SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Research on Education and Psychology / 2025 / Volume: 9 Issue: 2

The Effects of Reflective and Conceptual Scaffolding on TPACK and Technology Value Beliefs

Nilüfer Atman Uslu(DOKUZ EYLUL UNIVERSITY)0000-0003-2322-4210
Şemseddin Gündüz(NECMETTİN ERBAKAN ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0003-1075-0043
Pages
—
Publication Date
2025-12-22
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

These findings suggest that reflective and conceptual scaffolding during lesson planning enhances pre-service teachers’ TPACK development and positive technology value beliefs.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Higher education institutions need to support pre-service teachers in developing meaningful technology integration practices.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The sample consisted of 30 teacher candidates from a public university in Türkiye.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:These findings suggest that reflective and conceptual scaffolding during lesson planning enhances pre-service teachers’ TPACK development and positive technology value beliefs.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Scaffolding · Teacher candidate · Technology integration

Abstract

Higher education institutions need to support pre-service teachers in developing meaningful technology integration practices. This study examined the effects of reflective and conceptual scaffolding on pre-service teachers’ TPACK and technology value beliefs during the lesson planning process. A quasi-experimental design with pretest–posttest procedures and a control group was employed. The sample consisted of 30 teacher candidates from a public university in Türkiye. After a theoretical and applied learning process on technology integration, participants in both experimental and control groups completed a lesson design task using a lesson plan template that included technology-integrated instruction sections and TPACK scaffold questions encouraging reflection on relationships among TPACK domains. In addition, the experimental group received metacognitive questions and conceptual scaffolding materials during lesson plan development. Results revealed significant increases in TPACK scores in both groups, whereas technology value beliefs increased significantly only in the experimental group. These findings suggest that reflective and conceptual scaffolding during lesson planning enhances pre-service teachers’ TPACK development and positive technology value beliefs.

🔖

Cite This Article

Uslu, N. A., Gündüz, Ş. (2025). The Effects of Reflective and Conceptual Scaffolding on TPACK and Technology Value Beliefs. Research on Education and Psychology, Volume: 9 Issue: 2. https://doi.org/10.54535/rep.1831019

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (69)

