Master's Thesis, 2011, 64 Pages
List of Tables
List of Acronyms
Background of the Study
1.2 Statement of the Problem
1.3 Research Questions
1.4 Contribution of the Study
1.5 Overview of the Study
The Context of Tanzania
2.1 Teaching and Learning in Science and Mathematics
2.2 ICT Policy in Tanzania
2.3 ICT in Schools
2.4 ICT in Teacher Training Colleges
2.4.1 General Situation
2.4.2 The Situation at DUCE
2.5 Implementing ICT in Education in Tanzania: What Helps and What Hinders
3.1 ICT Integration in Education
3.2 TPACK in Science and Mathematics Teaching
3.3 TPACK Competencies for Pre-service Science and Mathematics Teachers
3.4 TPACK Training Package for Preservice Teachers
3.5 Summary and Way Forward
4.1 Research Design
4.3.1 Student Questionnaire
4.3.2 Instructors’ Interview
4.3.3 Observation checklist
4.3.4 Researcher’s Log Book
4.4.2 Training about TPACK
4.4.3 Peers’ Appraisal
4.4.4 Design of the Lesson
4.4.5 Presentation of the Lesson
4.5 Data Collection Procedures
4.6 Data Analysis
4.6.1 Instruments’ Validity
4.6.2 Reliability Analysis
5.1 Preservice teachers Competency in the Use of ICT in Teaching
5.2 Practices that are Effective in Enhancing Technology Integration Competencies
5.2.1 Microteaching (one)
5.2.2 Training (Introducing the Concept of TPACK)
5.2.3 Design of the Lesson
5.2.4 Lesson Presentation (Microteaching two)
5.2.5 Reflection on the Project (post intervention)
5.3 The Impact of the Intervention on TPACK Competency
Summary, Discussion, Conclusions and Recommendation
6.1 Summary of the Findings
6.2.1 Developing TPACK among Preservice Teachers: Effective Practices
6.2.2 The Impact of Interventions
Appendix A: Students’ questionnaire
Appendix B: Interview Questions for DUCE Instructors
Appendix C: TPACK observation checklist (microteaching and classroom activities)
Appendix D: Worksheet for Simple Pendulum
Many people made significant contributions to successful completion of this study. I appreciate all materials and ideas incurred during the study by people who showed concern, love and care. Unfortunately, it is difficult to mention all of them individually but there are some whose immense contributions deserve special appreciations. I would like to express special gratitude and appreciations to Dr. Petra Fisser, Principal Supervisor of this study. She worked tirelessly in making constructive criticisms, ideas, and corrections from research proposal development to final report write-up. Her intellectual skills, comments, advice, commitments and close supervision are quite remarkable towards successful completion of my study. I also acknowledge the contribution of Dr. Joke Voogt, the Second Supervisor of this study, who continuously made a follow up of my progress and provided constructive advices for successful completion of this study.
I am very grateful to third year B.Ed Science students (2010) and their instructors from Dar es salaam University College of Education (DUCE) who heartedly accepted to participate in this study. They both provided constructive and useful information which helped me to gather the required information for the study. Their commitment, willingness and harmony during the study, are highly appreciated. I confer special thanks to Edward Winston who was always there to support me technically and materially. Together with Edward, I recognize the contribution of Onditi, H. Z., Nzilano, J., Mwalongo, A. and Kalinga, J. who accepted to be part of this study. In addition, I convey my special gratitude to Dr. J. Katabaro and Dr. F. Mafumiko who always showed concern to my academic development.
I would like also to express a heartfelt appreciation to all people who in one way or another supported my nomination in the University of Twente Scholarships. Their decision has been of substantial impact to my life, my institution and my country. I would also like to give special thanks to Jan Nelissen and Monique Davids for their outstanding effort to ensure that my life at the University of Twente is as smooth as possible. I appreciate the motivation and support I got from Kassim Nihuka, Carolin Richtering and Yonas Yosef in the process of preparing my final report. I adore the company I got from Efraim Kosia (Tanzania), Zenebe Hailesellassie (Ethiopia), Wilson Chilembo (Zambia), Larissa Odendaal and Rinse Jelluma (Netherlands) who were always ready to share their experience and knowledge in different aspects of research. Lastly, I am grateful to DUCE management, for giving me a permission to attend studies on the Master of Science in Educational Science and Technology.
