Search

Emerging technologies present new possibilities for schools, but also present ethical issues for designers. Ethical issues arising from the design, accessibility, adoption, and implementation of emerging technologies in schools are intertwined with existing power dynamics, hierarchies, and decision-making norms that perpetuate entrenched systems. Using a framework called the fives spaces for design in education framework as an analytical lens, we explore the ethical implications of two emerging artificial intelligence technologies in education: remote proctoring software and large language models. We find that designers adopting and implementing these emerging technologies must attend to the consequences of past design decisions and recognize that emerging technologies also create places for resistance and contestations. Lastly, by recognizing the wide scope of what can be redesigned, designers can start to see possibilities for redesigning in ways that are inclusive, equitable, and ethically conscious. Ultimately, we hope to begin a critical conversation about the two technologies by thinking about the sites of consequence, contestation, and possibilities in the designed cultures, systems, experiences, processes, and artifacts of schooling.

This article reflects on the transformative nature of generative AI (GenAI) tools for teaching and teacher education, both reflecting on current innovation and consider future potentials and challenges. In that sense, we aim to position the field of education going forward with the implications of new technologies like GenAI for education and educational research. We argue the need for a dual-lens approach. First and foremost, practice and research should focus on the here-and-now, i.e. how to design powerful learning experiences for pre-service and in-service teachers for them to be productive, creative, critical, and ethical users. But there is also a need for a deeper, longer view--based on sociological and historical trends and patterns that will influence the socio-techno-cultural matrix within which education functions in the long term. We begin with a brief introduction to GenAI technologies. This is followed by an in-depth discussion of the fundamental nature of GenAI tools--their similarities and differences to prior technologies, and the implications for teacher education and research.

Theoretical work is essential to the progress of any discipline. Theories, models, and frameworks are underdetermined representations of a phenomenon that help us understand and take action in a domain. However, the field of learning design and technology (LDT) has traditionally struggled with developing a solid theoretical foundation that is useful for both research and practice. We propose viewing theory building as an act of design might address these challenges. After defining key constructs and describing two approaches to theory development, we describe three design perspectives that might be useful for theory development: Lawson and Dorst's (Design expertise, Elsevier, Amsterdam, 2009) view of design as a combination of analytical (problem-based) and creative (solution-based) moves, Schön's (The reflective practitioner: how professionals think in action, Basic Books, New York, 1983) reflection-in-action, and design as dialogic interpretation (Snodgrass and Coyne in Des Issues 9(1):56-74, 10.2307/1511599, 1992). We use a case study to illustrate each perspective. We conclude with implications of a design approach to theory creation, including how design perspectives enable scholars to design possible futures.

This article offers a critical review of the literature on 21st century knowledge frameworks, with a particular focus on what this means for teachers and teacher educators. The authors accomplish this by identifying common themes and knowledge domains in 15 reports, books, and articles that describe the kinds of knowledge that researchers state are integral and important for success in the 21st century. The authors argue that seemingly disparate frameworks converge on three types of knowledge, as necessary for the 21st century: foundational, meta, and humanistic. Although 21st century frameworks are thought to advocate new types of knowledge, little has actually changed in the new century with respect to the overall goals of education. Despite this sense of continuity, significant changes related to how technologies change all three types of knowledge need to be conveyed. The article ends with specific conclusions and recommendations for teacher education. (Contains 1 figure and 10 tables.)

This is the age of cool tools. Facebook, iPhone, Flickr, blogs, cloud computing, Smart Boards, YouTube, Google Earth, and GPS are just a few examples of new technologies that bombard people from all directions. As individuals people see a new technology and can appreciate its coolness, but as educators they wonder how these tools can be used for teaching. The fact that a technology is innovative and popular does not make it an educational technology. But these technologies have the potential to fundamentally change the way people think about teaching and learning. Repurposing these cool tools for educational purposes, however, is not simple. If educators are to repurpose tools and integrate them into their teaching, they require a specific kind of knowledge that is called technological pedagogical and content knowledge (TPACK). In this article, the authors provide three examples of technology that can be repurposed for educational ends--microblogging, visual search engines, and music DJ software. All of these examples were developed by a team of Punya Mishra's graduate students.

In this paper we critically analyze extant approaches to technology integration in teaching, arguing that many current methods are technocentric, often omitting sufficient consideration of the dynamic and complex relationships among content, technology, pedagogy, and context. We recommend using the technology, pedagogy, and content knowledge (TPACK) framework as a way to think about effective technology integration, recognizing technology, pedagogy, content and context as interdependent aspects of teachers' knowledge necessary to teach content-based curricula effectively with educational technologies. We offer TPACK-based "activity types," rooted in previous research about content-specific activity structures, as an alternative to existing professional development approaches and explain how this new way of thinking may authentically and successfully assist teachers' and teacher educators' technology integration efforts. (Contains 1 figure, 3 tables and 2 footnotes.)

Video is a powerful medium for communication and learning. With increased accessibility to digital video production equipment, an important question is what role teacher production of video might have in teacher education. Using the lens of design that highlights authenticity, efficacy, and expressiveness as goals, 38 in-service teachers designed videos for use in their classrooms. Interview data investigating the outcome of this activity suggests an effect on teacher thinking in five areas including: (1) instructional outcomes; (2) instructional design; (3) classroom performance; (4) process versus product; and (5) considering the needs of all learners. Data also highlights cautions about the practical use of these technologies in the daily work of teachers. (Contains 1 table.)

Although there has been much debate about "what" teachers need to know about technology, less attention has been paid to "how" they are supposed to learn it. Teacher preparation programs need to go beyond merely training teachers in how to use specific software and hardware tools, and instead focus on developing an understanding of the complex set of interrelationships between artifacts, users, tools, and practices. In this paper, we introduce and advocate a "Learning By Design" approach that can help teachers develop a flexible and situated understanding of technology. In this approach, inservice teachers work collaboratively in small groups to develop technological solutions to authentic pedagogical problems. We introduce the Learning by Design strategy and provide examples of its use in three different courses. We summarize what teachers learn in this approach, focusing on learning about technology, learning about design, and learning about learning.

In this study, we followed three faculty members' experiences with designing and teaching online courses for the first time. In order to complete the activity, the faculty members had to work collaboratively with others across the university. Activity theory provided a framework within which to study faculty members' collaborative activities with members of different activity systems that had different goals, tools, divisions of labor and accountabilities. In concordance with activity theory, such differences led to contradictions, disturbances, and transformations in thinking and work activities. The results of the study have implications for individuals and systems undertaking technology integration in teaching.

In this article, we explore creativity alongside educational technology, as fundamental constructs of 21st century education. Creativity has become increasingly important, as one of the most important and noted skills for success in the 21st century. We offer a definition of creativity; and draw upon a systems model of creativity, to suggest creativity emerges and exists within a system, rather than only at the level of individual processes. We suggest that effective infusion of creativity and technology in education must be considered in a three-fold systemic manner: at the levels of teacher education, assessment, and educational policy. We provide research and practical implications with broad recommendations across these three areas, to build discourse around infusion of creative thinking and technology in 21st century educational systems.

This article describes the design and implementation of the year 2 curriculum and student learning experiences in the Michigan State University Master of Arts in Educational Technology program. We discuss the ways that this second set of courses builds on the first year of the program that students encounter, and also describe the theoretical impetus and design-based implications for learning how to teach with technology in effective and creative ways. Students in this group usually come in with some prior knowledge of educational theory, as well as some experience of working with classroom technologies. We intentionally build upon this prior knowledge, to take it to the next level of a more sophisticated TPACK-oriented understanding of learning in technology-driven contexts. Our year 2 courses move classical educational psychology theories of learning, along with educational research issues, squarely into the modern context of educational technology and teacher leadership. Our curriculum design focuses centrally on making meaningful experiences for teachers around technology, and helping them develop the knowledge and skills to create such experiences for their students. Our goal is to develop teachers who see themselves as flexible designers of learning experiences through the creative re-purposing of existing technologies.

This paper describes a framework for teacher knowledge for technology integration called technological pedagogical content knowledge (originally TPCK, now known as TPACK, or technology, pedagogy, and content knowledge). This framework builds on Lee Shulman's construct of pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) to include technology knowledge. The development of TPACK by teachers is critical to effective teaching with technology. The paper begins with a brief introduction to the complex, ill-structured nature of teaching. The nature of technologies (both analog and digital) is considered, as well as how the inclusion of technology in pedagogy further complicates teaching. The TPACK framework for teacher knowledge is described in detail, as a complex interaction among three bodies of knowledge: Content, pedagogy, and technology. The interaction of these bodies of knowledge, both theoretically and in practice, produces the types of flexible knowledge needed to successfully integrate technology use into teaching. (Contains 1 figure.)

Effective technology integration for teaching subject matter requires knowledge not just of content, technology and pedagogy, but also of their relationship to each other. Building on Schulman's [Schulman, L. S. (1987). "Knowledge and teaching: foundations for a new reform." "Harvard Educational Review," 57(1), 1-22] concept of pedagogical content knowledge, we introduce a framework for conceptualizing "Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge"--TPCK [Mishra, P., Koehler, M.J., (in press). "Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A new framework for teacher knowledge." Teachers College Record]. We report the results of a semester-long investigation of the development of TPCK during a faculty development design seminar, whereby faculty members worked together with masters students to develop online courses. Quantitative discourse analysis of 15 weeks of field notes for two of the design teams show participants moved from considering technology, pedagogy and content as being independent constructs towards a richer conception that emphasized connections among the three knowledge bases. Our analyses suggests that developing TPCK is a multigenerational process, involving the development of deeper understandings of the complex web of relationships between content, pedagogy and technology and the contexts in which they function. Pedagogic, pragmatic, theoretical, and methodological contributions are discussed.

Research in the area of educational technology has often been critiqued for a lack of theoretical grounding. In this article we propose a conceptual framework for educational technology by building on Shulman's formulation of "pedagogical content knowledge" and extend it to the phenomenon of teachers integrating technology into their pedagogy. This framework is the result of 5 years of work on a program of research focused on teacher professional development and faculty development in higher education. It attempts to capture some of the essential qualities of teacher knowledge required for technology integration in teaching, while addressing the complex, multifaceted, and situated nature of this knowledge. We argue, briefly, that thoughtful pedagogical uses of technology require the development of a complex, situated form of knowledge that we call Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPCK). In doing so, we posit the complex roles of, and interplay among, three main components of learning environments: content, pedagogy, and technology. We argue that this model has much to offer to discussions of technology integration at multiple levels: theoretical, pedagogical, and methodological. In this article, we describe the theory behind our framework, provide examples of our teaching approach based upon the framework, and illustrate the methodological contributions that have resulted from this work.

This article reports the results of an experimental study on multimedia learning environments, which investigated the impact of increasing the social behaviors of a pedagogical agent on students' perceptions of social presence, their perceptions of the learning experience, and learning. Paradoxically, in this experiment students detected higher degrees of social presence in both the text only and the fully animated social agent conditions than students in the voice only and the static image of the agent with voice conditions. Furthermore, students had more positive perceptions of the learning experience in the text only condition. The results support the careful design of social behaviors for animated pedagogical agents if they are to be of educational value, otherwise, the use of agent technology can actually detract from the learning experience. (Contains 1 table and 3 figures.)

We introduce Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPCK) as a way of representing what teachers need to know about technology, and argue for the role of authentic design-based activities in the development of this knowledge. We report data from a faculty development design seminar in which faculty members worked together with masters students to develop online courses. We developed and administered a survey that assessed the evolution of student-and faculty-participants' learning and perceptions about the learning environment, theoretical and practical knowledge of technology, course content (the design of online courses), group dynamics, and the growth of TPCK. Analyses focused on observed changes between the beginning and end of the semester. Results indicate that participants perceived that working in design teams to solve authentic problems of practice to be useful, challenging and fun. More importantly, the participants, both as individuals and as a group, appeared to have developed significantly in their knowledge of technology application, as well as in their TPCK. In brief, learning by design appears to be an effective instructional technique to develop deeper understandings of the complex web of relationships between content, pedagogy and technology and the contexts in which they function.

The Web has caught the attention of many educators as an efficient communication medium and content delivery system. But we feel there is another aspect of the Web that has not been given the attention it deserves. We call this aspect of the Web its "component architecture." Briefly it means that on the Web one can develop very complex applications, not from scratch, but rather by mixing and matching a selected array of specialized modules. We argue that this component architecture allows us to easily and inexpensively develop complex, diverse, dynamic, and pedagogically sound educational software. Additionally this component architecture changes the way teachers think about and teach with technology. It also has implications for how we teach the next generation of educational technology designers. In this article we discuss the advantages of the Web as a component framework for educational software development by examining three web-based learning environments. The three environments are different in many ways and were developed on different computer platforms, but all took advantage of the component architecture of the Web. We also explore the implications of the component concept for teachers and educational technologists. (Contains 1 table and 1 figure.)

The article discusses various reports published within the issue which includes creativity in education, effective uses of technology for teaching and learning and graduate level course for in-service teachers to develop their own creativity.

A key complication facing teachers who seek to integrate technology in their teaching is the fact that most technologies are not designed for educational purposes. Making a tool an educational technology requires creative input from the teacher to re-design, or maybe even subvert the original intentions of the designer. The learning technology by design (LT/D) framework has been proposed as being an effective instructional technique to develop deeper understanding of technological pedagogical content knowledge. In this paper we expand our description of the LT/D technique to develop what we call a deep-play model for teacher professional development. The deep-play model integrates: a) pedagogy for key 21st century learning skills; b) content that cuts across disciplines with trans-disciplinary cognitive tools; c) technology by the creative repurposing of tools for pedagogical purposes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper discusses new literacy practices that can be enabled through the creative repurposing of digital technologies. We frame the discussion within the Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK) framework. TPACK is a form of knowledge that teachers need to have in order to successfully integrate technology in their teaching. TPACK argues for the idea of teachers as designers of curriculum, who repurpose existing technical tools for pedagogical purposes. Finally we offer a set of implications of this approach for teacher preparation programs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper describes a framework for teacher knowledge for technology integration called technological pedagogical content knowledge (originally TPCK, now known as TPACK, or technology, pedagogy, and content knowledge). This framework builds on Lee Shulman's construct of pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) to include technology knowledge. The development of TPACK by teachers is critical to effective teaching with technology. The paper begins with a brief introduction to the complex, illstructured nature of teaching. The nature of technologies (both analog and digital) is considered, as well as how the inclusion of technology in pedagogy further complicates teaching. The TPACK framework for teacher knowledge is described in detail, as a complex interaction among three bodies of knowledge: Content, pedagogy, and technology. The interaction of these bodies of knowledge, both theoretically and in practice, produces the types of flexible knowledge needed to successfully integrate technology use into teaching. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses the study "Effectiveness of Reading and Mathematics Software Products: Findings From the First Student Cohort" released by the National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance in the U.S. It cites that the key finding of the study is the use of preselected educational software products did not make a significant difference in student test scores. It notes that the investigation of technology use would help in the understanding of the interaction of students and teachers with educational software.

Although there has been much debate about what teachers need to know about technology, less attention has been paid to how they are supposed to learn it. Teacher preparation programs need to go beyond merely training teachers in how to use specific software and hardware tools, and instead focus on developing an understanding of the complex set of interrelationships between artifacts, users, tools, and practices. In this paper, we introduce and advocate a Learning By Design approach that can help teachers develop a flexible and situated understanding of technology. In this approach, inservice teachers work collaboratively in small groups to develop technological solutions to authentic pedagogical problems. We introduce the Learning by Design strategy and provide examples of its use in three d#rent courses. We summarize what teachers learn in this approach, focusing on learning about technology, learning about design, and learning about learning. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We introduce Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPCK) as a way of representing what teachers need to know about technology, and argue for the role of authentic design-based activities in the development of this knowledge. We report data from a faculty development design seminar in which faculty members worked together with masters students to develop online courses. We developed and administered a survey that assessed the evolution of student- and faculty-participants' learning and perceptions about the learning environment, theoretical and practical knowledge of technology, course content (the design of online courses), group dynamics, and the growth of TPCK. Analyses focused on observed changes between the beginning and end of the semester. Results indicate that participants perceived that working in design teams to solve authentic problems of practice to be useful, challenging and fun. More importantly, the participants, both as individuals and as a group, appeared to have developed significantly in their knowledge of technology application, as well as in their TPCK. In brief, learning by design appears to be an effective instructional technique to develop deeper understandings of the complex web of relationships between content, pedagogy and technology and the contexts in which they function. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Although some educational technology theorists and researchers view technology as a set of neutral tools, recent theoretical and empirical work has begun to examine technology as a social actor in relationships with humans. Drawing on recent research on people's psychological responses to interactive media, this study looked at people's emotional responses to computers when they felt that the computer had cheated them. Specifically we looked at whether people would act spitefully towards a computer (by attempting to punish it) when treated unfairly in an ultimatum bargaining game. Our findings suggest humans do treat machines as social actors, enter into psychological contracts with them, and act spitefully after feeling betrayed. We end with a discussion on implications for the design of educational software. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Web has caught the attention of many educators as an efficient communication medium and content delivery system. But we feel there is another aspect of the Web that has not been given the attention it deserves. We call this aspect of the Web its "component architecture." Briefly it means that on the Web one can develop very complex applications, not from scratch, but rather by mixing and matching a selected array of specialized modules. We argue that this component architecture allows us to easily and inexpensively develop complex, diverse, dynamic, and pedagogically sound educational software. Additionally this component architecture changes the way teachers think about and teach with technology. It also has implications for how we teach the next generation of educational technology designers. In this article we discuss the advantages of the Web as a component framework for educational software development by examining three web-based learning environments. The three environments are different in many ways and were developed on different computer platforms, but all took advantage of the component architecture of the Web. We also explore the implications of the component concept for teachers and educational technologists. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses various reports published within the issue, including one by Ismail Sahin on faculty instructional and faculty mainstream computer use and another by Jane Strawhecker, Ken Messersmith, and Amanda Baicom addressing the issue on teacher educators who are integrating electronic portfolio work into their programs.