Preservice elementary teachers as information and communication ...

Original article

Preservice elementary teachers as information and communication technology designers: an instructional systems design model based on an expanded view of pedagogical content knowledge C. Angeli & N. Valanides Department of Education, University of Cyprus, Nicosia, Cyprus

Abstract

This study discusses the evolution of an instructional systems design (ISD) model that is based on an expanded view of Shulman’s concept of pedagogical content knowledge (PCK). An initial model was evaluated in the first iteration of a design experiment, and then it was changed and assessed in two other iterations that followed. The proposed ISD model can be used in educational technology courses, elementary teacher education method courses, and teacher professional development courses to develop information and communication technology (ICT)-related PCK. ICT-related PCK comprises a body of knowledge that educators need to be able to teach with ICT. Evidence from the present study, with preservice elementary teachers, indicates that the evolved model was effective in developing some aspects of ICT-related PCK. Based on the results of the study, more systematic efforts are needed to engage preservice teachers in technology-rich design activities, so that they can adequately develop all aspects of ICT-related PCK. Finally, this study provides baseline data that can be used for comparison purposes in future studies that may be conducted to further validate or modify the suggested ISD model.

Keywords

design research, ICT-related pedagogical content knowledge, instructional systems design, pedagogical content knowledge, teacher preparation

Introduction

During the last 15 years, schools have made major investments and continue to invest heavily on increasing the number of computers in schools and the networking of classrooms (Pelgrum 2001). Veen (1993) argues that schools can only encourage information and communication technology (ICT) use, Accepted: 24 May 2005 Correspondence: Charoula Angeli, Department of Education, University of Cyprus, 11-13 Dramas street, PO Box 20537, CY-1678 Nicosia, Cyprus. E-mail: [email protected]

292

and that any actual take-up depends largely on teachers’ skills and capabilities. Recent research (Yildirim & Kiraz 1997; Mumtaz 2000) showed that a factor influencing beginning teachers’ uptake of computers is the amount and adequacy of their preservice training. In addition, research with elementary school children indicates that ICT can have a positive impact on student learning only when teachers know how to use ICT to promote student thinking, expression, and knowledge building (Loveless & Dore 2002). Evidently, the training of preservice teachers will be pivotal in determining the future role of ICT in education (Wedman & Diggs 2001; Wheeler 2001).

r Blackwell Publishing Ltd 2005 Journal of Computer Assisted learning 21, pp292–302

ICT-related PCK: a model for teacher preparation

Consequently, teacher education departments should undertake the responsibility of effectively training prospective teachers to integrate ICT in teaching and learning (Dexter & Riedel 2003; Russel et al. 2003). Presently, a gap exists between what preservice teachers are taught in their ICT courses and what they are expected to do with ICT in a real classroom (Pope et al. 2002). For example, the prevailing paradigm of technology education in teacher preparation has a primary focus on teaching preservice teachers how to use various computer applications, such as word processing, spreadsheets, e-mail, Internet, and graphics. There is no doubt that basic computing skills constitute the foundation of ICT literacy, but they are not enough for adequately preparing preservice teachers how to teach with ICT (Selinger 2001; Wetzel et al. 2004), especially when computing skills are taught in isolation from a pedagogical context. Thus, recent calls for educational reform in teacher education have as their top priority the preparation of preservice teachers in effective ways of ICT use (Brush et al. 2003; Dawson et al. 2003). In this study, we support the notion that the field of instructional systems design (ISD) can contribute positively to our efforts to better prepare future teachers in the design of technology-enhanced learning. An initial ISD model was constructed and evaluated in the first iteration of a design experiment. Subsequently, it was changed and assessed in two other iterations of the design experiment that followed. Specifically, in this study, we report on work within the context of elementary teacher education and argue that preservice elementary teachers need to develop a body of knowledge that is termed ICT-related pedagogical content knowledge (PCK). This knowledge stems from Shulman’s (1986) notion of PCK and constitutes an integrative knowledge base of skills, as well as knowledge of learners, content, pedagogy, and technology that are necessary for teachers to become competent to teach with ICT in a real classroom. Shulman’s PCK as a conceptual framework

Scholars unanimously recognize that both subject matter knowledge and pedagogical knowledge are crucial to good teaching (Shulman 1986; Tobin & Garnett 1988). In addition, Shulman (1986, 1987) suggested that teaching expertise should be described

293

and evaluated in terms of PCK, which concerns the manner in which teachers relate their subject matter knowledge to their pedagogical knowledge. For Shulman (1986), PCK: embodies the aspects of content most germane to its teachability. Within the category of pedagogical content knowledge I include, . . . the most powerful analogies, illustrations, examples, explanations, and demonstrations – in a word the ways of representing and formulating the subject that make it comprehensible to others . . . [It] also includes an understanding of what makes the learning of specific concepts easy or difficult: the conceptions and preconceptions that students of different ages and backgrounds bring with them to the learning (p. 9).

