For Peer Review O

nly

A survey to examine teachers’ perceptions of Design

Dispositions, Lesson Design Practices and their relationships with Technological Pedagogical Content

Knowledge (TPACK)

Journal: Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education

Manuscript ID: CAPJ-2013-0147.R2

Manuscript Type: Original Paper

Keywords: technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK), design thinking,

design dispositions

URL: http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/capj Email: kbown@csu.edu.au

Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education

For Peer Review O

nly

1

A survey to examine teachers’ perceptions of Design Dispositions,

Lesson Design Practices and their relationships with Technological

Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK)

This study investigates 201 Singaporean teachers’ perceptions of their TPACK, lesson

design practices and design dispositions through a survey instrument. Investigation of

these constructs reveal important variables influencing teachers’ perceptions of TPACK

which have not yet been explored. The confirmatory factor analysis and reliability

analysis confirm the validity and reliability of the instrument. The structural equation

model shows that the teachers’ perceptions of design dispositions (orientations towards

design) and lesson design practices (approaches used for lesson design) have direct

relationships with the teachers’ perceptions of TPACK. The results of this study show

that to enhance teachers’ TPACK perceptions, teacher educators need to help teachers

develop lesson design practices that support ideation and iteration. They also need to

develop teachers’ design dispositions that are amenable to exploring and resolving

conflicting lesson design ideas. Going beyond TPACK, understandings of teachers’

lesson design practices and design dispositions are important for teacher educators to

better design professional development for ICT integration.

Keywords: technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK); design

thinking; design dispositions

Introduction

Mishra and Koehler (2006) define teachers’ know-how for the integration of

information and communications technology (ICT) as technological pedagogical

content knowledge (TPACK). Their TPACK framework suggests that teachers need to

make connections among their technological knowledge, pedagogical knowledge, and

content knowledge in order to optimise emerging technologies for student-centered

learning. Lesson design activities are the conduit through which teachers formulate

TPACK (Koehler, Mishra, & Yahya, 2007). This is because teachers consider how

lesson goals can be achieved through the contextualised orchestration of pedagogy,

content and technological tools during lesson design. Teachers’ perceptions of lesson

Page 1 of 22

URL: http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/capj Email: kbown@csu.edu.au

Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education

123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960

For Peer Review O

nly

2

design influence how they manoeuver TPACK as they design ICT lessons (Author2,

Author1, & Author4, 2013).

Currently, there are many TPACK surveys that assess teachers’ perceptions of

TPACK with respect to different subject areas and pedagogies (e.g. Archambault &

Barnett, 2010; Author2, Author1, & Author4, 2011; Author4 & Colleague, 2010;

Graham et al., 2009). These capture teachers’ perceptions of knowledge but their

perceptions of ICT lesson design processes are not well understood. The volatility of

technological advancements has caused the process of ICT integration to be described

as somewhat of a “wicked problem” that is ill-structured and open to multiple solutions

(Mishra & Koehler, 2007). Such kinds of design problems are better dealt with through

iterative and reflective design processes (Cross, 2011; Lawson & Dorst, 2009). To date,

teachers’ efficacy for undertaking such kinds of lesson design processes as well as the

relationship between TPACK and teachers’ efficacy for lesson design have yet to be

examined.

In view of these gaps, this study reports the validation of a survey instrument for

measuring teachers’ perceptions of design dispositions and lesson design practices

through confirmatory factor analysis with a sample of 201 Singaporean teachers. It then

describes the use of structural equation modeling to examine the relationships between

teachers’ perceptions of TPACK, perceptions of design dispositions and perceptions of

lesson design practices. Implications for teacher development of ICT lesson design

competencies are then discussed.

Literature Review

Design

Laurillard (2012) recognizes that teaching should be approached as a process of design

Page 2 of 22

URL: http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/capj Email: kbown@csu.edu.au

Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education

123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960

For Peer Review O

nly

3

that embodies iterative cycles of design and redesign as well as reflective practice. This

process stands in contrast with current ICT lesson design models that have analysis,

design, development, implementation, and evaluation activities progressing in lock-step

fashion (See ASSURE model, Heinich, Molenda, Russell, & Smaldino, 1999). In fact,

a recent study by Summerville and Reid-Griffin (2008) found that lesson design is

better described by a set of iterative design tasks rather than by a prescribed procedure.

This description of design more closely reflects the process of “reflection-in-action” that

is being used by designers in professions such as engineering and architecture (Schön,

1983). Designers develop initial appreciations of a problem situation to shape initial

solutions. The consequences of these initial moves "talk back" to designers who respond

with critical reflection to re-frame and restructure their definitions of the design

problems and to work out new solutions (Lawson, 1997; Schön, 1983). Designers go

back and forth between these design activities until they reach a desired understanding

of the problem (Lawson, 1997; Rowe, 1991). The efficacy of teachers to undertake this

kind of process during lesson design needs to be further considered.