Ayoub C Kafyulilo
Table 1: Enabling and Constraining Factors for ICT Implementation in Schools
Table 2: Teacher Training Requirement for Developing TPACK Competencies
Table 3: Technological Infusion Activities for Preservice Teachers
Table 4: Demographic Characteristics of Participants
Table 5: Summary of Data Collection Instrument for Each Research Theme
Table 6: Groups Participated in the Design of the Lesson
Table 7: Interventions Activities and Data collection Instrument during TPACK Project
Table 8: Contact Summary Sheet for Analysis of Qualitative Data
Table 9: Reliability Values for each TPACK Variable in TPACK Survey
Table 10: Use of Technological Tools in Courses Undertaken by Preservice Teachers at the College
Table 11: Accessibility to Various Technological Tools at the College
Table 12: Use of Web 2.0 to Support Learning
Table 13: Preservice teachers ’ Technological Knowledge
Table 14: Summary of Interview with College Instructors
Table 15: Competencies in TPACK (Based on TPACK Survey Questionnaire)
Table 16: TPACK Competency as Observed during Microteaching
Table 17: Processes taken by each group in the process of designing a lesson
Table 18: Preservice teachers Competency in TPACK as Observed during Presentation
Table 19: Preservice teachers ’ Reflection on the Practices that Enhanced on TPACK
Table 20: TPACK Knowledge of the Preservice teachers after the Intervention
Table 21: Preservice teachers ’ Pre and Post-intervention TPACK Knowledge
Table 22: Paired sample t-test for pre and post-intervention presentation of the lesson
Table 23: Preservice teachers ’ Competency in Specific TPACK Areas
Table 24: Preservice teachers ’ Ability to Integrate Technology in Learning
Table 25: Preservice teachers ’ Areas of Confidence in Technology Integration
Table 26: Interaction Matrix for Competency Areas and Number of Responses
illustration not visible in this excerpt
This study investigated the ways through which pre-service science and mathematics teachers at Dar es Salaam University College of Education (DUCE) can acquire competencies for integrating technology pedagogy and content in teaching. Specifically the study investigated the preservice teachers’ ICT integration competencies; practices that can be effective in enhancing pre-service science and mathematics teachers’ competency in integrating technology, pedagogy and content; as well as the impact of those practices in the development of preservice teachers’ technological pedagogical content knowledge. An action research approach was employed in the study, employing the pre and post-intervention assessment of preservice teachers’ knowledge on technology, pedagogy and content. Planed interventions were carried out during the study, to enable preservice teachers to identify areas of weaknesses in their technology integration competencies, and propose alternative approaches for addressing the identified weaknesses. Student questionnaire, instructor interview and observation checklist were used to collect date before, during and after intervention. Researcher’s log book, digital camera and audio recorder were used in recording events and activities taking place during the study. Findings revealed that when preservice teachers engage in hands on activities such as microteaching, lesson design and the opportunity to share their ideas with peers, they easily developed their technological pedagogical content knowledge. An analysis of knowledge change after the intervention, showed a significant difference between pre-intervention and post intervention preservice teachers’ knowledge of TPACK. It is therefore concluded that, the adoption of hands on activities that uses technology and involve teachers in planning of what to teach, how to teach and with what technology to teach, and provision of an opportunity to share this plan with colleagues, can make a significant change in the development of TPACK among preservice teachers.
Teaching and Learning in science and mathematics place a lot of challenges to teachers and is setting an alarm to stakeholders in education: government, parents and schools. Many countries are currently experiencing a gradual dropdown on students’ participation and performance in science and mathematics subjects (Beauchamp & Parkinson, 2008; Ezeife, 2003; Martin et al, 2008; Mwinshekke, 2003). Failure in these subjects is raising a debate on how teachers teach and how students learn. Some see the failure as being born from teachers due to lack of important teaching competencies, while others see the failure as resulting from lack of students motivation in science and mathematics (Yunus, & Ali, 2009). However, Koehler & Mishra (2009) see the problem as being caused by both teaching approaches and the way students learn. Thus, they call for an approach that treats teaching as an interaction between what teachers know and how they apply what they know in the unique circumstance or contexts within their classroom. Luis, Illera & Escofet (2009), support the idea of Kohler & Mishra, by proposing the adoption of learner centered approach, an approach which is widely promoted throughout the world for its impact in students’ learning. However, effective learner centered approach requires the use of Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) which engage students in a flexible learning that allows dynamism in terms of location, time, materials, content and teaching approaches (Collis & Moonen, 2001).
Thus this study proposed the integration of ICT in science and mathematics teaching and learning. ICT has been referred as all products that can store, retrieve, manipulate, transmit or receive information electronically in a digital form, for example: personal computers, television, digital camera and other electronic hardware and software tools (Luppicini, 2005). Studies (Tilya, 2008; Senzige & Sarukesi, 2003; Voogt, 2003) have shown that use of ICT in teaching has a lot of advantages to teachers and students. For example a study by Keong, Horani & Daniel (2005) revealed that ICT use improves the way science and mathematics is taught and enhances students’ understanding of basic concepts of science and mathematics (cf. Voogt, 2003). Studies done by Niess et al. (2009), Beauchamp & Parkinson (2008) and Senzige & Sarukesi (2003) are currently addressing the importance of incorporating ICT in science and mathematics teaching, to overcome the existing failures in those subjects. The use of ICT in teaching, presents a paradigm shift from a teacher centered to a learner-centered, from individual learning to collaborative learning, and from a teacher as a source of knowledge to a learner as source of knowledge (Collis & Moonen, 2001; Nieveen, Handelzalts, van den Akker & Homminga, 2005). The ability to harness ICT in the design of the classrooms learning can have an impact in the engagement of students in the learning of science and mathematics, by creating more options for learners to connect technology with course content (cf. Dominique & Fereirra, 2008).