  1. Alcalde, M. L., Ortega-Ruipérez, B., & Pereles, A. (2025). Teachers’ beliefs about the usefulness and importance of self-regulated learning. Open Learning. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/02680513.2025.2567348
  2. Alptekin, Z., & Taneri, A. (2025). Technology integration in pedagogical processes: Digital competence and teaching practices of primary school teachers in Turkey. Discover Education, 4, 351. https://doi.org/10.1007/s44217-025-00646-9
  3. Aydoğmuş, M. & Ibrahim, M. (2022). Two approaches to investigate preservice teachers’ tpack competencies and self-regulated learning skills in the Turkiye and the United States. Journal of Computer and Education Research, 10 (20), 531-546. https://doi.org/10.18009/jcer.1107419
  4. Bahçıvan, E., Gürer, M. D., Yavuzalp, N., & Akayoğlu, S. (2019). Investigating the relations among pre-service teachers’ teaching/learning beliefs and educational technology integration competencies: A structural equation modeling study. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 28(5), 579-588. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-019-09788-6
  5. Bowman, M. A., Vongkulluksn, V. W., Jiang, Z., & Xie, K. (2020). Teachers’ exposure to professional development and the quality of their instructional technology use: The mediating role of teachers’ value and ability beliefs. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 54(2), 188–204. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2020.1830895
  6. Brinkley Etzkorn, K. E. (2018). Learning to teach online: Measuring the influence of faculty development training on teaching effectiveness through a TPACK lens. The Internet and Higher Education, 38, 28–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2018.04.004
  7. Bustamante, C. (2020). TPACK-based professional development on web 2.0 for Spanish teachers: a case study. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 33(4), 327-352. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2018.1564333
  8. Canbazoğlu Bilici, S., Şentürk, M., Kızılay, E., Yıldız Durak, H., & Sancar Tokmak, H. (2024). SQD strategies integrated online TPACK-based professional development: Examining science teachers’ TPACK practical and self-efficacy. Research in Science & Technological Education, 1–30. https://doi.org/10.1080/02635143.2024.2440400
  9. Chai, C. S., & Koh, J. H. L. (2017). Changing teachers’ TPACK and design beliefs through the Scaffolded TPACK Lesson Design Model (STLDM). Learning: Research and Practice, 3(2), 114-129. https://doi.org/10.1080/23735082.2017.1360506
  10. Chen, Y. C., & Hou, H. T. (2025). Design of a digital gamified learning activity for relationship education with conceptual scaffolding and reflective scaffolding. Asia-Pacific Education Research, 34(1), 237–251. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-024-00849-y
  11. Cheng, S., Ku, S.-C., & Tseng, S.-S. (2025). The influence of teachers’ beliefs and experience on effective instructional practices in online learning environments. Journal of Education for Teaching. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/02607476.2025.2562340
  12. Cheng, S.-L., Chen, S.-B., & Chang, J.-C. (2021). Examining the multiplicative relationships between teachers' competence, value and pedagogical beliefs about technology integration. British Journal of Educational Technology, 52(2), 734–750. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13052
  13. Cheng, S-L, & Xie, K. (2018). The relations among teacher value beliefs, personal characteristics, and TPACK in intervention and non-intervention settings. Teaching and Teacher Education, 74, 98-113. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2018.04.014
  14. Cifuentes,L., Maxwell, G., & Bulu,S. (2011). Technology integration through professional community. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 44(1), 59-82. https://doi.org/10.2190/EC.44.1.D
  15. Çebi, A., & Reisoğlu, İ. (2020). Digital competence: A study from the perspective of pre-service teachers in Turkey. Journal of New Approaches in Educational Research, 9(3), 294–308. https://doi.org/10.7821/naer.2020.7.583
  16. Doğan, B., & Göğüş, A. (2025). The effect of the ‘Instructional Technologies’ course on the competencies of teacher candidates in using Web 2.0 tools: The case of Early Childhood Education Program. Technology, Knowledge and Learning, 30(3), 883–910. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-025-09842-w
  17. Doherty, I. (2011). Evaluating the impact of educational technology professional development upon adoption of Web 2.0 tools in teaching. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 27(3), 381-396. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.950
  18. Durusoy, O., & Karamete, A. (2018). The effect of instructional material design process to mathematics teacher candidates’ TPACK. European Journal of Education Studies, 4(5). https://doi.org/10.46827/ejes.v0i0.1577
  19. Ehlert, M., De Smedt, F., Van Keer, H., & Aesaert, K. (2025). Time tells: Longitudinal changes in teachers’ beliefs and behaviour when implementing reading innovations. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 40, Article 74. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10212-025-00975-1
  20. Er, E., & Kim, C. (2017). Episode-centered guidelines for teacher belief change toward technology integration. Education Tech Research Dev, 65, 1041–1065. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-017-9518-1