Lesson Design Practices

Studies of design expertise propose that certain design practices are more evident in

strong designers. One practice is for designers to experiment and tinker with ideas, even

conflicting ones, before zooming in on possible solutions (Lawson, 1997). Throughout

this process, stronger designers allow conflicting ideas to coexist. Rather than forcing

an early formalization of problem solutions, these designers experiment and improve

ideas in order to develop new understandings of design problems till they feel the need

for consolidation (Schön, 1983). Cross (2011) describes stronger designers as those who

avoid pinning down solutions too early and are willing to change their ideas completely

Page 3 of 22

URL: http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/capj Email: kbown@csu.edu.au

Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education

123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960

For Peer Review O

nly

4

when needed. Engaging teachers in iterative lesson design practices is important as it

allows them to play with lesson ideas in order to enhance their lesson plans through

design and re-design (Author3, Author2, & Colleagues, 2011; Sawyer, 2004). As shown

in literature, expert teachers are found to possess a stronger sense of what may be

problematic or promising for different instructional solutions (Nonaka, 1994). Such

kinds of capacities can be developed through iterative cycles of lesson design and is

especially important when designing ICT-integrated lessons. Teachers can gradually

develop more elaborated forms of TPACK and learn how to capitalise on ICT tools

accordingly. To make this possible, however, it is equally important for teachers to

develop the appropriate design dispositions.

Design Dispositions

Design dispositions may be defined as the anticipations and orientations one brings to a

design activity (Boland & Collopy, 2004). Michlewski (2008) investigated what

constitutes design dispositions by interviewing expert designers, and revealed five

theoretical categories. These categories are: (1) embracing discontinuity and open-

endedness, (2) engaging polysensorial aesthetics, (3) being empathetic with people’s

needs, (4) consolidating multidimensional meanings, and (5) creating things and

bringing solutions to life. Among these categories, certain dispositions seem to better

support good design practices. Cross (2011) describes these as the ability to tolerate

uncertainty and conflicting ideas as well as the ability to allow time for solutions to

emerge. Openness to new experiences, the ability to accept failure, the willingness to

deviate from existing solutions as well as the motivation to turn constraints into

opportunities are the other dispositions that need to be considered (Lawson, 1997).

Page 4 of 22

URL: http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/capj Email: kbown@csu.edu.au

Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education

123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960

For Peer Review O

nly

5

The fast pace of technological change makes the constant design and adaptation

of ICT lessons a necessity and reality for teachers as they seek to keep their content and

approaches relevant. In fact, the lack of design capacity has been identified as the third

order barrier to effective ICT integration by teachers (Author4 & Author2, 2012).

Teachers’ TPACK

TPACK describes teachers’ know-how for ICT integration that is fostered

through teacher engagement in lesson design (Koehler, et al., 2007; Mishra & Koehler,

2006). This is because lesson design activities present teachers with concrete

instructional problems which require them to generate solutions by synthesizing their

technological knowledge, pedagogical knowledge and content knowledge. Design

activites enable teachers to work on their existing TPACK by adapting and transforming

it into the kinds of TPACK that are required to solve the instructional problems on

hand. In fact, Cox and Graham (2009) propose that teachers’ TPACK comprises the

lesson strategies they design. Teachers’ design dispositions and lesson design practices

could therefore influence how they manoeuver their TPACK throughout lesson design

as well as the outcomes of their lesson design efforts.

A critical challenge for teachers today is the design of lessons that engage

students in the practice of 21st century skills. These comprise cognitive skills for

engagement in critical thinking, creative thinking and problem-solving, social skills for

collaborative communication, metacognitive skills for planning, adapting, and reflecting

as well as technology skills for making responsible and intelligent use of ICT as a

conduit for productive work (e.g. Binkley et al., 2010; Group & NCREL, 2003; OECD,

2005; P21, 2007). Jonassen, Howland, Marra, and Crismond (2008) argue that one way

of developing students’ 21st century skills would be to engage them in “Meaningful

Learning with ICT”. This refers to learning experiences in which ICT tools are used to

Page 5 of 22

URL: http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/capj Email: kbown@csu.edu.au

Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education

123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960

For Peer Review O

nly

6

support students in their inquiry, knowledge construction, and collaboration as they

work on real-world problems. Empirical studies of teachers’ ICT lesson strategies show

them to be largely using ICT for information transmission to students (Author2 &

Colleague, 2008; Gao, Choy, Wong, & Wu, 2009; Hayes, 2007; Ward & Parr, 2010).