Other scholars also adopted the key elements of PCK (comprehensible representations of subject matter and understanding of content-related learning difficulties), and extended the concept of PCK by including some additional elements in it. For example, Cochran et al. (1993) proposed a modification of Shulman’s notion of PCK. They defined PCK as ‘a teacher’s integrated understanding of four components, namely, pedagogy, subject matter content, student characteristics, and the environmental context of learning’ (p. 266). Moreover, Cochran et al. (1993) emphasized the integrated nature of PCK and argued that the four components of PCK should not be acquired separately and then put together somehow, but should be developed concurrently. Thus, teacher education programmes should promote integration of these components by providing appropriate learning experiences to prospective teachers, so that they simultaneously experience all of the components of PCK and their complex interrelationships. ICT-related PCK: an expanded view

The steady increase of computers in schools and the numerous applications of technology in teaching and learning make it necessary to expand the construct of PCK to account for the phenomenon of teachers learning how to teach with technology. From this perspective, knowledge of technology becomes another important category of the knowledge base of teaching. Recent and relevant work by Margerum-Lays and Marx (2003) explored the construct of knowledge of

& Blackwell Publishing Ltd 2005 Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 21, pp292–302

294

C. Angeli & N. Valanides

educational technology through the lens of content knowledge, pedagogical knowledge, and PCK. They defined content knowledge of educational technology as knowing how to use several tools as well as knowing about their affordances and general ICT technical skills, such as troubleshooting and file management operations. Pedagogical knowledge was defined as the application of general pedagogical strategies that are not specific to the use of technology, and include strategies for scaffolding students’ thinking, motivating students, and checking for understanding. They defined PCK of educational technology as knowledge that is derived from, and applicable to, teaching and learning situations involving educational technology. Examples included the time required to teach about and with particular technologies, how to envision potential student problems with particular technologies, configure instruction and learning tasks for a variety of technological capacities, etc. In this paper, the term ICT-related PCK is used and it diverges from Margerum-Lays and Marx’s (2003) notion of PCK of educational technology in that it is conceptualized as a form of knowledge that constitutes an enhancement or an extension of Shulman’s and Cochran et al.’s conceptualization of PCK. ICT-related PCK constitutes a special amalgam of several sources of teachers’ knowledge base including pedagogical knowledge, subject area knowledge, knowledge of students, knowledge of environmental context, and ICT knowledge. ICT knowledge is defined as knowing how to operate a computer, knowing how to use a multitude of tools/software, and about their affordances. ICT-related PCK is the form of knowledge that makes a teacher competent to teach with ICT and can be described as the ways in which knowledge about tools and their affordances, pedagogy, content, learners, and context are synthesized into an understanding of how particular topics can be taught with ICT, for specific learners, in specific contexts, and in ways that signify the added value of ICT. It can thus be defined in terms of five principles related to knowing how to: 1. Identify topics to be taught with ICT in ways that signify the added value of ICT tools, such as topics that students cannot easily comprehend, or teachers face difficulties in teaching them effectively in class.

2. Identify representations for transforming the content to be taught into forms that are comprehensible to learners and difficult to be supported by traditional means. 3. Identify teaching strategies, which are difficult or impossible to be implemented by traditional means, such as application of ideas into contexts not possible to be experienced in real life, interactive learning, dynamic and context-situated feedback, authentic learning, and adaptive learning to meet the needs of any learner. 4. Select ICT tools with inherent features to afford content transformations and support teaching strategies. 5. Infuse ICT activities in the classroom. These aspects of ICT-related PCK are meant to be regarded as an integrated body of knowledge for guiding the design of ICT-enhanced learning. Thus, they should not be acquired separately and then put together somehow, but should be experienced simultaneously in the design of technology-rich lessons. ISD

It is well accepted that the field of instructional technology is replete with instructional design models (Reigeluth 1999). For the most part, these models are prescriptive, and offer structured guidelines and procedures for instructional designers (e.g., Gagne & Briggs 1979; Dick & Carey 1990). The foundations of traditional instructional design were laid by Gagne (1965), who is well known for his taxonomies on learning outcomes such as concepts, rules, strategies, etc. Gagne’s ISD process consisted of 11 well-specified steps categorized into three broad phases: (a) analyse the requirements for learning by working back from the intended learning goal, (b) select media, and (c) design the instruction and plan instructional events to support learning activities. Newer ISD models, such as Romiszowski’s (1988, 1992), and Reiser and Dick’s (1996) models, do not diverge much from Gagne’s initial systematic design process, and include the following phases: (a) define the design problem, (b) identify objectives, (c) plan instructional activities, (d) choose instructional media, (e) develop assessment tools, (f) implement instruction, and (g) revise instruction. Other developments in the field of ISD



