Cited by 59Online and Blended LearningMathematics Education and Teaching TechniquesEvaluation of Teaching Practices

Using the TPACK framework to unite disciplines in online learning

Open access
Anderson, Alan, Barham, Nicholas, Northcote, Maria·2013·Australasian Journal of Educational Technology

Abstract

This paper builds on a previous case study in which a group of lecturers from various disciplines were interviewed about their practice as facilitators of online learning. The lecturers' comments about their teaching practices revealed their awareness of specific types of teacher knowledge about online teaching. This was an unintended outcome of the previous study. Subsequently, as reported in this paper, the data were interrogated further using a new lens to investigate the extent to which these elements of teacher knowledge were evident throughout their practices. The technological, pedagogical and content knowledge (TPACK) theoretical framework enabled the researchers to identify the lecturers' views about the content taught in online and blended environments, the pedagogy which guided teaching and course design, and the technology selected to facilitate students' learning. This paper also considers practical issues about using the TPACK framework as a research tool as a lens through which to view online teachers' knowledge about pedagogy, technology and content.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.14742/ajet.24

Cites

2 of 2 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?

  • Providing an integrated approach in relation to the different knowledge domains and the elements involved in online teaching and learning led to impact.

    “providing an integrated approach in relation to the different knowledge domains (Anderson, Barham, and Northcote 2013;Evens et al. 2017;Niess and Gillow-Wiles 2014) as well as the elements involved in the online teaching and learning”

    From COVID-19 and teacher education: a literature review of online teaching and learning practices (2020) · cites this paper as Anderson, Barham, and Northcote 2013

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Anderson, A., Barham, N., & Northcote, M.
Affiliations
  • University of Newcastle Australia (AU)
  • Avondale University (AU)
Venue
Australasian Journal of Educational Technology
Published
2013-09-18
Volume
29
Issue
4
ISSN
  • 1449-3098 (ISSN-L)
  • 1449-5554
OpenAlex
W1815891240
Cited by
59
References
2
Citations by year
2025: 3 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 1
FWCI
12.90
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by-nc-nd
Locations
  • Australasian Journal of Educational Technology (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • RUNE (Research UNE) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion)
  • NOVA (University of Newcastle Australia) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Education › Online and Blended Learning
  • Social Sciences › Education › Mathematics Education and Teaching Techniques
  • Social Sciences › Education › Evaluation of Teaching Practices
Keywords
TPACK, teacher knowledge, online learning, blended learning, lecturer teaching practices, course design, pedagogy, educational technology, content knowledge

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