These results suggest that teachers may lack the kinds of TPACK specific for designing

meaningful learning with ICT. In such a landscape, it is worthwhile to better understand

the interplay between teachers’ perceptions of TPACK, lesson design practices, as well

as their design dispositions.

Research Questions

This study therefore aims to examine two research questions:

(1) Can a survey that assesses teachers’ perceptions of TPACK, lesson design

practices, and design dispositions be validated among a sample of Singapore

teachers?

(2) To what extent do teachers’ perceptions of lesson design practices and design

dispositions influence their perceptions of TPACK?

Method

Instrumentation

The survey used in this study has 18 items designed according to the constructs of

TPACK, lesson design practices and design dispositions. All items are measured on a

seven-point Likert-type scale rated with (1) strongly disagree; (2) disagree; (3) slightly

disagree; (4) neither agree nor disagree; (5) slightly agree; (6) agree; and (7) strongly

agree. The six TPACK items were taken from the TPACK from Meaningful Learning

survey validated in Author 2 et al. (2011) with Singapore teachers. We did not select

Page 6 of 22

URL: http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/capj Email: kbown@csu.edu.au

Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education

123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960

For Peer Review O

nly

7

items from TPACK surveys measuring generalized forms of TPACK (e.g. Schmidt et

al., 2009) because the literature review showed teachers to be lacking in TPACK for

designing lessons that embody the principles of meaningful learning with ICT. The

TPACK survey selected has operationalized Jonassen et al.’s (2008) Meaningful

Learning dimensions as being based on authentic problems, as well as learning

experiences that engage students in active, constructive, collaborative, and intentional

work. It addressed the kinds of TPACK that were congruent with teachers’ current

knowledge gaps as described in the literature review. Items in Author 2 et al.’s (2011)

study that are related to the six other TPACK constructs (technological knowledge,

content knowledge, pedagogical knowledge, technological pedagogical knowledge,

pedagogical content knowledge, and technological content knowledge) were not used in

this study as we were primarily interested in assessing teachers’ perceptions of the

connections among technology, pedagogy, and content during ICT lesson design. The

TPACK items best captured these three key sources of ICT integration knowledge.

Respondent fatigue (Fraenkel & Wallen, 2003) can also be reduced since the entire

survey in Author 2 et al. (2011) comprised 36 items.

To investigate pre-service teachers’ design dispositions (DD) and the lesson

design practices (LDP) they adopted, we first constructed items reflecting the desired

lesson design practices and design dispositions based on our review of the literature. An

initial pool of items was constructed and these together with the TPACK items were

subjected to expert review with two senior professors in the area of educational

technology who were familiar with design and TPACK research. This review concluded

with six items each for DD and LDP. Following this, the survey was pre-tested with 93

Singaporean pre-service teachers (Authors, 2013). The pre-service teachers responded

to the online survey voluntarily. There were 26 males (28%) and the mean age was 24.8

Page 7 of 22

URL: http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/capj Email: kbown@csu.edu.au

Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education

123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960

For Peer Review O

nly

8

(SD=4.7). An exploratory factor analysis carried out on these responses found that all

items were within the acceptable scores of |3| and |10| respectively for skewness and

kurtosis as recommended by Kline (2005). Following the recommendations of Costello

and Osborne (2005), principal axis factoring with direct oblimin rotation was employed.

Three factors - TPACK, DD, and LDP with eigenvalues greater than one were obtained.

The Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy at .88 and the Bartlett's Test

of Sphericity was significant (p<0.001). All item loadings were greater than the cut-off

point of 0.5. The internal reliability of each factor was good as all had Cronbach alphas

of at least 0.90. This provided some initial evidence for further verification of the factor

structure through confirmatory factor analysis.

Participants

The study was cleared with the Institutional Review Board of a teacher education

institute in Singapore. As the intent of this study was construct validation, 300

Singapore pre-service and in-service teachers attending ICT courses at educational

institutions were invited to participate in this study. A total of 201 teachers responded to

the survey, giving a total response rate of 67%. Close to 69% of the respondents

(N=138) were pre-service teachers who were attending a compulsory ICT module at a

teacher education institution in Singapore. The rest were in-service teachers who were

attending an ICT professional development workshop conducted by another educational

institution. All the teachers were invited via URLs provided by their course instructors

through e-mail, and they participated in the study voluntarily. While there were

comparatively more pre-service teachers than in-service teachers in the sample,

independent sample t-tests found no significant differences between these two groups in

terms of their mean ratings for TPACK, LDP or DD. Chi-square analysis also found no

Page 8 of 22

URL: http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/capj Email: kbown@csu.edu.au

Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education

123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960

For Peer Review O

nly

9

significant gender differences. Therefore, the data for these two groups was combined

for analysis.

