on March 8 2022 at 4:27 p.m.
Welcome to the SITE 2022 TP(A)CK Symposium, which is happening on Wednesday, 4/13/22 at 10:15 AM - 12:30 PM Pacific Time!
Please use this discussion space during the symposium (both hours) to post your "backchannel" reflections and questions in response to what the symposium presenters will be sharing. Near the end of the symposium, Judi will share the primary themes from your posts briefly, inviting further (live) discussion if time permits.
I have a request. Please make sure this symposium will be streamed online too. Much appreciated. Salma
in reply to Judi Harris
If you click where it says Tidepool 2 above, it should open the Zoom room for you. I'll also be monitoring the Zoom room and chat during the symposium once the presentations begin.
in reply to Salma Ali
I like the coordination of TPACK with inquiry based learning. TPACK is pedagogic neutral so by pairing we can better prioritize the pedagogy we believe to be most effective.
And as we noted in the introduction, choosing the right technology to match student learning outcomes should be intentional to reflect best pedagogic practice.
in reply to Daniel Mourlam
Our challenge was to develop discipline-specific TPACK in non-discipline specific course, so cognitive demand and inquiry were high-impact strategies that applied to different disciplines in a different way. Thus, we aligned TPACK levels with the levels in these two models adapted for techology use to define what it means higher or lower level of TPACK.
Great info.. When I click on the link of your session for the papers, only the Proposal comes up with the abstracts. how can we get your great. papers? Thanks so much
I checked online and it only allows to upload one paper and one presentation. I suggest we share our presentations with Rebecca and Dan, and you can compile them into a single file that could be uploaded.
Thank you, Irina. They should be able to access them through LearnTechLib as well. You can also share with Dan and me, and we will send them out to the SIG.
Sure, I will. I uploaded it, but it is hidden right now as I did not see any other presentations for sumposium
in reply to Rebecca Blankenship
Why was the context put on the outside as a circle and not within the actual TPACK model?
My thoughts is that knowledge is contextual, TPACK is knowledge, so it is contextual, it relates to specific population and discipline, school context, etc. Thus TPACK is within context always.
Salma Ali writes:
I would say that context is the entry point or the gate for this framework. TPACK enacted in a particular context.
Lynn Hartle writes:
Thanks for including those of us in ECE…and recognizing the distinctions for young children
I wonder how we take into account health issues related to youg children using technology. Should that be part of TPACK of early childhood educators?
I think that is a great question, particularly in terms of selecting age and cognitive appropriate digital content.
in reply to Irina Lyublinskaya
We view health issues as encompassed in PK with the focus on developmentally appropriate practice in the selection and use of technology.
Rebecca Blankenship writes:
What considerations were given to Vygotsky's ZPD and moving from object, to other, to self-regulation?
What kind of "technology" is included in TPACK for early childhood educators?
Sharo Dickerson writes:
If health issues are taken into account and integrated in the TPACK implementation when delivering instruction, I think there will be more buy in from public school education
As an active K-12 practitioner, social emotional learning is highly important among learners
I wonder whether AK, affective knowledge, is a part of CK for early childhood education and also a part of XK, ConteXtual Knowledge.
I had a similar thought but was wondering if it fit with PK?
in reply to Yi Jin
Considering the role of CK in ECE (and other contexts too, for example if we think of interdisciplinary teaching), I was wondering if there is the need to slightly broaden our understanding of CK from traditional view of knowledge of “subject matter” to a more generalized view of “what is being learned”/“the message”?
Exactly. I have been thinking about this as well. I think in ECE, social-emotional learning is a concrete subject for teaching and learning, although it might not be a content area.
in reply to Eliana Brianza
Were the teachers able to use the digital badges for in-service hours?
This is wonderful to see in-service teachers as your participants. Mostly researchers have been conducted on preservice teachers' TPACK development.
Teachers not being prepared for teaching with tech or in digital spaces is a systemic problem and Covid showed us how poorly prepared teachers are in this area. Moving forward we need to think differently about how we prepare teachers to integrate tech.
Agree to some extent. A barrier that causes the lack of consistency in developing teachers using digital tools and spaces effectively is the emphasis on state accountability and assessments.
In Yi’s presentation she shared that preservice teacher knowledge decreased pre-post and I’m wondering if this is a calibration effect where they thought they knew more than they did and then after completing the activities they realized they had less knowledge even though they benefitted from the activities? Curious if this is a trajectory teacher knowledge will take and the impact that will have on the design and structure of their development experiences.
I think of the same. I also wonder whether self-reported data is a good measure and whether pre- and post-design is appropriate for pre-service teachers because they don't know what they don't know at the pre-test.
From Meliss and Tracey's Presentation:
Here is Yi's presentation link: https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1nacZDgQI4C0P7moq1QMAV0h-z9IA8dfJXZJrrNpyBHI/edit?usp=sharing
Can perfectly relate to you, Tracy, with regard to scripted curriculum provided by the state education agency
Log in to post a a comment in this discussion.