human body and the rain forest.

The opportunities that technology can provide must be capitalized on in the classroom so students can become successful in today’s world. In Maine the “divides” exist. Even though my students have been raised with technology all around them, I would not call all of them “digital natives”. Many of them are more like “digital immigrants” due to the digital divide that exists in Maine. The classroom serves as the opportunity for many of my students to experience and utilize the technology that is available and level the playing field.

I hope that through this book, guidance will be given as to the most effective ways to establish and enhance relationships among content, pedagogy, and technology.

Rhonda
Reflections from Chapter One Defining technology as a tool that combines many resources, while using problem solving skills to create a desired product, provides a clearer understanding of technology for me. Technology, in this chapter, refers to analog and digital technology as tools that can be used to create a desired product.

As one who did not grow up with digital technology, I have found the definition of “digital immigrant” very fitting for myself. Being a” digital immigrant” places me in a digital divide with the “digital natives,” who have grown up with technology ( M.J. Kehler, & P. Mishra, 2008). This divide is similar to the diversity in learning styles, that we as educators encompass in our classrooms. The digital divide adds to the complex process of teaching and learning.

Through the years, I have tried to include digital technology into my first grade curriculum and my staff development goals. Being engulfed in my “functional fixedness” approach ( M.J. Kehler, & P. Mishra, 2008), I have allowed this to limit my ability to integrate digital technology in my classroom. This has effected my students’ continuation of experiences and knowledge using digtial technology, which places them at a deficit compared to other students.

Our staff development workshops are based on isolated technology skills, that do not help me to transition beyond this “functional fixedness” ( M.J. Kehler, & P. Mishra, 2008). Once I have become familiar with a software program or an operating system, the technology changes. This increases my frustration with technology.

I found the paragraph on educational games enlightening. I had thought educational games provided the same design and usage as commercial games. I was not aware that educational games had limitations and were ineffective in social interaction, complexity of mastery, and educational value, as compared to commercial games.

As we venture into this class, I am in hopes that the Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge framework, will assist me in intergrating my content and pedagogy knowledge and also have a better understanding of technology.

**Jenny**
Before reading the first chapter in the Handbook of Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPCK) for Educators, I had no idea what “technological pedagogical content knowledge for educators” meant. After reading only seven pages, I had to stop, take notes, and reflect. Many definitions were given, along with similar phrases throughout the chapter. Now that I’m finished chapter one, I’d like to take a minute to summarize my notes. Here is what I learned: -Technological pedagogical content knowledge(TPCK) is a framework for teacher knowledge for technology integration. This is critical for effective teaching with technology.

-There are two types of technologies, analog and digital. Analog includes such things as the chalkboard, whiteboard, a pencil, or microscope. Digital includes the computer, blogging, and the internet.

-Technology is defined on page 5 as- “Tools created by human knowledge of how to combine resources to produce desired products, to solve problems, fulfill needs, or satisfy wants.”

Remember: Particular technologies have specific affordances and constraints- affordance- the perceived and actual psychological properties of any object in the world. constraints-

functional fixedness- the manner in which the ideas we hold about an objects function can inhibit our ability to use the object for a different function (our own biases). Creative uses of technology requires us to go beyond this f.f. (p. 6)

-Technology integration- The act of including technology in teaching, is not a new phenomenon. You have to consider constraints and affordances.

-”Teachers practice in a highly complex, dynamic environment that asks them to integrate knowledge of student thinking and learning, knowledge of the subject matter, and increasingly, knowledge of technology. Teaching is an example of an ill-structured discipline with a high level of variability. (p.4)”

-”The push to integrate technology in teaching further complicates matters by bringing an additional domain of knowledge (technology knowledge) into the mix (p.4).”

This books view of technology does not distinguish between older technologies and newer ones (hand held calculators, overhead projectors, blogs, and MP3 players).

-There are many reasons why introducing technology complicates the processes of teaching: social and institutional contexts that are unsupportive of teacher’s efforts to integrate technology. Inadequate training, no one way that works for all. Lots of affordances and constraints......... (6).

Technology integration is made even more complex by the kinds of social and institutional contexts in which teachers work (9).

Unfortunately the problem of tech. integration has become named the SEP syndrome-somebody else’s problem! Teachers and techies read diff. journals, visit diff. conferences, and have fundamentally diff. visions of the role of technology in the classroom.