Data Analysis

As the factor structure was previously derived from the pilot study with 93 teachers, this

study used a fresh set of data for confirmatory factor analysis. To answer the first

research question, Cronbach alphas for each of the three constructs were first examined

to establish internal consistency. Following this, a measurement model was specified in

AMOS 21 with the three constructs and examined using maximum likelihood

estimation. Construct validity was then examined through the standardized regression

weights of measurement items, item communalities, and the model fit indices. The

second research question was answered by first examining the strength of the Pearson

correlations among TPACK, LDP, and DD to confirm if these relationships should be

further analyzed with structural equation modeling. Upon confirmation, a structural

model was set-up to test these hypotheses:

• H1: DD can positively predict LDP and TPACK

• H2: LDP can positively predict TPACK

Findings

Research Question 1 – Construct validity of survey

High internal reliabilities were obtained for the three scales: TPACK (α=0.95), LDP

(α=0.94), and DD (α=0.91). Adequate model fit was obtained by removing one

TPACK item and two DD items: χ2 = 175.94, χ2 /df = 2.02, p<.0001, TLI = .97, CFI =

.97, RMSEA = 0.07(LO90 = 0.06, HI90 = 0.09), SRMR = 0.04. The TPACK and DD

items were related to specific pedagogies and life experiences, respectively. The items

Page 9 of 22

URL: http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/capj Email: kbown@csu.edu.au

Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education

123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960

For Peer Review O

nly

10

TPACK6, “I can design lessons that appropriately integrate content, technology and

pedagogy for student-centered learning”, DD1, “I am comfortable with the presence of

uncertainty”, and DD2, “I am open to new experiences” could have been phrased too

generally and the study participants may not have perceived it to be conceptually similar

to the other items in the respective scales. All the remaining items had factor loadings

and communalities of above 0.50 as recommended by Hair, Black, Babin, Anderson,

and Tatham (2010) (See Table 1). The confirmatory factor analysis thus supported the

construct validity of the three-factor model.

Table 1. Descriptive statistics, factor loadings and communality for the survey items

Items Mean SD Factor loading

Communality

Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK, M=4.64, SD=1.25)

TPACK1 - I can formulate in-depth discussion topics about the content knowledge and facilitate students' online collaboration with appropriate tools. (e.g., Google Sites, CoveritLive)

4.52 1.36 0.88 0.77

TPACK2- I can craft real-world problems about the content knowledge and represent them through computers to engage my students.

4.61 1.38 0.87 0.76

TPACK3 - I can structure activities to help students to construct different representations of the content knowledge using appropriate ICT tools (e.g., Webspiration, Mindmaps, Wiki).

4.46 1.41 0.95 0.90

TPACK4 - I can create self-directed learning activities for the content knowledge with appropriate ICT tools (e.g., Blog, Webquest)

4.57 1.36 0.92 0.85

TPACK5 - I can design inquiry activities to guide students to make sense of the content knowledge with appropriate ICT tools (e.g., simulations, web-based materials).

4.42 1.43 0.90 0.81

TPACK6 - I can design lessons that Removed from analysis

Page 10 of 22

URL: http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/capj Email: kbown@csu.edu.au

Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education

123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960

For Peer Review O

nly

11

appropriately integrate content, technology and pedagogy for student-centered learning.

Lesson Design Practices (LDP, M= 5.08, SD=1.08)

LDP1 - When designing an ICT lesson, I start by playing with a few lesson ideas.

5.05 1.23 0.89 0.79

LDP2 - When designing an ICT lesson, I consider several lesson ideas to see if they adequately address students' learning problems before choosing one idea.

5.11 1.24 0.91 0.83

LDP3 - When designing an ICT lesson, I allow conflicting lesson ideas to coexist until I feel that I have adequately understood the learning problems.

4.79 1.26 0.87 0.76

LDP4 - When designing an ICT lesson, I continually refine my lesson ideas as I develop new understandings throughout the design process.

5.12 1.26 0.94 0.88

LDP5 - When designing an ICT lesson, I consider the consequences of adopting particular lesson ideas before working out its details.

5.09 1.20 0.93 0.86

LDP6 - When designing an ICT lesson, I am prepared to completely change my lesson ideas if needed.

5.00 1.36 0.75 0.56

Design Dispositions (DD, M=5.29, SD=0.94)

DD1 - I am comfortable with the presence of uncertainty.

Removed from analysis

DD2 - I am open to new experiences. Removed from analysis

DD3 - I am comfortable to explore conflicting ideas.

5.38 0.98 0.90 0.81

DD4 - I am comfortable to deviate from established practices.

5.35 1.06 0.85 0.72

DD5 - I am comfortable with occasional failures from trying out new approaches for ICT lessons.

5.16 1.09 0.80 0.64

DD6 - I am constantly seeking to turn constraints into opportunities.