include taxonomies or classifications of media as well as guidelines for media selection (Heidt 1978; Romiszowski 1988, 1992). Romiszowski (1992) specified generic factors, such as availability, practical constraints, effective communication, and cost. He and other scholars (e.g., Heidt 1978) also considered, in a context-free manner, the influence of content, objectives, and learners on the identification of the characteristics that presentation media should have. Content- and objectives-related factors were general and included the sequencing of sub-topics, the clarity of the presentation of the content, the clarity of the objectives specified, the extent to which the content presented related directly to the objectives, the amount of content presented as well as the rate with which it was presented. Learner-related factors included different individual preferences for learning, such as learning by observing or listening, learners’ understanding of the conventions or symbol systems used by various media, the age of the learner, and attention span and motivation on the part of the learner to achieve the objectives of the learning task. Undoubtedly, ISD has been a useful tool in training people how to accomplish certain well-specified tasks. Within the context of preservice education, researchers (e.g., Klein 1991; Reiser 1994) found that preservice teachers, who were taught to use ISD, expressed enthusiasm about using these skills in their classrooms, although their enthusiasm faded as they progressed through their student teaching. The question becomes whether teachers in their classrooms use systematic approaches to instructional design. Research indicates that only a few teachers actually use systematic ISD (Kennedy 1994; Young et al. 1998). For example, despite the fact that ISD places emphasis on objectives, a number of researchers found that teachers do not focus on objectives, but rather on the instructional activities that they will use (Clark & Peterson 1986; Bullough 1987; Kagan & Tippins 1992). In a recent case study, Moallem (1998) found that teachers use socially situated knowledge (Suchman 1987; Brown et al. 1989), which is different from that of formal, scientific, research-based knowledge used in the analysis phase of ISD models. In Moallem’s study, socially situated knowledge is considered as a highly contextual and practical complex body of knowledge that teachers acquire through years of ex-

295

perience. This knowledge consists of different forms that interact with one another, such as epistemological beliefs about teaching and learning, contextual knowledge of school expectations and values, practical classroom knowledge (what works and what does not) curriculum, content, pedagogy, and learners. These results point to major differences between ISD and teachers’ instructional decision-making. First, while teachers bring to the design task their personal beliefs and actions, the analysis phase of ISD appears to be context free and neglects their beliefs and experiences. Second, while teachers’ subject matter knowledge is in interaction with other forms of knowledge, such as curriculum, learners, pedagogy, and context, ISD models assume a generic and decontextualized approach to design. Finally, while reflection on previous actions seems to play a major role in how teachers plan instruction, ISD does not include reflection as one of its components. Most importantly, these results show that there is a need to develop new ISD methodologies to bridge the gap between the world of teachers’ work and the world of instructional design. An expanded view of PCK provides a strong conceptual basis for such an ISD methodology, because it describes teachers’ knowledge as highly contextual and situated in classroom experiences, as well as an integrative body of different forms of knowledge that interact with one another, such as content, pedagogy, and learners. These characteristics of PCK are in contrast with the generic and context- and content-free ISD models (e.g., Heidt 1978; Romiszowski 1988, 1992).

Method Design experiments

According to Cobb et al. (2003), design experiments constitute an effective methodology for studying teacher development in the setting of an education department. Design experiments or design-based research is an emerging paradigm of research for the study of learning in context through the systematic design and study of instructional strategies and tools (Brown 1992; Collins 1992). Design-based research ‘can help create and extend knowledge about developing, enacting, and sustaining innovative learning environments’ (Design-Based Research Collective


296


2003, p. 5). Moreover, it bridges theory and practice, accounts for how designs function in authentic contexts by documenting not only success but also failure, and focuses on interactions that refine our understanding of the learning issues involved. Thus, design experiments do not focus on the summative effects of an intervention, but mostly on how ‘to improve the initial design by testing and revising conjectures as informed by ongoing analysis of both students’ reasoning and the learning environment’ (Cobb et al. 2003, p. 11). A characteristic of design experiments is iterative design for the purpose of progressively refining the initial design. This approach of progressive refinement involves putting a first version of the design into practice to see how it works. Then, the design is changed or revised based on experience (Collins et al. 2004), until an effective and efficient design is developed. Research procedures

