RESEARCH PAPER
Factors impacting science and mathematics teachers’ competencies and self-efficacy in TPACK for PBL and STEM
 
More details
Hide details
1
College of Education, Qatar University, Doha, QATAR
 
 
Online publication date: 2024-04-17
 
 
Publication date: 2024-05-01
 
 
EURASIA J. Math., Sci Tech. Ed 2024;20(5):em2442
 
KEYWORDS
ABSTRACT
Science and mathematics teachers face the dual challenge of mastering subject-specific expertise and developing the pedagogical skills necessary for implementing integrated science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) lessons. Research indicates a deficiency in teachers’ pedagogical competencies, particularly in project-based learning (PBL) within STEM context. To address this, the study administered a questionnaire to 245 specialized science and mathematics teachers in Qatar, aiming to examine their competencies and self-efficacy within the realm of technological pedagogical content knowledge. The focus is specifically on its integration with PBL and STEM content. Additionally, the study explores the influence of demographic and contextual factors, including gender, teaching experience, major academic subject, possession of an education certificate, specialization in STEM disciplines, and workload hours, on science and teachers’ competencies and self-efficacy in technology integration when teaching through PBL and STEM approaches. The study’s findings highlight the pivotal role of gender, formal teacher education, and the unique expertise of teachers. Surprisingly, teaching experience and school level did not show significant differences among science and mathematics teachers. However, gender disparities persist, with male teachers scoring higher in technology integration, necessitating ongoing research. Discipline-specific differences underscore the need for tailored professional development. While workload does not significantly impact technology integration, a supportive school culture is crucial, especially in secondary schools. The findings not only deepen our understanding of these factors but also provide valuable insights for crafting targeted interventions, robust professional development programs, and support systems.
REFERENCES (77)
1.
Absari, N., Priyanto, P., & Muslikhin, M. (2020). The effectiveness of technology, pedagogy and content knowledge (TPACK) in learning. Jurnal Pendidikan Teknologi dan Kejuruan [Journal of Technology and Vocational Education], 26, 43-51. https://doi.org/10.21831/JPTK.....
 
2.
Akturk, A. O., & Saka Ozturk, H. (2019). Teachers’ TPACK levels and students’ self-efficacy as predictors of students’ academic achievement. International Journal of Research in Education and Science, 5(1), 283-294.
 
3.
Al Said, R. S., Du, X., ALKhatib, H. A. H., Romanowski, M. H., & Barham, A. I. I. (2019). Math teachers’ beliefs, practices, and belief change in implementing problem based learning in Qatari primary governmental school. EURASIA Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 15(5), em1710. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmst....
 
4.
Aldossry, B., & Lally, V. (2019). Investigating the integration of iPad among mathematics teachers in a secondary school in Saudi Arabia based on TPACK model. In Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Education and New Learning Technologies (pp. 8133-8138). https://doi.org/10.21125/EDULE....
 
5.
Anderhag, P., Wickman, P., Bergqvist, K., Jakobson, B., Hamza, K., & Säljö, R. (2016). Why do secondary school students lose their interest in science? or does it never emerge? A possible and overlooked explanation. Science Education, 100, 791-813. https://doi.org/10.1002/SCE.21....
 
6.
Anud, E. (2022). Teaching performance of science teachers in the new normal and their technological pedagogical and content knowledge (TPACK) self-efficacy. International Journal of Applied Science and Research. https://doi.org/10.56293/ijasr....
 
7.
Archambault, L. M., & Barnett, J. H. (2010). Revisiting technological pedagogical content knowledge: Exploring the TPACK framework. Computers & Education, 55(4), 1656-1662. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.comp....
 
8.
Astuti, P., Subali, B., Hapsari, N., Pradana, S., & Antony, M. (2019). TPACK mastery of biology teachers: A study based on teacher gender. Journal of Physics, 1397, 012050. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6....
 
9.
Ayite, D., Aheto, S., & Nyagorme, P. (2022). Gender dimensions of emerging technologies for learning in a University. Cogent Social Sciences, 8(1), 2071389. https://doi.org/10.1080/233118....
 
10.
Bakar, N., Maat, S., & Rosli, R. (2020). Mathematics teacher’s self-efficacy of technology integration and technological pedagogical content knowledge. Journal on Mathematics Education, 11, 259-276. https://doi.org/10.22342/jme.1....
 
11.
Ball, D., Thames, M., & Phelps, G. (2008). Content knowledge for teaching. Journal of Teacher Education, 59, 389-407. https://doi.org/10.1177/002248....
 
12.
Banal, C., & Cruz, R. (2022). Teachers’ resilience in facing workload adversities in times of pandemic: The case of the private school teachers in a developing country. Indonesian Journal of Social Sciences, 14(1). https://doi.org/10.20473/ijss.....
 