5.26 1.12 0.85 0.73

Page 11 of 22

URL: http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/capj Email: kbown@csu.edu.au

Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education

123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960

For Peer Review O

nly

12

Research Question 2 – Perceived relationships between TPACK, LDP and DD.

Pearson’s correlations showed there to be significant positive correlations among

TPACK, LDP, and DD (See Table 2). The correlations between LDP and DD were

moderate. LDP had a large positive correlation with TPACK, whereas the correlation

between DD and TPACK was moderate. These results showed that the teachers’

perceptions of LDP had a stronger relationship with TPACK rather than their

perceptions of DD. These correlations showed the plausibility of relationships between

these variables to warrant further analysis with structural equation modeling.

Table 2. Correlations among TPACK, LDP, and DD

LDP TPACK DD

LDP 1 .69** .48**

TPACK 1 .43**

DD 1

N=201 ** p<0.01 (two-tailed)

Note: TPACK =technological pedagogical content knowledge; LDP=lesson design

practices; DD=design dispositions

Table 3 shows the results of the structural equation modeling. Adequate model

fit was obtained (χ2 = 175.94, χ2/df = 2.02, p<0001, TLI = .97, CFI = .97, RMSEA =

0.07 (LO90 = 0.06, HI90 = 0.09), SRMR = 0.04).

Page 12 of 22

URL: http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/capj Email: kbown@csu.edu.au

Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education

123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960

For Peer Review O

nly

13

Table 3. Results of structural equation modeling

Hypothesis Path Path coefficient Standard error Critical ratio

1 DD->LDP

DD->TPACK

0.59***

0.17*

0.08

0.08

7.09

2.03

2 LDP->TPACK 0.69*** 0.08 8.97

*p<0.05 **p<0.01 ***p<0.001

The model we obtained is represented in Figure 1. The model suggests that

teachers’ perceptions of design dispositions play a positive role in their perceptions of

lesson design practices and TPACK. This supports the first hypothesis. A direct positive

relationship was also established between teachers’ perceptions of lesson design

practices and TPACK, which supports the second hypothesis.

Figure 1. The Structural Equation Model of DD, LDP, TPACK

Page 13 of 22

URL: http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/capj Email: kbown@csu.edu.au

Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education

123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960

For Peer Review O

nly

14

The direct relationship between design disposition and TPACK was the weakest,

whereas that between lesson design practices and TPACK was the strongest. Design

disposition also had a similarly strong positive relationship with lesson design practices.

The teachers therefore perceived their dispositions towards design to play a positive role

in their lesson design practices, but the role of their lesson design practices in their

perceptions of TPACK was stronger. The prediction of their perceptions of design

dispositions on perceptions of TPACK was relatively weaker.

Discussion

Current TPACK surveys show what teachers perceive to know about ICT integration.

By validating survey items that assess teachers’ perceptions of their lesson design

practices and design dispositions, this study provides a lens for understanding how

teachers develop TPACK. Given the close linkages between TPACK and design

(Koehler, et al., 2007), teachers’ perceptions of both design dispositions and lesson

design practices were found to be critical handles for influencing their TPACK

perceptions or perceived knowledge of ICT integration. The structural equation

modeling revealed these perceptions. It appeared that lesson design practices where

instructional problems were solved through emergent and iterative design cycles were

perceived to have a strong relationship with TPACK in this study. Current models of

TPACK development emphasize the comprehensive coverage of different kinds of

TPACK, e.g. technological knowledge, technological pedagogical knowledge, and

technological content knowledge. The study results show that such an approach is

incomplete as teachers also need to develop competencies for undertaking lesson design

practices. This could be one reason why teachers’ use of ICT has not yet moved beyond

information transmission (e.g. Ward & Parr, 2010). These results point to several

Page 14 of 22

URL: http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/capj Email: kbown@csu.edu.au

Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education

123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960

For Peer Review O

nly

15

implications for teacher educators:

Foster appropriate lesson design practices through ICT courses for teachers

In this study, the TPACK items used were focused on the kinds of instructional

approaches for supporting meaningful learning with ICT as described by Jonassen et al.

(2008). It was found that such kinds of TPACK perceptions are directly influenced by

teachers’ perceptions of their lesson design practices. What teachers do (i.e., their

lesson design practices) appeared to have a greater positive influence on their

perceptions of TPACK than what they are (i.e., their design dispositions) in this study.

For teacher educators, this suggests that the desired lesson design practices need to be

carefully considered in their instruction of ICT integration.