Despite the importance that ICT integration in education has in enhancing teaching and learning in science and mathematics (Niess et al, 2009; Voogt, 2003), less has been done to integrate it in education in developing countries. Most developing countries are currently developing ICT policies (Hare, 2007; Moonen, 2008; Tilya, 2008) which in most educational practices, their impacts are found to be insignificant (Ottevanger, Van den Akker & Feiter, 2007). These policies are reported to place a great deal of emphasis on providing ICT infrastructure to secondary and primary schools Gaible & Burns (2005) rather than their use in teaching (Unwin, 2005). For example, in Tanzania, ICT use is found to be limited to teaching basic ICT skills, and not integrated as a medium of instruction (Ottevanger et al, 2007). Also Tilya (2008) and Sugiyama (2005) reported that, majority of teachers in Tanzania are not using ICT in their teaching. The poor ICT uptake by teachers in schools is reported to result from lack of teachers’ motivation and self confidence (Cox, Preston & Cox, 1999; Pelgrrum, 2001), which is caused by lack of technological knowledge (VanFossen, 1999) and the fear that ICT is complicated and difficult to use (Snoeyink & Ertmer, 2001). Additionally, there are some teachers who are reluctant to change their traditional pedagogical practices (Snoeyink & Ertmer, 2001), and some of them believe that technology does not enhance learning (Yuen & Ma, 2002).
The inappropriate integration of technology in teaching is raising doubts as to whether teachers are disinterested to use technology or they were not well trained to integrate technology in teaching. This, calls for an investigation of the teacher training program to find out the way teachers are taught to work with technology. Unlike other professions, teacher training programs are expected to develop basic technological skills, operational skills and professionalism skills (ISTE, 2008). The development of skills in these three components is expected to foster the development of teachers’ knowledge, skills and ability to integrate technology into their teaching. This will consequently cultivate the development of technological pedagogical and content knowledge and the manner in which they (technology, pedagogy and content) are integrated.
According to Koehler &Mishra (2009), “at the heart of good teaching with technology are three core components: content, pedagogy, and technology, plus the relationships among and between them” (p.62). A teacher needs to have these three knowledge bases (content, pedagogy, and technology) which form the core of the technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) framework. TPACK is the promising framework for preparation of teachers who can integrate technology in their teaching. Thus, teachers’ training colleges are argued to focus on how they develop preservice teachers’ knowledge of using technology in relation to pedagogy and content, which makes up the TPACK. TPACK is the basis of good teaching with technology and requires an understanding of the representation of concepts using technologies”. Doering, Hughes & Hoffman (2003), argue that in most cases, teachers preparation program have been the problem in developing preservice teachers who are competent in technology integration. Thus, a study to investigate what can be done at the teacher training college, how can it be done and what will be the impact was found to be important, thus a reason for conducting this study at DUCE.
Knowledge of technology, pedagogy and content is important to preservice teachers for effective integration of technologies in science and mathematics teaching. Teacher training institutions as gateways to effective teaching with technology are required to develop these ICT integration competencies to preservice teachers. Although there are evidences from the courses offered in colleges, that preservice teachers are taught on how to use ICT in teaching science and mathematics, studies (Hare, 2007; Kafanabo, 2006; Sugiyama, 2005; Tilya, 2008) have reported a low level of ICT uptake in schools in Tanzania. Studies have further reported that, the extent to which teachers will integrate technology in teaching depends largely on the way they learned with technology (Doering et al, 2003; LeBaron, McDonough & Robinson, 2008). The later statement suggests that, the poor uptake of technology in teaching is the outcome of the poor training that teachers get from colleges. However, there is no evidence yet to prove that preservice teachers are not well trained to integrate technology in teaching. Most of the studies carried out in Tanzania on ICT integration in teaching, paid great attention on the teachers’ use of ICT in teaching at school rather than how a teacher is prepare to use ICT. This makes it difficult to explain the way preservice teachers are trained to integrate technology, pedagogy and content in teaching. Thus this study was determined to investigate the competencies that preservice teachers develop from the college on ICT integration in teaching, effective practices that can enhance preservice teachers’ ability to integrate technology, pedagogy and content and the impacts of those practices in developing preservice teachers’ technological pedagogical content knowledge.
The problem stated above leads to the main research question which is formulated as: “How can science and mathematics preservice teachers acquire competencies for integrating technology, pedagogy and content in their teaching? ” This main research question was answered by dividing the question into several sub questions:
The first sub question is related to ICT integration competencies that preservice teachers have already acquired from DUCE, and is formulated as: “What competencies do pre-service science and mathematics teachers at DUCE have, in relation to the use of ICT in teaching?”
The second question is about practices (interventions activities) that have potential impact in the development of preservice teachers’ competency in integrating technology with pedagogy and content and is formulated as: “What practices are effective in promoting the preservice teachers’ competencies in integrating technology with content and pedagogy at DUCE?”
