The DOI matches its Crossref record; 74 of the 74 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Developing a short assessment instrument for Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK.xs) and comparing the factor structure of an integrative and a transformative model
Open accessAbstract
Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK) is regarded as one of the most important models describing teachers' competencies for successfully teaching with technology. TPACK is most frequently assessed by means of self-report questionnaires, which beside their inherent methodological limitations present constraints related either to the validity, reliability, or practical applicability of existing instruments. Furthermore, the internal structure of the TPACK framework is a topic of debate. The two goals of this study were (1) to develop a valid and reliable short questionnaire for measuring TPACK (TPACK.xs), and (2) to use this instrument to investigate TPACK's internal relations, assessing whether the framework reflects an integrative or a transformative view regarding how the TPACK knowledge domains interact. An initial questionnaire of 42 items was administered to 117 pre-service upper secondary school teachers. Reliability analysis and confirmatory factor analysis were used to reduce the number of items per subscale and fit the model. Structural equation modelling investigated the internal relations between components. Results show that the final TPACK.xs questionnaire, consisting of 28 items, can be considered a valid and reliable instrument for assessing pre-service teachers' TPACK. Furthermore, the internal relations of knowledge components support a transformative view of the TPACK model.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing
R Core Team (2025) · doi:10.32614/r.manuals · Cited by 352,181
Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999) · Structural Equation Modeling A Multidisciplinary Journal · doi:10.1080/10705519909540118 · Cited by 108,788
lavaan : An R Package for Structural Equation Modeling
Rosseel, Y. (2012) · Journal of Statistical Software · doi:10.18637/jss.v048.i02 · Cited by 27,955
Those Who Understand: Knowledge Growth in Teaching
SHULMAN, L. S. (1986) · Educational Researcher · doi:10.3102/0013189x015002004 · Cited by 18,546
Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform
Shulman, L. (1987) · Harvard Educational Review · doi:10.17763/haer.57.1.j463w79r56455411 · Cited by 16,787
Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge: A Framework for Teacher Knowledge
Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006) · Teachers College Record: The Voice of Scholarship in Education · doi:10.1111/j.1467-9620.2006.00684.x · Cited by 12,604
Structural Equation Modelling: Guidelines for Determining Model Fit
Hooper, D., Coughlan, J., & Mullen, M. R. (2008) · Dublin Institute of Technology · doi:10.21427/d7cf7r · Cited by 8,746
Reporting Structural Equation Modeling and Confirmatory Factor Analysis Results: A Review
Schreiber, J. B., Nora, A., Stage, F. K., Barlow, E. A., & King, J. (2006) · The Journal of Educational Research · doi:10.3200/joer.99.6.323-338 · Cited by 6,937 · cited 2×
“Scale: 1 ( strongly disagree ) to 5 ( strongly agree ); α ¼ Cronbach ’ s alpha; ω ¼ McDonald ’ s omega; N ¼ 117. the CFA (Hooper, Coughlan, & Mullen, 2012; Hu & Bentler, 1999; Schreiber, Nora, Stage, Barlow, & King, 2006).”
InfluentialStanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
(2015) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.187763 · Cited by 5,309
Principles and practice in reporting structural equation analyses.
McDonald, R. P., & Ho, M.-H. R. (2002) · Psychological Methods · doi:10.1037/1082-989x.7.1.64 · Cited by 4,734
Cited by
Celik, I. (2023) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2022.107468 · Cited by 1,012
Schmid, M., Brianza, E., & Petko, D. (2021) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2020.106586 · Cited by 312
Self-citationSchmid, M., Brianza, E., Mok, S. Y., & Petko, D. (2024) · Computers & Education · doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2024.105024 · Cited by 87
Self-citationTan, M., & Subramonyam, H. (2024) · Proceedings of the CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3613904.3642592 · Cited by 40
Fabian, A., Backfisch, I., Kirchner, K., & Lachner, A. (2024) · Computers and Education Open · doi:10.1016/j.caeo.2024.100200 · Cited by 34
Metadata
- Authors
- Schmid, M., Brianza, E., & Petko, D.
- Venue
- Computers & Education
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2020-11
- Volume
- 157
- Pages
- 103967
- ISSN
- 0360-1315 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W3040076314
- Cited by
- 312
- References
- 74
- FWCI
- 54.44
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Developing a short assessment instrument for Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK.xs) and comparing the factor structure of an integrative and a transformative model. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.compedu.2020.103967
- The paper
- Schmid, M., Brianza, E., & Petko, D. (2020). Developing a short assessment instrument for Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK.xs) and comparing the factor structure of an integrative and a transformative model. Computers & Education. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2020.103967
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.