University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Technological pedagogical skills among K-12 teachers

(USC Thesis Other)

Technological pedagogical skills among K-12 teachers

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content Running head: TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

Technological Pedagogical Skills Among K-12 Teachers

By
Amy Kernan

A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE USC ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION

December 2018

Copyright 2018 Amy Kernan
Running head: TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS
Acknowledgements
I would like to thank the USC Rossier School of Education for giving me this wonderful
opportunity, and to my colleagues in the Summer 2016 Cohort for being such a great support and
also for being such a pleasure to work with.
I would like to thank my amazing family, Thack, Sloane, and Blake, for being incredibly
understanding and allowing me to miss so many family events to research and write and
complete this process. You guys are amazing and I could not have done this without you.
Dr. Samkian, my dissertation chair, you have been such a great support and your advice
and guidance have been invaluable. You have always been there during the process to provide
encouragement and motivation. Thank you for all of your help.
Dr. Ferguson, you are such a pleasure to work with. Your knowledge and insights
regarding learning and motivation, coupled with your great sense of humor and unending
enthusiasm were a tremendous joy throughout this process.
Dr. Crawford, you were my first USC professor and you set a high bar for the program.
Thank you for your kindness and your incredible enthusiasm and energy. You helped motivate
me to fulfill my vision of obtaining my Doctorate.

TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

2
Table of Contents
List of Tables 4
List of Figures 5
Abstract 6
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION 7
Introduction of the Problem of Practice 7
Organizational Context and Mission 8
Organizational Goal 9
Related Literature 9
Importance of Evaluation 11
Description of Stakeholder Groups 12
Stakeholder Performance Goals 14
Stakeholder Group for the Study 15
Purpose of the Project and Questions 15
Methodological Framework 16
Definitions 17
Organization of the Project 17
CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW 19
Influences on the Problem of Practice 19
Information and Communication Technology (ICT) Literacy 20
Technological, Pedagogical, and Content Knowledge (TPACK) 23
The Clark and Estes (2008) Gap Analytic Framework 30
Teacher Knowledge Influences 32
Teacher Motivational Influences 37
Organizational Influences 40
Conceptual Framework: The Interaction of Stakeholders’ Knowledge and
Motivation and the Organizational Context 45
Conclusion 50
CHAPTER THREE: METHODS 51
Participating Stakeholders 52
Interview Sampling Criteria and Rationale 53
Observations Sampling Recruitment and Rationale 55
Recruitment Sampling and Rationale 56
Qualitative Data Collection and Instrumentation 56
Observations 57
Interviews 58
Documents and Artifacts 60
Data Analysis 60
Credibility and Trustworthiness 61
Ethics 63
Limitations 64

TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

3
CHAPTER FOUR: FINDINGS 66
Findings 66
Research Questions 1 67
Research Question 2 90
Conclusion 98
CHAPTER FIVE: DISCUSSION 100
Implications for Practice 101
Coaching 101
Tech Ready Program Components 102
Time and Training 102
Technological, Pedagogical, and Content Knowledge (TPACK) 103
Recommendations for Practice 104
Future Research 107
Conclusion 109
References 111
Appendix A: Interview Protocol 121
Appendix B: Observation Protocol 125

TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

4
List of Tables
Table 1: Stakeholder Performance Goals 14
Table 2: Knowledge Influences and Knowledge Types 37
Table 3: Motivational Influence 39
Table 4: Organizational Influences 45
Table 5: Study Participants 54

TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

5

List of Figures
Figure 1: Conceptual Framework 47

TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

6
Abstract
Effective, systematic professional development regarding 21st century skills, focused on not only
content knowledge, but also technology skills and pedagogical strategies that incorporate
technology is vital for improving information and communication technology skills among K-12
students. Therefore, in order to assure that all students are college and career ready when they
leave high school, it is essential that teachers also have the 21st century skills necessary to be
successful in today’s global, technology rich society. The purpose of this project was to evaluate
how the Tech Ready professional development program prepared teachers to effectively
incorporate technology into the classroom by examining the knowledge and motivation of the
teachers after completing the program. Specifically, this study examined teachers’ knowledge
and motivation to effectively integrate technology in their classrooms as well as the
organizational factors that either facilitated or impeded their ability to do so. The study
population consisted of teachers in Beachside Unified School District who completed the Tech
Ready Professional Development program. The study method was qualitative, using interviews,
observations, and document analysis. Findings indicate that the Tech Ready program may
increase teacher knowledge and motivation regarding technology implementation. Additionally,
the findings indicate that coaching, time constraints, and the organization of the program
components influence teacher knowledge and motivation. Implications for practice and future
research are also discussed.

TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

7
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION
Introduction of the Problem of Practice
Our society has been transformed by technological and information forces that have
significantly changed the way that we learn and work in today’s world. In order for schools to
survive and thrive in this new society, they must adapt and begin to better equip students with
21
st
century skills to succeed in a technology-driven, fast-paced, information-rich world (Tucker,
2014; Partnership for 21
st
Century Skills, 2008). For today’s students to be competitive in this
market, they need to have the skills necessary to be digitally literate. Additionally, students are
not able to gain these skills on their own, thus they must acquire them as they progress through
K-12 education. Therefore, it is imperative that our K-12 teachers have the technological
pedagogical knowledge necessary to teach these skills to students and provide learning
environments that foster digital literacy because students are shaped by what they learn in
elementary and secondary school. However, according to a National Center for Education
Statistics survey of a nationally representative sample of over 3,000 K-12 teachers throughout
the United States, only 61% of the teachers reported that professional development activities
prepared them to effectively integrate technology into instruction (Gray, Thomas, & Lewis,
2010). Furthermore, a study by the OECD (2013), reported that over 20% of teachers in most
countries stated they required more professional development regarding technological
pedagogical skills to successfully facilitate integration and student understanding. When
educators do not possess the skills necessary to incorporate technology into instruction, students
are not provided the skills or resources necessary to be competitive in a technology rich global
society (Partnership for 21
st
Century Skills, 2008). Therefore, the best way for teachers to
TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

8
develop these specific technological skills is through professional development related to
technological pedagogical and content knowledge (TPACK) (Mishra & Koehler, 2006).
Organizational Context and Mission
The Beachside Unified School District (pseudonym) serves approximately 3000 students
in grades kindergarten through 12 by providing comprehensive educational programs through its
elementary schools, middle school, and high school. BUSD is located in a small, historical
coastal community where tourism is the main industry. The student population is approximately
85% white, 10% Hispanic, 10% socioeconomically disadvantaged, and 2% English language
learners.
BUSD strives to ensure that each student gains the skills, knowledge, and perspectives
needed to become a lifelong learner in today’s interconnected, global economy. BUSD is an
extremely high performing district with a graduation rate of 98%. Additionally, the district has a
strong focus on college and career readiness and information literacy. However, when assessing
the technology assets in the district, as well as the information communication technology (ICT)
knowledge and skills of students, the district found that many students lacked the skills necessary
to perform adequately on computerized testing and lacked many important ICT skills for future
college and career readiness. In response to this perceived need, in the 2015-16 school year, a
significant portion of the district’s budget, as well as over $2 million from the district’s
Foundation and Parent Teacher Associations, was allocated to create 21
st
century learning spaces
at each school and provide Chromebooks for each of the district’s students. As a result,
technology integration into instruction became a focus of the district. Although the district
supplied technology for each student and teacher, including one to one devices, Google Apps for
Education, audio amplification devices, and flat screen televisions, little professional
TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

9
development for technology integration was provided until the implementation of the Tech
Ready program in 2016.
Organizational Goal
Beachside Unified School District’s goal was that by June 2020, 100% of teachers would
increase integration of the aspects of TPACK into classroom instruction after successful
completion of the Tech Ready professional development program. The district’s leadership team
established this goal based on survey results and teacher feedback that showed that most teachers
did not feel that they had enough technological, pedagogical, and content knowledge (TPACK)
to effectively integrate technology into their instruction. Teachers did not have sufficient efficacy
using technology to be able to incorporate it into lessons or provide students with necessary
support and instruction to utilize the technology in learning activities. These results were
reported through surveys following full implementation of the district’s one-to-one device
initiative in 2016.
Related Literature
In order for students to learn how to use technology, teachers must have technology skills
and knowledge. Numerous studies have illustrated the need for increased technological,
pedagogical, and content knowledge in order for teachers to adequately use technology tools for
instruction and provide students the necessary skills to use technology tools effectively (Angeli
& Valanides, 2004; Cox & Graham, 2009; Chai, Koh, & Tsai, 2013; Avidov-Unger & Eshet-
Alkalai, 2014). Technological knowledge is defined as the ability to operate hardware, software,
and technological devices; pedagogical knowledge is the understanding of teaching strategies,
theories, and approaches; and content knowledge is the mastery of specific subject-matter
(Avidov-Unger & Eshet-Alkali, 2014). Furthermore, today’s students must be provided skills to
TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

10
be information and communication technology (ICT) literate because it is necessary to be
successful in a knowledge-driven society where employers find these skills crucial for
productivity (Moradi-Rekabdarkolaeil, 2011). Additionally, 88% of American voters believe that
K-12 schools should play a vital role in teaching 21
st
century skills including ICT (Partnership
for 21
st
Century Skills, 2008). Teachers must not only understand the subject matter through
content knowledge, but they must understand how best to “teach” subject matter through
pedagogical knowledge (Schulman, 1986). Additionally, effective technological pedagogical
skills encompass not only knowledge of and the ability to teach specific software and devices,
but also the ability to synthesize and think critically about information, solve authentic problems,
and communicate findings using a variety of different media types in digital environments (Chai,
Deng, Tsai, Koh, & Tsai, 2015; Kivunja, 2015; Eshet-Alkalai, 2004). Therefore, educators must
be adept at incorporating technological pedagogical knowledge into instruction and providing
students the skills necessary to effectively utilize technology.
In order for teachers to effectively integrate technology into instruction, they must
possess the necessary pedagogical knowledge and technology skills (Mishra & Koehler, 2006).
However, one of the most prominent barriers to effective technology integration is the lack of
adequate professional development (Anderson, 2012). Mishra and Koehler (2006) based their
TPACK framework on the earlier work of Shulman (1986), who first introduced the framework
of pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) as a means to describe the knowledge and skills
necessary for effective instruction. Research has shown that the TPACK framework illustrates a
lack of effective professional development in regard to adequately preparing teachers to utilize
technology for instruction (Mishra & Koehler, 2006; Archambault, 2016; Harris, 2016).
Therefore, it is imperative that effective methods of teacher preparation for integration of
technology be implemented.

TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

11
Importance of the Evaluation
It is important to evaluate TPACK professional development in Beachside Unified
School District for a variety of reasons. If BUSD teachers do not begin to gain TPACK
knowledge and efficacy regarding technology use, they will be ineffective at ensuring that all
students graduate with the knowledge and skills necessary to be successful in college and career.
The organization will not adequately prepare students to meet the college and career readiness
indicators or the California State Standards (California Department of Education, 2013; Common
Core Standards Initiative, 2016). This could lead to sanctions, as well as loss of status as a top
performing school district. In BUSD, a recent stakeholder survey reported that 32% of parents
and students felt that BUSD is not providing adequate science, technology, engineering, and
math (STEM) instruction to prepare students for future success. Today’s teachers must possess
heightened technology skills in order to meet the needs of their students who are “digital natives”
(Downes & Bishop, 2012). Therefore, evaluation of the current professional development model
must occur in order to assure that the district is meeting the needs of teachers to in turn meet the
cognitive and technological needs of students and to adequately prepare them for success in
college and career.
Effective, systematic professional development regarding 21
st
century skills, focused on
not only content knowledge, but also technology skills and pedagogical strategies that
incorporate technology is vital for improving information and communication technology skills
among K-12 students. Therefore, in order to assure that all students are college and career ready
when they leave high school, it is essential that teachers also have the 21
st
century skills
necessary to be successful in today’s global, technology-rich society, are efficacious in the use of
technology in the classroom, and understand the importance of teaching these skills. Even
TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

12
though technology has become increasingly widespread throughout many school districts,
integration of innovative technology into most school systems has proven to be ineffective and
difficult (Avidov-Unger & Eshet-Alkalai, 2014). Teacher knowledge, abilities, and pedagogy
must be transformed in order to ensure that students are graduating with the skills necessary to be
job-ready in our new technology and innovation-rich, global society (Hinrichson & Coombs,
2013; Kivunja, 2015). If these skills continue to decline in the United States, our students and
economy will suffer, allowing other nations to lead the way in global innovation.
Description of Stakeholder Groups
There are a variety of different stakeholder groups in Beachside Unified School District
including parents, administrators, students, and teachers. Each of these stakeholder groups has
input on the creation and implementation of the District’s goals and actions. Parents in the
district are involved, with more than 80% membership in the schools’ Parent Teacher
Associations. Parents are also involved in much of the district’s decision-making through
participation on the School Site Councils, English Learner Advisory Council, Gifted and
Talented Advisory Committee, Local Control and Accountability Plan Advisory, and various
other District Advisory Committees. Through these advisory roles, parents are able to actively
participate in the goal setting and evaluation process in BUSD.
Beachside Unified School District teachers also have an influence on the creation and
implementation of the district’s goals and actions. All of the teachers in the district are expected
to participate in yearly staff development opportunities, participate in the Tech Ready
professional development program, and use current, research-based instructional strategies.
Furthermore, with the implementation of the District’s one-to-one device program in 2016,
BUSD teachers are expected to incorporate technology into their instruction on a daily basis.
TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

13
Teachers are also expected to facilitate the students’ use of technology and computer
applications in the classroom, and therefore, are expected to be proficient in the use and
instruction of the technology and applications including Google Slides, Docs, and Sheets, Haiku,
and WeVideo.
Students are another stakeholder group in Beachside Unified School District. Students
contribute to the organizational goal by showing proficiency in the computer applications and
technology and utilizing it in their classroom activities and projects. In order for teachers to
complete the Tech Ready Program, they must provide evidence of student work that shows that
students are mastering the information and communication technology skills as well. Therefore,
as a result of the teachers mastering the technology skills and incorporating their technological,
pedagogical, and content knowledge into instruction, students should also be increasing their ICT
skills. And, in turn, the projects produced by the students should demonstrate a high-level
understanding of the different technologies addressed in the Tech Ready program, which will
illustrate that the teachers completed all five levels of the program.
Finally, administrators are also involved in the creation and implementation of the
district’s goals and actions. Administrators utilize data and stakeholder input to determine the
strengths and areas of need for the district and the schools. This information is used to create
initiatives to improve the district’s performance. Administrators are also responsible for assuring
that teachers and students have the necessary resources to achieve the district goals. In order to
understand what resources are necessary, district administrators must understand the aspects of
TPACK and ICT and the knowledge and skills necessary to effectively integrate technology into
instruction. Therefore, it is important that administrators also participate in the professional
TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

14
development program to attain an understanding of the skills and resources needed by the
teachers and students.
Stakeholders’ Performance Goals
The teacher, student, and administrator stakeholder groups discussed above have
associated goals in order for the organization to meet its own goal. Table 1 below provides a
summary of the organization’s mission, performance goal, along with the three stakeholder goals
for teachers, students, and administrators.
Table 1. Stakeholder Performance Goals
Organizational Mission
BUSD strives to ensure that each student gains the skills, knowledge, and perspectives needed
to become a lifelong learner in today’s interconnected, global economy.
Organizational Performance Goal
By June 2020, 100% of BUSD teachers will effectively implement the different aspects of
TPACK into classroom instruction after completion of the Tech Ready professional
development program.
BUSD Teachers
By June 2018, 100% of
BUSD teachers in cohort one
will effectively implement the
different aspects of TPACK
into classroom instruction
after completion of the Tech
BUSD Students
By June 2018, 100% of
BUSD students in cohort
one teachers’ classrooms
will be digitally literate as
demonstrated through
submission of various class
BUSD Administrators
By September 2018, all
school and district
administrators will have
participated in at least one
Tech Ready professional
development session as
TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

15
Ready professional
development program.
projects, including the
“World Changer” projects.
measured by meeting sign-in
logs.

Stakeholder Group for the Study

All stakeholders in Beachside Unified School District contribute to the district’s goal of
100% of teachers effectively implementing the different aspects of TPACK into classroom
instruction after completion of the Tech Ready professional development program by June 2020.
However, the group that has the greatest impact on attainment of this goal is the teacher
stakeholder group, and therefore, this study will focus on the Beachside Unified School District
teachers. Teachers are the direct recipients of the professional development program and thus
must be motivated to complete the program’s requirements in order for the goal to be met. The
stakeholder goal for this group is to have 100% of BUSD teachers in cohort one effectively
implement the different aspects of TPACK into classroom instruction after completion of the
Tech Ready professional development program. In order to complete the program, teachers must
submit evidence of their students’ “World Changer” projects as well as other classroom projects,
demonstrating proficient use of Google Slides, Docs, and Sheets, Haiku, and WeVideo.
Additionally, classroom observations must show that teachers are demonstrating effective
TPACK implementation and students are effectively demonstrating ICT skills. If 100% of cohort
one teachers do not submit complete, comprehensive evidence of student ICT skills, and
observations do not illustrate effective TPACK integration, there will be little evidence that the
stakeholder goal was met.
Purpose of the Project and Questions
The purpose of this project was to evaluate how the Tech Ready professional
development program prepares BUSD teachers to effectively incorporate technology into the
TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

16
classroom by examining the change in the knowledge and motivation of the teachers as a result
of completing the program. The analysis focused on knowledge, motivation and organizational
influences related to achieving this organizational goal. Specifically, this study examined
teachers’ knowledge and motivation to effectively integrate technology in their classrooms as
well as the organizational factors that either facilitate or impede their ability to do so.
Therefore, the guiding questions for this study were:
1. What are teachers’ TPACK knowledge, ICT skills, self-awareness, and self-efficacy related
to integrating aspects of TPACK into classroom instruction after successful completion of the
Tech Ready professional development program?
2. What are the interactions between professional development time constraints, missing
instructional time, and teacher resistance to change with teacher TPACK knowledge, ICT
skills, and self-efficacy regarding implementation of technology in the classroom?
3. What are the recommendations for organizational practice in the areas of knowledge,
motivation, and organizational resources?
Methodological Framework
This project employed a qualitative approach for data collection and analysis. The
qualitative research methods incorporated semi structured interviews and observations of a small
sample of Beachside Unified School District teachers, as well as document analysis of student
projects. The sample participants were comprised of teachers participating in cohort 1 of the
Tech Ready professional development program and represented maximum variation within this
group of teachers. An evaluation of the program based on the findings of the study was
conducted and recommendations for future practice will be discussed.

TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

17
Definitions
Common Core State Standards: A set of high-quality academic standards in mathematics and
English Language Arts developed by a consortium of national representatives and adopted by
over 30 states (Common Core State Standards Initiative, 2015).
Information and Communication Technology (ICT): A set of skills that students should be able to
demonstrate in order to be deemed digitally literate, including the ability to use technology to
find, organize, create, and evaluate information, and to understand legal and ethical issues
surrounding the access to and use of this information, including plagiarism and copywrite
(Trilling & Fadel, 2009).
Technology Integration: The use of technology by teachers and/or students in order to facilitate
learning and increase understanding of concepts and knowledge. Technology integration is also
used to foster the implementation of the 4Cs – collaboration, creativity, communication, and
critical thinking (Partnership for 21
st
Century Skills, 2008).
Technological pedagogical and content knowledge (TPACK): A framework for describing the
relationship between the teacher’s instructional practices and strategies (pedagogy), the subject
matter being taught (content), and the teacher’s ability to use different technologies (Mishra &
Koehler, 2006).
Organization of the Project
The dissertation is organized into five chapters. The first chapter provided an overview of
the purpose of the study, the research questions, and a brief review of related literature. This
chapter also discussed the stakeholder group for the study and provided an overview of the
organization and the organizational goal in relation to the problem of practice. The second
chapter provides a review of the literature related to the problem of practice and scope of the
TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

18
project. The chapter addresses topics of technology integration, professional development, and
the knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences on the stakeholder group in relation to
the stakeholder goal. Chapter three describes the research methods used for the study, including
the selection of participants and research methods employed. This chapter also discusses issues
of credibility and trustworthiness, the limitations of the study, as well as how ethics was
considered. Chapter four is comprised of the findings of the study resulting from the analysis of
the data collected. Chapter five provides the implications of addressing the perceived gaps and
recommendations for practice and future research.

TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

19
CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW
This literature review examines the factors that influence the gaps in technological,
pedagogical, and content knowledge (TPACK) in public school teachers. The review begins with
general research regarding the need for students to be information and communication
technology (ICT) literate in order to be successful in college and career. This is followed by a
review of literature on the need for teachers to possess technological, pedagogical, and content
knowledge (TPACK) for effective instruction using technology tools. A detailed discussion of
research-based approaches and current professional development practices for building TPACK
knowledge and efficacy follows. The section concludes with a review of the Clark and Estes Gap
Analytic approach, including the knowledge, motivation, and organization influences on teacher
implementation of the TPACK framework for ICT instruction.
Influences on the Problem of Practice
In today’s K-12 classrooms, there is a lack of technological, pedagogical and content
knowledge (TPACK) among teachers. Additionally, professional development is mainly driven
by the technology itself rather than the pedagogy surrounding effective teaching (Mishra &
Koehler, 2006). The successful integration of the different aspects TPACK is vital for the
effective integration of technology into instruction and the mastery of information and
communication technology (ICT) literacy by students (Chai, Koh, & Tsai, 2010). The
International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE) emphasize that all teachers should be
able to effectively use technology to improve the ICT skills of their students and themselves
(ISTE, 2016). Additionally, information and communication technology (ICT) skills are vitally
important for success in today’s ever changing, information-rich, global economy (Eshet-Alkali,
2004).
TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

20
Information and Communication Technology Literacy
Importance of Student ICT Literacy. Information and communication technology
(ICT) literacy encompasses a variety of different skills that students must master in order to be
considered college and career ready. ICT skills encompass not only the knowledge of specific
software and devices, but also many cognitive, technical, and social skills (Eshet-Alkali, 2004).
ICT involves student constructivist learning, where students develop their own meaning and
learn in collaborative settings (Chai, Koh, & Tsai, 2010). ICT literacy includes understanding
how to effectively create, evaluate, locate, and use information and communicate what is created
(Kivunja, 2015). Students must be able to synthesize and think critically about information and
communicate findings using a variety of different media types in digital environments. ICT
literacy also includes the ability to evaluate the validity of information from different media and
how media can influence behaviors and beliefs (Kivunja, 2015).
Students must learn to master all types of digital literacy in order to effectively navigate
digital media (Trilling & Fadel, 2009). Digital literacy incorporates a variety of cognitive, motor,
social, and emotional skills; it is not simply the ability to use an electronic device. Eshet-Alkali
(2004) defines various aspects of ICT necessary for students to be considered digitally literate.
Students must be able to read and understand visual media and visual representations of content
and students must also be able to navigate the social aspects of the digital world such as
discussion groups and global integration and communication (Eshet-Alkali, 2004). In addition,
student must have information literacy, that is the ability to find, evaluate, analyze, and
synthesize digital information; media literacy, or the ability to find and create media is different
forms; and technology literacy, or the ability to use various types of technology (Kivunja, 2015).
TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

21
Although research suggests students need to understand not only how to use technology,
but also how to locate, create, manage, and communicate information that they find on the
internet (Kivunja, 2015), students might not be interested in learning ICT skills because they feel
they are already digitally literate. However, Moradi-Rekabdarkolaei (2011) found that although
students feel they are digitally literate, they don’t possess ICT skills necessary to be college and
career ready. Students are constantly connected to the internet and instant information; however,
they don’t possess the skills to effectively utilize, manage, and communicate the information
(Trilling & Fadel, 2009). Therefore, students must have information and communication
technology literacy in order to be successful in the information technology-rich job market.
Teacher Integration of ICT. Explicit ICT instruction is critical to ensure students
understand how to use technology in both educational and real-world applications (Trilling &
Fadel, 2009). However, ICT instruction is the exception, not the norm. Most teachers still use
technology as simply a means to present the lesson, such a slideshow or PowerPoint
presentation, not to enhance student learning and student technology application (Chai, Koh, &
Tsai, 2013). Teachers must use technology to engage students in meaning-making and
knowledge construction by creating learning environments that are technology rich, and that
utilize the technology to enhance students’ intellectual abilities (Keengwe & Onchwari, 2011).
The technology must allow the students to access, create, organize, and evaluate information to
enhance learning (Trilling & Fadel, 2009). Rowlands et al. (2008) found that even though many
teachers possess ICT skills, students are not becoming proficient. Although there has been a
massive influx of technology into K-12 education, effective integration of technology into
instruction has been minimal. Teachers have general ICT self-efficacy, but are not confident in
teaching it to students (Almas & Krumsfeld, 2008). There is a large gap in teacher pedagogical
TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

22
and content knowledge and their technology knowledge. Current ICT research shows that
teachers are not adequately preparing students to be successful consumers and users of
information and communication technology. Harris, Mishra and Koehler (2009) found that there
is a discrepancy between leaders in education technology and secondary teachers regarding the
usage of educational technology tools in the classroom and ICT instruction. Furthermore, studies
have found that ICT instruction is not well integrated into the classroom and many teachers use
ICT tools for efficiency and to supplement curriculum, not to transform instruction (Lim & Chai,
2008; Almas & Krumsvik, 2008; Peeraer&Petegem, 2012). Balanskat et. al (2006) further point
out that ICT is used mostly with traditional teaching strategies, where teachers integrate their
own knowledge of computers, such as word processing and presentation software into lectures
rather than creating more student centered, project-based activities utilizing technology.
Kidd (2009) found that learning is enhanced when technology integration supports the
curriculum, is used throughout different aspects of the lesson, provides opportunities for student
collaboration and communication, and is used to facilitate project-based learning and inquiry.
Teachers should also use technology in all aspects of instruction, including assessment,
curriculum, and instructions in order to provide rich, real-world critical thinking and problem-
solving skills (Keengwe & Onchwari, 2011). In a study of 482 primary school students from a
school in Singapore that focuses on ICT integration, Chai et al. (2015) found that technology
integration should facilitate collaborative learning, self-directed learning, problem-based
learning, and a focus on critical thinking skills in order to effectively promote 21
st
century skills
and enhance student overall learning.
Angeli and Valanides (2005) discuss five principles of ICT that teachers must utilize to
successfully integrate technology into instruction and increase student ICT skills. Teachers must
TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

23
understand how the ICT tools add specific value to instruction. They must also understand how
technology can make material that is difficult to teach by traditional means more comprehensible
to students and identify teaching strategies that are more comprehensible through technology.
Additionally, teachers must be able to select the appropriate ICT tools, including computers,
interactive whiteboards, tablets, scientific instruments, smart phones, cameras, and classroom
response systems, to support teaching and content and infuse creative ICT activities into the
classroom (Partnership for 21th Century Skills, 2008; NCES, 2009b). When teachers are able to
effectively incorporate ICT tools into instruction, student ICT skills and knowledge increase
(Angeli & Valanides, 2005).
Additionally, when teachers are skilled at integrating ICT tools into instruction, there is a
positive impact on learning. Furthermore, ICT will only positively impact student learning and
engagement if teachers know how to effectively use ICT to promote critical thinking, expression,
and knowledge. If teachers are not encouraged to use new strategies to incorporate ICT and
given modeling in implementation, they revert to old strategies and do not effectively incorporate
ICT (Angeli & Valanides, 2005, Kurvits & Kurvits, 2013). Teachers must gain the procedural
knowledge to effectively use ICT tools and integrate them into instruction in order to provide
students the necessary understanding of technology to be successful and engaged in ICT
learning.
Technological, Pedagogical, and Content Knowledge (TPACK)
Components of TPACK. Whereas ICT refers to the literacies that students must possess
in order to be considered proficient with information and communication technologies, TPACK
addresses the instructional competencies and knowledge that teachers should utilize to
effectively incorporate technology into the classroom to increase student ICT (Almas &
TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

24
Krumsvik, 2008; Angeli & Valanides, 2005; Koh, Chai, & Tsai, 2012). Teachers must possess
technology knowledge, as well as content and pedagogical knowledge in order to successfully
integrate technology into instruction and create ICT literate students (Koh, Chai, & Tsai, 2012).
Technological, pedagogical, and content knowledge is a framework for understanding effective
integration of technological skills into instruction. TPACK consists of three knowledge types –
technological knowledge, or mastery of technology tools and use; pedagogical knowledge, or
mastery of teaching strategies and theories; and content knowledge, or mastery of subject matter
(Mishra & Koehler, 2006). These three types of knowledge can be looked at in combination or as
separate entities, but combining these three types of knowledge has been shown to result in more
effective integration of technology into instruction (Avidov-Unger & Eshet Alkali, 2014; Chai et
al, 2013). Therefore, TPACK can be described as transformative, collaborative, multifaceted,
and integrative (Chai et al., 2013). Technology instruction cannot be done in isolation, it must be
combined with instruction in content using effective pedagogy (Chai et al., 2013).
Importance of TPACK. Focusing on TPACK assures that all aspects of curriculum and
instruction are addressed when implementing new technology tools (Mishra & Koehler, 2006).
Technology knowledge alone does not ensure that teachers are effectively able to teach
technology use; when teachers are seamlessly able to incorporate all three TPACK knowledge
types into instruction, student technology use and learning is enhanced (Doering et al., 2009,
Khan, 2011). Angeli and Valanides (2013) found that TPACK is important because teachers not
only need to teach student how to use technology, they also need to be able to teach with the
technology themselves, while integrating the content and pedagogical strategies. Teaching is a
demanding profession, integrating technology places even higher demands, therefore, teachers
TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

25
must be able to integrate technology with pedagogy and content in order to ease some of the
complexities of teaching (Greenshow, Dexter, & Hughes, 2008).
In a study of 889 preservice teachers in Singapore, Chai et al. (2010) found that
technological knowledge, pedagogical, knowledge, and content knowledge all affect TPACK
and teachers’ ability to integrate technology into lessons. The study also found, that explicitly
providing teachers with TPACK instruction increased teachers’ perceived knowledge of
pedagogical concepts more than technological and content concepts, although all three were
significantly increased. Therefore, it is important that all three knowledge types are addressed in
teacher education programs in order to effectively increase ICT integration.
In a further study in 2013, Koh, Chai, and Tsai examined the effects of the different
aspects of TPACK on teachers’ TPACK perceptions. They studied 455 practicing teachers in
Singapore and found that TK and PK contributed the most significantly to TPACK and to the
constructs of TCK and TPK. Therefore, they determined that professional development should
focus on both technology use and the use of technology to enhance pedagogy (Koh, Chai, and
Tsai, 2013).
Integration of TPACK to promote ICT. Technological, pedagogical, and content
knowledge (TPACK) is essential for teachers to adequately use technology tools for instruction
and provide students the necessary skills to use technology tools effectively (Angeli &
Valanides, 2004; Cox & Graham, 2009; Chai, Koh, & Tsai, 2013; Avidov-Unger & Eshet-
Alkalai, 2014) Today’s students must be provided skills to be information and communication
technology (ICT) literate to be successful in a knowledge-driven society where employers find
these skills crucial for productivity (Moradi-Rekabdarkolaeil, 2011). According to a 2013 study
of European Union member nations, approximately 90% of new jobs will require employees to
TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

26
have high-level information and communication technology (ICT) skills (European Commission,
2013). Therefore, it is imperative that educators transform the way they teach and utilize
technology. Teachers must not only understand the subject matter through content knowledge,
but they must understand how best to “teach” the subject matter through pedagogical knowledge
(Schulman, 1986). Additionally, effective technological pedagogical skills encompass not only
knowledge of and the ability to teach specific software and devices, but also the ability to
synthesize and think critically about information, solve authentic problems, and communicate
findings using a variety of different media types in digital environments (Chai, Deng, Tsai, Koh,
& Tsai, 2015; Kivunja, 2015; Eshet-Alkalai, 2004). Therefore, educators must be adept at
incorporating technological pedagogical knowledge into instruction and providing students the
skills necessary to effectively utilize technology.
Barriers to TPACK Integration. Although many researchers agree that TPACK is
crucial to effective ICT instruction (Angeli & Valanides, 2013), there are several barriers to
successful implementation of technology in classrooms. Two of the most prevalent barriers are
adequate professional development and time (Anderson, 2012). Additionally, teachers must feel
that there is a benefit to implementing TPACK and they must be efficacious regarding TPACK
in order to successfully incorporate technology into instruction (Almas & Krumsvik, 2008;
Angeli & Valanides, 2004; Chai, Koh, & Tsai, 2010). However, many teachers have lower ICT
skills than their students, and this may limit their ability to effectively integrate TPACK and
teach students ICT skills (Petriashvili, 2012; Moradi- Rekabdarkolaei, 2011; Peters and Slotta,
2010). Additionally, it takes time to successfully integrate ICT literacy with pedagogical
knowledge and teachers must understand how to balance the innovative use of ICT with the need
to meet accountability measures (Anderson, 2012). However, once teachers have self-efficacy
TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

27
with ICT, they no longer see it as tool, but as an essential part of instruction and are better able to
incorporate all aspects of TPACK into instructional practice (Almas & Krumsfeld, 2008; Chai,
Koh, & Tsai, 2010).
Several other knowledge, motivational, and organizational factors may also act as
barriers to teacher TPACK and ICT integration. In a review of 48 research studies regarding
TPACK, Hew and Brush (2006) found several factors contributing to challenges in integrating
technology into the classroom, including a lack of resources, available technology, available
technical support, teacher skills, and efficacy regarding technology, as well as unfavorable
teacher attitude and feelings about technology. Additionally, support and technological
knowledge of principals and other school leaders can play a large role in teacher TPACK and
technology integration (Fox & Henri, 2005; Hargreaves & Fullen, 2013). Keengwe and
Onchwari (2011) also found that teacher beliefs about technology’s role in education and teacher
resistance to change can also negatively affect technology integration. Teachers have deep-
rooted notions about teaching and the tools used to for instruction, and this can lead to resistance
to adopt new strategies and tools, like TPACK and ICT, which have not been tested and proven
effective over time and which are constantly changing (Keengwe & Onchwari, 2011; Ertmer &
Ottenbreit-Leftwich, 2010)
Importance of Professional Development for TPACK Integration. Professional
development is essential for assuring that teachers have the TPACK skills necessary to overcome
the barriers to successful technology integration (Petriashvili, 2012). However, after studying the
35 member countries, the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (2013)
found that over 50% of teachers report that current professional development does not
adequately provide teachers with TPACK skills. Additionally, over 20% of teachers in most
TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

28
European countries stated that they required more professional development regarding TPACK
to successfully facilitate ICT integration and promote student understanding. In a review of 74
studies and journal articles related to ICT integration from the framework of TPACK, Chai, Koh,
and Tsai (2013) also found that teachers feel inadequately prepared to incorporate technology
into content instruction and that technology is still mainly used to support teacher lectures and
student homework. Chai, Koh and Tsai (2013) also found through examination of the different
studies, that teachers do not feel efficacious when teaching specific subject matter with
technology and TPACK may help increase teacher self-efficacy with technology.
Mishra and Koehler (2006) argue that the most effective way to train teachers to integrate
technology is not through traditional technology training because of the techno-centric emphasis
of traditional technology training methods, which are not grounded in effective pedagogy.
Instead, they argue that professional development should be done through a hands-on approach,
where the professional development is grounded in inquiry and technology instruction is
combined with best practices regarding content and pedagogy. Harris (2016) found that TPACK
instruction should incorporate authentic learning, collaborative instructional design, problem-
based learning, and inquiry in order to be effective for promoting technology integration. To
achieve this, Angeli and Valanides (2005) found that the use of technology-rich design activities
for pre-service teachers increased ICT integration skills and TPACK. In the study, the teachers
that used a hands-on, inquiry approach to lesson design, were more efficacious with technology
integration and exhibited increased ICT-related PCK (Pedagogical Content Knowledge) (Angeli
& Valanides, 2005).
In a study of eight social studies teachers, Doering et al. (2009) found that teachers that
were provided comprehensive professional development that integrated all aspects of TPACK
reported increases in all three knowledge domains and more confidence in incorporating
TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

29
technology in social studies instruction. Teachers must learn TPACK “by doing”, in other words,
TPACK professional development must afford teachers the ability to actively participate in
activities that incorporate instruction on pedagogy and content using technology (Mishra &
Koehler, 2006).
Professional development regarding technology implementation should also be job-
embedded, reflective, and based in the curriculum (Harris, 2016). Teachers must be able to see
how the technology fits into the standards-based curriculum that they must teach in order to meet
accountability measures and it must not be viewed as something extra that they must infuse in
their classrooms (Peters & Slotta, 2010). The professional development must emphasize content
goals and learning activities in order for teachers to be able to see how it will benefit them in the
classroom and concrete examples of how it can be used to facilitate instruction (Twining et al.,
2013; Harris et al., 2010). In a review of the findings of the EDUsummIT 2011, Twining et al.
(2013) found that TPACK professional development must also contain the following: direct
observations of teaching, support by peers, follow-up and feedback, the ability for teachers to
direct their own learning, professional learning environments, and activities that promote teacher
inquiry and authentic learning. Teachers retained knowledge and were able to better implement
TPACK when they were trained through real-world application and meaning-making strategies.
Using social media and authentic learning experiences with technology also improve teacher
understanding and implementation. (Kivunja, 2013).
There are a variety of models for the successful implementation of TPACK in a K-12
setting. TPACK professional development must be done through a constructivist approach.
Akkoc (2011) found that TPACK should be taught through content-based technology instruction.
After completing a content-based technology pre-service program, teachers were able to better
TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

30
integrate technology into instruction than with technology instruction alone. Professional
development must, therefore, provide teachers mastery of TPACK competencies in all aspects of
curriculum and instruction, not just technology use (Angeli & Valanides, 2013). Angeli and
Valanides (2013) also found that scaffolded technology instruction helps with retention of
knowledge and skills. Teachers that were provided scaffolded instruction had significantly lower
perceived task effort when implementing technology into instruction.
Most of the literature supports the idea that the learning opportunities must not be techno-
centric, and instead must incorporate all aspects of technological, pedagogical, and content
knowledge (Mishra & Koehler, 2006; Chai, Koh, Tsai, 2013; Harris, 2016). When professional
development is not grounded in content and pedagogy, it is much more difficult for teachers to
effectively utilize it to increase student ICT skills and overall digital literacy (Kivunja, 2015).
The Clark and Estes (2008) Gap Analytic Framework

Performance gaps in organizations can be assessed by analyzing the actual performance
levels as compared to the performance goals (Clark & Estes, 2008). A framework for analyzing
performance gaps, discussed by Clarke and Estes (2008), examines how knowledge, motivation,
and the organization influences stakeholder and stakeholder group performance gaps. The
knowledge and skill influences comprise what a person needs to know in order to meet his or her
goals (Rueda, 2011). The knowledge influences can further be defined as factual, conceptual,
procedural and metacognitive depending on the type of knowledge addressed (Krathwohl, 2002).
Motivation consists of the factors that stimulate a person to begin working toward a goal and
persist in the goal directed behavior (Mayer, 2011). Motivational influences cause people to
choose particular activities, start tasks, persist at tasks, and expend certain amounts of effort to
reach a goal (Rueda, 2011). Lastly, organizational influences consist of cultural model
TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

31
influences, such as workplace norms, and cultural setting influences, such as available resources
and organizational policies and procedures (Clark & Estes, 2008).
The different elements of the Clark and Estes (2008) gap analysis, regarding the
organizational goal of 100% of Beachside USD teachers effectively implementing the different
aspects of TPACK into classroom instruction after completion of the Tech Ready professional
development program by 2020, will be addressed in the following sections. The first section will
discuss the assumed knowledge and skill influences on the stakeholder performance goal. This
will be followed by a review of the assumed motivational influences on the Beachside USD
teachers. Finally, the assumed organizational influences on attainment of the performance goal
will be addressed.
There are a variety of factors that influence the achievement of goals, including
knowledge and skills of the stakeholder groups. These knowledge and skill influences comprise
what a person needs to know in order to meet his or her goals (Rueda, 2011). This is known as
the knowledge dimension of learning. This dimension is comprised of different types of learning
that describe how knowledge is attained through the cognitive process (Krathwohl, 2002).
Understanding the different aspects of the knowledge dimension provide insights into how to
best meet the needs of learners and assure that they have the necessary resources to meet their
goals.
Krathwohl (2002) describes four categories of knowledge within the knowledge
dimension of learning. The first category is factual knowledge, or the information that must be
known to solve a problem including details and definitions. The second category of knowledge is
conceptual. Conceptual knowledge refers to the relationships between different aspects of factual
knowledge, including models, theories, classifications, and principles. Another category of
TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

32
knowledge, procedural knowledge, is concerned with the methods, skills, and techniques for
doing things, specifically. The final category, metacognitive knowledge, is the knowledge of
one’s own learning, or self-knowledge. This type of knowledge is used to describe how one
thinks about learning and reflects on learning, and also on how one manages strategies and other
learning to determine the best methods for solving a problem (Mayer, 2011).
In the K-12 public education setting, stakeholders need to have capacity regarding
knowledge and skills in a variety of different areas including pedagogical strategies, content
knowledge, and technological skills in order to adequately prepare students to be successful in
the 21
st
century (Angeli & Valanides, 2013). The next section will review literature about
teachers’ knowledge and skills specifically related to effective pedagogical strategies aimed to
develop 21
st
century skills in students.
Teacher Knowledge Influences.
The first knowledge and skill influence that will be discussed describes the procedural
knowledge related to effectively utilizing information and communication technology to
positively impact learning. The second influence deals with declarative conceptual knowledge
regarding the different aspects technological, pedagogical, and content knowledge (TPACK).
The third influence addresses teachers’ ability to self-evaluate the effectiveness of their
technology integration and their understanding of the ICT tools. All three of these influences
were chosen because they are related to the specific knowledge and skills teachers must possess
to achieve their stakeholder goal and increase the effective integration of aspects of the TPACK
framework into classroom instruction, but each has different factors and implications based on
the knowledge types they encompass.
TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

