The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A comprehensive investigation of TPACK within pre-service teachers’ ICT profiles: Mind the gap!
Open accessAbstract
This study aims to identify profiles of pre-service teachers in order to explore their readiness to integrate technology in education. The assumption is that pre-service teacher characteristics such as technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK), go together with the influence of their teacher training. Specifically, this study examines whether pre-service teachers can be clustered on the basis of their TPACK, a typical set of ICT-related characteristics (e.g., general ICT attitudes, attitudes towards ICT in education, ease of use, ICT self-efficacy), and the perceived support at their training institution to adequately integrate ICT in education. Data were collected from a sample of 688 last-year pre-service teachers in 18 teacher training institutions in Flanders (the Dutch-speaking part of Belgium). Using correlational and latent profile analysis, the results suggest that: (1) two profiles can be distinguished, (2) TPACK and other individual ICT-related characteristics are positively correlated, and (3) pre-service teachers in a profile with strong TPACK, attitudes, and self-efficacy scores also report high scores on the support they perceive at their teacher training institution. Implications for the role of teacher training institutions are discussed with a specific focus on how to close the gap between the two identified profiles.
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
Nylund, K. L., Asparouhov, T., & Muthén, B. O. (2007) · Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal · doi:10.1080/10705510701575396 · Cited by 11,415
Testing the number of components in a normal mixture
Lo, Y. (2001) · Biometrika · doi:10.1093/biomet/88.3.767 · Cited by 4,640
The New Meaning of Educational Change
Fullan, M. (2001) · doi:10.4324/9780203986561 · Cited by 4,373
Sang, G., Valcke, M., Braak, J. V., & Tondeur, J. (2010) · Computers & Education · doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2009.07.010 · Cited by 840
Self-citationAbbitt, J. T. (2011) · Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education · doi:10.1080/21532974.2011.10784670 · Cited by 472 · cited 1×
“…reason, many researchers have centred on critical individual characteristics associated with TPACK, such as pre-service teachers’ attitudes (e.g., Holland & Piper, 2016), ease of use (e.g., Teo & Milutinovic, 2015), and their self-efficacy (e.g., Abbitt, 2011; Siddiq, Scherer, & Tondeur, 2016).”
Background
Cited by
A review of research exploring teacher preparation for the digital age
Starkey, L. (2020) · Cambridge Journal of Education · doi:10.1080/0305764x.2019.1625867 · Cited by 492
Bai, X., Guo, R., & Gu, X. (2024) · Education and Information Technologies · doi:10.1007/s10639-023-12343-x · Cited by 36
Brianza, E., Schmid, M., Tondeur, J., & Petko, D. (2024) · Education and Information Technologies · doi:10.1007/s10639-023-11801-w · Cited by 25
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Tondeur, J., Scherer, R., Siddiq, F., & Baran, E.
- Venue
- Australasian Journal of Educational Technology
- Published
- 2017-07-24
- Volume
- 33
- Issue
- 3
- ISSN
- 1449-3098 (ISSN-L)
- 1449-5554
- OpenAlex
- W2737135340
- Cited by
- 191
- References
- 5
- FWCI
- 25.47
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- diamond
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: A comprehensive investigation of TPACK within pre-service teachers’ ICT profiles: Mind the gap! https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.14742/ajet.3504
- The paper
- Tondeur, J., Scherer, R., Siddiq, F., & Baran, E. (2017). A comprehensive investigation of TPACK within pre-service teachers’ ICT profiles: Mind the gap! Australasian Journal of Educational Technology. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.3504
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.