-It is not easy for teachers to navigate between the two worlds, worlds in which norms, values, and language can be diff. (10). These false beliefs need to be broken down.

There is no perfect solution to the problem of integrating technology into a curriculum. Instead, integration efforts should always be custom-designed for particular subject matter ideas in specific classroom contexts.

-Teaching divides, complicate the issue of technology integration in classrooms. digital natives (the first generation of students to live and grow up entirely surrounded by digital technology) and digital immigrants(those who have migrated to the technology later in life). 2. Those who have access to the new technology vs. those who do not.

Wicked problems- continue to present an ever evolving set of interlocking issues and constraints (11). The diversity of teachers, students, and technology coordinators who operate in this social context bring diff. goals, objectives, and beliefs to the table, contribute to the wickedness of this problem.

Knowledge generation does not typically end with all possible problems are solved, but rather when external factors such as running out of time, money, information, support, or other resources come into play.


 * This book argues “That at the heart of good teaching with technology are three core components: content, pedagogy, and technology and the relationships between them. These three knowledge bases for the core of the TPCK framework. (12)

The goal for describing each of these bodies of knowledge is not to engage in philosophical discussions about the nature of knowledge. knowledge design-useable knowledge.....see pg 13.

Content Knowledge: knowledge about he actual subject matter that is to be learned or taught.

Pedagogical knowledge: is deep knowledge about the processes and practices or methods of teaching and learning and encompasses overall educational purposes, values, and aims. A generic form of knowledge that applies to student learning, classroom management, lesson plan development and implementation, and student evaluation. It includes knowledge about techniques or methods used in the classroom, the nature of the target audience, and strategies for evaluating student understanding.

Pedagogical content knowledge: PCK covers the core business of teaching, learning, curriculum, assessment, and reporting, such as the conditions that promote learning and the links among curriculum, assessment, and pedagogy. 14

Technology knowledge: is always in a state of flux- so cannot really be defined. 15

Technological content knowledge- technology and knowledge have a deep historical relationship. Progress in fields have coincided with the development of new technologies. Understanding the impact of technology on the practices and knowledge of a given discipline is critical if we are to develop appropriate technological tools for educational purposes. TCK can be defined as an understanding of the manner in which technology and content influence and constrain one another. 15/16

Technological pedagogical knowledge- is an understanding of how teaching and learning changes when particular technologies are used. This requires getting a deeper understanding of the constraints and affordances of technologies and the disciplinary contexts within which they function. 16/17 Teachers need to reconfigure the way we look at newer technologies as they were produced for other purposes, yet can be tweaked to fit our needs. Keep an open mind.

Technological pedagogical content knowledge- is an emergent form of knowledge that goes beyond all 3 components. They argue that TPCK is the basis of effective teaching with technology and requires an understanding of the representation of concepts using technologies, pedagogical techniques, and knowledge of what makes concepts difficult or easy to learn and how technology can help redress some of the problems that students face: students’ prior knowledge, theories of epistemology, knowledge of how technologies can be used to build on existing knowledge and to develop new epistemologies or strengthen old ones. Solutions lie in the ability of a teacher to flexibly navigate the space defined by the 3 elements.

“Teaching with technology is a difficult thing to do well (p.20).” However, this book suggests that there are some general implications for teachers who try to achieve this equilibrium, and they explore what this view implies for teaching practices.

Teacher knowledge in practice, or teachers as curriculum designers:

Be inventive Each “wicked problem” is unique and case-specific. Teachers need to be flexible in order to succeed. Teachers practice an art, making hundreds of decisions a day. Curricula do not exist independent of teachers. Teachers help construct and enact it in the classroom. Teachers are not merely the creator of the curriculum, but is a part of it: Teachers are curriculum designers, because implementation decisions lie primarily in the hands of teachers in their classrooms...........see pg. 21 The process of enacting teaching (with or without technology) in ways that are uniquely shaped by their personalities, histories, ideas, beliefs, and knowledge, has been called bricolage. This emphasizes situational creativity and flexibility. Teachers constantly negotiate a balance between technology, pedagogy, and content in ways that are appropriate to the specific parameters of an ever changing educational context.