In this paper, the findings from three iterations of a design experiment that took place in a teacher education department during the period 2001–2003 are discussed. The aim of the three iterations was to assist preservice teachers to develop their ICT-related PCK. A first version of an ISD methodology was developed in the summer of 2001 and was initially evaluated in the fall of 2001. Eighty-five second-year teacher-education students enrolled in an instructional technology course participated in the study. The initial ISD model was changed based on evidence and experience, and was evaluated in two other iterations that involved four sections of a third-year science-education method course. Two sections took place in the fall of 2002 and the other two in the spring of 2003, with a total enrolment of 111 and 116 preservice teachers, respectively. All participants completed a basic computing course during their freshman year in which they learned Word, Excel, Powerpoint, and Internet. The purpose of this course was to develop students’ basic computing skills, so that they become competent in using different productivity software on a personal level and not as tools in teaching and learning. Moreover, none of the participants had any previous experience pertaining to the design of lessons with ICT. For assessment purposes, participants were asked to design and develop an ICT-enhanced lesson, while assistance on how to use various ICT tools was pro-

vided as needed. Specifically, they were asked to (a) choose a topic from the elementary curriculum to be taught with ICT, (b) find materials from different sources including the Web for teaching the topic, (c) use ICT tools to develop ICT-enhanced learning activities, and (d) integrate ICT activities in an 80 min lesson for elementary school children to be taught in a classroom with other planned learning activities. Participants were also instructed to design their lessons based on learner-centred approaches. Assessment instrument

Participants’ ICT-enhanced lessons constituted the unit of analysis, and the dimensions of ICT-related PCK formed the instrument for collecting research data about each application of the ISD model and establishing a baseline that could be used for future comparisons to further revise and improve the ISD model. In this study, participants’ performance on the design task was assessed in terms of only four dimensions of ICT-related PCK, because they were guided to use specific ICT tools in all iterations of the design experiment. It was, however, possible to gain insights into the effectiveness of different ICT tools by comparing the results from the three iterations. Each of the four dimensions of ICT-related PCK was assessed using a two-rating scale – 1 or 0. A score of 1 indicated success in satisfying a specific dimension and a score of 0 indicated failure to do so. A cumulative score (0–4) was also calculated to assess preservice teachers’ overall performance. Thus, scores ranged from 1 (low performance) to 4 (high performance). Two independent raters, an expert in instructional technology and a doctoral student in science education, evaluated all lesson plans and activities, and a Pearson’s r between the two ratings was found to be 0.83, 0.86, and 0.89 for the first, second, and third iterations, respectively. Observed differences between the two raters were resolved with the help of the researchers. Design experiment: phase one

It was assumed that ICT-related PCK can be most effectively developed when preservice teachers’ learning is situated in authentic learning activities, and a case-based learning approach for developing parti-



cipants’ ICT-related PCK was initially adopted. Research findings (Kolodner & Guzdial 2000; Jonassen et al. 2003; Angeli 2004) suggest that case-based learning might be a promising pedagogical approach, because it (a) situates learning and has the instructional power to show the complexity of teaching, (b) fosters reflection as learners constantly try to understand others’ points of view in relation to theirs, and (c) promotes an inquiry-based learning environment that helps learners develop problem-solving and critical-thinking skills. The initial model combined the elements of casebased reasoning, reflection, and evaluation of personal beliefs. According to Myhre (1998), if changes are to occur in a classroom setting, then the use of ICT in relation to teachers’ beliefs must be considered. Reflection can generate the internal conflict that is required to close the gap between teachers’ beliefs about learning and their actions (Schon 1987; Wedman et al. 1998). Richardson (1990) argues that the improvement of the teacher learning process requires ‘acknowledging and building upon teachers’ experiences, and promoting reflection on those experiences’ (p. 12). Six cases of teachers who integrated ICT in their classrooms were presented during the thirteen 1 h weekly meetings of an instructional technology course. Students were asked to discuss and analyse them, and the course instructor (first author of this paper) facilitated the discussions and raised issues pertaining to the five dimensions of ICT-related PCK. Participants were then asked to reflect on each case, and evaluate the effects on their own personal beliefs about the use of ICT in classroom teaching and learning. For each case, students were provided with

297

rich descriptions of its context (school environment, school values and norms, teachers’ classroom practices, socio-technical infrastructure, tools used, teachers’ background and expertise, etc.), so that they could have a realistic picture of the factors that could possibly inhibit or facilitate the integration of ICT in the classroom. Besides the weekly meetings, participants also had thirteen 90 min weekly labs for learning how to use several ICT tools and for developing some of the ICT activities described in the teaching cases. All preservice teachers were asked to use Hyperstudio in their projects, because Hyperstudio, a well-known authoring software that is widely used in elementary schools, was regarded as an important piece of software that preservice teachers should learn how to use. Results and discussion

Participants’ ICT-enhanced lessons were assessed using the adopted instrument, and descriptive statistics were calculated for each one of the four aspects of ICT-related PCK as well as for the overall competency. The results are shown in the phase one column of Table 1. Participants in phase one performed poorly on the four aspects of ICT-related PCK, and their performance was particularly low on the third and fifth aspects of ICT-related PCK, namely, use of ICT to support teaching strategies and integration of ICT activities in classroom instruction. The cumulative evidence indicates that case-based instruction was not effective in developing preservice teachers’ ICT-related PCK. The results obtained indicated that learners found it difficult to draw generalizations across dif-