The third question is related to the outcomes of the intervention activities carried out in question two and is formulated as: “What are the impacts of intervention activities in developing pre-service science and mathematics teachers’ technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK)?”
This study was determined to investigate the relationship existing between what teachers learn from the teachers training college and what teachers practice in the teaching field. Through this study, it can be established whether the low uptake of ICT by teachers in science and mathematics teaching, is resulting from teachers themselves or the manner in which they are taught to integrate technology in their teaching. During the study, preservice teachers at DUCE engaged in different hands on activities, such as microteaching, TPACK training, lesson design, lesson presentation and discussion with peers. Participation in these intervention activities was important in the development of an understanding to the preservice teachers on how technology pedagogy and content can be integrated in the teaching process. These interventions activities can therefore enhance preservice teachers’ ability to integrate technology in their teaching. Also the interventions can be adopted by college instructors as a new approach for enhancing learning of technology integration, by involving preservice teachers in a number of hands on activities. In addition, participants in the study will become ambassadors of TPACK to all other teachers in schools where they will be employed to work. As they integrate technology in their teaching, they may become models to other teachers who may also be interested to adopt their teaching approaches.
This study is organized into six chapters; where as the first chapter presented an overall introduction to the study, the statement of the problem and research questions. The description of the context in which the study was carried out is covered in Chapter two. The chapter discusses the ICT policy in education in Tanzania, ICT in schools and teachers training colleges as well as ICT implementation in schools. Chapter three presents the review of literature related to technology integration in education and the overall conception of TPACK. In the literature review a comprehensive analysis of previous studies on the concept of TPACK and its use in the preservice science and mathematics teachers’ preparation has been covered. In chapter four, a research design has been described, presenting the participants, instruments and data collection procedures. Chapter five provides the findings of the study. Findings are organized according to the research questions that the study intended to answer. The last part of this study is chapter six which presents the summary of the findings, discussion, conclusion and recommendations.
This chapter describes the overall teaching and learning in science and mathematics in Tanzania and the extent to which ICT is integrated in teaching. The chapter is organized into six sections; where as, section
2.1 describes the teaching and learning in science and mathematics in secondary schools. Section 2.2 discusses the ICT policy in Tanzania and section 2.3 describes the ICT use in schools. ICT integration in teacher training colleges has been discussed in section 2.4 where as ICT integration situation at DUCE has been presented in section 2.5. The hindering and promoting factors for implementation of ICT in education in Tanzania have been discussed in section 2.6.
Teaching and learning in science and mathematics subjects has for a long time been a challenge in Tanzania secondary and primary schools. Since 1970s there has been an alarming decline in the level of participation and performance in science and mathematics in both primary and secondary schools in Tanzania (Mwinsheikke, 2003). The failure rates in mathematics in secondary schools, from 1995 to 2002 reached 70% (Sugiyama, 2005). A report by the Mathematical Association of Tanzania (MAT) shows that from 2003 to 2007 the failure rates in Basic Mathematics reached 73% (United Republic of Tanzania [URT], 2008). According to the National Examination Council of Tanzania Examination Cycle for 2002- 2008, failure rates in physics and biology from 2002 to 2007 were between 40-46% in physics and between 45-76% in biology. Studies (Kitta, 2004; Sugiyama, 2005) show that, majority of students participating in science (physics, chemistry, and biology) and mathematics subjects, at their secondary education levels do fail. While the country is in great demand of engineers, doctors, accountants, science and mathematics teachers as well as agricultural officers, the number of students engaging in science is decreasing year after year. When addressing the parliament meeting on 29th August 2008, Hon. Mizengo Pinda, the Prime Minister of Tanzania, described the failures in science and mathematics as undermining country’s efforts for development in science and technology (URT, 2008).
Poor performance in science and mathematics has been attributed to among many factors, the absence of competent teachers, lack of science teaching and learning resources as well as shortage of science and mathematics teachers in most schools (URT, 2008). In acknowledging the fact that teachers are the sole source for educational change and improvement of students’ learning, the government of Tanzania has since 1960s taken several initiatives to enhance teaching, learning and performance in Science and Mathematics. The first initiative was the establishment of a Mathematics Association of Tanzania (MAT) in 1966, which aimed at uniting Mathematics teachers in the country so that they can exchange experiences and techniques of teaching Mathematics (http://maths.udsm.ac.tz/mat/index.htm). However, since its establishment there has been no improvement of students learning outcomes in mathematics, rather a gradual drop down has been observed (O-saki, 2007; Sugiyama, 2005, Kitta, 2004).