13.
Bell, P., Lewenstein, B., Shouse, A. W., & Feder, M. A. (2009). Learning science in informal environments: People, places, and pursuits. National Academies Press.
 
14.
Chai, C. S., Koh, J. H. L., Tsai, C., & Tan, L. (2011). Modelling primary school pre-service teachers’ technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) for meaningful learning with information and communication technology (ICT). Computers & Education, 57(1), 1184-1193. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.comp....
 
15.
Christensen, R. (2022). Effects of technology integration education on the attitudes of teachers and students. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 34(4), 411-433. https://doi.org/10.1080/153915....
 
16.
Driel, J., Verloop, N., & Vos, W. (1998). Developing science teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35, 673-695. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)...<673::AID-TEA5>3.0.CO;2-J.
 
17.
Du, X. Y, Chaaban, Y., & ALMabrd, Y. M. (2019). Exploring the concepts of fidelity and adaptation in the implementation of project based learning in the elementary classroom: Case studies from Qatar. International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research, 18(9), 1-22. https://doi.org/10.26803/ijlte....
 
18.
Engeness, I. (2020). Developing teachers’ digital identity: Towards the pedagogic design principles of digital environments to enhance students’ learning in the 21st century. European Journal of Teacher Education, 44(1), 96-114. https://doi.org/10.1080/026197....
 
19.
Ertmer, P. A., Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. T., Sadik, O., Sendurur, E., & Sendurur, P. (2012). Teacher beliefs and technology integration practices: A critical relationship. Computers & Education, 59(2), 423-435. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.comp....
 
20.
Fathy, H. F., & Malkawi, A. R. (2022). Primary science teachers’ perceptions towards STEM education in public schools in Qatar. Journal of Education and Practice, 13(24), 34-52.
 
21.
Ferla, J., Valcke, M., & Cai, Y. (2009). Academic self-efficacy and academic self-concept: Reconsidering structural relationships. Learning and Individual Differences, 19(4), 499-505. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.LIND....
 
22.
Graham, C. R., Borup, J., & Smith, N. B. (2012). Using TPACK as a framework to understand teacher candidates’ technology integration decisions. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 28(6), 530-546. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365....
 
23.
Harris, J., & Hofer, M. (2011). Technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) in action: A descriptive study of secondary teachers’ curriculum-based, technology-related instructional planning. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 43(3), 211-229. https://doi.org/10.1080/153915....
 
24.
Harrison, A. W., & Rainer, R. K. (1992). The influence of individual differences on skill in end user computing. Journal of Management Information Systems, 9(1), 93-111. https://doi.org/10.1080/074212....
 
25.
Honey, M., Pearson, G., & Schweingruber, H. (2014). STEM integration in K-12 education: Status, prospects, and an agenda for research. National Academies Press.
 
26.
Hong, J., & Francis, D. (2020). Unpacking complex phenomena through qualitative inquiry: The case of teacher identity research. Educational Psychologist, 55, 208-219. https://doi.org/10.1080/004615....
 
27.
Hossain, S. F. A., Ying, Y., & Saha, S. K. (2020). Systematic mobile device usage behavior and successful implementation of TPACK based on university students need. In: K. Arai, & S. Kapoor (Eds.), Advances in intelligent systems and computing (pp. 729-746). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-....
 
28.
Igbaria, M., & Chakrabarti, A. (1990). Computer anxiety and attitudes towards microcomputer use. Behavior and Information Technology, 9(3), 229-241. https://doi.org/10.1080/014492....
 
29.
Islahi, F., & Nasrin (2019). Exploring teacher attitude towards information technology with a gender perspective. Contemporary Educational Technology, 10(1), 37-54. https://doi.org/10.30935/CET.5....
 
30.
Jordan, K. (2013). The influence of gender on beginning teachers’ perceptions of their technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK). Australian Educational Computing, 28(2), 32-50.
 
31.
Kayan-Fadlelmula, F., Sellami, A., Abdelkader, N., & Umer, S. (2022). A systematic review of STEM education research in the GCC countries: Trends, gaps and barriers. International Journal of STEM Education, 9, 2. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594....
 
32.
Koehler, M. J., Mishra, P., & Cain, W. (2013). What is technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK)? Journal of Education, 193(3), 13-19. https://doi.org/10.1177/002205....
 
33.
Koehler, M. J., Mishra, P., Kereluik, K., Shin, T. S., & Graham, C. R. (2014). The technological pedagogical content knowledge framework. In J. M. Spector, M. D. Merrill, J. Elen, & M. J. Bishop (Eds.), Handbook of research on educational communications and technology (pp. 101-111). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-....
 