As you can see, I am coming into this class with little knowledge about computers. I did not grow up with one, and only remember taking a typing class in high school. I am definitely just getting my feet wet when it comes to this whole new world of technology! While studying to become an Elementary Educator I never realized how important computer information would become for our students. Children really are going to need to know how to effectively use one in order to function in the 21st century work field. What’s hard, is that many of us, (who are very good teachers, who have a passion for teaching, who love children and being creative) know very little about computers, let alone how to teach computer lessons. My thoughts about integrating technology into the classroom continue to change with time. Because I am a “digital immigrant,” I have always been uneasy with computers, new programs, and technologies in our schools. I loved analogue technologies because they were simple to use, require no wires, and were what I grew up with. As a title 1a/Reading Recovery teacher of eight years, I was never included (until now) into the technology classes. Just one year ago, for instance, all teachers, except for Title 1a teachers were given laptops. I had one PC in my room, which I used to type up report cards on. E-mail was introduced a few years ago, but hardcopies were sent, so I never learned to use mine. Once it was made mandatory, I cringed, learned, and. . . . loved it! It was not as scary as I had thought, and truly liked being able to hit “reply” and instantly send my thoughts back to the sender. Learning that technology includes things such as digital cameras, e-mail, and the internet, has me more excited than ever about this whole new world. Unfortunately, I have not had the time, nor money needed to explore other technologies in our school. I also wonder what place technology has in a title 1/Reading Recovery classroom where time is limited, and procedures have been set? Only time will tell. Keeping a positive attitude, being willing to learn, and being given the time and equipment needed, will be key in the future success of teaching ourselves and our students about computers.

Meg
Technology is growing and changing at increasing rates of speed each year. Look at how quickly an iPod or computer goes out of date or becomes obsolete. Contrast that with the relative stasis of the canon of English literature. No wonder then that many teachers, when looking at technology, think, “It’s somebody else’s problem.” Many times, we don’t like to change, because change is hard. Change is work and sometimes change is frightening. And technology is change. But the truth is that we use technology every day, from the minute we get up until we go to sleep. Many of these innovative technologies are no longer new or exciting to us; therefore we discount them as technology. But a pencil is technology. Just as much as the computer and word processor were revolutionary, so too was the printing press and the clock. One of the discussions that I found most interesting in this chapter was the nature of analog and digital technology. So we use technology every day. So what? So what if what I use is a pencil while the technology that my colleague embraces is a SmartBoard. They are both technology. The “so what” is that our students are so much better at it than teachers (for the most part) are. Many of them have, after all, never even seen or heard of a typewriter, and discount writing with pens and pencils as “old school.” They cannot remember a time when they did not have the luxury of a computer. And they like learning things on (and about) computers; therefore they are more engaged in learning when it involves digital technology. How does this impact me? I believe that it reinforces what I already knew. I knew that kids like and respond well to technology and that we should continue to try to incorporate technology into our lessons. The challenge is finding the time to “do it all” as they say. Much like “supermoms” teachers have to be all things to all students…and that’s hard. But while it is hard, it is also exciting. The heart of teaching is the love of learning. If we as teachers are not open and willing to embrace new experiences and technology, then we lose the very essence of what makes us teachers. We should love to learn. Therefore, although it can be frightening to be asked to do so much with (sometimes) so little, we need to take up the challenge. I, for one, am looking forward to it.

Lisa
Reflection- Chapter 1, Handbook of Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge

The first portion of this chapter definitely confirmed a lot of the feelings I have about technology. It seems as though we are expected to use technology in our classroom, but the people who organize the technology components do not understand what our needs and wants are. Some of the things they do make using the technology more difficult for us. I was glad to get a refresher on the terms used in the book. Content knowledge is knowing about the subject areas that we teach. Pedagogical knowledge is knowing how to teach- methods and processes. Technological knowledge is more difficult to define, but seems to be knowing how to use technology to teach your content area using the proper methods and practices. I learned many things from this chapter. Many of which were reaffirming to feelings I already had. I feel like I use technology periodically in my classroom, but do not take the time to really connect it to what I am teaching. This chapter also reminded me that computers are not the only technology source available to us. White boards, chalkboards, overhead projectors, and music players are all technology as well. I am looking forward to continuing to read and learn ways to better integrate technology.

**Christine**
Reflection on Chapter 1 (Introduction) of TPCK book

WOW... this is not an easy read. There was lots of terminology that is very confusing for me. This chapter contained many definitions. I am not a well versed computer and technology person. Computers do not come easy for me. I do not own multiple technology devices and therefore any new technology practices and devices that come my way are often scary, more work for me, and an additional stress to my life. I have a feeling I am going to learn a lot in this course. Practice makes perfect, right! Here goes...

