General

The technology, pedagogy, and content knowledge (TPACK) framework describes seven domains of knowledge that teachers rely on for teaching with technology. The framework includes an eighth element labelled “contexts,” representing the situated nature of instruction. This latter construct has been inconsistently represented and defined across the literature as well as interchangeably considered both the settings surrounding teachers’ TPACK and an additional domain of knowledge. Disentangling these two conceptually different constructs and viewing context as a domain of knowledge may be a crucial addition to teachers’ TPACK, given that teachers’ abilities to account for contextual complexity is a feature of teaching expertise. This systematic review focused on the literature addressing context specifically as a domain of knowledge (XK) of TPACK. Database searches retrieved 675 records, of which 47 contained substantial references to XK and were retained for final analyses. Findings present XK as a complex construct described by three levels (micro, meso, and macro) and three dimensions (social, resources, and content). Based on these findings, the authors discuss the structure of XK and propose an extension of the TPACK framework for promoting a more systematic approach to TPACK as a situated construct relevant for research on teacher expertise and teachers’ professional development.

Teachers have been called upon to be more entrepreneurial in their approaches to change. However, the universities in which preservice teachers learn and the schools in which teachers practice tend to emphasize standards, accountability, and risk-management, while traditional entrepreneurial conceptions of innovation tend to promote risk-taking and the pursuit of disruptive change. In this interpretive qualitative study, the authors conducted semistructured interviews of 14 teachers, entrepreneurs, and teachers-turned-entrepreneurs, analyzing how they position themselves in terms of guiding interests, approaches to change-making, and orientations to power and the educational status quo. Findings revealed that innovators in schools must often work subversively and in an oppositional manner to make change. Teachers must position themselves beyond traditional roles as managers, consumers, and rote implementers of technology in preference of more creative and agentic modes of innovational leadership. Considering their critical emic perspectives, their professional ethic of care and their authority of expertise, the authors suggest that teachers could be developed as uniquely trustworthy agents of calculated risk-taking in change-resistant schools. They highlight measures that could be taken to better prepare and support them as critical innovators with technology, and draw implications for teacher education.

This study describes the ways in which 36 preservice elementary teachers (PSETs) incorporated text into slides (n = 158) they designed for use with K-5 students during whole-group mathematics instruction. A qualitative content analysis was conducted to determine the extent and purposes for which the PSETs used slide text. Overall, 80% of slides contained text, which was closely aligned with what the PSETs planned to say during instruction. Text was used for three primary purposes: to convey information, to prompt student engagement, and to prompt teacher action. Study findings indicate that instruction in visual literacy skills should be incorporated into teacher education coursework if teacher educators expect PSETs to use slides effectively in their teaching. The findings also highlight the potential utility of slide text as a tool to support novice teachers as they learn to enact cognitively demanding teaching practices, such as engaging students in discussion during lessons. Collectively, the results suggest that slides designed for teaching should be viewed as shared spaces, to be used by and useful to both students and their teachers. Recommendations for ways PSETs may be taught to use slides as a shared space are included.

Corporate EdTech Certification Programs (CECPs) have the potential to disrupt the traditional ways professional development has been offered to teachers. With large companies creating CECPs to demonstrate the ways their products can be used for educational purposes, this study utilized a content analysis methodology to analyze which knowledge bases from the Technology, Pedagogy, and Content Knowledge (TPACK) framework were being integrated into CECPs. Overall, the knowledge bases that included technological knowledge were emphasized, and the ones connected to content knowledge were seldom addressed, if at all. The study is first contextualized, followed by a description of its methodology before reporting findings. The implications section identifies the collective strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats of the CECPs before concluding with recommendations for stakeholders to improve and use CECPs for educational purposes.