Context: Context is defined by different researchers as subject matter, grade level, student
background, available technologies, the design and characteristics of learning environments,
supporting elements available in the school, and societal conditions such as state and national
standards (Kelly, 2008; Mishra & Koehler, 2006; Porras-Hernandez and Salinas-Amescua, 2013;
Rosenberg & Koehler, 2015).
Context Knowledge Knowledge of educational contexts refers to the ability to consider not only
the physical conditions of the classroom, technological facilities, access to these technologies,
but also the demographics or the profile of the students.
TPACK as a conceptual framework embraces the interplay between different teacher
knowledge bases but also emphasizes the importance of context for teacher education. (Chai,
Koh, & Tsai, 2013; Rosenberg & Koehler, 2015; Voogt, Fisser, Roblin, Tondeur, & van
Braak, 2012). Context is an important, and often neglected element of the TPACK
framework. Various researchers have used such elements to describe context: “subject
matter, grade level, student background, and available technologies” (Mishra & Koehler,
2006; p. 1032), designing learning environment and characteristics of learning environments
(Kelly, 2008), and design and layout of the classroom, supporting elements available in the
school, and societal conditions such as state and national standards (Porras-Hernandez &
Salinas-Amescua, 2013). These different contextual factors may allow researchers/educators
to explain how and to what extent TPACK is achieved. Depending on the differential context
of various teaching and learning conditions, such factors may be useful to help understand
how TPACK develops in these environments.
Karakaya, O. (2017). Investigating preservice teachers' TPACK integration into lesson
planning (Doctoral dissertation, Iowa State University).
Technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) was developed in response to the
absence of a theory guiding the integration of technology in education (Koehler & Mishra, 2005;
Rosenberg & Koehler, 2015). Rooted in Shulman’s (1986) pedagogical content knowledge
(PCK) model, TPACK extends to additionally examine the knowledge of how to apply
technological resources. Holistically, it considers technological knowledge (TK), pedagogical
knowledge (PK) and content knowledge (CK). Rosenberg and Koehler (2015) explain that these
three bodies of core knowledge coalesce to comprise technological pedagogical knowledge
(TPK), pedagogical content knowledge (PCK), and technological content knowledge (TCK).
Context is identified as an important component of TPACK (Koehler & Mishra, 2008; Koh et al.,
2014; Mishra & Koehler, 2006; Phillips et al., 2017; Porras-Hernandez & Salinas-Amescua,
2013; Rosenberg & Koehler, 2015; Swallow & Olofson, 2017). TPACK has been referred to as
“context bound” because of how influential contextual factors (e.g., classroom design and layout,
school policies, state and national technology initiatives, and teachers’ technology experience)
are on teachers’ development of TPACK (Mishra & Koehler, 2006). The categorization and
analysis of the studies in this systematic literature review was guided by a theoretical lens that
views TPACK as context bound.
The conceptualizations of TPACK context vary from teachers’ epistemological beliefs to
classroom and institutional resources (Rosenberg & Koehler, 2015). In their analysis of 170
TPACK focused publications, Rosenberg and Koehler (2015) reported a wide variation in how
context is explained and interpreted. Moreover, prior research has found context is frequently
missing when TPACK is described (Porras-Hernandez & Salinas-Amescua, 2013; Rosenberg &
Koehler, 2015). There is a need to investigate the extent to which context is included in studies
examining TPACK, the meaning assigned to TPACK context, and contextual characteristics that
enable teachers to leverage technology resources. The current literature review advances the
TPACK framework by examining a more complex conception of context that includes teacher’s
subjective contextual factors such as dispositions to understand technology integration and
TPACK knowledge construction.
Context in TPACK is limited on several levels. Porras-Hernandez and Salinas-Amescua (2013)
argue that context in TPACK is referred to in a rather ambiguous manner. Contextual references
in TPACK include student characteristics; classroom and institutional conditions for learning;
situated teaching activities; and teacher’s epistemological beliefs. Previous reviews made
substantial contributions to the understanding of how context has been included in recent
TPACK research, what it means when it is included and the nature of the TPACK framework
(Rosenberg & Koehler, 2015; Willermark, 2018). This current review advances understanding of
TPACK by including teacher’s subjective contextual variables in the form of dispositions to
understand characteristics of TPACK and technology integration in the context of English
language teaching and learning.