Here is what I learned and got out of this chapter. I like the comment made on page 4 that stated “the push to integrate technology in teaching further complicates matters by bringing an additional domain of knowledge (technology knowledge) into the mix.” Part of my problem with technology integration is that it is one more thing educators are asked to put on their plate. For some, it is an easy, but for me a definite challenge.

Not sure this is the place for definitions. Those are underlined in my book. Here is an important definition I thought I should add. TPCK= emergent form of knowledge that goes beyond all three components (content, pedagogy, and technology). Technological pedagogical content knowledge is an understanding that emerges from an interaction of content, pedagogy, and technology knowledge. (p. 17-18)


 * technology, content, and pedagogy need to be intertwined.

I fully agreed with the section of this chapter that was titled: Digital technologies are unstable. Software and programs are constantly changing. Technology can be stressful when taking a classroom of kindergartners to use the computers and not having their passwords, software, or equipment working correctly or easily accessed. As an educator, this is discouraging and frustrating for me and my children.

“The instability of digital technologies requires that teachers become life long learners who are willing to contend with ambiguity, frustration and change.” Once something is learned, it is changed again. I feel there is not enough time in an educators life when trying to learn something new. I might be taught a new concept, but I never have the time to implement it or experiment with it myself to feel fully comfortable. The constant demands of teaching right now is a lot! Everyday, something more is added to our plates. We do not have time to do all that is expected of us. It is very discouraging.

This section of the book was written just for me! Teachers often have inadequate (or inappropriate) experience. “Teachers often lack experience with using digital technologies for teaching and learning.” That has me written all over it! I do not consider myself prepared to use technology in my classroom and often times, “do not appreciate the value or relevance to the classroom.” I know that technology is a weakness for me. It is not a priority in my teaching routine and I know that it needs to change. I am trying my best to work on this! I need to understand the impact of technology on the disciplines I am teaching and how critical it is on the education of my children. Teachers are the primary source of change that can occur in the classroom. It is my job to integrate technology. I know this...

Here are my problems to solve: How do I make it a priority? How do I become proficient enough to teach technology to my children? Where do I find the time in my schedule to educate myself when the demands are so high for me already? How can I integrate it into my already demanding curriculum and course schedules?

This chapter gave me lots to think about.

**Kurt**
Chapter one of TPCK introduces a new way to look at technology, as well as reaffirms a previously held belief. In terms of the latter, increasingly, educators are being pushed to integrate technology with little regard for the appropriateness of the tool. They are given technology without training, and expected to use it without verification of its educational value. It is as if “We integrate technology” is a self-awarded credential for the purpose of impressing school boards and administrators, who in turn nod in oblivious approval. Koehler and Mishra’s discussion of FITness is valid in that educators need “to recognize when information technology can assist or impede the achievement of a goal, and to continually adapt to changes in information technology.” (15) The authors recognize that educators need to be selective in order to be efficient, and adaptive in order to be current and effective. This is not so much a criticism of teachers, school board members, or administrators as it is of an institution struggling to meet the demands of the modern workforce and the desire of parents for their child to have an edge.

As a criticism of the text, on page 6 Koehler and Mishra quote Ong when arguing how writing was once “an external, alien technology, as many people today think of the computer.” This may be a valid argument, but the authors’ selection of evidence in Ong is weak, as it is a source from 1982. I do not know “many” people today who think that computers are “alien.” Moreover, Koehler and Mishra follow with Plato’s reservations regarding new technology. For the record, I’ll go out on a limb and state that I believe that Plato’s lessons (without technology) will far outlast my best techno-laden plans.

Plato aside, chapter one introduces an important new way to look at technology. Instead of trying to force technology into the classroom for the sake of integration, teachers should explore new and creative ways of adapting current technology. By overcoming “functional fixedness” (9) teachers may find more uses for technology, in line with their pedagogical beliefs. For example, I use Wikis in my classes, but I now feel that I need to consider expanding their use in more collaborative ways. However, this feeling is not so much based upon a desire to utilize more technology, as it is a desire to have a more collaborative classroom. In more meaningful terms, my pedagogical knowledge dictates that I expand my technological knowledge in order to more effectively convey my content knowledge.

