TPCK Chapter 11 Reflections

Margaret Nerney
TPCK Chapter 11: Guiding pre-service teachers in developing TPCK

Chapter 11 was certainly not written with the in-service teacher as audience. Margaret Niess clearly directed her essay to those in charge of teacher preparation programs at the University level. Yet, I was certainly able to glean a sense of how to assist future student teachers that might be placed in my classroom. It was clearly asserted that pre-service teachers need the experience of real classroom settings and real classroom problems to grow and evolve into effective teachers. I agreed with much of Niess’ recommendations, however, I disagreed with her assumptions that pre-service teachers would not be digital natives or that they would need substantial observations to understand the mental workings of tech. savvy, modern students.
As a twenty-seven year old teacher, I have not found myself out of touch with my students or fearful of their technological fascinations. I am very comfortable with, and aware of, their personal and educational technology devices and habits. I grew up with computers and the Internet, and even now feel excited to try out the latest gadgets or technological trends. This leads me to completely challenge the notion that those entering the field will be unaware of technology as a tool or lacking the ability to truly understand the needs of today’s students. If I have been teaching for five years and don’t feel disconnected, I doubt that someone with more classroom opportunities and experiences with technology will either.
My comfort level may be, in part, from my own interests, but I know a large part is also from my excellent methods courses here at UMF. During my teacher training, I was required to address the use of technology in the classroom and was encouraged to integrate technology in all of my methods courses. So TPCK is not foreign to me or even new. At first, it was difficult to teach differently than I learned, but that is easily overcome when you are exposed to the multitude of affordances by these new technologically inclusive methods. What I have found new and interesting are the ways in which to think about TPCK. I hadn’t thought of the inclusion of technology as declarative, procedural, schematic or strategic, but I see the benefit of assessing its use in this way. I have not spent enough time analyzing the ways in which I use technology or the ways in which I am meeting technology standards. This is certainly an area for growth, as I am teaching my students these skills for use in their real lives. I realize that my comfort level makes it hard for me to remember to stop and explain the technology as a skill at times. I assume deeper understanding of the programs, even word processing programs, than is truly there. Kids really do need those step-by-step lessons at some point in their schooling. In fact, it struck me that one should worry more about those who lack the experience of those new methods courses than those who have had the enriching opportunity of a technology inclusive training program. We are the ones that need to learn how to slow down and teach technology as its own content when necessary.
Seasoned teachers, like many of my colleagues, are the ones who need more in the way of focused technology groups, as indicated in the pre-service training. We are the ones who would benefit from content specific teams to explore new technologies and then reflect on the inclusion of those new technology laden methods in our classrooms. It is not enough to train the next generation. What about those of us in the field? How long will it really be before all of the teachers with limited technology skills are out of the profession? Should education wait that long for change? Should mandates be established that require the integration of technology? These are the real questions that apply to my educational sphere.