Table 1. Descriptive statistics of preservice teachers’ performance on ICT-related PCK for the three phases of the design experiment Dimensions of ICT-related PCK

1 2 3 4 5

Identify topics to be taught with ICT Identify representations to transform the content Identify teaching strategies Select ICT tools to afford content transformations and support teaching strategies Infuse ICT activities in classroom instruction Total ICT competency

Phase one (n 5 85)

Phase two (n 5 111)

M

SD

M

0.40 0.48 0.11

0.49 0.50 0.31

0.13 2.12

0.34 1.31

ICT, information and communication technology; PCK, pedagogical content knowledge.


Phase Three (n 5 116) M

SD

0.91 0.29 0.68 0.47 0.17 0.38 Not assessed

0.92 0.78 0.62

0.27 0.42 0.49

0.14 1.90

0.33 2.65

0.47 1.29

SD

0.35 1.09

298


ferent teaching episodes and design ICT-enhanced instruction, despite the fact that they expressed interest in doing so. In particular, 71% of preservice teachers selected topics that a teacher could also teach with more traditional means and for which the added value of ICT was not prominent, and only 29% of them selected topics that could not be taught as well without ICT. An overwhelming percentage of preservice teachers (91%) used Hyperstudio to simply deliver content electronically (textual and pictorial representations) and not as a tool that their students could use to construct knowledge. Preservice teachers were exposed to a number of ICT integration cases, but the assumption that they could take identified episodes of best practice, and then appropriately and skillfully adapt these episodes in other situations was not verified. The results corroborate other research findings (e.g. Mishra & Koehler 2005) indicating that preservice teachers may need to be explicitly taught how to ally content, pedagogy, and technology in the act of teaching. Sprague (2004) also stated that there is a pressing need to focus on how ICT tools can be used to support learning of content areas and the pedagogical issues associated with that learning. Design experiment: phases two and three

Based on the results of the first phase, the model of case-based instruction was replaced. Thus, a new ISD model, shown in Fig. 1, was developed and used in the second and third iterations of the design experiment. This model proposes to take into consideration three types of teachers’ knowledge, namely, (a) knowledge of the context within which the instruction will take place such as school values, norms, and expectations, (b) practical knowledge of teaching and previous classroom experiences, and (c) teachers’ epistemological beliefs about teaching and learning. Thus, based on the broader school context as well as previous classroom experiences and personal beliefs about teaching and learning, teachers can select the content to be taught, and decide on the content transformations in conjunction with their knowledge of pedagogy, learners, and ICT. ICT in this framework is not considered a mere presentation or delivery medium but a powerful cognitive tool that transforms abstract science content into more concrete or realistic forms

School Context Classroom Experiences Epistemological Beliefs Identify Content and transformations

Learners´ backgrounds, computing skills

ICT tools

Pedagogy

Implementation/ Infusion

Assessment

Reflection on action

Fig. 1 An ISD model based on an expanded view of pedagogical content knowledge.

(Valanides 2003). Finally, the instruction can be implemented in the classroom and its effectiveness in terms of students’ learning can be assessed, while respective revisions can be made based on teachers’ reflections during and after teaching. The new ISD model was evaluated in the second and third phases of the design experiment. The second phase took place in the fall semester of 2002 in two sections of a third-year science-education method course, and the third phase took place in the spring of 2003 in two other sections of the same course. The two sections in the fall had a total enrolment of 111 preservice teachers, and the other two in the spring had a total enrolment of 116. Preservice teachers in both phases were third-year students who were randomly enrolled in the four sections of the course. The instructors of the course in both semesters were the authors of the present paper. Design experiment: phase two

In the second phase, the enactment of the ISD model in Fig. 1 included only multimedia authoring tools,



such as Hyperstudio and Multimedia Builder. Several computer workshops were carried out throughout the semester for teaching preservice teachers how to use the multimedia tools. In both sections, students also studied constructivism and its educational implications, teaching methodology for science, and learners’ alternative conceptions for several topics in science. Students were furthermore engaged in laboratory activities aligned with the same philosophy. The instructors also used the ISD model to design exemplary technology-enhanced lessons for science and model them in class. For example, it was explicitly modelled how to align science content with inquiry-based pedagogy and technology tools with inherent features that could afford science content transformations, such as making scientific concepts more accessible through visualization and multiple representations. It was also pointed out that the instructional design of the ICTenhanced lessons reflected the designers’ beliefs of how students learn and how technology can enhance teaching and learning. The ISD model in Fig. 1 was explicitly explained in class as a means for teaching preservice teachers how to design their own ICT-enhanced science lessons. It was first explained to the preservice teachers that classroom teaching is not value neutral and that school vision, norms, and values as well as teachers’ own beliefs regarding the nature of knowledge and knowing (epistemological beliefs) are likely to affect the way they integrate ICT in the learning environment. They were also prompted to express and discuss their views about the nature of knowledge, justification of beliefs, and how students learn. Subsequently, they were asked to think about the alignment between ICT, the content to be taught with ICT, and ICT-supported pedagogy and to reflect on the ways in which their epistemological beliefs and experiences affected their proposed designs. Design experiment: phase three