Lesson design activities are currently used in ICT courses to help teachers make

connections among their technological knowledge, pedagogical knowledge, and content

knowledge (Koehler, et al., 2007). These have been implemented through a

combination of group and individual projects (Angeli & Valanides, 2009; Author1 &

Colleague, 2013; Jang & Chen, 2010). Many studies have tried to describe the kinds of

TPACK teachers generate throughout lesson design projects (Koehler, et al., 2007;

Özgün-Koca, Meagher, & Edwards, 2009/2010) but the strategies for scaffolding

teachers’ lesson design practices have not been described in detail.

We suggest two strategies that can be used by teacher educators to support

teachers’ lesson design practices. The first is through the use of faculty modeling which

has traditionally been a successful strategy for enhancing teachers’ self-efficacy for ICT

integration (Author1, 2011; Brush et al., 2003). Teacher educators can model lesson

design practices where lesson ideas, even conflicting ones, are generated, evaluated and

consolidated iteratively (Dorst, 2006; Dym, Agogino, Eris, Frey, & Leifer, 2005).

Secondly, teacher educators can also reinforce their modeling by structuring project

Page 15 of 22

URL: http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/capj Email: kbown@csu.edu.au

Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education

123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960

For Peer Review O

nly

16

assessments with components that reward teachers for ideation and iteration during

lesson design. These strategies could be used to foster teachers’ confidence to engage in

iterative lesson design work.

Foster teachers’ design dispositions

Design dispositions describe the extent to which teachers are comfortable to engage in

the iterative processes of lesson design and redesign. The results suggest the need to

consider how teachers’ perceptions of design dispositions can be enhanced as it was

found to positively predict teachers’ perceptions of lesson design practices which in turn

positively influenced their perceptions of TPACK. Teachers’ comfort levels for design

work need to be considered by teacher educators as these apprehensions may indirectly

influence their TPACK perceptions. With the dynamic technological environment, the

demands to change one’s pedagogical approaches and integrate ICT are unlikely to

relent. The affective dimensions of ICT integration may be difficult to change as

internal factors such as teachers’ beliefs have been found to be strong barriers that

impede their adoption of ICT (Ertmer, 1999). Ertmer (2005) suggested that teachers’

beliefs could be influenced through the engagement of teachers in dialogue as well as

by providing them with opportunities to work in communities of practice where new

technologies are being explored and implemented. Similarly, we suggest that teacher

educators could conduct dialogue and debriefing sessions with teachers during and after

lesson design activities, which may be conducted in groups. These kinds of dialogue can

be used to reinforce successful experiences or to co-construct strategies for alleviating

teachers’ apprehensions about design. Jang and Chen (2010) found that peer coaching

and reflection enhanced pre-service teachers’ TPACK when they engaged in lesson

design. It is worthwhile to consider if these strategies could also enhance teachers’

Page 16 of 22

URL: http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/capj Email: kbown@csu.edu.au

Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education

123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960

For Peer Review O

nly

17

perceptions of design dispositions.

Incorporate teachers’ perceptions of lesson design into ICT course evaluation

Teacher educators and teacher education institutions can use the survey instrument

validated in this study to track teachers’ perceptions of the processes underlying their

TPACK development. Currently, some variables used for ICT course evaluation are

teacher efficacy for ICT integration, teacher efficacy for using computers as well as

their perceived intentions to integrate ICT into their teaching (Author1 & Colleague,

2009; Brush, et al., 2003; Zhao, Pugh, Sheldon, & Byers, 2002). In recent years,

TPACK surveys have been used increasingly (Schmidt, et al., 2009). By incorporating

the survey questions validated in this study, ICT course evaluation can be made more

comprehensive as it incorporates what teachers know (TPACK), what teachers do

(lesson design practices) and their comfort level with design (design dispositions). In

this way, teachers’ perceptions of the how and what of their ICT knowledge

development can be analyzed more comprehensively. Such kinds of data can be used by

teacher educators to better understand teachers’ learning behaviors and performance

throughout ICT courses. These are important data that can contribute to the

improvement of ICT course design.

Limitations and Future Research

This study is a quantitative analysis of the relationships between lesson design practices,

design dispositions and TPACK. The structural equation model has revealed some

statistical relationships but these still need to be verified through replication studies. As

this study focused on survey validation, a sample comprising Singapore pre-service and

in-service teachers was used. Since 1997, Singapore has been actively promoting ICT

integration in schools through its ICT Masterplans (Teo & Ting, 2010). Singapore

Page 17 of 22

URL: http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/capj Email: kbown@csu.edu.au

Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education

123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960

For Peer Review O

nly

18

teachers are not unfamiliar with ICT lesson design which could perhaps explain their

positive ratings for TPACK, lesson design practices and design dispositions. Further

studies are needed to validate this survey with teachers from different countries. These

studies could also target either pre-service or in-service teachers to better understand

their specific perceptions. When administering these future studies, further

consideration needs to be given to survey items TPACK6, DD1, and DD2 that were

removed from the confirmatory factor analysis. These items need to be re-validated with

different groups of teachers to confirm if they need to be re-designed.