33
Information and communication technology. Information and communication
technology (ICT) refers to technology tools, such as the internet, computers, and computer
software and applications, that can be used to provide information to students and that students
can use to communicate learning and fulfill learning objectives (Angeli & Valanides, 2004). ICT
is becoming an increasingly significant resource for K-12 instruction, and students are expected
to be able to utilize ICT tools in order to be considered college and career ready (Kivunja, 2015,
Gunn & Hollingsworth, 2013). Therefore, it is imperative that teachers have the procedural
knowledge to be able to integrate ICT tools into their instruction and teach students appropriate
ways to use ICT tools Almas & Krumsvik, 2008). Even though there are increasing amounts of
information, collaboration, and technology resources available in classrooms, it is not useful
unless teachers change their methods to effectively utilize these resources and teach students to
utilize them. Simply having the tools at one’s disposal is insufficient for teaching technological
skills to students (Almas & Krumsvik, 2008). However, researchers have found that many
teachers do not know how to effectively use ICT tools or integrate ICT into instruction, and thus,
these tools are not effectively utilized to increase students’ ICT skills (Chai, Koh, & Tsai, 2013;
Gunn & Hollingsworth, 2013; Kurvits & Kurvits, 2013; Almas & Krumsvik, 2008).
Technological, pedagogical, and content knowledge. Technological, pedagogical, and
content knowledge (TPACK) is a framework for understanding what teachers must know and the
skills they must possess in order to effectively teach with technology (Mishra & Koehler, 2006;
Angeli & Valanides, 2013). Teachers must understand the aspects of TPACK in order effectively
integrate technology into their instruction and meet the goal of effectively implementing the
different aspects of TPACK into classroom instruction after completion of the Tech Ready
professional development program. The Tech Ready program requires teachers to complete five
TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

34
components that include activities regarding technology implementation, instructional strategies
using technology, and teaching content utilizing technology. Therefore, it is imperative that
teachers have conceptual understanding of the different aspects of the TPACK framework in
order to assure that they are able to successfully integrate technology into instruction. These
different aspects include technological knowledge, or the ability to use technology; pedagogical
knowledge, or the understanding of instructional strategies and theories; and content knowledge,
or discipline specific knowledge about the subject matter being taught (Avidov-Unger & Eshet-
Alkalai, 2014; Angeli & Valanides, 2013; Chai, Koh, & Tsai, 2010). Furthermore, it is not only
necessary that teachers understand the different components of TPACK, but that they understand
how the components work together to produce effective teaching and technology integration
(Angeli & Valanides, 2013; Chai et al., 2010).
Research has shown that teaching technology integration concurrently with pedagogical
and content knowledge through hands-on, authentic design tasks, where teachers were able to
integrate their understanding of all aspects of TPACK produced greater TPACK understanding
and more effective integration of technology into instructional design (Angeli & Valanides,
2013; Kramarski & Michalsky, 2009). In a study of 72 preservice teachers, Angeli and Valanides
(2013) had the teachers complete five design tasks assessing the different aspects of TPACK
through technology mapping after taking a course in Excel. The researchers found using a
holistic approach to technology instruction that incorporates content, technology use, and
pedagogy during real-world lesson design activities produced teachers with greater TPACK and
greater knowledge of each of the three individual TPACK knowledge types (Angeli &
Valanides, 2013). Angeli and Valanides (2013) also found that the participants’ comments
supported the fact that ICT professional development courses must incorporate not just how to
TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

35
teach with technology, but also what to teach, what tools to use, and what instructional strategies
to employ.
Additionally, information processing theory suggests that learners are able to more
efficiently and deeply process information when they can make connections between concepts
and connect new information to prior knowledge (Schraw & McCrudden, 2006). By integrating
the instruction of the different aspects of TPACK, it is hoped that teachers will be able to form
connections and aid in the processing of the TPACK framework and its related skills and
knowledge. Therefore, the teachers in Beachside Unified School District will require explicit
knowledge of the various aspects of TPACK and types of knowledge that are incorporated in the
TPACK framework in order to successfully integrate the technology into their instruction and
complete the various technological and pedagogical components of the “World Changer”
projects.
Metacognition regarding technology integration. In addition to understanding TPACK
and ICT, teachers must also self-evaluate their understanding of the importance of TPACK and
any resistance to integrating technology that they may have. Metacognitive knowledge allows
one to understand why something is done or not done and to consider both contextual and
conditional reasons for actions (Rueda, 2011). Additionally, as Rueda (2011) suggests, it is
important not just to have knowledge and skills, but also to understand when and why to use
something like technology in order to assure that it is being used effectively and should not be
changed to something more effective.
In order for teachers to effectively integrate technology into instructions and use TPACK,
they should be able to self-evaluate when and why TPACK and technology are important. In a
qualitative study of Norwegian high school teachers, Almas and Krumsvik (2008) found that
TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

36
when teachers see the value of ICT, they are more likely to embrace using technology for
instruction. Additionally, teachers must regularly reflect on the benefits of using technology as
an instructional strategy in order to assure that they are using it to positively impact student
learning. This reflection also allows teachers to be able to understand the impacts of technology
on both their own pedagogy and student ICT skills (Almas & Krumsvik, 2008). Additionally, in
a qualitative study of 72 pre-service teachers, Angeli and Valanides (2013) found that teachers
need to be able to evaluate their use of technology tools for improving instruction in order to
determine the correct tools to use for different instructional purposes. Angeli and Valanides
(2013) proposed the use of technology mapping, where teachers self-evaluate which technology
tools will be the most effective for teaching particular concepts and map them together during
lesson planning. Therefore, it is important for teachers to self-evaluate their own understanding
of TPACK and use of TPACK in the classroom in order to achieve their technology instructional
goals (Krauskopf, Foulger, & Williams, 2017).
Teachers must also reflect on their own technology learning in order to successfully
implement it in their classrooms. Lu (2014) found that reflective practices help teachers
remember what they learn during professional development experiences, encourage them to
think about how to use technology effectively in their classrooms, and help. Them to apply what
they learn regarding technology effectively with students. Therefore, in order to effectively
implement technology in the classroom, teachers must reflect-before-action, reflecting about
technology use before implementing it in the classroom; reflect-in-action, reflecting about their
technology use while teaching; and reflect-on-action, reflecting about the effectiveness following
technology implementation (Almas & Krumsvik, 2008).
TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

37
Table 2 provides information regarding the two knowledge influences discussed above
and the knowledge types related to them.
Table 2 Knowledge Influences and Knowledge Types

Teacher Motivational Influences
Motivation consists of the factors that stimulate a person to begin working toward a goal
and persist in the goal directed behavior (Mayer, 2011). Motivational influences cause people to
choose particular activities, start tasks, persist at tasks, and expend certain amounts of effort to
reach a goal (Clark & Estes, 2008; Rueda, 2011). It is important to examine the motivational
influences related to a problem in order to understand the possible factors affecting the
organization and the stakeholder attainment of goals.
Motivational influences, particularly self-efficacy theory, shape teachers’ desires or
resistance to integrate TPACK into their classroom instruction. Self-efficacy refers to the beliefs
that individuals have about their capability to perform tasks and attain specific goals (Pajares,
2006). The following literature review focuses on the motivational factors affecting the teachers’
Knowledge Influence Knowledge Type (i.e., declarative (factual or
conceptual), procedural, or metacognitive)
Teachers need to know the different aspects of
technological, pedagogical, and content
knowledge (TPACK) and the types of
knowledge that compose the TPACK
framework.
Declarative
(Conceptual)
Teachers need to know how to effectively
integrate information and communication
technology (ICT) in order for it to positively
impact learning.
Procedural
Teachers need to self-evaluate their own
technology learning, the effectiveness of their
technology integration, and their
understanding of the ICT tools.

Metacognitive
TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

38
attainment of their stakeholder goal. Specifically, self-efficacy theory will be outlined because it
pertains to the feeling of increased confidence that teachers gain from achieving the goal.
Self-efficacy beliefs involve the perceptions that people have about their capabilities to
perform tasks and attain goals, and it influences all three aspects of motivation – choice,
persistence, and effort (Rueda, 2011). When individuals have high self-efficacy regarding a
subject, they are more likely to start tasks related to the subject, persist in completing the tasks,
and expend higher amounts of effort to complete the tasks (Mayer, 2011). Alternatively,
individuals with low self-efficacy can have difficulty starting, persisting, and exerting effort
towards a task, especially if the task is perceived to be difficult or of little value (Rueda, 2011).
There are several factors that contribute to self-efficacy beliefs, including prior
knowledge and mastery, positive versus negative feedback, and past experiences of themselves
and others (Pajares, 2006). Additionally, self-efficacy influences individuals in a variety of ways
including their behaviors, outcome expectancies, anxiety levels, stress, and perseverance. It can
also influence factors such as the perceived level of difficulty of a task, commitment to goals,
flexibility, and the self-regulatory processes utilized (Bandura, 2000; Mayer, 2011). For
example, individuals with low self-efficacy regarding math may not choose to attempt problems
that they perceive as difficult such as word problems or complex equations. Additionally, they
may not be able to effectively use self-regulatory strategies when they incorrectly solve
problems, and they may become extremely anxious and stressed when faced with math tests or
activities.
Teachers who are confident in their technology skills are more likely to use ICT tools in
their classrooms and encourage the use of ICT tools by students (Angeli & Valnides, 2004;
Lawless & Pelligrino, 2007). Koh, Chai, and Tsai (2013) found that teachers who felt confident
TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

39
with the technology and pedagogy skills had higher perceptions of their own TPACK and were
more likely to effectively integrate technology. Furthermore, teachers who receive high quality
professional development regarding ICT that is long term and combined with coaching and
follow-up are more likely to have high levels of self-efficacy with technology and ICT
implementation (Gunn & Hollingsworth, 2013; Chai, Koh, & Tsai, 2010).
In a study of 41 pre-service teachers, professional development was found to be one of
the strongest factors for increasing TPACK and ICT self-efficacy and decreasing teacher and
student perceived cognitive load (Angeli and Valanides, 2004). Mishra and Koehler (2006), also
found that along with teacher beliefs and attitudes, their prior knowledge of ICT and training
with ICT has a positive effect on self-efficacy with ICT tools. Therefore, when individuals feel
more confident using ICT and have practical experience incorporating into lessons, they are
more likely to use it in the future and to have better experiences integrating it into instruction
(Angeli & Valanides, 2004; Chai, Koh, & Tsai, 2010). The findings from the Second
Information Technology in Education Study (SITES) in 2006, where over 35,000 math and
science teachers were surveyed from 22 different countries, further supports the idea that
teachers are more likely to integrate technology effectively when they have higher levels of
confidence with technology and greater skills using technology (Law, Pelgrum, & Plomp, 2008).
Table 3 provides information regarding the assumed motivational influence, self-efficacy.
Table 3 Motivational Influence

Assumed Motivation Influence

Self-Efficacy

Teachers need to feel efficacious in integrating technology into instruction.
TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

40
Organizational Influences
Stakeholder knowledge and motivational influences are shaped by the culture, policies,
procedures, and structures that exist in an organization (Rueda, 2011). All organizations contain
an organizational culture that is driven by the stakeholders associated with the organization
(Rueda, 2011). Additionally, organizations change over time, the stakeholders within the
organizations and the organization itself adapt to changes in the environment (Rueda, 2011).
Furthermore, just as knowledge and motivational influences can contribute to performance gap,
these changes in organizations can also lead to performance gaps.
Cultural influences include a variety of factors within an organization, including, climate,
norms, rules, rituals, and shared meanings and values. Cultural influences can be very hard to
operationalize, though, because they are sometimes not easily visible, are subjective, and the
stakeholders may not even be aware they exist (Rueda, 2011). Yet, culture has a great influence
on individuals with an organization and on the organization itself. Therefore, cultural influences
must be examined when determining the causes for performance gaps.
Cultural settings. Organizational culture consists of both cultural settings and cultural
models. The cultural settings, or the visible, tangible aspects of organizational culture include
aspects such as policies and structures in place in the organization (Rueda, 2011). Cultural
settings are the concrete structures that comprise an organization. These include things such as
available resources, policies and procedures, and funding, and time management systems.
The cultural setting influences that will be examined in this study include professional
development time constraints and missing instructional time caused by weekday professional
development (Akkoc, 2015). Teachers do not want to be out of their classrooms for professional
development because of the loss of instructional time. Additionally, professional development
TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

41
can be very time consuming, causing a burden on teachers. However, most professional
development offerings are done during the school day and require teachers to be out of the
classroom. In interviews with 18 teachers, Shamburg (2004) found that scheduling was a crucial
barrier to technology professional development; teachers did not want to attend professional
development during the school day. Additionally, in a survey of representative schools in 26
countries, Pergrum (2001) found that 54% of teachers reported that there was not enough time to
learn and prepare for technology lessons, 43% stated that there was not enough technology
training opportunities, and 41% stated that there was not enough time in the day to incorporate
technology and technology professional development.
In a study of two Silicon Valley high schools, Cuban et al. (2001) surveyed teachers
regarding barriers to technology implementation. Teachers reported that one of the barriers was
the lack of time for collaboration regarding innovative teaching strategies and technology as well
as the lack of time for professional development. Additionally, teachers stated that there was not
enough time in the class periods to effectively incorporate ICT instruction (Cuban et al, 2001).
The lack of time for both professional development and technology integration is therefore a
possible critical cultural setting influence to technology integration. Kopcha (2012) also found
that time was the biggest barrier to implementing technology in elementary school classrooms. In
a study of 18 elementary teachers, 12 stated that time was the biggest challenge to using
technology in their classrooms and 10 stated that it became increasingly difficult to implement
ICT, even as their technology skills improved (Kopcha, 2012).
Cultural models. Cultural models also influence the stakeholders in an organization.
Cultural models consist of the shared understandings and beliefs within an organization, and they
can be sometimes invisible to the stakeholders (Rueda, 2011). These cultural models help to
TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

42
create the cultural setting in an organization (Rueda, 2011). Cultural models are also dynamic,
changing as the stakeholders and other factors in the organization change (Rueda, 2011).
One cultural model consideration is whether technology integration into classroom
instruction is prioritized in one’s context. It is important for leaders to value technology
integration and keep consistent priorities regarding technology implementation (Hodge & Lear,
2007). Administrators must value technology implementation and prioritize professional
development regarding technology implementation in order for teachers to see its importance
(Bollinger & Wasilik, 2009). Administrators that support teacher integration of technology have
been found to have a positive impact on technology integration in classrooms (Al-Mashaqbeh,
2012; Weng & Tang, 2014). In a study of 203 teachers in Jordan, Al-Mashaqbeh (2012) found
that when administrators encouraged teachers to use technology and provided incentives for
effective technology use, ICT integration increased. Additionally, Weng and Tang (2014) found
that after studying 382 administrators from 82 elementary schools in Taiwan, those that
encouraged integration of technology and had efficacy with ICT had a much higher rate of
integration of technology among their teachers.
Furthermore, in a survey of representative schools in 26 countries, Pergrum (2001) found
that 19% of teachers surveyed stated that administrative support was a barrier to technology
integration and 17% stated that a lack of school board support was a barrier. Therefore, if
teachers fell that administration and school boards don’t prioritize and support technology
integration, they will not prioritize integration either and this will lead to decreased integration
(Pergrum, 2001). Also, according to the Second Information Technology in Education Study
(SITES) in 2006, where over 35,000 math and science teachers were surveyed from 22 different
TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

43
countries, administrative support was one of the most important factors influencing teacher
integration of technology (Law, Pelgrum, & Plomp, 2008).
Furthermore, it is important for leaders to value technology implementation and keep
consistent priorities regarding technology implementation (Hodge & Lear, 2007). In interviews
of 42 elementary and secondary teachers in five New York districts, Thornburg and Mungai
(2011) found that inconsistency in priorities and changes in leadership leading to changing
reform efforts had a significantly negative impact on teacher willingness to implement new
initiatives. This effect would be consistent with resistance to implement technology in
classrooms as well. If administrators are not consistent with their technology initiatives, teachers
are less likely to risk taking the time to implement the technology.
This leads to the second cultural model relevant to this study, teacher resistance to change
and resistance to learning how to utilize technology for instruction. Many teachers are resistant
to adopting new pedagogical and technology strategies and skills because of the time
commitment required to implement new technology (Cosmah & Seine, 2013; Hutchison &
Reinking, 2011). Teachers can also be resistant to implementing technology because of their own
lack of technology knowledge and skills (Angeli & Valanides, 2004). In a review of research
findings over the past twenty years, Mumtaz (2006) found that teachers’ resistance to learning
new strategies, especially in regards to technology, is a critical barrier to ICT integration into
classrooms. A qualitative study of teachers in Australia found that teachers may be resistant to
technology integration due to perceived anxiety about the risk involved in integrating technology
(Howard, 2013). In a mixed methods study of two schools in Australia, Howard (2011) also
found that if teachers have a negative affective response to technology, don’t feel comfortable
trouble-shooting technology issue, or feel that there is significant “risk” involved in a new tool or
TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

44
pedagogical method, they are more likely to be resistant to implementing technology in the
classroom.
In a review of literature on teacher technology integration, Ertmer and Ottenbreit-
Leftwich (2010) found that there are several possible reasons why teachers are resistant to
integrating new technology including the fact that technology changes constantly and thus
teachers may not want to spend the time to keep up with the constant influx of new technology
and skills needed to utilize it. The review also found that though many teachers believe
technology helps them complete everyday tasks, they do not feel it is important to integrate the
technology into instruction because of their lack of confidence using the technology tools and
teaching the skills to student and their lack of knowledge of the importance of integrating
technology (Ertmer & Ottenbreit-Leftwich, 2010). In a review of different technology adoption
theories, Straub (2009) found that resistance to technology integration is due a complex
combination of social, emotional, and knowledge factors. Teachers may show resistance to
integrating technology because of a lack of knowledge and skills with technology, lack of
efficacy with technology, social pressure, lack of time, or a variety of other influences, and these
need to be addressed before technology integration can be effectively undertaken or teacher
resistance will impede the process (Straub, 2009).
Table 4 provides information regarding the assumed organizational cultural model and
cultural setting influences.
Table 4 Organizational Influences

Assumed Organizational Influences

Cultural Model Influence 1:
The organization needs to provide ample technology professional development
TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

45

Cultural Model Influence 2:
The organization needs to encourage teachers to change their instructional practices.

Cultural Setting Influence:
The organization needs to provide teachers adequate time to attend professional development
opportunities and not miss excessive amounts of class time.

Conceptual Framework: The Interaction of Stakeholders’ Knowledge and Motivation and
the Organizational Context
The conceptual framework provides a visual and narrative representation of theories,
models, and concepts in order to provide a deeper understanding of the research and frame the
structure of the research study (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016; Maxwell, 2013). The conceptual
framework can use existing literature, personal knowledge and beliefs, exploratory research, and
thought experiments to guide the study and explain relationships between the stakeholder
influences (Maxwell, 2013). This, in turn, drives the research study, helping to focus research
questions, guide goal development and methodology, and inform analysis of the results
(Maxwell, 2013). Merriam and Tisdell (2016) describe the conceptual framework as a
compilation of information, drawn from the literature, that illustrates what will be studied, how it
will be studied, why it is necessary to understand, and what gaps exist in the current
understanding of the phenomenon.
While each of the potential knowledge, motivation, and organization influences were
previously represented independently of each other, I recognize that they do not exist in isolation
of each other. Instead, they perpetually interact, which forms the basis for my research question:
What is the interaction between the Beachside Unified School District organizational culture and
TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

46
context and teacher knowledge and motivation? The organizational culture and context influence
teacher knowledge, skills and motivation in a variety of ways. In the context of this study, I
examined teacher TPACK, technology skills and metacognition regarding integration, and self-
efficacy regarding technology instructional integration. Additionally, the influences were
investigated related to how they interact with the cultural settings regarding lack of adequate
professional development time and missed instructional time and the cultural models involving
inconsistent priorities and support and resistance to change.
Figure 1 below represents the relationship between the knowledge, motivational, and
organizational influences. In the figure, the large circle is the organization because it houses all
of the stakeholders and stakeholder influences. It also holds the organizational influences,
including the policies, culture, and norms. Within this larger circle is the smaller stakeholder
circle with the stakeholder knowledge influencers (TPACK, ICT Skills, metacognition) and
motivational influencer (self-efficacy). The stakeholder circle is inside the organization circle
because the organizational cultural setting interacts with the stakeholder knowledge and
motivational influences. Below this is the stakeholder goal that the organization is trying to
achieve by addressing these influences. The arrow represents the need for the organization to
support the teachers’ knowledge and motivation of technology integration in order to assure the
successful attainment of the district’s goal of 100% of teachers in cohort two increasing
integration of the aspects of TPACK into classroom instruction after successful completion of
the Tech Ready professional development program.

TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

47

Beachside Unified School District
Cultural Settings: Professional development time and missed
instructional time
Cultural Models: Support from administration and teachers’
resistance to change

By June 2018, 100% of BUSD teachers in cohort one will
effectively implement the different aspects of TPACK into
classroom instruction after completion of the Tech Ready
professional development program.
Teachers
Conceptual, procedural, and
metacognitive knowledge: TPACK, ICT
skills, and technology integration, self-
evaluation regarding technology
integration
Motivation: Self-efficacy regarding
technology instructional integration

Figure 1 Conceptual Framework
TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

48
The knowledge and skill influences comprise what a person needs to know in order to
meet his or her goals (Rueda, 2011). This dimension is comprised of different types of learning
that describe how knowledge is attained through the cognitive process (Krathwohl, 2002).
Understanding the different aspects of the knowledge dimension provide insights into how to
best meet the needs of learners and assure that they have the necessary resources to meet their
goals (Krathwol, 2002). Today’s teachers need to have capacity regarding knowledge and skills
in a variety of areas including pedagogical strategies, content knowledge, and technological
skills in order to adequately prepare students to be successful in the 21
st
century (Angeli &
Valanides, 2013). In order to accomplish this, several knowledge and skill influences must be
addressed, including teacher TPACK and the ability to effectively integrate technology into
instruction and utilize general technology resources. Additionally, teachers must self-evaluate
their own feelings regarding the importance of technology integration and any resistance to to
integrating technology.
In addition to knowledge influences, motivational influences must also be addressed.
Motivation consists of the factors that stimulate a person to begin working toward a goal and
persist in the goal directed behavior (Mayer, 2011). It is important to examine the motivational
influences related to a problem in order to understand the possible factors affecting the
organization and the stakeholder attainment of goals. Drawing from the literature, a possible
motivational influence affecting teacher attainment of the goal of completing the Tech Ready
professional development program involves self-efficacy motivational theory, which refers to the
beliefs that individuals have about their capability to perform tasks and attain specific goals
(Rueda, 2011; Pajares, 2006). Self-efficacy has been shown to influence persistence in
performing tasks (Rueda, 2011). Therefore, professional development should provide teachers
TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

49
the skills necessary to effectively use ICT tools and build efficacy regarding using ICT tools
within the classroom (Avidov-Unger & Ashet-Alkalai, 2014; Chai, Koh, & Tsai, 2010; Angeli &
Valanides, 2004).
These knowledge and motivational influences are impacted by the culture, policies,
procedures, and structures that exist in Beachside Unified School district (Rueda, 2011). All
organizations contain an organizational culture that is driven by the stakeholders associated with
the organization (Rueda, 2011). This culture consists of both cultural settings and cultural
models.
The cultural settings, or the visible, tangible aspects of organizational culture include
aspects such as policies and structures in place in the organization (Rueda, 2011). The cultural
setting influences that will be examined in this study include professional development time
constraints and missing instructional time. Cultural models also influence the stakeholders in an
organization. Cultural models consist of the shared understandings and beliefs within an
organization, and they can be sometimes invisible to the stakeholders (Rueda, 2011). In BUSD,
the cultural models examined are the support by the leadership and teacher resistance to change.
The conceptual framework attempted to unite the knowledge, skills, motivation, and
organizational components that influence the completion of the Tech Ready professional
development program by BUSD teachers. Teacher knowledge of TPACK and technology
integration, metacognition regarding technology integration, and self-efficacy was examined
through the lens of organizational influences including time constraints, inconsistent priorities
and support, and resistance to change. This framework linked these influences with the
stakeholder goals, supporting literature, and personal experiences, which is consistent with
Maxwell’s (2013) suggestions for creating a conceptual framework.
TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

50
Conclusion

Today’s teachers face enormous challenges attempting to effectively integrate technology
into instruction, while assuring that students master state standards and possess the skills
necessary to be college and career ready in a competitive, global economy. Teachers must
possess strong technological, pedagogical, and content knowledge (TPACK) in order to provide
content instruction, in an engaging and relevant way, while incorporating technology (Chai, Koh,
Tsai, 2010). Additionally, effective technological pedagogical skills encompass not only
knowledge of specific programs and devices, but also the ability to synthesize and think critically
about information, solve authentic problems, and communicate findings using a variety of
different media types in digital environments (Kivunja, 2015; Eshet-Alkalai, 2004). In order to
solve this problem, administrators must understand and address the knowledge, motivational, and
organizational influences and challenges facing teachers as they attempt to increase their TPACK
and successfully integrate technology into instruction. These influences include teacher
knowledge and understanding of the TPACK framework and effective technology integration
and ICT skills, and teacher efficacy with technology. Additionally, organizational influences
include teacher resistance to new pedagogy and content, as well as unclear priorities from
administration and a lack of professional development time.

TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

51
CHAPTER THREE: METHODS
Chapter One of this study described the importance of increasing teacher technological,
pedagogical, and content knowledge in order to assure that students are prepared to be successful
in today’s fast-paced, interconnected, global economy. As a smaller scale problem of practice,
this issue was then described in terms of the needs of the Beachside Unified School District and
its stakeholder groups, specifically in relation to the effectiveness of the Tech Ready professional
development program in addressing the problem. Chapter Two outlined the literature related to
the topics of TPACK, professional development, and knowledge, motivational, and
organizational influences on TPACK implementation. Chapter Three will now address the
research methods used to examine teachers’ knowledge and motivation after being engaged in
the Tech Ready professional development program. The specific research questions to be
addressed are as follows:
1. What are teachers’ TPACK knowledge, ICT skills, self-awareness, and self-efficacy
related to integrating aspects of TPACK into classroom instruction after successful
completion of the Tech Ready professional development program?
2. What are the interactions between professional development time constraints, missing
instructional time, and teacher resistance to change with teacher TPACK knowledge, ICT
skills, and self-efficacy regarding implementation of technology in the classroom?
3. What are the recommendations for organizational practice in the areas of knowledge,
motivation, and organizational resources?
Chapter Three will begin with a discussion of the participants for the study, who were
selected through purposeful sampling to produce maximum variation, as described by Maxwell
(2013). The qualitative research approach will then be discussed, including the sampling criteria
TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

52
and data collection strategies utilized, namely interviews and observations, and strategies for
document and artifact collection. This is followed by a description of the data analysis. Finally,
Chapter 3 will address the credibility, trustworthiness, and ethical considerations of the study as
well as possible limitations of the study.
Participating Stakeholders
The participants for this study were a sample of the Beachside Unified School District
teachers. Beachside Unified School District teachers have a large influence on the creation and
implementation of the district’s goals and action. All 136 teachers in the district are expected to
participate in yearly staff development opportunities and use current, research-based
instructional strategies. Furthermore, with the implementation of the District’s one to one device
program in 2016, BUSD teachers are expected to incorporate technology into their instruction on
a daily basis. Teachers are also expected to facilitate the students’ use of technology and
computer applications in the classroom, and therefore, are expected to be proficient in the use
and instruction of the technology and applications including Google Slides, Docs, and Sheets,
Haiku, and WeVideo. In order to achieve this, each year, a cohort of 30 teachers are expected to
complete the district’s Tech Ready professional development program. The first cohort of
teachers began the program in the fall of 2016 and the second cohort began the program in the
fall of 2017. Participation in the program was voluntary at the time of this study, however all
teachers will be expected to complete the program by the 2020-2021 school year.
This study used a qualitative approach, and this section will discuss the observation
sampling and interview sampling. The sample for the study was drawn from teachers that
participated in cohort one of the Tech Ready professional development program at Beachside
Unified School District. The participants were selected using purposeful sampling. Purposeful
TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

53
sampling is the deliberate selection of specific types of participants in order to provide more
relevant information that closely aligns to the research questions (Maxwell, 2013). The
participants were selected to provide maximum variation and thus provide the most accurate
representation of the entire range of the study population as well as provide triangulation to
increase validity (Maxwell, 2013).
For the study, there were four participants. The participants were selected from the list of
teachers that participated in cohort one of the Tech Ready program. These teachers represented a
variety of different grade levels and subject areas. This provided a variety of different
perspectives because it employed purposeful sampling for maximum variation. According to
Maxwell (2013) this type of sampling increases validity because it draws from a wide range of
the population and increases triangulation through specific focus on all different types of
participants.
Interview Sampling Criteria and Rationale
Participation in Tech Ready Program. All interview participants were part of the Tech
Ready program cohort one. These teachers participated in the professional development program
and had first-hand knowledge of the strengths and weaknesses of the program and the
knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences affecting teacher completion of the
program. Furthermore, these teachers had an entire semester after the completion of the program
to implement the TPACK strategies and create lessons to enhance student ICT skills.
Grade levels and Subject Areas. Participants were chosen so that they represented the
maximum variation in grade levels and subject areas. However, only core subject area teachers
were chosen to participate in the interviews. The sampling criteria were two elementary teachers,
one from primary grades (kindergarten through grade two) and one from upper grades (grade
TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

54
three through grade five), a middle school teacher and a high school teacher, from two different
core subject areas. Therefore, participants would represent a variety of grade levels and subject
areas. This would provide a widely varied sample of the different grade level and subject area
knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences regarding successful completion of the
Tech Ready program, including a deeper understanding of any variation in completion levels or
influences among different grade levels or subject areas. Table five shows the grades and subject
areas of each of the actual study participants. The elementary participants were both from upper
grades because the primary teacher dropped out of the study due to personal reasons before the
observations could be completed.
Table 5 Study Participants
Participant Years of Teaching
Experience
Grade Level(s) Subject Area(s)
Alex 5 3 Multiple Subjects
Carol 15 4 Multiple Subjects
Beth 7 7 Social Studies
Debra 12 10-12 Science

Teaching experience. The selection criteria for the participants was that they were to
have between five and twenty years of teaching experience, in order to assure that all teachers
had some experience in the classroom, but that there was a wide range of experience from newer
teachers to more veteran teachers in the sample. The teachers were also to have had no formal
technology training or certifications prior to starting the Tech Ready program. Table 5 shows the
teaching experience of each study participant. Two participants had between five and seven years
TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

55
of teaching experience and two teachers had between twelve and fifteen years of teaching
experience. Additionally, none of the teachers had any technology certifications or advanced
technology training before starting the program. This provided information regarding possible
differences in age and experience as they relate to completion of the program and KMO
influences.
Observation Sampling Criteria and Rationale
The observation sampling strategy was also purposeful. The participants were the same
teachers that participated in the interviews and thus were selected based on a specific set of
criteria as listed above, including participation in the program, teaching experience, and grade
level and subject area. This was meant to provide the maximum variation in participants and the
broadest range of different perspectives regarding possible knowledge, motivation, and
organizational influences on completion of the Tech Ready professional development program
and technology integration. In addition, I sought four participants because observations were
effectively and efficiently done with this small number of participants, requiring a feasible
amount of time for data collection and analysis. During the observations, the teachers were
observed providing lessons, interacting with students, modeling and using technology during
lessons, and working with the whole class, in small groups, and one on one with students.
The observations were conducted in the teachers’ classrooms so that they took place in
the same environment where I could see whether they have met the goal of integration of
TPACK into the classroom. I worked with the teachers and the school principals to gain access
to the classrooms to conduct the observations. I wanted the teachers and principal to be aware of
my research and the times when I was on campus in order to alleviate any uneasiness. By
observing teachers in their own classrooms, before the interviews, with the knowledge and
consent of the site principals, the observations yielded in depth information regarding the
TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

56
knowledge and organizational influences on teacher integration of TPACK and completion of the
Tech Ready program and they provided insights into teacher confidence using technology in
their classrooms.
Recruitment Strategy and Rationale
The participants were the same for the observations and interviews, and therefore the
recruitment strategy and the sampling criteria were the same. This provided triangulation of the
data because both the interviews and observations addressed the same sample and participants
(Maxwell, 2013). In order to recruit the participants, I solicited a list of Cohort 1 Tech Ready
participants from the Chief Technology Officer at Beachside Unified School District with grades
and subjects taught and years of teaching experience and determined teachers that met the
criteria outlined above. I then sent an email invitation to each participant that met the criteria
above with the purpose of the study and information regarding what their participation may
entail. The first teachers meeting the criteria to respond had a follow up personal meeting where
I further discussed the study, methods, and voluntary aspects of participation. Those participants
that agreed to participate were recruited as participants for the study. Once participants were
recruited, I informed the school administration that I would be observing several of their teachers
and provided the administrators information regarding the study and observation timeframes.
Qualitative Data Collection and Instrumentation
This study employed a qualitative research approach, utilizing interviews,
observations, and document analysis. Qualitative research design aims to explain a phenomenon
and provide meaning through collection and analysis of rich, descriptive, detailed data (Merriam
& Tisdell, 2016). Further, as explained by Maxwell (2013), the use of multiple, different data
collection methods allows for a broader examination of the phenomenon and the ability to study
TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

57
many different aspects contributing to the phenomenon. Interviews collect information regarding
the participants’ motivation, individual perspectives, and knowledge (Maxwell, 2013).
Additionally, observations provide information regarding the organizational setting and culture
as well as a more objective view of the participants’ knowledge. These observations provide a
first-hand examination of teacher integration of technology in classrooms. Finally, the document
analysis provides information regarding the setting and participants without intruding or possibly
altering the normal actions of the participants (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Utilizing all three
methods allowed for triangulation, where each method acted as a check to increase the validity of
the study and provided different strengths to compensate for limitations in the other methods
(Maxwell, 2013). The observations were done before the interviews in order to negate the
possibility of the interview questions changing the participants’ actions during the observations.
These participants represented a sequential sample because the participants were from the
observation group and were interviewed after the observations were completed (Johnson &
Christensen, 2014).
Observations
Observations allow for a firsthand account of the phenomenon being studied (Merriam &
Tisdell, 2016). Observations further provide direct, authentic insights that may not be provided
by participants during interviews (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). This provides more validity to the
qualitative research as it provides triangulation with the interviews and document collection
(Maxwell, 2013). In this study, each of the four participants were observed in their classrooms
for five to six, 50-75 minute observations. The secondary school observations were 55 minutes
each because that is the typical length of a class period at the middle and high school level. For
TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

58
elementary teachers, the observations were between 50 and 75 minutes depending on the length
of the lesson.
The observations were conducted before the interviews so that the participants were not
influenced by the interview questions. The observations were based on the conceptual
framework and focused on the integration of technology into instruction, including the types of
technology utilized, the students’ ICT skills, and the perceived confidence of the teachers in
regard to using the technology. The observations took place in each teacher’s classroom so that
the teachers were using their own technology with their own students, thus more accurately
reflecting the normal technology usage.
I conducted the observations as a “complete observer” (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
Although I have an extensive background and knowledge in technology and instruction, I did not
participate in the class so as to not influence the teacher’s use of technology or instructional
strategies (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016) I took written notes using the observation protocol in
Appendix B, and added any other information found to be important such as non-verbal cues,
expressions, movement around the classroom, and gestures.
Interviews
In this research study, a semi-structured interview protocol was employed. The interview
protocol contained the list of questions, but there was some flexibility to allow for follow-up
questions in order to provide more detailed responses (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Additionally,
the questions were asked in a generally consistent order, but there was also some probing, when
necessary, to allow for more detailed responses. Also, all questions were open-ended and
provided time for the participants to give as detailed of a response as they preferred. This
allowed for the respondents to provide their own unique viewpoints and allowed the researcher
TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

59
to delve deeper into answers that were unexpected or provided new insights into the phenomenon
(Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
The interviews were conducted one time with each of the participants, however, the
participants were told that they may be contacted later to provide clarification or follow-up to
interview answers. Two teachers participated in 15-minute follow-up interviews. The interviews
were audio-recorded and transcribed for each participant and took approximately 45-60 minutes.
238 total minutes of interviews were conducted during the study. Notes were also taken during
the interviews to capture the participants’ expressions, body language, pauses, and other nob-
verbal cues. The interviews were conducted at the school sites either during the teacher’s prep
period or immediately after school in order to be more convenient for the participants. The
interviews were held in a conference room at the school site, rather than in the teachers’
classroom, in order to decrease interruptions and provide a more neutral location with less
distraction. However, one interview had to be held in the classroom during the teacher’s prep
period as there were no other available rooms.
For this research study, the interviews were conducted following the classroom
observations in order to assure that the interview questions did not affect the participants’ actions
during the observations. The interview protocol used different types of interview questions in
order to stimulate the participants to provide general background knowledge first and more
detailed information regarding the program later in the interview (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). The
questions gained information regarding the teacher knowledge of TPACK and technology
integration strategies, as well as the teachers’ efficacy with technology integration, and the
teachers’ perceptions of the different cultural model and setting influences, including adequate
professional development, adequate support, time constraints, and possible feelings of resistance
TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

60
to incorporate new technology and instructional strategies. The interview protocol can be found
in Appendix A.
Documents and Artifacts
Several documents and artifacts were collected during this research project. Document
collection is useful because it does not influence participants or the setting the way that an
observer or interview questions may (Maxwell, 2013). Merriam and Tisdell (2016) define
artifacts as objects or things that provide meaning to the participants and documents as written,
visual, or digital media. For this study, deidentified examples of the “world-changer” projects
completed by the students were collected, as well as deidentified samples of student work
showing technology use. These samples included assignments and projects created with Google
Docs, Slides, and Sites, as well as examples of collaboration using Hangouts and examples of
student created videos. These samples provided authentic examples of technology integration
and the effectiveness of technology to enhance instruction.
Data Analysis
Data analysis is the process of making meaning out of data that is collected using various
methods such as interviews, observations, and document collection by organizing it in a way that
increases understanding and allows for it to be used to answer research questions (Creswell,
2014). I used the conceptual framework to drive both deductive and inductive analysis of the
results of the observations, interviews, and documents in order to provide possible answers to my
research questions.
Analysis of observation and interview data began during data collection. I documented
my thoughts in the form of analytic memos, written reflections and insights, and lists of further
questions after each observation and interview. I also documented any initial concerns or
TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

61
conclusions in relation to my conceptual framework and research questions, such as the addition
of coaching and gamification as a possible influencer, the lack of teacher’s mentioning loss of
instructional time or administrative support, and the focus of time and the learning curve as
major influencers.
All interviews were transcribed and coded using ATLAS.ti software. Observation notes
were also uploaded to ATLAS.ti for coding and analysis. A code table was created using both a
priori and emergent codes. These were then combined to form themes which made up the basis
for the findings section of the paper. I also analyzed documents and artifacts for evidence
consistent with the concepts in the conceptual framework in order to provide possible answers
for my research questions. However, the samples of student work and “World Changer” projects
provided only limited data because I was not able to observe the teachers actually teaching the
lessons that lead to much of these artifacts.
Credibility and Trustworthiness

Credibility and trustworthiness are important factors for any research, and they can be
increased through diligent focus on data collection, analysis, sampling, and interpretation
(Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Credibility focuses on internal validity of a study and is related to
whether the data is accurate and unbiased (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). In this study, I attempted
to increase internal validity through a variety of methods. Triangulation was used to assure that
the data was accurate. Observations, interviews, and document collection were used and these
multiple methods helped to assure that the limitations of each individual method were reduced by
comparing the data across all methods (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Additionally, a wide range of
participants was utilized in the study to provide additional a variety of different perspectives,
experience levels, and subject area knowledge. This decreased the bias possibly associated with
TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

62
just using teachers from one site, grade level, or subject area. Credibility was also be addressed
through rich data. The data collected through observations and interviews was very detailed and
descriptive, providing a broad description of the phenomenon.
As an insider in the organization with an extensive background in the research subject,
my perspectives, assumptions, and biases, may have influenced the research study. Merriam and
Tisdell (2016) argue that reflexivity is an awareness of the possible ways in which the researcher
influences the study and the ways in which the study influences the researcher. Additionally,
reflexivity is not about eliminating these biases and assumptions, but rather explaining them and
understanding them (Maxwell, 2013). Because I am an administrator in the district, I have an
insider’s point of view. Therefore, I had easier access to study participants and knowledge of the
background of the school sites and school staff. This provided me with knowledge that outside
researchers may not have had. This prior knowledge allowed me to make assumptions which I
attempted to triangulate with actual study data. Additionally, my knowledge and expertise in the
field of educational technology and curriculum and instruction provided me with insights into
why teachers may have used particular strategies. I attempted to support any of my own insights
with actual data from the research study as well. When I was not able to support assumptions and
conclusions with actual data from the study, I attempted to suspend my judgments in order to not
affect my findings with my own prior knowledge and experience. Conversely, the findings and
data from the study inevitably changed my views and added to my knowledge of TPACK, ICT,
and instructional strategies. As a researcher, I am aware of these possible biases and know that
they shaped parts of the research project. Also, as an instructional leader in the district, I had a
strong interest in improving the effectiveness of instruction and technology integration
throughout the district. This may have influenced my research, and therefore, I took steps to
TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

63
ensure that I remained objective including interviewing a variety of program participants and
recording their responses accurately.
Ethics
Many ethical considerations were incorporated into the plans for data collection for the
study in order to assure the well-being of my study participants, as well as maintain the
reliability and validity of my study (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Through the University of
California Institutional Review Board (IRB) process, the study was reviewed for adherence to
the university’s policies and guidelines for ethical considerations when working with human
participants in a mixed-methods study. These guidelines drove my methods and determined the
ways in which study participants were utilized (Rubin & Rubin, 2012).
For the qualitative portion of the research study, classroom observations and in-person
interviews were conducted with cohort 1 teachers. Although as the researcher, I was an
administrator in the district, I did not have a direct supervisory role over any of the research
participants. However, as an administrator, it is important that the participants knew that I would
not share identifiable information with other district administrators. Therefore, informed consent
forms were provided to all participants prior to the observations and interviews and strict
confidentiality will be upheld. As the interviews were audio recorded, I got permission to record
from all participants prior to beginning the interviews. All information regarding the study
participants was kept secure in a locked cabinet in order to ensure the privacy of the participants
(Glesne, 2011). Additionally, I did not discuss any specific responses from participants with
others, including principals or other supervisors. It was also important that the participants not
feel pressured to participate in the study and that participation was completely voluntary. When
eliciting informed consent, I explained to the participants that participation or non-participation
TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

64
would not affect their performance evaluations or any other aspects of their employment so that
they did not feel pressured to participate. Furthermore, participants were assured that they could
choose to answer or not answer any of the questions during the interview, as recommended by
Rubin and Rubin (2012).
I was also very open with all of the members of the district about my research project to
assure transparency and clear understanding of the goals and different aspects of the research.
However, I did not provide any specific information regarding individual participants or
responses to ensure confidentiality; only final findings were discussed publicly.
Limitations
There were several possible sources of validity threat in this research study. First, only
four of the thirty teachers who participated in the Tech Ready professional development program
were sampled. If all of the participating teachers had been part of the sample population, more
information regarding technology integration may have been compiled providing deeper insights
into the Tech Ready program. However, only four participants were chosen because of limited
time to collect data and the need to cause the least amount of classroom disruption during the
study. The four participants, though, were a good representation of the total population and
provided in-depth and thorough information. Additionally, the first cohort of teachers
volunteered for the program, and thus, the four teachers may have been composed of teachers
that were early adopters and who were more open to implementing new technology and
instructional methods. Therefore, they may have been qualitatively different from some of the
other teachers in the population. Also, the timeframe for the study was only two months.
Therefore, it was only a brief snapshot in time regarding the implementation of TPACK by
teachers. Although I was able to observe the four participants for four to six hours each, this
TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

65
amount of time might not completely illustrate their overall TPACK integration and the students’
ICT skills. In addition, the data collected through interviews illustrated teachers’ perceived
knowledge and motivation regarding technology, thus mush of the data does not show actual
knowledge and motivation, but rather perceived knowledge and motivation, which does not
completely answer the research questions. Additionally, the participants had prior knowledge of
the purpose of the observations and they may not have accurately represented the typical
technology use in their classrooms. This may have led to teachers using more technology during
the observations than they would normally use in order to show that they were using technology
effectively.

TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

66
CHAPTER FOUR: FINDINGS
Findings
In this section, the findings from the research study are discussed. The findings are
organized by research question and address the influences outlined in the conceptual framework.
These assumed influences were based on the Clark and Estes gap analysis model (2008) and
include knowledge, motivational, and organizational influences. The knowledge influences that
were included in the conceptual framework included declarative knowledge regarding the
different aspects of TPACK, procedural knowledge regarding technology implementation, and
metacognitive knowledge regarding teacher self-evaluation of technology implementation. The
motivational influence that was examined was teachers’ self-efficacy. Furthermore, the
organizational influences examined through the study include two cultural model influences,
adequate professional development time and missed instructional time, and two cultural setting
influences, support from administration and teachers’ resistance to change.
Though the above assumed influences were laid out in the conceptual framework, several
of the assumed influences were not shown to be actual influences according to the data collected.
First, teacher self-evaluation regarding technology implementation did not appear to be a
significant knowledge influence. In addition, all of the participants stated that the Tech Ready
program did not result in significant loss of instructional time, although two participants stated
that other professional development did impact their instructional time. Finally, none of the
teachers stated that they were resistant to change, and all seemed to embrace change and feel that
they were early adopters in regard to technology implementation. Therefore, some of the
influences in my conceptual framework did not match the actual findings from the data.
However, several other assumed influences did, at least in part, match the findings from the data.
TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

67
The findings in relation to research question one are knowledge findings - 1) there was a
perceived increase in teacher information and communication technology skills as a result of
participation in the Tech Ready program, 2) there was a perceived improvement in teacher
technological, pedagogical, and content knowledge (TPACK) as a result of participation in the
Tech Ready program, and 3) Teachers did not perceive self-reflection to have a significant
influence on TPACK or technology integration. Additionally, as it relates to teachers’
motivation -1) there was a perceived increase in teacher self-efficacy regarding TPACK and ICT
skills, and 2) there was a perceived increase in motivation to implement new technology in the
classroom as a result of the gamification incorporated into the Tech Ready program. In regards to
the interaction between the teachers’ knowledge and motivation and the organizational
influences, two findings will be advanced: 1) teachers reported a lack of coaching to improve
teacher self-efficacy, ICT skills, and TPACK, and 2) teachers reported that time decreased
motivation to implement technology and the ability to learn new ICT skills and learn TPACK
strategies. In the next sections, the findings, supported with data from the participant interviews,
observations, and examples of student work will be discussed. Additionally, assumed influences
that were not supported by the data will be addressed.
Research Question 1: What are cohort one teachers’ TPACK knowledge, ICT skills and
self-efficacy related to integrating aspects of TPACK into classroom instruction after
successful completion of the Tech Ready professional development program?
Knowledge Finding 1: There was a perceived increase in teacher information and
communication technology skills as a result of participation in the Tech Ready program.
Information and communication technology (ICT) refers to the specific technology used to
communicate learning and fulfill learning goals (Angeli & Valanides, 2004). It is important for
TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

68
teachers to understand how to use technology tools and how to teach students to use these tools
in order to increase the effectiveness of technology implementation (Almas & Krumsvik, 2008;
Angeli & Valanides, 2005). If teachers do not have adequate information and communication
technology skills themselves, they will not be able to teach students to use the ICT tools, and
thus technology implementation will not be successful for increasing learning. Therefore, it is
important for any technology professional development program to provide training to increase
teacher ICT skills. A common perception expressed by the participants in the study was an
increase in their knowledge of how to use technology tools as a result of the Tech Ready
Program. Additionally, all four participants felt that they did not have adequate professional
development regarding technology prior to the program, which made the Tech Ready Program
all the more needed. Debra stated,
Well, my technology use was basic, like this is a keyboard. I was uncomfortable even
with e-mails. I'm like, "Ooh, who's seeing this?" It basically was a glorified typewriter for
me. And it was kind of nice to be able to communicate with people that weren't sitting
next to me almost like a phone, but it's a text. So that was kind of nice, but it was really
minimal. I didn't do a lot of research or anything on the computer. So, now it's just ... It's
opened everything up.
Therefore, Debra felt that her use of technology before the program was very limited and not
used to support instruction. This is consistent with research from the National Center for
Education Statistics (2000) that found that almost 70% of American teachers do not feel that they
have adequate ICT skills to use technology for instruction, even though they are able to use
technology for personal activities. Despite this lack of prior exposure to technology, Debra said
the Tech Ready program “opened everything up.”
TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

69
Similarly, Beth stated that, “[Tech Ready] has really shaken me out of my comfort zone
and my ambivalence about technology. I use it much more in my classroom now, and way more
types of technology” implying also that she has increased the use of technology and her
knowledge of ICT tools. As with Debra, Beth alluded to not being comfortable with using
technology before her involvement in Tech Ready. This is demonstrated by her comment that the
program “has really shaken me out of my comfort zone.” The perceived increased use of
technology in her classroom seems to be linked to her involvement in the program.
Additionally, Carol stated that before the Tech Ready program her ICT skills were, “I
think maybe a four and then with [the Tech Ready program] and the technology and having to do
it, I've done more projects with it. Now it is maybe a 7.5.” Carol, therefore, had a significant
perceived increase in her ICT skills since completing the Tech Ready program. While Carol
didn’t mention comfort level, like Debra and Beth, Carol pointed to a change in her skill level.
The teachers’ ability to use the technology tools themselves and also teach students to use
the tools after completing the Tech Ready program was also apparent during observations.
During one observation of Alex’s class, she taught the students how to use Google Maps to
create a map of the California Gold Rush. During the class session, the following was observed:
Alex’s screen was shown on the three 80” monitors in the corners of the room, to
illustrate the steps for students. “Students, click on the nine dots and click on Google
Maps.” Now type in “Sutter’s Mill Replica.” All students quickly got to the Sutter’s Mill
Replica location on the map. “Now click ‘Add a label’ and label the point “Sutter’s Mill.”
The students followed the teacher’s instructions and labeled the point. Alex, quickly
walked around assuring that all students were able to add the point. “Okay, now add a
photo. You can use a photo from the internet. Alex then showed the students how to add
TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

70
a photo. Also, add a caption for the photo with your information about Sutter’s Mill”
Student, “What do I add?” Alex, “What is Sutter’s Mill?” Student, “Where gold was
discovered?” Alex, “Yes, you could say, ‘Sutter’s Mill was where gold was discovered
and the California Gold Rush was started.’ Now, add the rest of the points on your
handout to your map.” The students worked independently to add the rest of the points.
The only questions involved students asking if their pictures were good or their captions
were correct.
Students were instructed regarding how to use Maps, add points to their maps, add text and
pictures to the points, and how to find information regarding the various points on the internet.
The teacher was able to teach the elementary students all of these concepts and have them begin
working independently in less than 15 minutes. When asked about the Google Maps lesson in a
follow-up interview, Alex stated, “I had no idea that you could use Google Maps for more than
just getting places, but we did this activity during one of the trainings and I thought it would be a
great way to study the places involved in the California Gold Rush. And it was so engaging for
the kids and so easy to use.”
Another example of technology use occurred in the high school classroom. Debra had
student groups create wind turbines to study various physics concepts. Debra told the students to
create wind turbines, or windmills, using materials available in the classroom, including
cardboard, Styrofoam, plastic tubing, etc. She then showed one that a former class had created,
made of popsicle sticks and paper, and demonstrated how well it rotated in front of the fan. First
the students built prototypes to see which ones rotated faster when placed in front of a fan. Once
the groups completed their designs, Debra stopped the class to explain that they would then need
to take pictures and videos of the turbines with their phones. Debra instructed them to use
TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

71
WeVideo to create and edit the videos. The students appeared to already know how to use the
program, and Debra told me, “We have used WeVideo for several projects. I learned how to use
it during the first level of [Tech] Ready and was able to show them how to use it in just a few
minutes.” The students were then directed by Debra to upload pictures to Google Draw to create
blueprints of the designs. Debra quickly showed how to upload one student’s picture to draw on
the monitor in the front of the room, and illustrated how to create a blueprint. The student groups
followed the directions, and created their own blueprints. Then all of the information was
uploaded to Wiki as a completed project. Debra stated during her interview that all of the
different technology used during the wind turbine project, “was learned just this year in[Tech
Ready].” She stated, “I learned how to use WeVideo, Google Draw, and Wiki during [Tech
Ready], and I was totally able to teach it to the kids right away. It was like we were learning it
together and it was so easy once I realized I could do it… And the [Tech Ready] program helped
me so much with becoming more comfortable teaching how to use the technology” Therefore, in
one project, the students used multiple technology tools and the teacher was able to provide
assistance and instruction on the use of each tool thanks to, as she recounted, the Tech Ready
program having taught them to her recently.
In her interview, Debra corroborated the observational data and extended it to other
technology when she said,
I think specifically I'm utilizing more different types of technologies in terms of programs
that we're using. I mean, I just used to use Google Drive… So now my use of
technologies I think is more varied. Like I had never used Quizlet before. And the kids
love Quizlet Live. So, I'm using more different technologies than I was before.
TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

72
The Tech Ready program provided teachers with knowledge and skills regarding a vast array of
different technologies and technology programs to use with students to support instruction. All of
the participants stated that the Tech Ready program increased the variety of ICT tools that they
used with students. This is important, because students need to be able to effectively utilize a
wide variety of ICT tools, including different digital media, in order to be considered digitally
literate (Trilling and Fadel, 2009; Eshet-Alkali, 2004). Additionally, throughout the observations,
the teachers were using a variety of ICT tools including Google Docs. Google Sites, Google
Slides, Pear Deck, WeVideo, Quizlet, Wiki, and FlipGrid. Therefore, following completion of
the Tech Ready program, teachers were observed to have knowledge of a vast répertoire of
different technology tools available to use for instruction.
In addition to knowing how to use a variety of technology tools, teachers must also know
what tools to use for specific activities and how to implement the tools in order to be effective,
which is difficult because of the sheer volume of available ICT tools (Angeli & Valanides,
2004). Therefore, it is important for professional development programs to expose teachers to
different ICT tools, illustrate how each tool benefits learning, and instruct teachers to use the ICT
tools in their specific content area (Kramarski & Michalski, 2010; Almas & Krumsvik, 2008). A
common theme expressed by all of the participants was the perceived effectiveness of the Tech
Ready program in providing them with the knowledge of which ICT tools to use for what types
of activities. Alex expressed,
So the [Tech Ready] program helped me with using different websites, and there are still
ones that are on my list that I didn't get to. But it can be overwhelming. But I think if you
can pick the right tool for the project for whatever I'm teaching, it can have a good effect.
And the [Tech Ready] program definitely helped me to be able to pick out the right tech
TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

73
tool for each job... I mean, Google Hangouts for collaboration or Google Docs,
depending on the activity… [Tech Ready] has taught me when to use things like
Peardeck for assessment or Kahoot, or a more formal online test.”
The program provided Alex with the knowledge to be able to pick the right tools for the activity
she was using them for. This was corroborated when observing her classroom, as she used a
variety of different technology tools throughout each of the six observations and the tools she
used enhanced the instruction and appeared to increase student engagement and understanding.
During one observation, Alex had the students broken up into five groups. Each group was
completing a different task using different technology tools in a station rotation activity. The
technology used for each activity, including Google Slides, Pear Deck, Spelling City, and
Google Docs, were well suited to increasing student learning and the students were actively
engaged in each activity. For example, one group was using Google Slides to create a
presentation regarding a historical figure. The students were finding information regarding their
figure on the internet and in their textbooks, and adding images to the slides. Another group was
working on a Google Doc to define and write sentences regarding vocabulary terms, with images
to add visuals. A third group was using the program “Spelling City” to practice spelling, which
included auditory, visual, and text illustrations of the spelling words. All of the groups were
actively engaged and the activities seemed to effectively allow the students to practice different
learning using appropriate tools. The rotations seemed to effectively allow students to complete
activities, learn and practice new material, while allowing Alex to work in a small group
providing direct instruction regarding figurative language. Therefore, Alex was able to identify
which specific ICT tools were appropriate for specific student activities and use technology for
TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

74
independent practice, allowing for differentiation to meet different students learning needs,
including visual, audio, and text.
The Tech Ready program also provided teachers with a broader variety of ICT tools to
use for evaluating and assessing student work. Alex discussed the changes in the way she
assessed students, “A product doesn't always have to be a paper or even a slideshow, it can be a
visual or a recording.” Alex started using a variety of technology tools to assess what students
learned and was able to determine which technology tools were the most appropriate for
illustrating specific student learning goals and for meeting individual student needs and
differentiating instruction and assessment. Similarly, Carol also discussed how she used
technology to evaluate student learning through the use of student websites for illustrating their
work:
So we currently do a Google website and they add information to every section of their
notebook. It's a synopsis, a summary of the content that we've done per unit. Then they
put that in, so I'm seeing and evaluating what they've learned.
The student websites contained written work, student created videos, pictures, and student
drawings for the teacher to evaluate to assess each student’s understanding of the concepts
learned. Therefore, students in Carol’s classroom used a variety of different technology tools to
illustrate their learning. Additionally, the work was differentiated to allow for different student
needs and learning styles. Carol further stated, “Using the website allows me to see what they are
able to do in a way that lets them pick how they want to show their learning. It is so much more
meaningful for them.” Therefore, the teacher was able to select appropriate technology tools for
each learning goal and evaluate the student work through the use of the student websites.
Therefore, there was both a perceived increase in ICT knowledge, as well as early signs of actual
TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

75
increases in procedural knowledge is ICT as demonstrated by their appropriate use of technology
during observations following completion of the Tech Ready program.
Knowledge Finding 2: There was a perceived improvement in teacher technological,
pedagogical, and content knowledge (TPACK) as a result of participation in the Tech ready
program. The participants in the study expressed a variety of perceived changes in their
technological, pedagogical, and content knowledge (TPACK) because of their participation in
the Tech Ready program. Angeli and Valanides (2013) found that teachers not only needed to
know how to use technology, but also how to transform their content and pedagogy with ICT to
effectively integrate technology into the classroom to support student learning. In addition,
teachers must have the ability to combine all three types of knowledge - content, pedagogy, and
technology, in order to effectively integrate new technologies into their classrooms (Avidov-
Unger & Eshet-Alkalai, 2014). The participants in the study expressed that the Tech Ready
program had improved not only their knowledge of technology tools, but also their pedagogical
strategies. Changes in the content presented to the students and the pedagogical strategies used as
a result of the use of technology were also observed during instruction as well as discussed by
the participants in the interview responses.
Theme 1: The Tech Ready program changed the pedagogical strategies teachers used.
The participants in the study all expressed that the knowledge they gained in the Tech Ready
program changed their pedagogy. The teachers used different strategies to teach concepts to
students using technology than they had previously used. One of the pedagogical strategies that
the Tech Ready program changed that was expressed by all participants was the way in which
they provided feedback. All of the participants stated that the new technology they were using
increased their ability to give frequent and timely feedback to students. Debra expressed that she
TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

76
liked the Apps that they learned about for formative assessments, such as Quizlet and Peardeck.
She stated that she could use the information to alter her instruction immediately, rather than,
“waiting until after the test when it was really too late.” In other words, the technology allowed
her to get just in time data about her students’ understanding, thus shaping her instruction.
Alex also agreed that technology changed her feedback. He stated,
Instant feedback has been huge, as far as using Illuminate for online testing and other
formative assessment apps that we learned about. For students, parents, and as myself, as
a teacher, obviously, they like when they take a test online and see how they do right
away… We can go back and look and see if they did miss something that moment in time
when it is still fresh in their minds.
The online assessments allow for timely feedback regarding student performance and the online
assessment Apps provide quick feedback to inform instruction. Beth also described the use of
technology to provide feedback regarding writing to students in a more meaningful and
collaborative fashion. Beth stated,
I think one of the things that [the Teach Ready program] has made me realize is that there
are more things that I can do online, so for example every year I have my students write
down on an essay scorecard, so we go through their essay. We grade them while they're
sitting next to me. They go back and write down their strengths, their weaknesses, what
they want to work on next time. However, now we do this online with a spreadsheet so
that students can keep it in the folder and refer back to it. Also, I can collaborate with
them right through Google Docs, as they are working on it. It is much more timely
feedback that they can keep from paper to paper.
TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

77
The teacher used technology not only to provide summative feedback on student essays, but also
formative feedback collaboratively as students were working on the essays. As she said “I can
collaborate with them right through Google Docs, as they are working on it” recognizing that this
made her feedback “timely.” Therefore, using online assessment and formative assessment Apps
that teachers learned in the Tech Ready program changed the pedagogical strategies that the
teachers used for assessment and feedback.
The Tech Ready program also influenced the way teachers presented material and
provided guided and independent practice. Classroom observations revealed that all of the
teachers used Google Slides and Video to present information to students. However, Alex also
used Google Maps and Google Sites to present information to students during two of her
observations. Additionally, two of the teachers also discussed how the technological and
pedagogical strategies and tools that they learned through the Tech Ready program have allowed
them to use a more “flipped” classroom approach, where students were using technology to
facilitate their own learning through inquiry and also teaching each other. This corresponds to
findings from Eshet-Alkali (2004) that students that learn using a variety of technology tools and
digital media show increased digital literacy. Additionally, it is consistent with Kuvits and
Kurvits’s (2013) findings that students that learn through inquiry using technology perceive
higher levels of problem-solving, critical thinking, and communication skills. In support of this,
Alex stated,
I guess in the past, you would just kind of sit around, it’s a lot more direct instruction in
the past. And now, it’s a lot more flipped. Just that sharing of information. I can say here
is the topic we are learning about, I want you to research it. Here are the sites and sources
TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

78
that you can use. And the kids are able to find usually the same information that I want
them to find, but they learn it so much better because they are researching it themselves.
Whereas, before the Tech Ready program, Alex used a more direct, teacher-centered form of
instruction, she changed to a more student-centered, inquiry-based approach. This is consistent
with Kivunja’s (2015) findings that students are able to increase their critical thinking and
problem-solving skills when they are able to use technology to bridge online research with other
forms of instruction. This further increases their understanding of concepts because it allows
them to make connections between “multimodal texts of the 21st century” (p.166). Furthermore,
this type of “flipped” learning where technology aided inquiry is used to allow students to make
their own meaning and find their own information, has been shown to increase student
engagement and students’ ability to solve authentic, real-world problems (Tucker, 2014; Kurvits
& Kurvits, 2013). Therefore, the perceived increased TPACK that the teachers learned as a result
of the Tech Ready program led to an increased use of technology to enhance instruction and
provide a “flipped” learning experience.
Several teachers also stated that the Question Formulation Technique (QFT) that they
learned as part of the Tech Ready program really changed the way they used inquiry in the
classroom. Alex stated that one of the best pedagogical learning experiences she had as part of
the Tech Ready program, “wasn’t really about tech use, it was the QFT training.” Rather than
determining the questions that drive the learning themselves, the teachers had the students
determine their own questions and find their own answers, both with and without technology.
During an observation of Alex’s classroom, the students were asked to determine their own
questions about what would be necessary to survive in different situations. Once the students
determined their own questions, they began researching the answers using three different texts,
TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

79
as well as research on several internet sites. The teacher told the students to open their
Chromebooks and to take out their notes from “Island of the Blue Dolfin,” as well as two other
informational handouts on survival. She instructed them to write five questions regarding what
they would need to survive in the locations they had previously chosen, and then to use the
sources, including the internet to answer the questions. The students used this information to
write an informational essay regarding survival skills using Google Docs. In her interview, Alex
also elaborated about the effectiveness of this technique for improving student learning and
engagement. Alex stated that the QFT “really gets them actively thinking about a concept. You
want them wondering because that’s how they learn and get excited about learning.” Here, Alex
recognized that student-centered approaches increase students’ interest in the content and
positively influence their learning.
Carol also expressed that the Question Formulation Technique was beneficial in her
classroom. Carol used the pedagogical technique during an observation where the students were
learning about the Renaissance. Carol instructed the students to write three questions on different
Google Slides regarding Renaissance paintings that she showed on the monitors. The students, in
groups of four, were then instructed to use their books and the internet to answer the questions
using text and images on the Google Slides. These were shared with the teacher and projected on
the monitors while the students presented their findings to the class. Carol, therefore, used both
the QFT and Google Slides to provide an engaging, inquiry-based learning experience for her
students, where they used technology to research information and present their findings to the
class.
Therefore, several pedagogical shifts, including the QFT and the flipped classroom
pedagogical strategies and changes in the way feedback was provided, were implemented by
TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