In phase three, ModellingSpace (Dimitracopoulou & Komis 2005), a computer-modelling tool was used to create and explore computer models of scientific phenomena. Three 3 h workshops took place for teaching preservice teachers how to use ModellingSpace. In essence, the research procedures that were followed in the enactment of the ISD model in phases

299

two and three were exactly the same. Thus, preservice teachers in the third phase also had several lectures on various topics of the knowledge bases, such as pedagogy, science content, and learners’ conceptions in science. In addition, the two instructors repeatedly modelled the pedagogical uses of ModellingSpace in science teaching. In a series of sessions, the importance of modelling in science was covered in depth, and the process of creating a model was explicitly exemplified. The instructors of the course also discussed how to infuse the software in the classroom with a variety of lesson plans and activities. Specifically, it was exemplified how ModellingSpace could be used in an inquiry-based science classroom to create and run interactive models for controlling variables and testing out hypotheses. Preservice teachers were also guided to design their own ICT-infused lessons with ModellingSpace following the same guidelines as in phase two, where multimedia tools were used. Results and discussion

Descriptive statistics for the four aspects of participants’ ICT-related PCK in the three phases of the design experiment are presented in Table 1, and thus comparisons among the results from each phase are immediately obtainable. The results show that the performance of the participants in phase three appears to be better than the performance of participants in phases one and two, and that participants in phase two appear to show a higher performance than participants in phase one at least on some aspects of ICT-related PCK. A multivariate ANOVA (MANOVA), using the four aspects of ICT-related PCK and total performance as the five dependent variables, was subsequently conducted. The results indicated that the ratings on the total ICT-related PCK competency between the three groups in the design experiment were statistically significant, F(2, 309) 5 33.04, Po0.01. Participants’ performance on the four aspects of ICTrelated PCK, namely, selection of topics to be taught with ICT, use of ICT-supported representations to transform content, use of ICT to support teaching strategies, and integration of ICT activities in the classroom, were also statistically significant, F(2, 309) 5 67.42, Po0.01, F(2, 309) 5 10.17, Po0.01,


300


F(2, 309) 5 50.92, Po0.01, and F(2, 309) 5 8.34, Po0.01, respectively. Post hoc comparisons using the Tukey procedure indicated that participants in phases two and three outperformed participants in phase one, Po0.01, on the first aspect of ICT-related PCK, namely, selection of topics to be taught with ICT, and on the second aspect of ICT-related PCK, namely, use of ICT-supported representations to transform content. Also, participants in phase three outperformed participants in phases one and two, Po0.01, on the use of ICT to support teaching strategies, as well as on the integration of ICT activities in the classroom. In terms of the total performance, participants in phase three outperformed participants in phases one and two, Po0.01, and participants in phase two outperformed participants in phase one, Po0.01. General discussion

The construct of PCK embodies those aspects of content that ‘are most germane to its teachability’ (Shulman 1986) and, analogously, ICT-related PCK expands Shulman’s construct of PCK by including aspects of technology that are most germane to the teachability of specific content, for specific learners in specific contexts, in ways by which the added value of ICT tools is signified. ICT-related PCK provides guidance to teacher educators about how to creatively repurpose the use of technology in teacher preparation and teach prospective teachers how to empower their teaching with ICT. The main question that was investigated in the study was how to develop preservice elementary teachers’ ICT-related PCK. Case-based instruction was applied and evaluated in the first phase of a design experiment. A new ISD model was then developed and assessed in two other iterations of the design experiment. In the first two phases of the study, students were guided to use multimedia authoring tools, while in the third phase students were asked to use a modelling tool. The results indicated that the new ISD model was far more effective in developing participants’ ICTrelated PCK than the initial case-based model. In particular, preservice teachers in phase three outperformed those in phase one on the four aspects of ICT-related PCK, and preservice teachers in phase two outperformed those in phase one on the selection of