From 1990s, the government of Tanzania in collaboration with different international organizations introduced several projects which intended at enhancing science and mathematics teaching approaches, preparing new teaching resources including books and training more science and mathematics teachers. Example of projects carried out includes;
1. The Science Education in Secondary Schools (SESS) Project, funded by GTZ-German in 1997, which aimed at improving the teaching and learning of science and mathematics in secondary schools (O-level) in Tanzania. It concentrated on in-service teacher education and training of resource persons (O-saki, 2007);
2. The Teacher Education in Mathematics and Science (TEAMS) from 1996 to 2004, funded by Dutch government, focusing on review of undergraduate science teacher education programs at the University of Dar es Salaam and developing in-service training materials (cf. Ottevanger, Faiter, O-saki & van den Akker, 2005);
Despite all those initiatives taken by the government of Tanzania to overcome the massive failure of students in science and mathematics, the situation has remained hectic year after year (O-saki, 2007). ICT integration in science and mathematics teaching remains to be the only promising method to enhance learning in these subjects (Keong et al, 2005). In a research by Keong et al. (2005) and Voogt (2003) it was revealed that, use of ICT in teaching science and mathematics improves learning through increased collaboration among students through the increased level of communication and sharing of knowledge. It was also found that ICT helps teachers to provide a rapid and accurate feedback to students and allow students to focus on strategies and interpretations of answers rather than spending time on tedious computational calculations. Keong and colleagues also report that constructivist pedagogical approach is easily supported by ICT (cf. Tilya, 2003; Voogt, 2003), where students use technology to explore and reach an understanding of mathematical concepts by concentrating on problems solving process rather than on calculations related to the problems. Thus, ICT integration in science and mathematics teaching and learning can be a promising solution to the long existed students’ failure in science and mathematics in Tanzania.
The development and growth of technology integration in education in Tanzania started as early as 1980s, when the science and technology policy of Tanzania was formulated. This was followed by the formation of Tanzania Commission for Science and Technology (COSTECH) in 1986 and the formation of the Ministry of Science, Technology and Higher Education (MSTHE) in 1990 (Mambo, 2001). Since 1990s, Tanzania established a good number of training institutions which intended to promote research and development in science, technology and education. However, the government of Tanzania was not able to sustain those institutions financially; this made them academically unviable. Failure of ICT to produce the desired results in most of the fields including education in the early 1990s was caused by the lack of a policy on information technology, its acquisition and use.
The first national ICT policy in Tanzania was developed in 2003 (URT, 2003). This policy had two main objectives: first, was to provide a national framework to enable ICT to contribute towards achieving national development goals; and the second was to transform Tanzania into a knowledge-based society through the application of ICT. Although the 2003 policy mentioned education as one of the areas of its focus, still the policy was too vague and thus could not address specific components of ICT integration in education. In 2007 the ICT policy for basic education was formulated which aimed to promote the acquisition and appropriate use of literary, social, scientific, vocational, technological, professional and other forms of knowledge, skills and understanding for the development and improvement of man and society (URT, 2007). This policy incorporates the integration of ICTs in pre-primary, primary, secondary and teacher education, as well as non-formal and adult education (Hare, 2007; URT, 2007).
The ICT policy for basic education considers issues of ICT infrastructure; curriculum and content; training and capacity development; planning procurement and administration. It also pays attention on the management, support and sustainability, and monitoring and evaluation (Hare, 2007; URT, 2007). The ICT policy for basic education is implemented in collaboration with other education policy documents which govern the education sector in Tanzania in general. These are the Education and Training Policy of 1995, the Primary Education and Development Plan (PEDP) 2002-2006, and the Secondary Education Development Plan (SEDP) 2004-2009 (URT, 2009). All three documents emphasize the need for access to and improved quality of education for all despite the increasing number of enrolments. Both PEDP and SEDP prioritize ICT-based information management at all levels and an introduction of computer courses into primary and secondary education (Hare, 2007; URT, 2009).
The process to introduce ICT in education started as far back as 1997, when the first official syllabus for school computer studies was introduced (Mambo, 2001; Tilya, 2003; URT, 2003). Since 1997 little was done to have ICT integrated in education, until 2002 is when ICT integration initiatives started in education in Tanzania. It was in 2002 when a stakeholders’ workshop was called by the ministry of education with support from the International Institute for Communications Development (IICD), a Dutch NGO (Hare, 2007). According to Hare, the workshop identified areas of ICT interventions and 11 project proposals were generated to raise awareness of the benefits and the potential gains in adopting ICT in the education sector. In 2005, the Ministry of Education and Vocation Training (MOEVT) formed an e-school forum to design a programme supporting the introduction and use of ICT for secondary education known as the “e-School Programme”. The program aimed at introducing ICT in secondary schools, in phases starting with 200 schools in phase 1 (2006 to 2008), a large scale rollout covering 2,000 schools in phase 2 (in a five years period), and nationwide coverage by 2015. The project covers a wide range of activities including ICT infrastructure development in the schools, technical resources, student management at school levels, content and curriculum development, e-learning, sensitization, human resources development, and programme co-ordination and funding.