80
teachers to improve instruction following the Tech Ready program. Teachers were shown to
have a perceived increase in their TPACK and use of ICT skills after completion of the Tech
Ready professional development program.
Theme 2: The Tech Ready program changed the content teachers taught in their
classrooms. Two of the participants in the study perceived a change in their content knowledge
and the content they presented to students because of the Tech Ready program. Koh, Chai, and
Tsai (2012), in their study of 455 practicing teachers in Singapore, found that effective TPACK
professional development programs had a significant impact on teacher content knowledge and
content instruction. Therefore, the teacher perceptions may suggest that the Tech Ready program
had a positive impact on the content teachers are teaching, however further, longitudinal research
is needed in this area. At the very least, it can be asserted that participants perceived an increase
in content knowledge thanks to the Tech Ready program. For example, Carol discussed how the
Tech Ready program not only increased her knowledge of ICT tools, but also how her TPACK
increased, especially her technological content knowledge.
I would say we still use [technology] a lot. I think now I'm just kind of using
[technology] differently. We would be on the computer a lot, but I feel like now there's
more of a purpose to different projects that we're doing. It's not just as a, a computer isn't
a tool for printing a final project or doing some math practice. Now there's those
connections being made. We are able to tie our content into real-world issues.
This teacher felt that her use of technology became more purposeful and provided experiences
for students that helped them make connections while learning specific content. Without training
teachers how technology can help to make those connections, the availability of technology
alone won’t give them TPACK. Rather, more likely than not, teachers will use a computer
TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

81
simply for “printing out a final paper.” This is consistent with Kramarski and Michalski (2010),
who found that teachers needed training in order to have enough knowledge of ICT tools to
adequately use it to teach content-specific material.
In another example, Carol was able to take the content that the class was learning about
the Gold Rush and add in real world examples of a gold rush that was happening in the world at
the time of the instruction. This authentic learning changed the content so that it incorporated
present day examples to meet the content standards. The teacher also expressed that she felt that
this increased student engagement, and as a result increased student learning. Carol stated that,
“the real-world examples of the gold rush in Ghana allowed the kids to actually see the social
effects of this type of situation. They could actually see how kids they were talking to over
Hangouts could be affected by the rush in their country. Kids their own age were having to work
in mines.” She went on to state, “by using technology, the student could actually talk to student
in Ghana and understand first-hand what happens during these types of events. It made them
really engaged in the material we were learning.” Carol’s comment that it gave students “first-
hand” understanding speaks to the power of technology to teach content in a different, more
meaningful way. Therefore, the ability to use technology to talk to students in another country
and research current issues changed the content that the teacher presented to the students and
teachers argued that this increased student engagement.
While Carol explicitly stated that technology facilitated a change in the content she was
teaching, others didn’t attribute content changes to increased use of ICTs. For example, Beth
stated, “I don’t really think the content has changed. I mean the standards are still the standards.
Everything else is the same.” However, some of her other statements and the observations of her
classroom clearly illustrated that her content knowledge had increased and the content she was
TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

82
teaching the students had changed after completion of the Tech Ready program. Later in the
interview, Beth stated,
I think I feel like we amplified the standards that we already being taught before the
[Tech Ready] program. I found new examples to use in lessons from sites that we learned
about in the program. I also learned more about resources for citing sources and research.
So now I'm teaching them how to especially cite their sources, not just gather information
but, "Where did you find it? Is it a relevant source? And then how do you cite the
information that you're gathering?
By saying “we amplified the standards” and “so now I’m teaching them how to especially cite
their sources” Beth demonstrated that there was, in fact, new content being taught in the post-
Tech Ready classroom. Therefore, although Beth may not have felt that she explicitly learned
new content during the Tech Ready program, and subsequently taught this content to her
students, she did learn new content to present to the students such as that associated with citing
sources and researching information. Additionally, during one observation, she was showing the
students several examples of leaders, artists, and artwork in a Google Slides presentation that
were not available in the adopted curriculum, which she stated she found through several sites
for finding primary sources that she learned about in the Tech Ready program. During the lesson,
Beth showed pictures of Michelangelo, Raphael, and Donatello, along with various artwork from
each. She also showed several pictures from her own visit to Europe of artwork from the Louvre
and the Sistine Chapel. This use of technology added real-world examples and visual
representations to the content of the Renaissance. Therefore, the perceived increase in
technology use following the Tech Ready program changed the content that teachers taught in
TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

83
some of their lessons, which provides support for the assumption that the Tech Ready program
increased teacher TPACK in the areas of technology and content.
Although perceived increases in TPACK and ICT were discussed by all participants in
the interviews, and TPACK and ICT skills were observed during classroom observations
indicating early evidence of increased teacher knowledge, actual increases could not be
determined based on the data, as there was no data collected before the participants completed
the Tech Ready program. All findings, therefore, are based on teacher perceptions or
observations made after completion of the Tech Ready program. Additionally, not all of the
technology strategies and TPACK skills taught in the Tech Ready program were observed or
discussed by the participants. Therefore, some of the Tech Ready program training may not be
effectively translating to classroom implementation and should be examined for effectiveness in
future research. These include training on Excel and Sheets, iMovie, Scratch, and Screencastify.
Knowledge Finding 3: Teachers did not perceive self-reflection to have a significant
influence on TPACK or technology integration. Though several interview questions involved
metacognition, teachers did not appear to find this to be something that influenced their
knowledge regarding TPACK or ICT skills. Even after probing two of the teachers through
follow-up interviews, teachers did not express that reflective practices were a substantial part of
their technology integration process. Two teachers did state that they used feedback from
students to modify their technology use. Debra stated,
I give the students exit surveys after major projects to see what projects were more
successful for them, personally and in general, what projects had the most engagement…
how easy it was to use the technology and how they used it to in their projects. Then I
take the feedback and make adjustments and try to make them better… Like getting rid of
TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

84
some of the tech that really doesn’t help with engagement and just makes things more
difficult.
Debra used the reflections from the students to alter her instruction, however, she did not
perceive this as being self-reflection. She expressed that her students reflected on their learning
through the exit surveys, but even when specifically asked if she used reflective practices herself
when she was learning and integrating new technology, she said, “I really don’t have enough
time to really reflect on how to change the way I use technology. It wasn’t really part of the
program, and we were always like go, go, go, so I just used what we learned and did the
activities.”
Carol also discussed ways that she used feedback from students to adjust her teaching.
Carol stated,
With technology you have to be really aware of what kids are doing. I mean, if you are
using a new app or a new program and you look around and you see everyone struggling,
and kids are telling you afterwards that it didn’t help or that it was too hard to use, you
have to be able to change the way you use it in the future or just scrap it all together. I
mean I guess that’s reflection, like hearing the feedback from the kids and changing your
teaching or the tech you use based on the feedback.
Therefore, Carol did not feel that she was reflecting on her own learning, but instead using the
students’ reflections about the lesson to inform her practice. Although Carol did not explicitly
think of this behavior as self-reflecting, she was using the feedback from the students to help her
learn ways to improve her pedagogy and create more meaningful activities for the students.
Carol also stated that self-reflection was not part of the training she received in the Tech Ready
program. “We didn’t actually have to do any reflection as part of the program. It wasn’t
TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

85
something that was actually incorporated into the game, but it probably would have been good to
have.” Therefore, since self-reflection was not explicitly part of the program, teachers did not
perceive that they did any self-reflection while participating in the Tech Ready program or
completing the activities or trainings. Furthermore, they did not perceive that they participated in
self-reflective practices when implementing technology in their classrooms.
In addition, during the observations, the teachers were not observed using reflective
practices or modeling reflective practices when implementing technology to teaching technology
use. However, reflection aids in meaning-making and is essential for learning (Rodgers, 2002).
Therefore, there may be a gap in the teachers’ metacognitive knowledge and this could lead to
difficulty learning technology and integrating it effectively. More emphasis should be placed on
reflective practices and modeling self-reflection in the Tech ready program in order to assure that
teachers are increasing the metacognitive knowledge and their ability to make meaning of the
technology integration processed and TPACK.
Motivational Finding 1: There was a perceived increase in teacher self-efficacy
regarding TPACK and ICT skills. Self-efficacy can influence teachers’ acceptance of or
resistance to increasing TPACK, ICT skills, overall implementation of technology in the
classroom. Mayer (2011) found that when individuals have high self-efficacy, they are more
likely to begin tasks, persist at them, and expend high amounts of effort to complete them.
Additionally, when teachers feel efficacious about their own technological and pedagogical
skills, they are more likely to integrate technology into their instruction, have more positive
experiences when using technology, and also have a higher perception of their own TPACK
(Angeli & Valanides, 2004; Chai, Koh, & Tsai, 2013).
TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

86
A common perception expressed by the all four participants in the study was an increase
in self-efficacy regarding technology implementation after completion of the Tech Ready
program. Of the four teachers interviewed, all expressed that they had increased self-efficacy
with technology following completion of the tech ready program. For example, Carol stated,
[The Tech Ready Program] just gave me a little more courage, and just a willingness … I
feel less intimidated by it. So, yes, I think it has given me a greater confidence. It’s made
me more willing to try new things in my classroom. For example, creating a website. I
have never created a website, except for Haiku. And now my students and I are creating a
website together.
Carol felt that the Tech Ready program increased her confidence and efficacy with trying new
technology with her students, such as creating a webpage, with little previous experience. After
the Tech Ready program, she was also more willing to try new technology tools because she had
increased confidence in her ability to implement them with her students.
Another example of increased teacher self-efficacy was discussed by Debra. She said,
[Tech Ready] definitely increased my confidence. And then also my willingness to just
kind of muck around with the kids because showing them that I didn't have it all figured
out allowed them to also be okay with that, that they didn't have to know the answers.
And then, for example, I tried a Google Hangout with another school, and it kept freezing
and being glitchy, and we were like, "Uh, you know, that’s technology sometimes", and
the kids were really good at just the whole process not being perfect. And I thought this is
a really good example of that "Hey, we're still learning here," even if it's not perfect. And
so, I think, it definitely increased my confidence in just having the kids be there, kind of
muck around. It also helps with their confidence and their willingness to just jump in and
TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

87
muck around and try new things. So, yes, it has increased my confidence using
technology, and also my kids’ confidence.
After the program, Debra had both greater self-efficacy with technology, but also an increased
willingness to try new technology tools as well. When there is a lack of self-efficacy, individuals
aren’t willing to take risks and then to persist in the tasks at hand. In contrast, Debra’s statement
showed that the program gave her the space and courage to “muck around” and despite not being
perfect, she confidently took risks and modeled the same behavior with her students. In addition,
Debra’s response illustrates not only that the Tech Ready program had a perceived positive
impact on teacher self-efficacy regarding technology, but also on student self-efficacy. Teachers
and students were working together on authentic uses of technology, such as Google Hangouts,
and learning to be more comfortable with technology. This corresponds to what Angeli and
Valanides (2013) discovered in their research that when individuals have practical experience
incorporating technology into lessons, they are more confident using technology in the future.
Therefore, the learning experiences that were part of the Tech Ready program encouraged
teachers to use technology in their classrooms and in turn, increase teacher self-efficacy
regarding technology implementation.
Motivational Finding 2: There was a perceived increase in motivation to implement
new technology in the classroom as a result of the gamification incorporated into the Tech
Ready program. A motivational influence that was found through the research, but was not part
of the original motivational influences in my conceptual framework, was the influence of
gamification on increasing technology implementation. The Tech Ready program had a
component of accountability that was achieved through gamification of the professional
development activities. Teachers had to post evidence of completion of trainings as well as
TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

88
implementation of technology onto the “Alludo” site that was visible to all participants in order
to earn “Rocket Fuel” and move to the next level. As such, the Tech Ready program used a game
to engage the teachers.
Research has shown that gamification can increase motivation and engagement when
used as part of a technology professional development program. In a study of professional
development programs for 1:1 iPad use, Like (2013) found that gamification increased teacher
engagement, as well as persistence and positive attitudes toward technology implementation. In
addition, in a study of pre-service teachers, Tsay, Kofinas, and Luo (2018) found that those that
participated in an information technology-based gamified professional development program had
significantly higher performance than those that participated in the non-gamified, traditional
delivery program. Furthermore, they found that engagement significantly increased in the
gamified program over the traditional program. When studying nursing students, Castro and
Goncalves (2018) found that the use of gamification when teaching ICT skills increased
motivation and engagement and also was shown to foster soft skills such as research and
collaboration. This suggests that gamification increases engagement and overall success of
technology professional development programs.
The findings from the literature were corroborated with the participants in this study. All
of the participants commented that the gamification aspect of the Tech Ready program increased
their motivation to implement the skills and knowledge they acquired through the program.
Because they gained a reward, “Rocket Fuel” for each training completed and piece of evidence
of implementation, they were more likely to implement the new technology in their classrooms.
For example, Debra stated,
TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

89
Having that accountability through the game. If you would have just told me about this
website, okay maybe I'll try, maybe I won't. Okay, I get points for it, it's part of the
program, I should try it out. And then how can I make it fit with what I'm already
teaching, how can I use it in my classroom? I feel like that's made it doable for sure.
There was a few things that were, I would have never thought about before. Knowing
that I would get rocket fuel for trying it, made me much more likely to try.
Without the game element, it is likely that Debra wouldn’t have tried some of the things being
taught in the Tech Ready program. It’s only through exposure that individuals learn something
new. So in this case, the accountability that was embedded in the game encouraged Debra to try
things that she “would have never thought about before.”
The gamification and reward aspect of the program increased teacher motivation to try
new technology in their classrooms. Alex stated that she “felt the gamification” and “posting
evidence publicly to receive rewards really motivated me to try new technology” and implement
what she was learning in the program. She “thought that the gaming format really pushed” her.
Beth also expressed how the gamification aspect of the program increased her motivation, by
saying,
It's made me less wary of trying new things. Every time that I use something new, it
shows me how engaging it is for the kids. And I mean, the whole concept of gamification
is huge with these kids. And for me too. I mean, I wanted to finish level one. And I
wanted to get all the points. And I wanted to be the top person. And I was for a while
until … knocked me out. So I get it. And so I just think that there's a lot there. So I think
in terms of student engagement, it's definitely shown me what a difference it can make
there for sure.
TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

90
Alex recognized that gamification is engaging for children and adults alike, saying “I wanted to
finish level one. And I wanted to get all the points.” This is consistent with Castro and
Goncalves’s (2018) findings that incorporating gamification into technology professional
development increases engagement and motivation. Therefore, the evidence illustrates that
through a gamified approach towards technology professional development, teacher engagement
was increased and learning may have been the positive result of this engagement. These findings,
therefore, illustrate that the Tech Ready program had a perceived effect on increasing self-
efficacy and motivation of the participants for implementing technology in the classroom, as
discussed in the first research question and conceptual framework.
Research Question 2: What are the interactions between professional development time
constraints, missing instructional time, and teacher resistance to change with teacher
TPACK knowledge, ICT skills, and self-efficacy regarding implementation of technology in
the classroom?
Finding 1: Teachers reported a lack of coaching to improve teacher self-efficacy,
ICT skills, and TPACK. Instructional coaching can be an effective way to increase teacher
learning and implementation of new instructional strategies, as it allows both the coach and the
teacher to deeply examine the subject-matter and collaborate ways to increase effectiveness of
implementation, often with real-time reflection and feedback (Desimone & Pak, 2017).
Additionally, sustained coaching provides practice with feedback as well as reinforcement to aid
in understanding and motivation (Dysart and Weckerle, 2015). All of the participants in the study
expressed that the most beneficial aspect of the Tech Ready program was the coaching that they
received in the first two levels. The teachers stated that the coaches not only provided knowledge
TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

91
and skills for implementing the different aspects of the program, but also feedback, motivation,
and encouragement. Beth expressed,
The coach was really great because, again you got that immediate feedback, and it was
from somebody who’s in the education world… so they really understood, “Hey this is a
big deal that you took your time and did this.” The coaches really provided not only like
feedback on the lessons, but also encouragement to keep trying new things.
Beth felt that the coaching was an important factor in motivating her to try new things and also to
provide feedback on her lessons. The coaching, therefore, had a perceived positive influence on
motivation to implement new technology in the classroom.
Debra also expressed that the coach was, “the person I benefitted the most from.” Hence,
Debra felt that the coach was a very important facet to the program. She went on to state, “[the
coach] was hugely helpful in my being able to navigate all of the stuff we were learning in the
[Tech Ready] program.” Debra also explained, “It was great being inspired by others willing to
be a coach and just be there to listen. They were inspiring and could help with specific issues I
was having in a positive way.” The coaches were able to tailor the feedback and support directly
to the individual teachers’ needs and also provide one-on-one feedback and encouragement.
Debra perceived the coach to be important for motivating or inspiring her, as well as for helping
her to complete the various requirements of the program by providing specific advice and
feedback. Debra’s perceptions were consistent with Powell and Diamond (2013), who assert that
a coach can be beneficial for tailoring professional development to each teacher’s specific needs,
skills, knowledge, and classroom environment. In this way, the coach can be effective for
providing individualized support for technology integration and teacher TPACK.
TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

92
All of the participants also expressed their displeasure at the lack of coaching during the
later levels of the program. The teachers felt that this left them on their own and made it more
difficult to implement what they were learning in the Tech Ready program. Carol responded,
“Level 3 was much more on your own, and I kind of wish there was a bit more of someone
checking in a providing more support.” She went on to say,
It would have been nice to at least have a check-in with a coach… I liked having that
feedback. “Hey this is really awesome what you’re doing.” Our coach would even come
in and watch lessons and give advice. I wish we could have kept that throughout the
whole program.
Carol felt that the coaches were an integral part of her successfully completing the program and
implementing the learning in her classroom. Even less time intensive “check ins” would have
been sufficient for Carol, which speaks to the importance Carol attributed to this aspect of the
program. This is consistent with Kopcha (2012), who found that coaching lead to positive
attitudes toward technology implementation and more effective resolutions to technology
implementation issues. However, the loss of the coaches for the second part of the program did
seem to have negative perceived effects on the effectiveness of the trainings and the motivation
and efficacy of the teachers, as relayed by the participants during their interviews.
The coaches were also important for providing feedback on the various assignments that
the teachers turned in as evidence of completion of the different aspects of the programs. In the
later levels of the program, when the coaches were no longer provided, there was no feedback
given. This made it more difficult for the teachers to know whether they were being successful
and to get advice on things to change to improve implementation. Beth stated, “At the end we
didn’t have a coach, so I was turning in assignments and getting no feedback.” This lack of
TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

93
feedback may have made learning less effective, as feedback has been shown to increase
learning during professional development because it provides opportunities to reflect on areas of
success and improvement as well as provides advice on ways to improve technology use (Dysart
& Weckerle, 2015). Therefore, the coaches were perceived to be an important aspect of the
success of the initial levels of the program to provide feedback, knowledge, and encouragement,
but were absent in later levels which may have resulted in less motivation and implementation.
Finding 2: Teachers reported that the time required to learn and implement new
technology decreased their motivation to implement technology and their ability to learn
new ICT skills and learn TPACK strategies. Learning technology and integrating TPACK
takes a great deal of time both for planning and implementation (Kopcha, 2012). Teachers must
spend time redesigning lessons to add technology, learning new ICT tools and learning when to
best implement different tools to enhance learning. Therefore, time required to learn and
implement technology was reported to be one of the biggest barriers to successful completion of
the Tech Ready program. Additionally, respondents felt that there was a large learning curve
associated with the completion of the Tech Ready program. However, one of the assumed
organizational influences, missed instructional time for completion of the professional
development, was not found to be a barrier based on the participant’s responses. These various
themes associated with time are discussed below.
Theme 1: Teachers felt time was the biggest constraint for learning new ICT skills and
increasing TPACK. According to the study participants, the biggest barrier to completion of the
Tech Ready program, as well as to technology implementation overall, was time. All of the
teachers expressed that it took a great deal of time to learn all of the new technological and
pedagogical strategies and tools, and also to determine how best to integrate them into their
TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

94
instruction. When asked what the biggest obstacle to completing the Tech Ready program was,
Carol stated, “I think it is just too time consuming sometimes to learn all of this stuff. There were
too many layers and some things just took too much time to learn.” Carol felt that time was an
influence in completing the program requirements as well as actually learning how to use the
technology. This lack of time may be a barrier to successful completion of the Tech Ready
program and technology implementation. Alex also iterated that the biggest obstacle was that,
“There were so many required components and evidence required to show we had completed the
requirements, that the time was somewhat overwhelming at times, especially in level 1.” The
Tech Ready program seemed to have included too many components given the time the teachers
had to learn them and demonstrate their learning. Beth also expressed, “I think there were a lot of
modules. I think some of the stuff was too many in each one to fulfill. That was the hardest part.
Some modules took so much time.” Therefore, the various levels and required trainings took
time to complete, and the teachers all felt that this was a significant barrier to completion of the
Tech Ready program and to technology implementation.
In addition to expressing that it took a great deal of time to learn all of the new
technology, teaching the students to use the technology and troubleshooting issues also
sometimes took away from class time or overwhelmed them with excessive time requirements.
Beth expressed her concern with the amount of time implementation required. She stated, “Every
module would bring something new… I mean, it was time consuming. It was trying to
implement it all in the classroom, and learn myself while teaching the kids to use it all too. It just
took so much time.” The teacher was concerned that the vast amount of training and new
technology was taking excessive time to implement. In her comment too, the sense of overwhelm
TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

