Cited by 35Mathematics Education and Teaching TechniquesEducation and Technology IntegrationTeacher Education and Leadership Studies

A systematic review and meta-analysis on TPACK-based interventions from a perspective of knowledge integration

Open access
Fabian, Armin, Backfisch, Iris, Kirchner, Kenneth, Lachner, Andreas·2024·Computers and Education Open

Abstract

Designing effective interventions that foster (pre-service) teachers' knowledge to teach with technologies is paramount in education research . Researchers have prominently relied on the TPACK-model as theoretical foundation to design such interventions. However, a myriad of distinct TPACK-based interventions emerged, which likely targeted the different knowledge components of TPACK to varying extents. Given this diversity and the lack of performance-based measures to estimate competence growth, little is known about the effectiveness of respective interventions. In the present synthesis study, we therefore sought to systemize TPACK-based interventions regarding targeted knowledge domains across various contexts. Accordingly, we scrutinized which of the TPACK-components were explicitly targeted in TPACK-based interventions within the framework of a systematic review . Further, we conducted a subsequent meta-analysis based on studies applying performance-based measures to investigate whether the targeted knowledge domains affected the effectiveness of interventions. Based on a set of N = 163 primary intervention studies and one theoretical contribution, our analyses suggest that Technological Knowledge was the most prominent targeted TPACK-component. Interestingly, in more than 20% of the interventions, specific training on Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (i.e., TPCK) was absent although TPCK is considered crucial for successful technology integration. Results furt…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.caeo.2024.100200

Cites

221 of 221 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. *Fenton, 2021, Preparing elementary preservice teachers to integrate technology: examining the effects of a new science course sequence with technology infusion, Electron J Res Sci Math Educ, 26, 23
  2. *Hardy, 2010, Enhancing preservice mathematics teachers’ TPCK, J Comput Math Sci Teach, 29, 73
  3. *Lyublinskaya, 2014, A study of special education teachers’ TPACK development in mathematics and science through assessment of lesson plans, J Technol Teacher Educ, 22, 449

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Fabian, A., Backfisch, I., Kirchner, K., & Lachner, A.
Affiliations
University of Tübingen (DE)
Corresponding author
Fabian, Armin
Venue
Computers and Education Open
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2024-12
Volume
7
Pages
100200
ISSN
2666-5573 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4400804766
Cited by
34
References
221
Citations by year
2026: 22 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 3
FWCI
4.67
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Computers and Education Open (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Federal Ministry of Education and Research Berlin Office
  • State of Baden-Wurttemberg Ministry for Science Research and Art
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Education › Mathematics Education and Teaching Techniques
  • Social Sciences › Education › Education and Technology Integration
  • Social Sciences › Education › Teacher Education and Leadership Studies
Keywords
TPACK, pre-service teachers, teacher training intervention, technological knowledge, technological pedagogical content knowledge, knowledge integration, intervention effectiveness, performance-based measures, intervention design

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review