This study has not examined how the statistical relationships evolve across time.

Future studies can therefore consider investigating the change in the structural equation

model at different points of an ICT course, or through longitudinal examination of a

cohort of teachers in their pre-service to in-service experiences. Since this study was

aimed at survey validation, we have not conducted interviews or observations of

teachers’ engagement in lesson design work as it was outside its scope. The

relationships were derived statistically and were based on teachers’ perceptions.

Therefore, another aspect for future study would be the qualitative analysis of how

teachers develop their lesson design practices and design dispositions throughout ICT

course instruction. Additionally, studies related to ICT course pedagogies for

supporting teachers’ development of the desired lesson design practices and design

dispositions can also be carried out.

Conclusion

This study provides evidence that teachers’ perceptions of TPACK can be enhanced

when they are more confident of engaging in lesson design practices that encourage

iterative ideation. Such kinds of lesson design practices can be supported with design

Page 18 of 22

URL: http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/capj Email: kbown@csu.edu.au

Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education

123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960

For Peer Review O

nly

19

dispositions that favor idea exploration. Teacher educators need to model appropriate

lesson design practices as well as influencing teachers’ design dispositions through

continual dialogue. By doing so, they can enhance teachers’ TPACK. This may better

prepare teachers to design ICT lessons that can support students in 21st century learning.

This study has validated an instrument for assessing teachers’ design thinking for ICT

lesson design. Teacher educators can use this instrument to understand the interactions

between teachers’ perceptions of lesson design competencies and ICT integration

knowledge through ICT course evaluation. Further efforts are needed to validate the

survey instrument as well as to support the development of such kinds of lesson design

competencies through ICT training.

Acknowledgement

This paper refers to data from the research project Developing teachers’ Technological

Pedagogical Content Knowledge for 21st Century Learning (TPACK-21CL) Through

Design Thinking (OER5/13/KHL), funded by the Education Research Funding

Programme, National Institute of Education(NIE), Nanyang Technological University,

Singapore. The views expressed in this paper are the authors’ and do not necessarily

represent the views of NIE.

References

Angeli, C., & Valanides, N. (2009). Epistemological and methodological issues for the conceptualization, development, and assessment of ICT-TPCK: Advances in technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPCK). Computers & Education, 52(1), 154-168.

Archambault, L. M., & Barnett, J. H. (2010). Revisiting technological pedagogical content knowledge: Exploring the TPACK framework. Computers & Education, 55(4), 1656–1662. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2010.07.009.

Author1. (2011). Author1, & Colleague. (2009). Author1, & Colleague. (2013). Author2, Author1, & Author4. (2011). Author2, Author1, & Author4. (2013).

Page 19 of 22

URL: http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/capj Email: kbown@csu.edu.au

Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education

123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960

For Peer Review O

nly

20

Author2, & Colleague. (2008). Author3, Author2, & Colleagues. (2011). Author4, & Author2. (2012). Author4, & Colleague. (2010). Authors. (2013). Binkley, M., Erstad, O., Herman, J., Raizen, S., Ripley, M., & Rumble, M. (2010).

Draft White Paper 1: Defining 21st century skills. Melbourne: ACTS. Boland, R. J., & Collopy, F. (2004). Design matters for management. In R. J. Boland &

F. Collopy (Eds.), Managing as designing (pp. 3-18). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

Brush, T., Glazewski, K., Rutowski, K., Berg, K., Stromfors, C., Hernandez Van-Nest, M., . . . Sutton, J. (2003). Integrating technology in a field-based teacher training program: The PT3@ ASU project. Educational Technology Research and Development, 51(1), 57-72.

Costello, A. B., & Osborne, J. W. (2005). Best practices in exploratory factor analysis: Four recommendations for getting the most from your analysis. Practical Assessment Research & Evaluation, 10(7). Retrieved from http://pareonline.net/getvn.asp?v=10&n=7

Cox, S., & Graham, C. R. (2009). Diagramming TPACK in Practice: Using and elaborated model of the TPACK framework to analye and depict teacher knowledge. TechTrends, 53(5), 60-69.

Cross, N. (2011). Design thinking. NY, USA: Berg. Dorst, K. (2006). Design problems and design paradoxes. Design issues, 22(3), 4-17. Dym, C., Agogino, A., Eris, O., Frey, D., & Leifer, L. (2005). Engineering design

thinking, teaching, and learning. Journal of Engineering Education. Ertmer, P. A. (1999). Addressing first and second-order barriers to change: Strategies

for technology integration. Educational Technology Research & Development, 47(4), 47-61

Ertmer, P. A. (2005). Teacher pedagogical beliefs: The final frontier in our quest for technology integration? Educational Technology Research and Development, 53(4), 25-39.

