Technological pedagogical content knowledge is a framework to understand and describe the kinds of knowledge needed by a teacher for effective pedagogical practice in a technology-enhanced learning environment. Mishra and Koehler added technology as a modeling element to Lee Shulman's pedagogical content knowledge construct. They proposed that addressing content knowledge, pedagogical knowledge, and technology knowledge concurrently provides a framework for technology integration in the curriculum.
Framework
The TPACK framework looks at the relationships between technology, pedagogy, and content. A teacher capable of negotiating these relationships represents a form of expertise different from, and broader than, the knowledge of a disciplinary expert, a technology expert or an expert at teaching/pedagogy.
2-area overlap
Technology knowledge refers to an understanding of the way that technologies are used in a specific content domain. For example, for physics teachers, it is an understanding of the range of technologies that physicists use in science and industry. Within the context of technology integration in schools, it appears to most often refer to digital technologies such as laptops, the Internet, and software applications. TK does however go beyond digital literacy to having knowledge of how to change the purpose of existing technologies so that they can be used in a technology enhanced way. Content knowledge is "a thorough grounding in college-level subject matter" or "command of the subject". It may also include knowledge of concepts, theories, conceptual frameworks as well as knowledge about accepted ways of developing knowledge. Pedagogical knowledge includes generic knowledge about how students learn, teaching approaches, methods of assessment and knowledge of different theories about learning. This knowledge alone is necessary but insufficient for teaching purposes. In addition, a teacher requires content knowledge.
3-area overlap
Pedagogical content knowledge is knowledge about how to combine pedagogy and content effectively. This is knowledge about how to make a subject understandable to learners. Archambault and Crippen report that PCK includes knowledge of what makes a subject difficult or easy to learn, as well as knowledge of common misconceptions and likely preconceptions students bring with them to the classroom. Technological content knowledge refers to knowledge about how technology may be used to provide new ways of teaching content. For example, digital animation makes it possible for students to conceptualize how electrons are shared between atoms when chemical compounds are formed. Technological pedagogical knowledge refers to the affordances and constraints of technology as an enabler of different teaching approaches. For example online collaboration tools may facilitate social learning for geographically separated learners.
4-area overlap
Koehler and Mishra added technological T to Shulman's pedagogical content knowledge PCK, getting technology, pedagogy, and content TPCK or TPACK. Technological pedagogical content knowledge refers to the knowledge and understanding of the interplay between CK, PK and TK when using technology for teaching and learning. It includes an understanding of the complexity of relationships between students, teachers, content, practices and technologies.
Context
Teachers are limited by what they are able to do within their own environment. For example, teachers with limited access to technology are unable to use Web 2.0 tools available to students in schools that have ubiquitous access to the Internet. Time, training, and the nature of assessment in schools also impacts on how technology may be used in classrooms. Context is thus an important factor. Archambault and Crippen found that "adding the element of technology to Shulman's notion of pedagogical content knowledge befuddles an already complex model". They found that potential users of the framework found it difficult to define the boundaries of the different TPACK knowledge areas.
Criticism
Archambault and Crippen found that "adding the element of technology to Shulman's notion of pedagogical content knowledge befuddles an already complex model". They found that potential users of the framework found it difficult to define the boundaries of the different TPACK knowledge areas. Other authors have questioned the central construct, the TPCK, asking if it is actually a knowledge or rather an action. Philips, Koehler and Rosenberg provided an updated diagram which has the central overlap described as 'TPACK enactment'. Harris and Hofer's study group used the term 'Fit' to describe the conceptualisation and operationalisation of TPACK. These views of the central component, led other authors such as Byrne to describe the TPCK of TPACK as an action rather than a knowledge. Byrne altered Harris and Hoffer's description of TPCK from "How to teach specific content based material, using technologies that best embody and support it, in ways that are appropriately matched to students' needs and preferences" to "The actions we employ to teach specific content-based material, using technologies that best embody and support it, in ways that are appropriately matched to students' needs and preferences".