34.
Kubieck, J. (2005). Inquiry-based learning, the nature of science, and computer technology: New possibilities in science education. Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology, 31(1). https://doi.org/10.21432/T29C7....
 
35.
Kyriacou, C., & Kunc, R. (2007). Beginning teachers’ expectations of teaching: Do they really matter? Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 13(5), 509-524.
 
36.
Lavidas, K., Katsidima, M., Theodoratou, S., Komis, V., & Nikolopoulou, K. (2021). Preschool teachers’ perceptions about TPACK in Greek educational context. Journal of Computers in Education, 8, 395-410. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40692....
 
37.
Liu, Q., Zhang, S., & Wang, Q. (2015). Surveying Chinese in-service k12 teachers’ technology, pedagogy, and content knowledge. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 53, 55-74. https://doi.org/10.1177/073563....
 
38.
Mailizar, M., Hidayat, M., & Artika, W. (2021). The effect of demographic variables on mathematics teachers’ TPACK: Indonesian context. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1882, 012041. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6....
 
39.
Mansour, N. & EL-Deghaidy, H. (2021). STEM in science education and S in STEM: From pedagogy to learning. Brill-Sense Publishers. https://doi.org/10.1163/978900....
 
40.
Mansour, N. (2013). Modelling the sociocultural contexts of science education: The teachers’ perspective. Research in Science Education, 43, 347-369. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165....
 
41.
Mansour, N. (2015). Science teachers’ views and stereotypes of religion, scientists and scientific research: A call for scientist-science teacher partnerships to promote inquiry-based learning. International Journal of Science Education, 37(11), 1767-1794. https://doi.org/10.1080/095006....
 
42.
Mansour, N. (2020). The dissonance between scientific evidence, diversity and dialogic pedagogy in the science classroom. International Journal of Science Education, 42(2), 190-217. https://doi.org/10.1080/095006....
 
43.
Mansour, N. (2024). Students’ and facilitators’ experiences with synchronous and asynchronous online dialogic discussions and e-facilitation in understanding the Nature of Science. Education and Information Technologies. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639....
 
44.
Mansour, N., EL-Deghaidy, H., Alshamrani, S., & Aldahmash, A. (2014). Rethinking the theory and practice of continuing professional development: Science teachers’ perspectives. Research in Science Education, 44(6), 949-973. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165....
 
45.
Mdolo, M., & Mundalamo, F. (2015). Teacher knowledge shaping the teaching of genetics: A case study of two underqualified teachers in Malawi. African Journal of Research in Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 19(1), 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1080/102884....
 
46.
Ministry of Education and Higher Education, Qatar. (2017). Education and training sector strategy 2018-2022. https://www.edu.gov.qa/en/Page....
 
47.
Mirzajani, H., Mahmud, R., Ayub, A., & Wong, S. (2016). Teachers’ acceptance of ICT and its integration in the classroom. Quality Assurance in Education, 24(1), 26-40. https://doi.org/10.1108/QAE-06....
 
48.
Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017-1054. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467....
 
49.
Mullis, S., Martin, O., Foy, P., & Arora, A. (2012). The TIMSS 2011 international results in mathematics. TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center.
 
50.
Mullis, S., Martin, O., Foy, P., & Hooper, M. (2016). TIMSS 2015 international results in mathematics. TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center.
 
51.
Mullis, S., Martin, O., Foy, P., Kelly, L., & Fishbein, B. (2020). TIMSS 2019 international results in mathematics and science. TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center.
 
52.
Murphy, C., Abu-Tineh, A., Calder, N., & Mansour, N. (2018). Implementing dialogic inquiry in Qatari mathematics and science classrooms: Challenges and provocations. Teachers and Curriculum, 18(1), 33-40. https://doi.org/10.15663/tandc....
 
53.
Murphy, C., Abu-Tineh, A., Calder, N., & Mansour, N. (2021). Teachers and students’ views prior to introducing inquiry-based learning in Qatari science and mathematics classrooms. Teaching and Teacher Education, 104, 103367. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate....
 
54.
Naji, K. K., Al-Thani, H. H., Al-Ali, A. K. A., Ebead, U. A. A., & Du, X. (2020). Characteristics, benefits, challenges, and socio-cultural factors of implementing PBL in Qatar. In Proceedings of the 8th International Research Symposium on Problem-Based Learning (pp. 148-156). Aalborg University.
 
55.
Naji, K. K., Ebead, E., Al-Ali, A., & Du, X. (2020). Comparing models of problem and project-based learning (PBL) courses and student engagement in civil engineering in Qatar. EURASIA Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 16(8), em1867. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmst....
 