Although there have been initiatives for integrating ICT in education since 1997, a study by Vesisenaho in 2007, ten years later, shows that mostly private secondary schools in Tanzania are the one which are able to offer ICT integration in teaching. Vesisenaho’s findings are supported by Hare (2007), who reports that; “mostly private schools in the urban centers, especially Dar es Salaam, are the one which are using ICTs, albeit without a formal setting or a policy framework” (p. 4) (cf. Ottevanger et al, 2007; Tilya, 2003). More over, these ICTs are mostly confined to administration purposes. There is some limited use for teaching basic ICT skills, and in most cases ICTs have not been integrated as a medium of instruction. Kafanabo (2006) and Tilya (2008) report that in schools where ICT is used, students are mostly taught on how to switch on and off the computer, as well as some basic computer program such as Microsoft Word, Excel and PowePoint. In areas where there is internet connection they also learn internet applications. Teachers are not yet using ICT as a tool to enhance teaching and learning in their subjects. The delay in the development of ICT integration in education is caused by the apparent lack of commitment and inadequate resources from the government for information technology, lack of competent teachers and delay of an effective information technology policy in education (Hare, 2007; Tilya, 2008). As a method of addressing incompetency in ICT integration in teaching among teachers, the Ministry of Education and Vocational Training (MoEVT) formulated the Information and Communication Technology for Teacher Professional Development (ICT-TPD) framework (URT, 2009). The framework was developed to address challenges of teacher shortages in key subjects (Mathematics and Science), teacher quality and teacher support using the existing ICT infrastructure in the Teacher Training Colleges (TTCs) for pre-service and in-service programmes and on-going learning of teachers (URT, 2009).
The Ministry of Education in Tanzania, through the support by the Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency (Sida), initiated the ICT-Connect-TED programme for introducing ICT in teachers’ training colleges (TTC) in 2002. The programme was initiated on the view that, the poor performance of teachers in science and mathematics teaching is often caused by a lack of information and the absence of the means to communicate and cooperate effectively with their peers in other schools. Thus, the programme aimed at improving the quality of teacher education by using ICTs to improve both pre- service and in-service teacher education (Hare, 2007). ICT-Connect-TED has managed to provide 44 teachers training colleges in Tanzania with computers and networking infrastructure that allows participating teachers to exchange information through internet. By the end of 2004, the project had managed to achieve its goal of connecting all Tanzania’s teacher training colleges with the internets and setting up a network that links all of them together. The project is now focusing on content development, via a regular newsletter and other communication related activities including ICT training for TTC staff (IICD, 2010). It is expected that at the end of ICT-Connect-TED project, all colleges will be equipped with thin client computers with a server and internet access. Tutor technicians are also being trained on support and networking essentials to be able to offer installation and maintenance services to colleges. Although TTCs were equipped with ICT facilities since 2004, the ICT integration competency of the preservice teachers graduating from these colleges is still low (Tilya, 2008). No researches have been done yet to investigate how preservice teachers are trained to integrate technology with pedagogy and content in their teaching. But there is a great likelihood that, the ICT facilities available in colleges are not appropriately used to train teachers to become competent users of ICT in teaching.
The Dar es Salaam University College of Education (DUCE) is among the two constituent colleges of the University of Dar es salaam (the other being Mkwawa University College of Education), which were established by the Government of Tanzania in September 2005 to address the problem of acute shortage of graduate teachers as a result of the expansion of primary education enrolment through the Primary Education Development Plan (PEDP) (2002- 2006) and the creation of new secondary schools through the Secondary Education Development Plan (SEDP) (2004 -2009). The two government initiatives (PEDP & SEDP) created an enhanced demand for graduate teachers and tutors in the country. Being one of the public higher education institutions, DUCE has its primary business of educating and training, carrying out research and providing public service for improved quality of life of the Tanzanian people. The college envisages of becoming a reputable higher institution that efficiently gives high quality services with diligence as its vision and it strives to provide integrated high quality teaching, research, and consultancy services as its mission (www.duce.ac.tz).
At the moment DUCE has a population of 3550 students enrolled in four degree programmes (Bachelor of Arts with Education (BA.Ed), Bachelor of Science with Education (B.Sc.Ed), Bachelor of Education in Arts (B.Ed Arts) and Bachelor of Education in Science (B.Ed. Science). These degree programs are offered by three faculties (Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Science and Faculty of Education. The total number of staff is about 310 where by 159 (53.3%) are academic members of staff. The Bachelor of Education in Science; one of the degree programs offered by DUCE enrolls students with different science (Physics, Chemistry and Biology) and mathematics backgrounds. One of the expected learning outcomes from this Bachelor program is to provide sufficient depth in an academic discipline (Mathematics, Physics, Chemistry and Biology), focusing on the development of concepts and ideas as well as basic requirements of the modern school curriculum. In addressing the need for teachers who fit in the modern society and modern school curriculum, DUCE offers three ICT related courses to pre-service science and mathematics teachers: Computer Literacy for Teachers (3 units), Educational Media and Technology (3 units), and ICT in Science and Mathematics Education (3 units). 1 unit is equivalent to 15 one hour lectures; thus, 3 units is equivalent to 15 two hour lectures and 15 one hour seminars thus, a total of 45 hours (http://www.udsm.ac.tz/undergraduate/DUCE2009-10.pdf). The three courses are expected to provide a wide range of experiences to preservice teachers on how to work with technology and are widely offered by most teacher training colleges in the country.