Ruth
THE “WICKED” PROBLEM   In the first chapter introduced the concept of integrating technology with content knowledge and pedagogy. At the center of the problem is the complex interaction of technology knowledge, content knowledge, and pedagogical knowledge. To prepare students for the 21st Century educators need to create curriculum that addresses all three content areas. “Viewing any of these components in isolation represents a real disservice to teaching” (AACTE, p. 18) and “Teaching and learning with technology exist in a dynamic transitional relationship between the three components.” (AACTE, p. 18)  The chapter included several perceived obstacles that prevent educators from utilizing technology effectively. Digital technologies are unstable. When using technology, one has to be able to adapt the plan midstream. For example, today I planned to watch the inauguration via the Internet using a PC and a projector. In preparation for the event I watched CNN news live last week, it worked great. Today it worked great at the beginning of the day, but by 11:30 a.m. the lag was increasing. Fortunately, there was a TV in a storage closet near my classroom, so I dug it out and connected it to cable. When using technology in the classroom, teachers need to be prepared to troubleshoot problems.  Teachers need professional development to keep up with the technologies that are available. Finding time to acquire new technological skills is extremely important. Teachers often have inappropriate or inadequate experience with computers. Teachers need to integrate content with technology and adjust teaching methods to engage today’s students. For example, today’s student often goes to the website “You Tube” when they need to learn something like how to fix their iPod. Technology is part of our students’ culture. Money for professional development is often one of the first budget lines cut during tough economic times, but superintendents, principals, and board members need to be reminded how vital professional development is to learning in the classroom.  The chapter also discusses the digital divide among students. There are students who have an advantage because they have grown up with the technology (digital natives) and the students who have been migrated into technology (digital immigrants). The MLTI laptop initiative tried to address the digital divide in Maine. However, I work with students from three different high schools and there are noticeable differences. Students in one district complain that in seventh and eighth grade they had the luxury of 1:1 computing afforded by the MLTI project. Then, they move on to high school and they have to give up a learning tool that they have become accustomed to using to complete their assignments.

Hattie DeRaps
Review Chapters 1 & 2

I found the first chapter of the TPCK book to be very clear and direct. I appreciated the authors’ definition of technology because it included older forms of technology in with the new. I think that this definition is a comforting one in that it could help some to realize that we all already use some technologies in our daily lessons. In addition to their definition of technology, the authors seemed to understand that there exists a baseline fear for those who have not themselves grown up with technology or who do not possess a huge interest or excitement for technology. Plus, even if you are someone who has used technology, it is an ever-changing field. You can never ‘done’ learning about technology, which must be a frustration for those who do not completely understand or feel comfortable with existing technologies. In my reading of the first two chapters of this book, I really felt like its authors must have attended some of the technology trainings at my school. I thank the coordinators of these events because they are tirelessly chipper and often undaunted by the negativity and lack of morale surrounding these events. This started to all make sense, though, when the authors talked about the fact that introducing new technologies and/ or giving repeated trainings will not necessarily change the philosophy of the teacher who is resistant to integrating technology into his or her teaching. I had never thought of technology as a part of one’s philosophy, but it makes sense that it is absolutely part of the foundation of one’s every day teaching. If I am a teacher who believes that students should have actual books rather than photocopies of books for reading, I’ll make sure that it happens. If though, I do not place the same value on students having an actual book in their hands, I will place my attentions and resources elsewhere. In the second chapter, the authors made the connection between changing technologies and changing workplace skills. Of course, it makes sense that as new technologies are developed to aid the work environment (the authors point out that this is, in fact, why new technologies are invented), new skills are required of workers in order to ensure success. For instance, I know have a friend who lives in Hollywood. She is an online journalist and completes most of her work via the Internet and her cell phone, and she records her interviews via podcasts. She is not from Hollywood, but from Strong, Maine. She grew up poor but with the skills and the interest to develop her understanding and use of technology. Even though there are probably thousands of examples of poor, rural students who’ve made careers in technological fields and live fabulous lives, there are obviously many who are left behind. This issue is addressed in chapter two. I was struck by the statement that “even if the differences in the physical access to ICT were to be immediately erased, and all schools and families had high-end equipment...the differences in use would perpetuate the digital divide” (40). This makes sense when we think about the enormous amount of time, curiosity, and baseline knowledge it takes to figure out and to navigate new technologies. Just because I have a new program does not mean that I will understand how to use it or how it will be useful to me. This is why, in my opinion, we have a responsibility to integrate and encourage appropriate technologies into our teaching and into our lives. The final aspect of this second chapter that connects to my teaching is idea that we need to differentiate between data entry and higher-level tasks for students. I have several students who are in classes where they are continually “practicing” skill sets and low-level functions using technologies. Then, I see and hear about other classes where students are thinking for themselves and truly building on skill sets and their technological abilities. Just because you use a computer in a lesson does not mean that your students are learning more about technology. There needs to exist some sort of understanding that students who are not encourages to stretch their skills and their thinking will become bored with technology and could be turned off from it. Using technology just for the sake of using is not appropriate. It needs to make sense in terms of curricular objectives and work to move students forward in their understanding and application of technology.