topics to be taught with ICT and use of ICT-supported representations to transform content. In addition, preservice teachers in phase three outperformed those in phase two on two aspects of ICT-related PCK, namely, use of ICT to support teaching strategies and integration of ICT activities in the classroom. Evidently, preservice teachers in phases one and two did not use the ICT tools to support learnercentred teaching strategies or integrate the tools with appropriate pedagogy in the classroom, but they only used the tools to support existing old teaching practices. In contrast, participants in phase three exhibited a statistically significant greater technology competency in using ICT to support interactive teaching strategies and integrate them with appropriate inquirybased pedagogy in classroom instruction. These results indicate that the aspects of ICT-related PCK concerning use of ICT to support teaching strategies and integration of ICT activities with appropriate pedagogy in the classroom may be the most difficult to develop, and that some ICT tools have the technological affordances to guide the design of more constructivist learning activities. For example, the results showed that the ISD model in Fig. 1 proved to be more effective in the third phase of the design experiment where a computer-modelling tool was used. This difference in performance can be explained by the fact that ModellingSpace afforded a built-in interface that encouraged the use of the software in constructivist ways, whereas this was not as obvious with either Hyperstudio or Multimedia Builder. Thus, it was much easier for preservice teachers to continue teaching in the same old ways with the multimedia software than the modelling software. Finally, the present work constitutes a starting point of intensive future research efforts for the validation or modification of the ISD approach described herein in a variety of learning contexts with different teachers and students, multiple content domains and pedagogical strategies, and various ICT tools. The impetus for this research was motivated by a need to develop robust design methodologies for the optimal design of ICTenhanced learning. Within the context of teaching and teacher education, this impetus is guided by a pressing need to depart from traditional decontextualized ISD approaches to more culturally bound or situated ISD approaches where the influence of school context and teachers’ epistemological beliefs and experiences are



considered in the design of ICT-enhanced instruction. Future efforts towards this direction will benefit both the fields of teacher education and instructional design.

References Angeli C. (2004) The effects of case-based learning on early childhood pre-service teachers’ beliefs about the pedagogical uses of ICT. Journal of Educational Media 29, 139–151. Brown A. (1992) Design experiments: theoretical and methodological challenges in creating complex interventions in classroom settings. The Journal of the Learning Sciences 2, 141–178. Brown J.S., Collins A. & Duguid P. (1989) Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher 18, 32–42. Brush T., Glazewski K., Rutowski K., Berg K., Stromfors C., Van-Nest M.H., Stock L. & Sutton J. (2003) Integrating technology in a field-based teacher training program: the PT3@ASU project. Educational Technology Research and Development 51, 57–72. Bullough R. (1987) Planning and the first year teaching. Journal of Education for Teaching 13, 231–250. Clark C. & Peterson P. (1986) Teachers’ thought processes. In Handbook of Research on Teaching (ed. M.C. Wittrock), pp. 255–296. MacMillan Publishing Company, New York. Cobb P., Confrey J., diSessa A., Lehrer R. & Schauble L. (2003) Design experiments in educational research. Educational Researcher 32, 9–13. Cochran K.F., DeRuiter J.A. & King R.A. (1993) Pedagogical content knowing: an integrative model for teacher preparation. Journal of Teacher Education 44, 263–272. Collins A. (1992) Toward a design science of education. In New Directions in Educational Technology (eds E. Scanlon & T. O’Shea). Springer-Verlag, Berlin. Collins A., Joseph D. & Bielaczyc K. (2004) Design Research: theoretical and Methodological Issues. The Journal of the Learning Sciences 13, 15–42. Dawson K., Pringle R. & Adams T.L. (2003) Providing links between technology integration, methods courses, and school-based field experiences: a curriculum-based and technology-enhanced microteaching. Journal of Computing in Teacher Education 20, 41–47. Design-Based Research Collective. (2003) Design-based research: an emerging paradigm for educational inquiry. Educational Researcher 32, 5–8. Dexter S. & Riedel E. (2003) Why improving preservice teacher educational technology preparation must go be-