However, DUCE as it is for most teachers training institutions in the country is experiencing some challenges in offering ICT related course. One of the challenges is insufficient ICT infrastructure and a lack of technological knowledge among the college instructors. The college has two computer labs, one in the faculty of education with approximately 10 working computers and the other in the faculty of science with approximately 20 working computers. In total there are 30 computers for 3500 students. Similarly there is one computer for the college staffs in each department with about 15 members of staff. Thus, the computer to student ratio is 1:117 and computer to staff ratio is 1:15. Computer labs are mostly open when there is an ICT related class which requires the use of computer. There is also one laptop and one projector in each faculty with over 60 academic staffs. In addition the college has only one television set to facilitate students learning. Overall, the college gets a very low internet bandwidth which makes it difficult for most synchronous communication and access to some learning sites that requires high bandwidth such as YouTube. This situation is found to affect the ICT use among instructors and preservice teachers, thus raising questions on whether preservice teachers at DUCE acquire the required competencies for ICT integration in teaching or not.
Hare (2007) and Resta & Laferriere (2008), present several factors which can either promote or hinder the implementation of ICT in teaching and learning. Table 1 presents the hindering and promoting factors to ICT implementation in secondary schools in Tanzania.
Table 1: Enabling and Constraining Factors for ICT Implementation in Schools (Hare, 2007)
Abbildung in dieser Leseprobe nicht enthalten
Resta & Laferriere (2008) also mention access to hardware, software, connectivity to the internet and access to high quality, culturally relevant content in local language as one of the challenges to effective integration of ICT in education. They also describe that access to creating, sharing and exchanging digital content and access to educators who know how to use digital tools and resources as other challenges. In addition, Resta & Laferriere put forward the importance of high quality research on the application of digital technologies to enhance learning. Absence of such researches hinders the understanding of the effective ICT integration approaches that can be of beneficial to students’ learning. This is true for Tanzania, where there are limited studies on the integration of technology pedagogy and content, which are the core of good teaching with technology. Thus this study seems important in a way towards the integration between pedagogical content knowledge and technological knowledge which has for a long time missed in the researches carried out in Tanzania.
This chapter provides a summary of literature related to technology integration in education and TPACK framework. The review is presented in five sub-sections which includes; ICT integration in education (section 3.1), TPACK in science and mathematics teaching (section 3.2), TPACK Competencies for Pre- service Science and Mathematics Teachers (section 3.3) and TPACK training package for preservice teachers (section 3.4). It also provides a summary and way forward towards preservice teachers TPACK development in section 3.5.
The idea of integrated knowledge of teachers is not new in teacher education. Discussion about the interplay of different components of knowledge to enhance teaching competencies started as far back as 1980s. One of the pioneers of the integrated knowledge for teachers was Shulman (1986) who focused on the importance of treating pedagogy and content knowledge as basic requirement for teacher training. Shulman traced as far back as 1870s, when pedagogy was ignored and attention was paid on content, and further in 1980 when it was conspicuously absent. “I propose that we look back even further than those 1875 tests for teachers and examine the history of the university as an institution to discern the sources for this distinction between content knowledge and pedagogical method ” (Shulman, 1986, 6). Since the presentation of the idea of pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) as a basis for teachers to deliver the required learning outcomes, there existed quietness until the early 1990s when the idea of technology started to be introduced in schools. In 1993, Marcinkiewicz, in his paper, “factors influencing computer use in the classroom”, described how easily or difficult could computer technology be integrated in teaching (cf. Voogt, 1993). Marcinkiewicz focused his discussion on how the attitude of teachers towards computer use in teaching is important in having technology integrated in education. Also in 1998, the International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE) developed the so called National Educational Technology Standards for teachers and students. In 2000, Roblyer reviewed those standards and provided a description on how best technology can be integrated in teaching to offer pleasing learning outcomes.
Most of the studies done from 1990s to 2000 had more focus on the overall use of technology in education. These studies put less attention on the relationship between technology and the previously identified competencies for teachers on pedagogical content knowledge. In 2005 two publications were made on the integration of pedagogy, content and technology. Niess (2005) tried to make a link between pedagogical content knowledge based on Shulmans idea, and technological knowledge, and described how the three components can interact to form TPCK. Mishra & Koehler (2005) also came up with the idea of TPCK as a core of good teaching with technology being as well built on the idea of Shulman. However the difference between the concepts put forward by Mishra & Koeler and that proposed by Niess, is that while Mishra & Koehler consider technology as everything that can support learning (pencil, chalkboard, analogy and digital equipments), Niess discussed technology in reference to analogy and digital equipments alone. In addition, Mishra & Koehler (2005) discussed technology integration in the general education while Niess (2005) focused on a specific subject (Mathematics). But both had a common idea of developing teachers’ knowledge on technology, pedagogy and content as important attributes for effective teaching with technology.