56.
Nasser, R. (2014). Using mobile device to increase student academic outcomes in Qatar. Open Journal of Social Sciences, 2(2), 67-73. https://doi.org/10.4236/JSS.20....
 
57.
Niess, M. L. (2005). Preparing teachers to teach science and mathematics with technology: Developing a technology pedagogical content knowledge. Teaching and Teacher Education, 21(5), 509-523. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate....
 
58.
Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development (OECD) (2014). PISA 2012 results in focus: What 15 year olds know and what they can do with what they know. http://www.oecd.org/pisa/keyfn....
 
59.
Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development (OECD) (2016). PISA 2015 Results in Focus. http://www.oecd.org/pisa/pisa-....
 
60.
Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development (OECD) (2018). Qatar: Student performance (PISA 2018). https://gpseducation.oecd.org/....
 
61.
Player-Koro, C. (2012). Factors influencing teachers’ use of ICT in education. Education Inquiry, 3(1), 93-108. https://doi.org/10.3402/edui.v....
 
62.
Qatar National Research Fund. (n.d.). Education. https://www.qnrf.org/en-us/Sea....
 
63.
Qazi, A., Hasan, N., Abayomi-Alli, O., Hardaker, G., Scherer, R., Sarker, Y., Paul, S., & Maitama, J. Z. (2022). Gender differences in information and communication technology use & skills: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Education and Information Technologies, 27(3), 4225-4258. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639....
 
64.
Qureshi, S., Vishnumolakala, V. R., Southam, D. C., & Treagust, D. F. (2017). Inquiry-based chemistry education in a high-context culture: A Qatari case study. International Journal of Science and Math Education, 15, 1017-1038. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763....
 
65.
Rogers, M., Cross, D., Gresalfi, M., Trauth-Nare, A., & Buck, G. (2011). First year implementation of a project-based learning approach: The need for addressing teachers’ orientations in the era of reform. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 9, 893-917. https://doi.org/10.1007/S10763....
 
66.
Rohaan, E., Taconis, R., & Jochems, W. (2012). Analyzing teacher knowledge for technology education in primary schools. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 22, 271-280. https://doi.org/10.1007/S10798....
 
67.
Said, Z. (2016). Science education reform in Qatar: Progress and challenges. EURASIA Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 12(8), 2253-2265. https://doi.org/10.12973/euras....
 
68.
Said, Z., Mansour, N. & Abu-Tineh, A., (2023) Integrating technology pedagogy and content knowledge in Qatar’s preparatory and secondary schools: The perceptions and practices of STEM teachers. EURASIA Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 19(6), em2271. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmst....
 
69.
Scherer, R., & Siddiq, F. (2019). The technology acceptance model (TAM): A meta-analytic structural equation modeling approach to explaining teachers’ adoption of digital technology in education. Computers & Education, 128, 13-35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.comp....
 
70.
Schmidt, D. A., Baran, E., Thompson, A. D., Mishra, P., Koehler, M. J., & Shin, T. S. (2009) Technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK), Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 42(2), 123-149. https://doi.org/10.1080/153915....
 
71.
Sellami, A., Kayan-Fadlelmula, F., Abdelkader, N., & Al Thani, M. (2021). A critical review of research on STEM education in Qatar, International Journal of Humanities Education, 20(1), 19-37. https://doi.org/10.18848/2327-....
 
72.
Sojanah, J., Suwatno, S., Kodri, K., & Machmud, A. (2021). Factors affecting teachers’ technological pedagogical and content knowledge (a survey on economics teacher knowledge). Journal Ilmiah Pendidikan [Educational Scientific Journal], 40(1), 1-16. https://doi.org/10.21831/CP.V4....
 
73.
Stohlmann, M., Moore, T., & Roehrig, G. (2012). Considerations for teaching integrated STEM education. Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research, 2(1), 4. https://doi.org/10.5703/128828....
 
74.
Swallow, M., & Olofson, M. (2017). Contextual understandings in the TPACK framework. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 49(3-4), 228-244. https://doi.org/10.1080/153915....
 
75.
Teo, T., Fan, X., & Du, J. (2015). Technology acceptance among pre-service teachers: Does gender matter? Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 31, 235-251. https://doi.org/10.14742/AJET.....
 
76.
Wilson, K. (2020). Exploring the challenges and enablers of implementing a stem project-based learning program in a diverse junior secondary context. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 19, 881-897. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763....
 
77.
Zhou, G., & Xu, j. (2007). Adoption of educational technology: How does gender matter? International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 19(2), 140-153.
 
eISSN:1305-8223
ISSN:1305-8215
Journals System - logo
Scroll to top