Stacey
Reflection from Chapter 1

Before reading the chapter, I have struggled with technology integration and how to implement it effectively and seamlessly in Kindergarten. After reading this chapter, I have confirmed my beliefs about technology integration, that it is difficult to do well and takes much understanding and knowledge about the specific technologies and content. As a teacher, I must be familiar with many different technologies, mediums and their purposes and constraints. From there I must be flexible in how and what I teach the children and ensure that using specific technologies is meaningful and necessary. I did learn about “wicked problems” and how this also makes integrating technology difficult in the classroom. I have learned about keeping the balance between content, pedagogy, and technology is essential when using technology in the classroom with children. Every classroom is unique, complex, different, and dynamic and I have a tough time balancing all the children’s needs, curriculum, assessment, and technology. After reading this chapter, I have to admit that I have a difficult time finding creative uses for technology and sometimes I use technology just to use it. I have a hard time breaking out of the “functional fixedness” and going beyond to transcend the use technology in a way that is meaningful and purposeful. I do want to integrate more technology in my classroom, but I sad to admit that sometimes it seems like a lot more work, preparation, and struggle, that on some days I just can contend with. I would like to say that technology integration and wicked problems have made me a more effective teacher that is flexible and knowledgeable, but I am not there yet. I was struck by the section in the book that Schwab (pg.20-21) talks about teachers as practicing an art, and they make frequent, instant choices to meet varying situations. He goes on to say that teachers are curriculum designers and we are active participants in implementation and instructional reform. How true and how empowering for teachers to truly make a difference, but without the professional development and knowledge than this task of technology integration seems unobtainable. I must say that I also was very interested in the research by Philip Jackson that investigates the mental constructs and processes that underlie teacher behavior and also Clark and Peterson focused on teacher’s thinking and decision-making processes. I learned a lot of information from this chapter including the many factors involved when integrating technology into the classroom and I hope from this class and more knowledge, reading, and learning I can use technology more effectively with the children in my classroom.

Kim
Reflection TPCK Chapt. 1 Kim Fuller 1/20/09

The complexities of teaching and learning have been present in my work from the first day I began my career as an elementary teacher. My first teaching assignment was to work with pre first-graders and I was hired in November due to large class sizes. My students were 5 and 6 year-olds and had already bonded with their first teacher. This alone was a huge hurdle not to mention I had no experience with students that young. So the complexities of teaching hit me full-on everyday of my first year. I was constantly trying things, evaluating, revamping and trying again. Many days I was scared to death because I had no idea what the day would bring. I was on my own and had little support in those early days. I look back and wonder sometimes… How did those students survive my first attempts as an educator? That experience humbled me and continues to influence my teaching and learning to this day. I learned quickly that teaching involves constant decision-making, reacting to energies from multiple sources and behaviors. How I behave as an educator and the choices I make constantly impact someone. This can be a very overwhelming concept. I did learn early to seek help from my peers. I was lucky to work with veteran teachers who were very willing to share materials, strategies and philosophies. Those early interactions with my colleagues helped me to face the complexities of education with some preparedness. As I continue in my career, I am constantly looking for ways to improve my teaching and assist my students but I am also aware of how we all operate at our owndevelopmental levels, teachers and students alike. We all take in information, learn strategies and apply them as we are ready. That adds to the complexities of education.I might learn a new technique or strategy and attempt to use it with my students and it may or may not be successful. I will have to reflect, adjust and try again. My students will follow a similar path. Today, I have much more support and have had many opportunities to work with my peers. It is my belief that due to the complexities of teaching and learning, we need to be in a transparent environment where we work with other professionals to improve our skills.