301

yond the college’s walls. Journal of Teacher Education 54, 334–346. Dick W. & Carey L. (1990) The Systematic Design of Instruction, 3rd edition. Scott Foresman, Glenview, IL. Dimitracopoulou A. & Komis V. (2005) Design principles for the support of modeling and collaboration in a technology-based learning environment. International Journal of Continuous Engineering Education and Life-Long Learning 15, 30–55. Gagne R.M. (1965) The Conditions of Learning, 1st edition. Holt, Rinehart, & Winston, New York, NY. Gagne R.M. & Briggs L.R. (1979) Principles of Instructional Design, 2nd edition. Holt, Rinehart, & Winston, New York, NY. Heidt E.U. (1978) Instructional Media and the Individual Learner: A Classification and Systems Appraisal. Kogan Page, London. Jonassen D.H., Wang F.-K., Strobel J. & Cernusca D. (2003) Applications of a case library of technology integration stories for teachers. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education 11, 547–566. Kagan D. & Tippins D. (1992) The evolution of functional lessons among twelve elementary and secondary student teachers. Elementary School Journal 92, 477–489. Kennedy M. (1994) Instructional design or personal heuristics in classroom instructional planning. Educational Technology 34, 17–25. Klein J. (1991) Preservice teacher use of learning and instructional design principles. Educational Technology Research and Development 39, 83–89. Kolodner J.L. & Guzdial M. (2000) Theory and practice of case-based learning aids. In Theoretical Foundations of Learning Environments (ed. D. Jonassen), pp. 215–242. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ. Loveless A. & Dore B. eds (2002) ICT in the Primary School. Open University Press, Buckingham, UK. Margerum-Lays J. & Marx R.W. (2003) Teacher knowledge of educational technology: a case study of student/mentor teacher pairs. In What Should Teachers Know About Technology? Perspectives and Practices (ed. Y. Zhao), pp. 123–159. Information Age Publishing, Greenwich, CO. Mishra P. & Koehler M.J. (2005) Technological pedagogical content knowledge: a new framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record (in press). Moallem M. (1998) An expert teacher’s thinking and teaching and instructional design models and principles: an ethnographic study. Educational Technology Research and Development 46, 37–64. Mumtaz S. (2000) Factors affecting teachers’ use of information and communications technology: a review of


302


the literature. Journal of Information Technology for Teacher Education 9, 319–341. Myhre O.R. (1998) I am thinking this will keep them busy: computers in a teacher’s thought and practice. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education 6, 93–103. Pelgrum W. (2001) Obstacles to the integration of ICT in education: results from a worldwide educational assessment. Computers and Education 37, 163–178. Pope M., Hare D. & Howard E. (2002) ICT integration: closing the gap between what preservice teachers are taught to do and what they can do. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education 10, 191–203. Reigeluth C. ed. (1999) Instructional-Design Theories and Models, 2nd Vol. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ. Reiser R.A. (1994) Examining the planning practices of teachers: reflections on three years of research. Educational Technology 34, 11–16. Reiser R.A. & Dick W. (1996) Instructional Planning: A Guide for Teachers, 2nd edition. Allyn and Bacon, Boston. Richardson V. (1990) Significant and worthwhile change in teaching practice. Educational Researcher 19, 10–18. Romiszowski A.J. (1988) The Selection and Use of Instructional Media: For Improved Classroom Teaching and for Interactive, Individualized Instruction, 2nd edition. Kogan Page, London. Romiszowski A.J. (1992) Designing Instructional Systems: Decision Making in Course Planning and Curriculum Design. Kogan Page, London. Russel M., Bebell D., O’Dwyer L. & O’Connor K. (2003) Examining teacher technology use: implications for preservice and inservice teacher preparation. Journal of Teacher Education 54, 297–310. Schon D.A. (1987) Educating the Reflective Practitioner: Toward a New Design for Teaching and Learning in the Professions. Jossey-Bass Inc., San Francisco. Selinger M. (2001) Learning information and communications technology skills and the subject context of the learning. Journal of Information Technology for Teacher Education 10, 143–154. Shulman L.S. (1986) Those who understand: knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher 15, 4–14.

Shulman L.S. (1987) Knowledge and teaching: foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review 57, 1–22. Sprague D. (2004) Technology and teacher education: Are we talking to ourselves? Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education 3, 353–361. Suchman L.A. (1987) Plans and Situated Action. The Problem of Human–Machine Communication. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK. Tobin K. & Garnett P. (1988) Exemplary practice in science classrooms. Science Education 72, 197–208. Valanides N. (2003) Learning, computers, and science education. Science Education International 14, 42–47. Veen W. (1993) The role of beliefs in the use of information technology: implications for teacher education, or teaching the right thing at the right time. Journal of Information Technology for Teacher Education 2, 139– 153. Wedman J. & Diggs L. (2001) Identifying barriers to technology-enhanced learning environments in teacher education. Computers in Human Behavior 17, 421–430. Wedman J.M., Espinosa L.M. & Laffey J.M. (1998) A Process for understanding how a field-based course influences teachers’ beliefs and practices. Paper Presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Diego, USA. Wetzel K., Wilhelm L. & Williams M.K. (2004) The introductory technology course: a tool for technology integration. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education 3, 453–465. Wheeler S. (2001) Information and communication technologies and the changing role of the teacher. Journal of Educational Media 26, 7–17. Yildirim S. & Kiraz E. (1997) Obstacles in integrating online communication tools into preservice teacher education: a case study. Journal of Computing in Teacher Education 15, 23–28. Young A.C., Reiser R.A. & Dick W. (1998) Do superior teachers employ systematic instructional planning procedures? A descriptive study. Educational Technology Research and Development 46, 65–78.