Fraenkel, J. R., & Wallen, N. E. (2003). How to Design and Evaluate Research in Education. McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc: New York, NY.

Gao, P., Choy, D., Wong, A. F. L., & Wu, J. (2009). Developing a better understanding of technology based pedagogy. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 25(5), 714-730.

Graham, R. C., Burgoyne, N., Cantrell, P., Smith, L., St. Clair, L., & Harris, R. (2009). Measuring the TPACK confidence of inservice Science teachers. TechTrends, 53(5), 70-79.

Group, M., & NCREL. (2003). EnGauge 21st century skills: Literacy in the digital age. . Chicago, IL NCREL.

Hair, J. F., Jr. , Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., Anderson, R. E., & Tatham, R. L. (2010). SEM: An introduction Multivariate data analysis: A global perspective (7th ed.) (pp. 629-686). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.

Hayes, D. N. A. (2007). ICT and learning: Lessons from Australian classrooms. Computers & Education, 49(2), 385-395.

Heinich, R., Molenda, M., Russell, J., & Smaldino, S. (1999). Instructional media and technologies for learning (6th ed., pp. 7-92). Columbus, OH: Prentice-Hall

Page 20 of 22

URL: http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/capj Email: kbown@csu.edu.au

Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education

123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960

For Peer Review O

nly

21

Jang, S.-J., & Chen, K.-C. (2010). From PCK to TPACK: Developing a transformative model for pre-service science teachers. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 19(6), 553-564.

Jonassen, D., Howland, J., Marra, R., & Crismond, D. (2008). Meaningful learning with technology (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.

Kline, R. B. (2005). Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling (2nd ed.). New York: The Guilford Press.

Koehler, M. J., Mishra, P., & Yahya, K. (2007). Tracing the development of teacher knowledge in a design seminar: Integrating content, pedagogy and technology. Computers & Education, 49(3), 740-762.

Laurillard, D. (2012). Teaching as a Design Science: Building Pedagogical Patterns for Learning and Technology. NY: Routledge.

Lawson, B. (1997). How designers think: the design process demystified: Architectural Press, Oxford.

Lawson, B., & Dorst, K. (2009). Design expertise (Vol. 31): Architectural Press. Michlewski, K. (2008). Uncovering design attitude: Inside the culture of designers.

Organization Studies, 29(3), 373-392. Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge: A

Framework for Teacher Knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017-1054.

Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2007). Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPCK): Confronting the Wicked Problems of Teaching with Technology. Technology and Teacher Education Annual, 18(4), 2214-2226.

Nonaka, I. (1994). A dynamic theory of organizational knowledge creation. Organization Science, 5(1), 14-37.

OECD. (2005). The definition and selection of key competencies: Executive summary. Paris, France: Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.

Özgün-Koca, S. A., Meagher, M., & Edwards, M. T. (2009/2010). Preservice Teachers’ Emerging TPACK in a Technology-Rich Methods Class. The Mathematics Educator, 19(2), 10-20.

P21. (2007). Maximizing the impact: The pivotal role of technology in a 21st century education system. Retrieved from http://www.p21.org/documents/p21setdaistepaper.pdf.

Rowe, P. G. (1991). Design thinking: The MIT Press. Sawyer, R. K. (2004). Creative teaching: collaborative discussion as disciplined

improvisation. Educational Researcher, 33(2), 12-20. Schmidt, D. A., Baran, E., Thompson, A. D., Mishra, P., Koehler, M. J., & Shin, T. S.

(2009). Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK): The development and validation of an assessment instrument for preservice teachers. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 42(2), 123-149.

Schön, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action: Basic books.

Summerville, J., & Reid-Griffin, A. (2008). Technology integration and instructional design. TechTrends, 52(5), 45-51.

Teo, Y. H., & Ting, B. H. (2010). Singapore Education ICT Masterplans (1997-2004). In C. S. Chai & Q. Y. Wang (Eds.), ICT for self-directed and collaborative learning (pp. 2-14). Singapore: Pearson Education South Asia Pte Ltd.

Ward, L., & Parr, J. M. (2010). Revisiting and reframing use: Implications for the integration of ICT. Computers & Education, 54(1), 113-122.

Page 21 of 22

URL: http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/capj Email: kbown@csu.edu.au

Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education

123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960

For Peer Review O

nly

22

Zhao, Y., Pugh, K., Sheldon, S., & Byers, J. (2002). Conditions for classroom technology innovations. The Teachers College Record, 104(3), 482-515.

Page 22 of 22

URL: http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/capj Email: kbown@csu.edu.au

Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education

123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960