95
was also driven by the fact that they were being asked to do too many things at once: to “learn
myself while teaching the kids to use it all too.”
Alex also iterated a similar experience, stating that the biggest obstacle for her was,
“Time. There’s a lot, and it takes time to learn it all and to figure out how to make it work with
students.” Therefore, gaining both procedural and conceptual knowledge regarding TPACK and
ICT tools may be difficult and may require large amounts of time to accomplish, and this time
may create barriers if it is not available. This is consistent with Kopcha’s (2012) findings that
time was a significant barrier to learning new technology and using it to support instruction.
Time may be perceived as a barrier because integrating technology takes additional planning,
training, and classroom management, and teachers are not used to these additional demands
(Kopcha, 2012). Additionally, as mentioned above, the lack of coaching and support in the later
levels of the program, may create additional barriers to gaining procedural and conceptual
knowledge that are further exacerbated by the extensive amounts of time required to learn and
implement technology.
Theme 2: There is a large learning curve associated with completion of the Tech Ready
program. In addition to the time barriers discussed by the participants, several participants also
described a steep learning curve associated with their completion of the Tech Ready program
requirements and training. This led to a great deal of extraneous load and higher cognitive load
for the teachers during the early stages of the program. In addition, this increased cognitive load
may have led to decreased self-efficacy and more difficulty creating schema, resulting in
decreased TPACK. As alluded to above, teachers found that the first level of the program had
more trainings and required activities than the later levels. The teachers expressed that they
would have preferred the requirements to be more spread out so that they did not get
TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

96
“overwhelmed” in the beginning of the program when they felt less efficacious about technology
implementation in general. Carol stated, “I think more people would have been able to finish or
interested in joining the program if there was not so much to do right off the bat. I was not great
with tech, so all of the required stuff was really hard to do.” This teacher felt that there were too
many requirements in level one, especially for someone coming to the program without a robust
background in technology.
And even for teachers who had more of a background in technology, the Tech Ready
program was perceived to be overwhelming. As Beth stated,
I was already pretty tech savvy, but the first level was overwhelming. There was so much
to do and so many new things to learn, I felt like I didn’t have time to implement them
with fidelity. I also couldn’t even unlock level two to see what I was going to have to do,
and that would have really helped. Either they should have moved some of the stuff to
level two, or they should have at least let me see that there was so much less in the later
levels so I wasn’t so freaked out.
Both Carol and Beth’s responses demonstrated that the emotional element of feeling
overwhelmed mixed with the sheer number of modules and amount of work to be done, wasn’t
as conducive to true learning from the program. The interview responses illustrated that the
participants felt overwhelmed by the amount of activities required for level one, whether they
came to the program with background knowledge or not. The participants perceived a large
learning curve at the beginning of the program that may have been alleviated by moving some of
the activities to later levels of the program, as well as by having coaches available throughout all
levels of the program.
TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

97
One assumed influence in the conceptual framework that was not a perceived influence
by the participants was teacher resistance to change. None of the teachers felt that they were
resistant to trying new technology, and all considered themselves eager to try new technology
and learn ICT skills. One example of this is when Debra stated, “I think I’m probably a little bit
more of a risk taker than other teachers… I’m okay with a little discomfort and trying out new
things.” Beth also stated, “There is so much out there, if you don’t try it, you are just behind. I
think that’s why I just jump in. So, yeah, I guess I would consider myself an early adopter.” Both
Debra and Beth expressed that they were not resistant to change and liked trying new things. As
part of the first Cohort, they most likely were already less resistant to change. However, Beth
also stated, when talking about some of her colleagues, “They’re probably just stuck to doing
what they’ve always been doing, maybe not willing to change. And that’s why they didn’t want
to be in our cohort.” Therefore, Beth also eluded to her perception that those not in Cohort 1 may
have had some resistance to change and that was why they did not volunteer. However, all of the
participants in Cohort 1 were voluntary participants, and thus they may not accurately reflect the
whole sample population.
The organizational influences of time, lack of coaching at the later levels of the Tech
Ready program, and the steep learning curve at the beginning levels of the program, all appeared
to contribute to the participants’ TPACK and ICT learning, as well as their motivation and
efficacy with technology implementation. Teachers did perceive that the Tech Ready program
increased their technological, pedagogical, and content knowledge and the ability to use
information and communication technology tools, however, they also conveyed that time to learn
these new strategies and skills was affected by a lack of time and coaching, as well as the
organization of the learning throughout the Tech Ready levels. In addition, teachers perceived
TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

98
that their self-efficacy with technology increased after the Tech Ready program and their
motivation increased due to the gamification of the program, however, the lack of coaching may
have impacted these increases in the later levels of the program.
Conclusion
Through interviews and observations of four Beachside Unified School District teachers
that were part of cohort 1 of the Tech Ready program, the study aimed to answer two research
questions:
1. What are cohort one teachers’ TPACK knowledge, ICT skills and self-efficacy related to
integrating aspects of TPACK into classroom instruction after successful completion of
the Tech Ready professional development program?
2. What are the interactions between professional development time constraints, missing
instructional time, and teacher resistance to change with teacher TPACK knowledge, ICT
skills, and self-efficacy regarding implementation of technology in the classroom?
The data partially answered the research questions and led to several findings and themes. The
knowledge findings included a perceived increase in both teacher ICT skills and TPACK after
completion of the Tech Ready program, as well as early evidence of actual demonstrations of
procedural ICT and TPACK knowledge. Also, teachers did not perceive self-reflection to have a
significant influence on TPACK or technology integration. In addition, the motivational findings
included perceived increases in self-efficacy with technology and the influence of gamification
on teacher motivation to implement technology in their classrooms. Time was shown to have a
negative influence on teacher implementation of technology and perceived ability to learn new
technology. Finally, one organizational influence that was not anticipated in the initial assumed
TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

99
influences was the lack of coaching in the later levels of the Tech ready program and the
perceived effect this lack had on teacher technology implementation and efficacy.
The findings from the study illustrated that the Tech Ready program may increase teacher
knowledge and motivation regarding technology implementation. However, as no data was
collected prior to the teachers participating in the program, there was no baseline data to show an
actual increase. Therefore, the increase in knowledge and motivation is based on the perceptions
of the study participants. Additionally, knowledge increases were also detected through the
classroom observations. One finding that was not anticipated in the initial assumed influences
was the increased motivation expressed by the teachers as a result of the gamification on the
program. Teachers felt increased accountability as a result of the gamification that lead to higher
motivation.
In response to the second research question, the data also showed several connections
between the knowledge, organizational, and motivational influences. Teachers expressed that the
lack of coaching during the later levels of the program lead to decreased knowledge and self-
efficacy regarding technology implementation. Teachers also expressed that not having a coach
for the whole program and a lack of time were the greatest barriers to completing the Tech
Ready program and implementing technology in their classrooms. Chapter Five will discuss the
implications of the findings and recommendations for future research and practice.

TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

100
CHAPTER FIVE: DISCUSSION
The purpose of this study was to use the Clark and Estes (2008) gap analysis model to
study the knowledge, motivational, and organizational influences affecting implementation of
technology in the classroom following teacher completion of the Tech Ready professional
development program in Beachside Unified School District. Chapter Four addressed the findings
in relation to two research questions:
1. What are cohort one teachers’ TPACK knowledge, ICT skills and self-efficacy related to
integrating aspects of TPACK into classroom instruction after successful completion of
the Tech Ready professional development program?
2. What are the interactions between professional development time constraints, missing
instructional time, and teacher resistance to change with teacher TPACK knowledge, ICT
skills, and self-efficacy regarding implementation of technology in the classroom?
The findings in relation to research question 1 indicated that there was an increase in teacher
technological, pedagogical, and content knowledge (TPACK) and information and
communication technology (ICT) skills following the completion of the Tech Ready program.
Teacher self-efficacy with TPACK and ICT skills was perceived to have increased as well. An
additional finding was that teacher motivation to implement technology increased because of the
gamification present in the Tech Ready program. In regard to research question 2, I found that
teachers felt there was a lack of coaching in the later levels of the program, a large learning curve
in the beginning of the program, and a significant impact of time on completing the various
activities and requirements associated with the Tech Ready program, as well as with
implementing technology.
TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

101
In this chapter, the third project question will be addressed: What are the
recommendations for organizational practice in the areas of knowledge, motivation, and
organizational resources. First, the implications for practice given the research findings will be
addressed. Next, the recommendations for practice will be discussed. Finally, recommendations
for future research will be outlined, including possible future training and resource allocation,
further evaluation of the Tech Ready program to alleviate some of the current limitations, and
future research based on several unexpected findings.
Implications for Practice
Several implications for practice emerged from the study, including the need to provide
more coaching and change the organization of the various levels within the program. In addition,
teachers must be provided ample time and training in order to be able to effectively implement
technology in the classroom to support instruction. Finally, teachers’ technological, pedagogical,
and content knowledge aids teachers in effectively implementing technology in the classroom.
These implications are discussed below.
Coaching
Instructional coaching can have positive effects on teacher knowledge and motivation
because coaching allows both the teacher and the coach to engage in deep subject-matter
discussions, collaborative planning, reflection, and evaluation of progress (Desimone & Pack,
2017). The participants in the study indicated that the coaching that they received at the
beginning of the program significantly increased their ability to implement technology in the
classroom, as well as their efficacy with technology. This is consistent with Lawless and
Pelligrino’s (2007) findings that coaching leads to greater confidence and proficiency with
instructional technology. The participants also complained that the lack of coaching in the later
TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

102
levels of the program made it more difficult to complete the requirements, and made them less
motivated to complete the program and implement the various skills and knowledge they were
learning. Therefore, it is imperative that coaching be utilized as a component of technology
professional development programs, and coaching should be increased in the later levels of the
Tech Ready program.
Tech Ready Program Components
The Tech Ready program required participants to complete various technology trainings
within each level, as well as to submit evidence of technology implementation. The participants
in the study stated that the program required the completion of too many components in level
one, leading to a steep learning curve and very high extraneous load at the beginning of the
program. This caused some to lose motivation and efficacy early, which is consistent with
Kirschner, Kirschner, and Paas (2006), who found that excessive extraneous load leads to
decreased schema construction, knowledge, and efficacy. If teachers feel overwhelmed at the
start of the program, they may quit before completion. Therefore, in order to decrease the
extraneous cognitive load and increase efficacy, the components of the program should be more
evenly spread out between the various levels.
Time and training
Teachers need both adequate time to be able to learn and implement new technology, as
well as comprehensive training to assure that they have the skills and knowledge necessary to be
successful (Kopcha, 2012). Although, participants in the study stated that time was a factor in
implementing new technology in their classrooms, they also stated that comprehensive
professional development that provided ongoing training and support was beneficial for
successful implementation. Teachers need to be provided time to both learn how to use
TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

103
technology, as well as time to learn how to actually implement it in their classrooms. Therefore,
technology professional development should be comprehensive, ongoing, and incorporate all
aspects of TPACK. It is therefore important that organizations provide teachers ample time to
devote to training and implementation (Gunn & Hollingsworth, 2013).
Technological, Pedagogical, and Content Knowledge (TPACK)
Technology professional development programs should incorporate all aspects of
TPACK in order to assure that teachers are able to make connections between technology and
instruction and effectively use technology to support curriculum and instruction with students
(Koh et al., 2013). TPACK must also be taught using an integrated model, where authentic, real-
world tasks are used in order for teachers to learn what technology to use, how to use it, when to
use particular ICT tools, and how to incorporate them into instruction (Angeli & Valanides,
2013). The Tech Ready program was perceived by the participants to effectively increase teacher
TPACK because it combined instruction regarding technology, content, and pedagogy using
real-world projects and integrates the learning into classroom activities. Participants stated that
this integrated approach helped them to learn the material, implement the ICT tools, and
understand what tools to use for particular activities. Additionally, good pedagogical strategies
are effective with or without technology. By integrating knowledge of effective pedagogical
strategies into the professional development program, it increased the teachers’ overall
pedagogical effectiveness and knowledge, which then translated in to effective pedagogy with
technology as well. Therefore, the Tech Ready program should continue this practice of
focusing on providing pedagogical knowledge, and other technology professional development
programs should incorporate all aspects of TPACK in an integrated, authentic manner.

TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

104
Recommendations for Practice
The research study illuminated several recommendations that could be implemented to
improve the Tech Ready program, as well as other technology professional development
programs. These recommendations for practice address knowledge, motivation, and
organizational influences. These recommendations include increased coaching to support
technology implementation and teacher efficacy, authentic learning and activities that can be
integrated into existing curriculum, and cohesive professional development focusing on all
aspects of TPACK to increase ICT skills and effective implementation.
First, teachers need to know how to effectively integrate information and communication
technology (ICT) in order for it to positively impact learning. According to Schraw and
McCrudden (2006), individuals need to be able to apply skills that they have learned and know
what skills to use in different contexts. Additionally, procedural knowledge will allow teachers
to know what skills to use and how to integrate them into instruction (Krathwohl, 2002).
Therefore, increasing teacher procedural knowledge of ICT tools and skills should support their
understanding and implementation. The recommendation, therefore, is to provide training to
teachers regarding technology skills, pedagogy, and instructional strategies so that they are able
to select and use various tools and strategies for integrating technology into instruction.
The Local Control and Accountability Plan (LCAP) goals of Beachside Unified School
District include providing professional development focused on 21
st
Century teaching and
learning in order to increase academic achievement and college and career readiness. Therefore,
it is imperative that the Tech Ready program provide pedagogical knowledge and strategies to
assure that teachers are able to provide quality instruction both with and without technology.
Therefore, the technology aspect of TPACK may not be as important as the pedagogy aspect of
TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

105
TPACK because effective pedagogy spans all types of instruction. Therefore, it is recommended
that the Tech Ready program continue to focus on providing pedagogical knowledge to increase
teacher effectiveness and student academic achievement and college and career readiness.
Kidd (2009) found that when teachers understood both how to use different technology as
well as how to integrate it into meaningful learning experiences, such as project-based learning
and student-centered activities, learning outcomes were improved and the technology integration
was more effective. However, much of the current training regarding technology focuses on
using it to present lessons and record information, rather than as an integrated part of their
instruction, which does not effectively enhance student ICT skills (Chai, Koh, & Tsai, 2013).
Angeli and Valanides (2005) also found that when teachers possess a thorough understanding of
how to use the technology and what technology to employ in different situations, they were able
to use technology to enhance instruction more effectively. Therefore, the research shows that
providing training regarding ICT skills in conjunction with pedagogy and instructional strategies
will increase teachers’ abilities to select appropriate technology and effectively implement it into
instruction to foster student learning.
Additionally, coaching should be incorporated into the entire professional development
program. Coaching provides feedback, collaboration, and support for teachers, that builds self-
efficacy and allows for reflection and discussion of best practices (Desimone & Pack, 2017). The
study participants stated that the lack of feedback and coaching in the later levels of the program
significantly decreased their efficacy and motivation to complete the requirements. Therefore, it
is recommended that the Tech Ready program incorporate coaching throughout all levels and
increase the feedback provided by the technology coaches. Motivational factors, such as self-
efficacy, have a strong impact on whether learners start and persist at particular activities
TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

106
(Mayer, 2011). This suggests that if teachers have high self-efficacy regarding technology use,
they will be more likely to learn to effectively implement technology in the classroom and persist
in learning new technology skills. Angeli and Valanides (2004) found that if teachers are
confident in their technology skills, they are more likely to try new technology in their
classrooms. This corresponded with the findings from the study, as participants were shown to
have more motivation to implement technology when they felt confident that they understood
how to use the technology for instruction. Additionally, if teachers feel confident with their own
ICT skills, they have higher perceptions of their own TPACK and are more likely to have
positive experiences integrating technology into instruction (Chai, Koh, Tsai, 2010).
The findings from the Second Information Technology in Education Study (2006),
showed that when over 35,000 teachers from 22 different countries were surveyed, a majority of
teachers reported that they were more likely to integrate technology into the classroom and
provide ICT instruction when they felt efficacious regarding their own ICT skills (Law, Pelgrum
& Plomb, 2008). Additionally, in a three-year study of 932 teachers, Gunn and Hollingsworth
(2013) looked at the effects of different types of professional development on teacher technology
use. They found that professional development models that incorporated coaching and frequent
feedback resulted in higher levels of teacher self-efficacy with technology integration and ICT
skills (Gunn & Hollingsworth, 2013). This was also supported by the findings; participants
expressed that when they felt more efficacious with technology, they were more likely to try new
technology in their classrooms. Furthermore, some participants articulated that the lack of
coaching in later levels of the program negatively impacted their self -efficacy which lead to
decreased motivation to try new technology. Therefore, research suggests that increasing self-
TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

107
efficacy through professional development involving coaching and feedback will increase
technology integration and ICT instruction.
Time was also found to be one of the most significant barriers to completing professional
development programs and implementing new strategies and technology into the classroom. In
order to mitigate some of the time constraints, it is recommended that the organization provide a
variety of professional development opportunities including online, blended, after-school, and
summer training and that the learning be easily integrated by teachers into their current
classroom lessons. By providing a variety of different types of professional development,
teachers will have options that meet their individual needs and time constraints, thereby
decreasing the factor of time as a barrier to completing professional development. Additionally,
all professional development should be relevant, and grounded in real world, authentic projects.
This recommendation is consistent with Angeli and Valanides’s (2013) findings that TPACK
should be developed using real world, authentic design tasks, where teachers create lessons and
activities using the technological pedagogical, and content learning concurrently in an interactive
instructional design practice. This will alleviate the amount of time afforded to TPACK
professional development as it is a more effective way for teachers to build schema, and it
infuses the learning into the teachers’ current planning processes (Angeli & Valanides, 2013;
Chai et al., 2010). Therefore, by providing a variety of diverse professional development
opportunities, teachers should be able to find time to complete the trainings without significantly
impacting instructional time or requiring a great deal of extra time outside of work hours.
Future Research
The research and findings from this study lead to several recommendations for future
research. These recommendations include:
TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

108
● Future research on technology professional development programs that focus on effective
pedagogy, rather than technology, in order to assure that teachers understand effective
socio-constructivist strategies that promote student learning.
● Utilizing pre and post professional development observations and survey of participants
to obtain data regarding technology implementation, ICT and TPACK knowledge, and
efficacy regarding technology use. This would allow for comparisons to be made
regarding these factors both before participating in the Tech Ready program and
following participation to determine changes.
● Increasing the sample size to include a larger sample, as well as teachers from other grade
levels and subject areas in order to provide better triangulation and increase variation and
possible transferability of the findings.
● Expand the study to examine how the types of professional development opportunities,
such as online, blended, and classroom-based, impact the perception of insufficient time.
Several participants alluded to the fact that time constraints were significantly alleviated
based on the method of delivery of the professional development. Further research is
needed, however, to determine the actual impact of the delivery method on the time
constraints perceived by teachers.
● Further research on the impact of gamification on teacher motivation. The research
showed that teachers perceived the gamification of the program as a significant factor in
increasing their motivation for completing the different levels. Therefore, future research
on whether gamification may lead to decreased extraneous load, increased efficacy, and
improved learning.
TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

109
● Further research on how the learning progression of technology professional development
programs. Study participants indicated that the learning curve was significant and there
was too much new learning placed in the early levels of the program. This large learning
curve participants to feel overwhelmed at the beginning of the program and decreased
their motivation and efficacy regarding technology implementation.
Conclusion
This case study examined the Tech Ready professional development program, in order to
investigate the knowledge, motivational, and organizational influences affecting teacher
integration of technology in the classroom. The stakeholders for the study were Beachside
Unified teachers, who successfully completed the Tech Ready program as part of the cohort 1.
This stakeholder group was chosen because they were the first group to volunteer to participate
in the program, and thus were likely to be enthusiastic about trying new technology with their
students.
The study was based on the Clark and Estes (2008) gap analysis model and the purpose
of the study was to evaluate how the Tech Ready professional development program prepared
teachers to effectively incorporate technology into the classroom by examining the knowledge
and motivation of the teachers as a result of completing the program. Specifically, this study
examined teachers’ knowledge and motivation to effectively integrate technology in their
classrooms as well as the organizational factors that either facilitated or impeded their ability to
do so.
The findings of the study revealed that the Tech Ready program was perceived to have
increased teacher knowledge and motivation regarding technology implementation and there was
early evidence that teachers had the conceptual and procedural knowledge to implement ICT and
TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

110
TPACK. Additionally, the “gamification” aspects of the program were shown to increase teacher
motivation in regard to completing the requirements of the program in implementing technology.
Teachers felt increased accountability as a result of the gamification that lead to higher
motivation. The data also illustrated several connections between the knowledge, organizational,
and motivational influences. Teachers expressed that the lack of coaching during the later levels
of the program lead to barriers in knowledge acquisition and self-efficacy regarding technology
implementation. Teachers further expressed that time was the greatest barrier to completing the
Tech Ready program and implementing technology in their classrooms. Finally, teachers also
expressed that they felt overwhelmed because of the significant learning curve at the beginning
of the tech Ready professional development program.
This study, though focused on one small school district, examined a variety of factors
involved in technology integration, TPACK, and professional development that could be useful
in a broader context, in other educational settings. The findings could be used by other
educational institutions to inform their own professional development programs in order to
increase TPACK, ICT skills, motivation to implement new technology, and decrease
organizational barriers. These findings could also improve other professional development
programs, through the use of gamification and integrated, authentic task-based training.

TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

111
References
Akkoc, H. (2015). Formative questioning in computer learning environments: A course for pre-
service mathematics teachers. International Journal of Mathematical Education in
Science and Technology, 46(8), 1096-1115.
Almas, A. G., and Krumsvik, R. (2008). Teaching in technology-rich classrooms: Is there a gap
between teachers’ intentions and ICT practices? Research in Comparative and
International Education, 3(2), 103-121.
Al-Mashaqbeh, I.F. (2012). The use of computer skills in teaching and administration support.
Damascus University Journal. 28(4), 31-50.
Angeli, C., and Vilanides, N. (2004). The effect of electronic scaffolding for technology
integration on perceived task effort and confidence of primary student teachers. Journal
of Research on Technology in Education, 37(1), 29-43.
Angeli, C., & Valanides, N. (2005). Preservice elementary teachers as information and
communication technology designers: An instructional systems design model based on an
expanded view of pedagogical content knowledge. Journal of Computer Assisted
Learning, 21, 292-302.
Angeli, C., and Vilanides, N. (2013). Technology mapping: An approach for developing
technological pedagogical content knowledge. Journal of Educational Computing
Research, 48(2), 199-221.
Avidov-Unger, O., and Eshet-Alkalai, Y. (2014). TPACK revisited: A systematic perspective on
measures for predicting effective integration of innovative technologies in school
systems. Journal of Conitive Education and Psychology, 13(1), 19-31.

TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

112
Baker, L. (2006). Metacognition. Retrieved from
www.education.com/reference/article/metacognition.
Balanskat, A., Blamire, R., & Kefalla, S. (2006). The ICT Impact report: a review of studies of
ICT impact on schools in Europe. European Schoolnet. Retrieved from
http://unpan1.un.org/intradoc/groups/public/documents/unpan/unpan037334.pdf.
Bandura, A. (2000). Exercise of human agency through collective efficacy. Current Directions in
Psychological Science, 9(3), 75–78.
Brinkerhoff, J. (2006). Effects of a long-duration, professional development academy on
technology skills, computer self-efficacy, and technology integration beliefs and
practices. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 39(1), 22-43.
California Department of Education. (2013). California Common Core State Standards.
Retrieved from http://www.cde.ca.gov/be/st/ss/documents/finalelaccssstandards.pdf.
Castro, T., and Gonçalves, L. (2018). The use of gamification to teach in the nursing
field. Revista Brasileira De Enfermagem, 71(3), 1038-1045.
Chai, C.S., Deng, F., Tsai, P., Koh, J.H.L., and Tsai, C.C. (2015). Assessing multidimensional
students' perceptions of twenty-first-century learning practices. Asia Pacific Education
Review, 16(3), 389-398.
Chai, C.S., Koh, J.H.L., and Tsai, C.C. (2013). A review of technological pedagogical content
knowledge. Educational Technology and Society, 16(2), 31-51.
Chai, C.S., Koh, J.H.L., and Tsai, C.C. (2010). Facilitating preservice teachers’ development of
technological, pedagogical, and content knowledge (TPACK). Educational Technology
& Society, 13(4), 63-73.
TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

113
Clark, R. E., & Estes, F. (2008). Turning research into results: A guide to selecting the right
performance solutions. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing, Inc.
Common Core Standards Initiative. (2016). Standards in your state. Retrieved from
http://www.corestandards.org/standards-in-your-state.Downes, J. M., & Bishop, P.
(2012). Educators engage digital natives and learn from their experiences with
technology. Middle School Journal, 43(5), 6-15.
Cosmah, M., & Saine, P. (2013). Targeting digital technologies in Common Core standards: A
framework for professional development. New England Reading Association Journal,
48(2), 81-88.
Cox, S., and Graham, C.R. (2009). Diagramming TPACK in practice: Using an elaborated model
of the TPACK framework to analyze and depict teacher knowledge. TechTrends, 53(5),
60-69.
Creswell, j. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods
approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Cuban, L., Kirkpatrick, H., & Peck, C. (2001). High access and low use of technologies in high
school classrooms: Explaining an apparent paradox. American Educational Research
Journal, 38(4), 813.
Eccles, J. (2006). Expectancy value motivational theory. Retrieved
from http://www.education.com/reference/article/expectancy-value-motivational-theory/.
Ertmer, P.A., and Ottenbriet-Leftwich. (2010). Teacher technology change: How knowledge,
confidence, beliefs, and culture intersect. Journal on Research on Technology in
Education, 42(3) 255-284.
TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

114
Eshet-Alkalai, Y. (2004). Digital literacy: A conceptual framework for survival skills in the
digital era. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 13(1), 93-106.
Fox, R., & Henri, J. (2005). Understanding teacher mindsets: IT and change in hong kong
schools. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 8(2).
Glesne, C. (2011). Chapter 6: But is it ethical? Considering what is “right.” In Becoming
qualitative researchers: An introduction (4th ed.) (pp. 162-183). Boston, MA: Pearson.
Gray, L., Thomas, N., and Lewis, L. (2010). Teachers’ Use of Educational Technology in U.S.
Public Schools: 2009 (NCES 2010-040). National Center for Education Statistics,
Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. Washington, DC.
Greenshow, C., Dexter, S., and Hughes, J.E. (2008). Teacher knowledge about technology
integration: An examination of in-service and preservice teachers’ instructional decision-
making. Science Education International, 19(1), 9-25.
Gunn, T.M., and Hollingsworth, M. (2013). The implementation and assessment of a shared 21
st

century learning vision: A district-based approach. Journal of Research on Technology in
Education, 45(3), 201-228.
Hargreaves, A., & Fullan, M. (2013). The power of professional capital. Journal of Staff
Development, 34(3), 36-39.
Harris, J. (2016). Inservice teachers' TPACK development: Trends, models, and trajectories. In
M. Herring, M. Koehler, & P. Mishra (Eds.), Handbook of technological pedagogical
content knowledge for educators (2nd ed.) (pp. 191-205). New York, NY: Routledge.
Harris, J., Hofer, M., Blanchard, M., Grandgenett, N., Schmidt, D., Van Olphen, M., &
Young, C. (2010). “Grounded” technology integration: Instructional planning
using curriculum-based activity type taxonomies. Journal of Technology and
TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

115
Teacher Education, 18(4), 573-605.
Harris, J., Mishra, P., and Koehler, M. (2009) Teachers’ technological pedagogical content
knowledge and learning activity types: curriculum-based technology integration
reframed. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 41(4), 393-416.
Hew, K., & Brush, T. (2007). Integrating technology into K-12 teaching and learning: Current
knowledge gaps and recommendations for future research. Educational Technology
Research and Development, 55(3), 223-252.
Hodge, K.A., & Lear, J.L. (2011), Employment skills for 21
st
century workplace: The gap
between faculty and student perceptions. Journal of Career and Technical Education,
26(2), 28-41.
Howard, S. K. 2011. Affect and acceptability: Exploring teachers’ technology risk
perceptions. Educational Media International, 48, 261–273.
Howard, S. (2013). Risk-aversion: understanding teachers’ resistance to technology
integration. Technology, Pedagogy, and Education, 22(3), 357-372.
Hutchison, A., & Reinking, D. (2011). Teachers’ perceptions of integrating information and
communication technologies into literacy instruction: A national survey in the United
States. Reading Research Quarterly, 46(4), 312- 333.
International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement (IEA). (2006). Second
information technology in education study: SITES 2006 Technical Report. Retrieved
from https://www.iea.nl/fileadmin/user_upload/Publications/Electronic_versions/SITES_
2006_Technical_Report.pdf.
TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

116
International Society for Technology Education. (2016). ISTE Standards for Educators.
Retrieved from https://www.iste.org/standards/for-educators
Keengwe, J., & Onchwari, G. (2011). Fostering Meaningful Student Learning Through
Constructivist Pedagogy and Technology Integration. International Journal of
Information and Communication Technology Education, 7(4), 1-10.
Khan, S. (2011). New pedagogies on teaching science with computer simulation. Journal of
Science Education and Technology, 20(3), 215-232.
Kidd, T. T. (2009). The dragon in the school's backyard: A review of literature on the uses of
technology in urban schools. International Journal of Information and Communication
Technology Education, 5(1), 88-102.
Kirschner, P., Kirschner, F., & Paas, F. (2006). Cognitive load theory. Retrieved from
http://www.education.com/reference/article/cognitive-load-theory/.
Kivunja, C. (2014). Do you want your students to be job-ready with 21st century skills? Change
pedagogies: A pedagogical paradigm shift from Vygotskyian social constructivism to
critical thinking, problem solving, and Siemen’s digital connectivism. International
Journal of Higher Education, 3(3), 81-91.
Kivunja, C. (2015). Unpacking the information, media, and technology skills domain of the new
learning paradigm. International Journal of Higher Education, 4(1), 166-181.
Kopcha, T. (2012). Teachers' perceptions of the barriers to technology integration and practices
with technology under situated professional development. Computers &
Education, 59(4), 1109-1121.
TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

117
Kramarski, B. and Michalsky, T. (2009). Three metacognitive approaches to training pre-service
teachers in different learning phases of technological pedagogical content knowledge.
Educational Research and Evaluation, 15(5), 465-485.
Krathwohl, D. R. (2002). A revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy: An overview. Theory Into Practice,
41(4), 212–218.
Krauskopf, K., Carmen, Z., and Hesse, F. (2015). “Cognitive Processes Underlying TPCK:
Mental Models, Cognitive Transformation, and Meta-Conceptual Awareness.”
In Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge, edited
by Charoula Angeli and NicosValanides, 41–61. New York: Springer.
Kurvits, J., & Kurvits, M. (2013). High school students’ acquisition of knowledge and skills
through web-based collaboration. International Journal for Technology in Mathematics
Education, 20(3), 95-102.
Law, N., Pelgrum, W.J., & Plomp, T. (Eds.). (2008). Pedagogy and ICT use in schools around
the world: Findings from the IEA SITES 2006 study. Hong Kong: CERC-Springer.
Lawless, K. A., & Pellegrino, J. W. (2007). Professional development in integrating technology
into teaching and learning: Knowns, unknowns, and ways to pursue better questions and
answers. Review of educational research, 77(4), 575-614. Mayer, R. E. (2011). Applying
the science of learning. Boston, MA: Pearson Education.
Like, C. (2013). Mission possible: Using gamification to increase engagement in
1:1 professional development. Learning & Leading with Technology, 41(2), 22.
Lu, L. (2014). Cultivating Reflective Practitioners in Technology Preparation: Constructing
TPACK through Reflection. Education Sciences, 4(1), 13-35.
Maxwell, J. A. (2013). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach (3rd ed.). Thousand
TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

118
Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
Mayer, R. E. (2011). Applying the science of learning. Boston, MA: Pearson Education.
Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and
implementation (4th ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge: A new
framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record 108 (6), 1017-1054.
Moradi-Rekabdarkolaei, S. (2011). The comparison of ICT Literacy between teachers and
students and presenting a model for development of ICT in schools. Journal of Turkish
Science Education, 8(4), 43-54. National Center for Education Statistics. (2009).
Condition of Education 2009. Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2009/2009081.pdf.
National Center for Education Statistics. (2009b). Teachers’ Use of Educational Technology in
U.S. Public Schools: 2009. Retrieved from
https://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=2010040
OECD. (2013). Education at a Glance 2013: OECD Indicators. OECD Publishing. Retrieved
from https://www.oecd.org/edu/eag2013%20(eng)--FINAL%2020%20June%202013.pdf
Pajares, F. (2006). Self-efficacy theory. Retrieved
from http://www.education.com/reference/article/self-efficacy-theory/.
Partnership for 21
st
Century Skills. (2008). 21
st
Century Skills, Education & Competitiveness: A
Resource and Policy Guide. Retrieved from http://www.p21.org/storage/documents/
21st_century_skills_education_and_competitiveness_guide.pdf
Peerer, J. & Petegem, P.V. (2012). The limits of programmed professional development on
integration of information and communication technology in education. Australasian
Journal of Educational Technology, 28(6), 1039-1056.
Pelgrum, W. J. 2001. Obstacles to the integration of ICT in education: Results from a worldwide
TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

119
educational assessment. Computers & Education, 37: 163–178.
Peters, V.L. and Slotta, J.D. (2010). Scaffolding knowledge communities in the classroom: New
opportunities in the web 2.0 era. DOI 10.1007/978-0-387-88279-6_8.
Petriashvili, I. (2012). Integrating electronic instructional and assessment tools
into teacher education programs. International Journal of Arts & Sciences.
Rodgers, C. (2002). Defining reflection: Another look at John Dewey and reflective thinking.
Teachers College Record, 104(4), 842-866.
Rubin, H. J., & Rubin, I. S. (2012). Chapter 6: Conversational partnerships. In Qualitative
interviewing: The art of hearing data (3rd ed.) (pp. 85-92). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE
Publications.
Rueda, R. (2011). The 3 dimensions of improving student performance. New York: Teachers
College Press.
Schein, E. H. (2004). The concept of organizational culture: Why bother? In E. H. Schein,
(Ed.), Organizational culture and leadership (3 rd ed.). (pp. 3–24). San Francisco, CA:
Jossey Bass.
Schraw, G., & McCrudden, M. (2006). Information processing theory. Retrieved
from http://www.education.com/reference/article/information-processing-theory/.
Schulman, L. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational
Researcher, 15(2), 4-14.
Shamburg, C. (2004). Conditions that inhibit the integration of technology for urban early
childhood teachers. Information Technology in Childhood Education Annual, 2004(1),
227-244.
TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

120
So, H. & Kim, B. (2009). Learning about problem-based learning: Student teachers integrating
technology, pedagogy, and content knowledge. Australasian Journal of Educational
Technology, 25(1), 101-116.
Trilling, B. & Fadel, C. (2009) 21
st
Century Skills: Learning for Life in Our Times. San
Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Tsay, Kofinas, and Luo. (2018). Enhancing student learning experience with technology-
mediated gamification: An empirical study. Computers and Education, 121, 1-17.
Tucker, S.Y. (2014) Transforming pedagogies: Integrating 21
st
century skills and Web 2.0
technology. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 15(1), 166-173.
Twinning, P., Raffeghelli, J., Albion, P., and Knezek, D. (2013). Moving education into the
digital age: The contribution of teachers’ professional development. Journal of Computer
Assisted Learning, 29, 426-437.
Weng, C., & Tang, Y. (2014). The relationship between technology leadership strategies and
effectiveness of school administration: An empirical study. Computers &
Education,76(C), 91-107.

TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

121
Appendix A
Interview Protocol
Interviewee Date Location

Start Time End Time School Site

Hello. My name is Amy Kernan and I’m an Ed.D. candidate at the University of Southern
California conducting a study regarding the Tech Ready program for my dissertation. Thank you
for agreeing to help me with my research. I’m looking forward to hearing about your experience
in the program.

This interview is meant to obtain information regarding technology implementation following
the completion of the Tech Ready professional development program. My goal is to gain
information in order to increase the effectiveness of technology implementation.

Everything said here today will be kept completely confidential. If there are any questions you
don’t want to answer, please let me know and we will skip them. I would also like to audio
record our conversation so that I don’t miss anything. Is that OK with you?

I expect this interview to take approximately 30-60 minutes. If at any time you feel you would
like to stop or pause, please do not hesitate to let me know. Do you have any questions or
concerns before we begin?

I am going to start by asking you some general questions about technology and professional
development.

1. What do you think is the role of technology in education?
2. Some people would say you don’t need technology in the classroom in order to teach.
What would you say to them?
3. What would you say are the three greatest benefits to using technology to aide
instruction?
4. Please reflect on your understanding of why technology is important in today’s
classrooms?
TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

122
5. Please provide some examples of how you currently use technology in your classroom?
How effective are these in improving your instruction? What is your evidence for your
response?
6. Please describe how you think technology should be used in the classroom.
7. What are the three biggest obstacles for you to implement new technology in your
classroom?
8. What role does technology play in your instructional practice?
9. What role does content play in your instructional practice?
10. What role does pedagogy play in your instructional practice?
11. Do you find you are more or less confident in any of the three areas, technology, content,
or pedagogy? In what specific ways do you want to be able to use technology in your
classroom? What types of technology are you interested in implementing?
12. Tell me about the most beneficial professional development opportunity that you have
participated in recently. What made it effective in your opinion?
13. Other than during the Tech Ready program, describe a time when you successfully
implemented a new program or curriculum in your classroom? Specifically, what lead to
effective implementation.
14. Would you describe yourself as an early adopter of new teaching strategies and materials
or someone who likes to wait and see if something works before jumping in to try it out?
Provide an example that demonstrates how you see yourself.
15. Please provide an example of a time when you were resistant to try something new in
your teaching methods? Why do you think you were resistant?
TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

123
16. Have you ever been resistant to trying out new technology in your classroom? What
factors caused you to feel resistant?
Thank you. Now I would like to ask you some questions related to the Tech Ready program.
1. What influenced your decision to be part of cohort 2 of the Tech Ready program?
2. Before participating in the Tech Ready program, how would you describe your
technology use in the classroom? After participating in the program?
3. Describe one way in which you have implemented the Tech Ready program in your
classroom?
4. Describe what you feel is the most beneficial aspect of the Tech Ready program for
helping you implement technology effectively in your classroom.
5. Describe any pedagogical strategies that you learned in the Tech Ready program.
6. Describe any content area information that you learned in the Tech Ready program.
7. Describe any technology skills or strategies that you learned in the Tech Ready program.
8. How, if at all, did any of the things you learned in the Tech Ready program impact your
knowledge regarding technology implementation?
9. How, if at all, did any of the things you learned in the Tech Ready program impact your
efficacy regarding technology implementation? Please provide an example that
demonstrates evidence for your thinking here.
10. As a teacher, what do you feel is the biggest obstacle to completing the Tech Ready
program? Why?
11. As you reflect about the Tech Ready Program, how has your participation changed how
you feel about the importance of technology in instruction? How has it changed your
actions regarding using technology?
TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

124
12. Describe the level of support that your site administration and the district administration
provides regarding technology integration in your classroom? How important do you
think administrators find ICT skills for teachers and students?
13. Please describe a time that you had to contact the Tech Department for technical
assistance? What was that experience like?
14. How do you balance being part of the Tech Ready program and the other demands placed
on you regarding instruction?
15. How much instructional time do you think you have missed by participating in the Tech
Ready program and was this time useful?
16. Please provide some examples or other professional development and whether it has
required you to be out of the classroom more or less than the Tech Ready program?
17. What are the least effective aspects of the Tech Ready program? What are some specific
suggestions that you have for improvements? What suggestions could you provide to
address these issues?
Thank you very much for your time. I truly appreciate your insights and feedback regarding
the Tech Ready program. Would it be possible for me to contact you in the future for
clarification to any of the answers provided, if necessary? If so, what is the best way to
contact you in the future?

Thank you again for your participation.

TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

125
Appendix B
Observation Protocol
Teacher Date Grade Level

Subject School Site # of Students

Start Time End Time Observation #

Pictures of classroom before students enter:

Classroom environment: (student seating, teacher proximity)

Visible technology: (Computer, monitors, iPads)

TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

126
Types of technology used:
Type: Used by: (teacher,
students, both)
How was technology used:

Describe the instructional strategies used:

Describe the content being taught:

TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS

127
Describe the teacher’s ability to use the technology and your perceptions of the teacher’s
technology skills:

Describe your perceptions of the teacher’s confidence with technology:

Describe the students’ ICT skills observed:

Additional Observation Notes:

Abstract (if available)

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

The importance of technological training among public school teachers integrating one-to-one computing: an evaluation study

PDF

E-TECH professional development: a Mountain View University initiative

PDF

21st century teaching and learning with technology integration at an innovative high school: a case study

PDF

Answering the call for shared leadership - the missing conditions for successful implementation of English language teacher leadership: an evaluation study

PDF

Developing a computer science education program: an innovation study

PDF

Instructional differentiation and accommodations to support student achievement in SLD and ADHD secondary school populations: an evaluation study

PDF

Effective coaching of teachers to support learning for English language learners

PDF

Educator professional development for technology in the classroom: an evaluation study

PDF

Addressing the mental health care gap in American youth: an evaluation study of character education

PDF

Transformational technology practices in K-12 schools: a case study

PDF

How are teachers being prepared to integrate technology into their lessons?

PDF

Classroom environment for Common Core

PDF

Learning the language of math: supporting students who are learning English in acquiring math proficiency through language development

PDF

Digital learning in K12: putting teacher professional identity on the line

PDF

College and career readiness through independent study: an innovation study

PDF

Implementing a digital information management system for advising adult students in professional education programs

PDF

A case study of promising practices mentoring K-12 chief technology officers

PDF

Using technology to drive high academic achievement

PDF

Leveraging the principalship for instructional technology equity and access in two urban elementary schools

PDF

Evaluation study: building teacher efficacy in K8 computer science integration

Asset Metadata

Creator Kernan, Amy (author)

Core Title Technological pedagogical skills among K-12 teachers

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Organizational Change and Leadership (On Line)

Publication Date 10/17/2018

Defense Date 10/11/2018

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag ICT,OAI-PMH Harvest,technological, pedagogical, and content knowledge,technology education,technology professional development,TPACK

Format application/pdf (imt)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Samkian, Artineh (committee chair), Crawford, Jenifer (committee member), Ferguson, Holly (committee member)

Creator Email kernan@usc.edu,mijonhen@gmail.com

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c89-81453

Unique identifier UC11671748

Identifier etd-KernanAmy-6863.pdf (filename),usctheses-c89-81453 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-KernanAmy-6863.pdf

Dmrecord 81453

Document Type Dissertation

Format application/pdf (imt)

Rights Kernan, Amy

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the a...

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA