Talkin' 'bout my cerebration.

I’ve been reading, thinking, concept mapping, reading again, thinking more about Technological Pedagogical and Content Knowledge (TPACK) framework as briefly outlined in my previous post.  In particular I have been thinking how this might actually look within the context of my practice.  Reflecting on the diagram embedded from the official TPACK wiki (in my previous post) the focus of intent is the represented in the centre, as the intersection between the three knowledge types.

However, in thinking about how I progress through a unit of work and how it can be related to the TPACK diagram, I come to the conclusion that I tend to act like a circling shark.  I don’t begin at the central point of the TPACK framework, but rather aim to end up there.  I see that focal point as the point at which the students are experiencing a range of learning experiences within which they negotiate the pathway.  If the three arms of the framework have been implemented effectively, learners may not see the distinction between the separate knowledge types.  I am aware there are times where I focus specifically on development of content knowledge.  I am also aware that simply because Content Knowledge is the focus at that specific time, I am not ignoring Pedagogical or Technological knowledge.

Within the discussion on the Classroom 2.0 site where TPACK is presented, Punya Mishra (one of the professors credited with development of the TPACK framework) states that the framework is a continuum, in reference to teacher development.  I am beginning to think that it may also be a continuum in reference to point in time learning management.  I envisage myself as a single point roaming through the diagram, progressively getting closer to the central focus.

The reflection above does take the point of view of the TPACK framework as a working / implementation framework.  If I consider it as a planning framework then I recognise a very different approach.  I’m not quite sure how this might look in application.  The point Punya Mishra makes on the Classroom 2.0 discussion is important though – The important goal is that opportunities to develop TPACK, whether for a beginner or an expert, deal with all three of these components together, not independent of each other.

As I write this, it becomes clear to me that the three types of knowledge are well known.  Whilst at university I took many courses built on Content Knowledge and a few built on Pedagogical Knowledge.  Since teaching I have had many opportunities to experience Professional Development built on Technological Knowledge.  Rarely have I experienced them in partnership though.  So this will be a real challenge for me.  Especially as I (possibly) use it to develop my ability to build capacity of teachers.  Currently within my school I am working in a range of paths represented by this framework.  For some teachers I am definitely focused on pure Technological Knowledge.  I don’t believe that individually I can target the convergence of the three knowledge types.

Consider that I am trained within a specific subject discipline, and therefore have specialist knowledge.  This would suggest as an individual I could only build the TPACK capability of teachers within the same subject discipline.  As an individual I could address the convergence of Technological and Pedagogical Knowledge within teachers not teaching within my subject discipline.  And this in itself highlights a very important factor in the continual development of teachers – an individual approach cannot be completely effective.  Any person responsible for the Professional Development of teachers needs to engage in a team setting, and I suggest this is most effectively done with the specific clientele who have elected to attend your seminar, workshop or session.

My brain is exceptionally jumbled with the thinking around this framework (could you tell?) at the moment, hoping for some clarity on Tuesday.