Dispositions in this review are defined from a Bourdieusian perspective and are presented as a
missing link between TPACK development and enactment. Bourdieu’s (1977) definition of
dispositions includes individual attributes, tendencies, practices and sense of the game. They are
seen as the result of an individual’s past experiences and experiential influences. Conceptually,
dispositions are addressed in this review through two main categories: (a) teacher tendencies and
beliefs (e.g., willingness to experiment with new technology, belief in the importance of
technology in teaching and learning, level of comfort with technology) and (b) teacher practices
(e.g., using technology to facilitate learning in the classroom, incorporating technology in
planning, designing and executing lesson plans). The interaction between these categories results
in a particular outcome which can explain how dispositions may shape a teacher’s technological
knowledge. Identifying teachers’ dispositions in the context of teaching with technology
provides a lens to describe and analyze the contextual factors that reciprocally affect teachers’
TPACK development (Rosenberg & Koehler, 2015). In other words, the conceptualization of
teachers’ TPACK contextual factors is conducted in an organized and systematic way within the
framework defined by dispositions.
Drawing on the framework advanced by Porras-Hernandez and Salinas-Amescua (2013), the
definition of context in this review includes three levels: micro, meso, and macro. Porras-
Hernandez and Salinas-Amescua (2013) describe micro level factors as those at the classroom or
learning environment level, which involve in-class conditions for learning, available
technologies and class norms. The meso level represents factors at the school and local
community level, and is defined through the social, cultural, political, organizational, and
economic conditions established there. Factors such as the availability of technology at the
school level, support staff and school leadership expectations define this level. The macro level
is defined through the social, political, technological, and economic conditions at the state or
national level. Factors such as mandated curricular standards, initiatives related to technology
development as well as national and global policies define this level. Informed by the
conceptualization of context introduced by Porras-Hernandez and Salinas-Amescua (2013) and
its operationalization developed by Rosenberg and Koehler (2015), levels of context in the
current review are defined as follows:
• • Micro: factors in the classroom affecting the development, enactment, or assessment of
TPACK. This level of context includes actions and practices of teachers, classroom norms, and
technology in the classroom.
• • Meso: factors in the school and community affecting the development, enactment, or
assessment of TPACK. This level of context includes the school system or individual schools,
school culture, infrastructure related to technology, and leadership expectations.
• • Macro: factors at the state, national, and global level affecting the development,
enactment, or assessment of TPACK. This level of context includes larger social, political, or
economic conditions of the state (or country) that shape norms as well as policies such as
national curriculum standards and technology initiatives at the state or national level.
Context is important in examining and understanding how different contextual factors may
impact and shape teaching practices. Trends in the literature on context levels, dispositions, and
TPACK in English language teaching and learning could inform how context is addressed in
programs providing professional development and training on technology integration to English
language teachers. An in-depth understanding of contextualized dispositions and the
characteristics of TPACK are important in facilitating the development of teachers’
technological knowledge.
Variable Description
Definition of TPACK TPACK as knowledge
(general, specific or
experienced) or TPACK as
performance
Micro Factors at the classroom
level
Meso Factors at the school level
Macro Factors at the societal level
Teacher Factors related to teacher
including dispositions
Feldman, A., & Herman, B. C. (2015). Teacher Contextual Knowledge. Encyclopedia of Science
Education, 1020–1021. doi:10.1007/978-94-007-2150-0_208
We define teacher contextual knowledge as simply knowledge of the context of teaching, where
the context of their teaching includes who they teach (their students), where they teach (their
classrooms, schools, communities, and so on), and what they teach (the school subject, the level,
the curriculum, and its relationship to local, state, and national standards). Given this, teachers’
contextual knowledge is acted upon by the ethical, political, economic, and social factors that
influence teaching and learning in schools. It should be clear then that to recognize the
importance of teachers’ contextual knowledge is to reject “one size fits all” education initiatives
(e.g., standardized curriculum) that assume that effective science teaching is context
independent. In the remainder of this small entry, we provide a brief overview of the literature
related to science teachers’ contextual knowledge.