It is Mishra & Koehler (2006, 2009) who extended TPCK to TPACK and added the context as one of the important components in thinking of the integration between technology, pedagogy and content (cf. Harris, Mishra & Koehler, 2009). The context may refer to grade level of the students, schools or a class in which the technology is used. According to Koehler & Mishra (2009), teachers need to know what and how they apply technology in the unique contexts within their classrooms. A teacher is urged to also develop an ability to flexibly navigate the spaces defined by the three elements; content, pedagogy, and technology and the complex interactions among these elements in specific contexts (cf. Koehler & Mishra, 2009; Voogt, Tilya & van den Akker, 2009). Thus, technology integration programs should focus on the development of teachers’ knowledge of integrating technology, pedagogy and content.
There is a growing body of research (Niess et al, 2009) which indicates that, technologies, including graphing, and some computer based mathematics learning programs can enhance students’ conceptual and procedural knowledge of mathematics (Özgün-Koca, Meagher & Edwards, 2010; Webb, 2008). When teachers decide whether and how to use technology in their teaching, they need to consider the science or mathematics content that they will teach, the technology that they will use, and the pedagogical methods that they will employ” (Ozgun-Koca et al, 2010). This requires teachers to reflect on the critical relationships between content, technology and pedagogy (Koehler & Mishra, 2009; Niess et al, 2009). However, the ability of teachers to establish the relationship between content, pedagogy and technology, depends largely on the way they were taught to integrate technology in teaching. In the late 1980s and early 1990s, an examination of teachers’ science and mathematics PCK, revealed an overarching conception that teachers’ beliefs about how to teach science and mathematics generally were aligned with how they learned science and mathematics (Beyerbach et al, 2001; Niess et al, 2009). Teachers who learned to solve science and mathematics problems through the use of graphing calculators, spreadsheets and some learning software were among the few who embraced the use of those tools in teaching science and mathematics (Niess et al, 2009).
Niess and colleagues, see the low uptake of technology by teachers as being mostly associated with the poor knowledge of science and mathematics, instructional strategies and representations of a particular science or mathematical topics supported by digital technologies to demonstration, verification, and drill and practice (cf. Koehler & Mishra, 2009; Webb, 2008). Also their knowledge of students’ understandings, thinking, and learning in mathematics held to the importance of mastery of skills with paper and pencil prior to using modern digital technologies was found to hinder the uptake of technology by teachers (Kastberg & Leatham, 2005, cited in Niess et al, 2009). In their study, Niess and colleagues found that, access to technology without necessary knowledge of related science and mathematics curriculum materials did not encourage teachers to incorporate the technology in their classroom instruction. Thus, a reason why Mishra & Koehler (2009) insist on the need for teachers to know, not only the subject matter they teach but also the manner in which the subject matter can be changed by the application of technology. Thus, the need for science and mathematics teachers to participate in the training that cultivate the knowledge of various technologies as they are used in teaching and learning settings, and conversely, knowing how science and mathematics teaching might change as the result of using particular technologies seem to be inevitable.
At present, researchers (cf. LeBaron, McDonough& Robinson, 2009; Kirschner, Wubbels & Brekelmans, 2008; Mcdougall, 2008) are questioning the efficacy of teacher preparation for successful use of technology in schools and classrooms. LeBaron et al. (2009) believe that the quality of teaching with technology depends in some significance measures on the way teachers were taught to work with technology. There are still some challenges on how teachers are trained to integrate technology with pedagogy and content. Studies by Pope, Hare, & Howard (2002) and Selinger (2001) cited in Angeli (2005) found that preservice teacher education does not adequately prepare future teachers to teach with technology. In most teachers training colleges the concept of TPACK is still new, thus preservice teachers are still learning technology, pedagogy and content as independent subjects; not as integrated knowledge.
Bachelor Thesis, 31 Pages
Master's Thesis, 159 Pages
Research Paper (undergraduate), 29 Pages
Research Paper (postgraduate), 18 Pages
Research Paper (undergraduate), 11 Pages
Bachelor Thesis, 48 Pages
Doctoral Thesis / Dissertation, 178 Pages
Master's Thesis, 140 Pages
Term Paper (Advanced seminar), 37 Pages
Research Paper (postgraduate), 21 Pages
Research Paper (postgraduate), 13 Pages
Bachelor Thesis, 31 Pages
Master's Thesis, 159 Pages
Research Paper (undergraduate), 29 Pages
Bachelor Thesis, 48 Pages
Doctoral Thesis / Dissertation, 178 Pages
Master's Thesis, 140 Pages
Term Paper (Advanced seminar), 37 Pages
Research Paper (postgraduate), 21 Pages
Research Paper (postgraduate), 13 Pages
GRIN Publishing, located in Munich, Germany, has specialized since its foundation in 1998 in the publication of academic ebooks and books. The publishing website GRIN.com offer students, graduates and university professors the ideal platform for the presentation of scientific papers, such as research projects, theses, dissertations, and academic essays to a wide audience.
Free Publication of your term paper, essay, interpretation, bachelor's thesis, master's thesis, dissertation or textbook - upload now!