  21. Ergüleç, F., Eren, E., & Ersoy, M. (2022). Implementation of TPACK-based instructional design model in an emergency remote course. Hacettepe University Journal of Education, 37(2), 560–572. https://doi.org/10.16986/HUJE.2021073521
  22. Ertmer, P. A., & Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. T. (2010). Teacher technology change: How knowledge, confidence, beliefs, and culture intersect. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 42(3), 255–284. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2010.10782551
  23. Farjon, D., Smits, A., & Voogt, J. (2019). Technology integration of pre-service teachers explained by attitudes and beliefs, competency, access, and experience. Computers & Education, 130, 81-93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.11.010
  24. Fischer, E., & Hänze, M. (2020). How do university teachers’ values and beliefs affect their teaching? Educational Psychology, 40(3), 296–317. https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410.2019.167586
  25. Funkhouser, B. J., & Mouza, C. (2013). Drawing on technology: An investigation of preservice teacher beliefs in the context of an introductory educational technology course. Computers & Education, 62, 271-285. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.11.005
  26. Gill, L., & Dalgarno, B. (2017) A qualitative analysis of preservice primary school teachers’ TPACK development over the four years of their teacher preparation programme. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 26(4), 439-456. https://doi.org/10.1080/1475939X.2017.1287124
  27. Hannafin, M., Land, S., & Oliver, K. (1999). Open learning environments: Foundations, methods, and models. In C. M. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional-design theories and models: A new paradigm of instructional theory (Vol. 2, pp. 115–140). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  28. Hou, H.-T. (2023). Learning science through cloud gamification: A framework for remote gamified science learning activities integrating cloud tool sets and three-dimensional scaffolding. Information, 14(3), 165. https://doi.org/10.3390/info14030165
  29. Ifinedo, E., Rikala, J., & Hämäläinen, T. (2020). Factors affecting Nigerian teacher educators’ technology integration: Considering characteristics, knowledge constructs, ICT practices and beliefs. Computers & Education, 146, 103760. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103760
  30. Janssen, N., Knoef, M., & Lazonder, A. W. (2019). Technological and pedagogical support for pre-service teachers’ lesson planning. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 28(1), 115-128. https://doi.org/10.1080/1475939X.2019.1569554
  31. Kabakçı Yurdakul, I., Odabaşı, H. F., Kılıçer, K., Çoklar, A. N., Birinci, G., & Kurt, A. A. (2012). The development, validity and reliability of TPACK-deep: A technological pedagogical content knowledge scale. Computers & Education, 58, 964-977. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2011.10.012
  32. Kagan, D. (1992). Professional growth among preservice and beginning teachers. Review of Educational Research, 62, 129–169. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543062002129
  33. Kale, U., & Akcaoğlu, M. (2018). The role of relevance in future teachers’ utility value and interest toward technology. Education Tech Research Dev., 66, 283-311. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-017-9547-9
  34. Khlaif, Z., Gök, F., & Kouraïchi, B. (2019). How teachers in middle schools design technology integration activities. Teaching and Teacher Education, 78, 141-150. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2018.11.014
  35. Khoza, H. C. (2024). Exploring the rationale for lesson design as a tool for developing and evaluating science pre-service teachers’ topic-specific pedagogical content knowledge. Journal of Education, (95), 3–22. https://doi.org/10.17159/2520-9868/i95a01
  36. Kim, J. Y., & Lim, K. Y. (2019). Promoting learning in online, ill-structured problem solving: The effects of scaffolding type and metacognition level. Computers & Education, 138, 116-129. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.05.001
  37. Koehler, M. J., & Mishra, P. (2009). What is technological pedagogical content knowledge? Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 9(1), 60–70. https://citejournal.org/volume-9/issue-1-09/general/what-is-technological-pedagogicalcontent-knowledge
  38. Koh, J. H. L. (2019). TPACK design scaffolds for supporting teacher pedagogical change. Educational Technology Research and Development, 67, 577–595. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-018-9627-5
  39. Koh, J.H.L., Chai, C.S., & Lim, W.Y. (2017). Teacher professional development for TPACK21CL: Effects on teacher ICT integration and student outcomes. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 55(2), 172-196. https://doi.org/10.1177/0735633116656848
  40. Krauskopf, K., Foulger, T. S., & Williams, M. K. (2018). Prompting teachers’ reflection of their professional knowledge. A proof-of-concept study of the Graphic Assessment of TPACK Instrument, Teacher Development, 22(2), 153-174. https://doi.org/10.1080/13664530.2017.1367717
  41. Ladrón-de-Guevara, L., Almagro, B. J. & Cabero-Almenara, J., (2021). Cuestionario TPCK para docentes de educación física. Campus Virtuales, 10(1), 173-183. http://uajournals.com/ojs/index.php/campusvirtuales/article/view/763/441
  42. Lai, T-I, & Lin, H-F. (2018). An investigation of the relationship of beliefs, values and technological pedagogical content knowledge among teachers. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 27(4), 445-458. https://doi.org/10.1080/1475939X.2018.1496137
  43. Lehiste, P. (2015). The impact of a professional development program on in-service teachers’ TPACK: A study from Estonia. Problems of Education in the 21st Century, 66, 18-28. https://doi.org/10.33225/pec/15.66.18
  44. Lin, Y.-H., Chen, C.-H., Chan, K. K. H., Peng, C.-H., Chen, Y.-S., Xie, K., Liu, C.-C., & Hu, D. (2022). Teachers’ perceptions of teaching sustainable artificial intelligence: A design frame perspective. Sustainability, 14(13), 7811. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14137811
  45. Liu, D., Lai, C., Lin, R. X., & Jin, T. (2025). Pre-service teachers' technology integration in pronunciation instruction: Professional identity and value beliefs. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 35(2), 577–589. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijal.12640
  46. Ministry of National Education [MEB]. (2025). Artificial intelligence in education: Policy document and action plan (2025–2029). https://yegitek.meb.gov.tr/www/egitimde-yapay-zek-politika-belgesi-ve-eylem-plani-yururluge-girdi/icerik/3825
  47. Mishra, P., & Warr, M. (2021). Contextualizing TPACK within systems and cultures of practice. Computers in Human Behavior, 117, Article 106673. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2020.106673
  48. Murthy, S., Iyer, S., & Warriem, J. (2015). ET4ET: A large-scale faculty professional development program on effective integration of educational technology. Educational Technology & Society, 18(3), 16–28. https://www.j-ets.net/collection/published-issues/18_3
  49. Njiku, J., Mutarutinya, V., & Maniraho, J. F. (2021). Building mathematics teachers’ TPACK through collaborative lesson design activities. Contemporary Educational Technology, 13(2), ep297. https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/9686
  50. Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A., Glazewski, K. D., Newby, T. J., & Ertmer, P. A. (2010). Teacher value beliefs associated with using technology: addressing professional and student needs. Computers & Education, 55, 1321–1335. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2010.06.002
  51. Özden, M., & Örge Yaşar, F. (2024). Eğitim fakültesi öğrencilerinin dijital yeterlikleri [Digital competencies of faculty of education students]. Journal of Mother Tongue Education, 12(3), 516–529. https://doi.org/10.16916/aded.1496401
  52. Pareto, L., & Willermark, S. (2019). TPACK in situ: A design-based approach supporting professional development in practice. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 57(5), 1186-1226. https://doi.org/10.1177/0735633118783180
  53. Pehlevan, İ., & Ünal, B. (2024). Investigating the relationship between digital literacy and TPACK levels of pre-service English teachers. Journal of Language Education and Research, 10(1), 87-111. https://doi.org/10.31464/jlere.1432879
  54. Reinholz, D. L., White, I., & Andrews, T. (2021). Change theory in STEM higher education: A systematic review. International Journal of STEM Education, 8, Article 37. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-021-00291-2
  55. Richardson, J. C., Caskurlu, S., Castellanos Reyes, D., Duan, S., Duha, M. S. U., Fiock, H., & Long, Y. (2022). Instructors’ conceptualization and implementation of scaffolding in online higher education courses. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 34(1), 242–279. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12528-021-09300-3
  56. Rienties, B., Brouwer, N., & Lygo-Baker, S. (2013). The effects of online professional development on higher education teachers’ beliefs and intentions towards learning facilitation and technology. Teaching and Teacher Education, 29, 122-131. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2012.09.002
  57. Saralar-Aras, İ., & Türker-Biber, B. (2024). Enhancing technological pedagogical content knowledge of prospective teachers through mathematics lesson plan development. Education and Information Technologies, 29, 14491–14512. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-12435-8
  58. Taimalu, M., & Luik, P. (2019). The impact of beliefs and knowledge on the integration of technology among teacher educators: A path analysis. Teaching and Teacher Education, 79, 101-110. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2018.12.012
  59. Taymaz Demirok, N. (2025). Technology integration in English language teacher education programs in Türkiye: A curriculum-based analysis through the DigCompEdu framework. Baskent University Journal of Education, 12(Special Issue), 59–72.
  60. Tondeur, J., Scherer, R., Siddiq, F., & Baran, E. (2020). Enhancing pre‑service teachers’ technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK): a mixed‑method study. Educational Technology Research and Development, 68, 319-343. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-019-09692-1
  61. Uslu, B., & Güner, P. (2022). Matematik öğretmen adaylarının TPACK yeterlilik düzeyleri algıları ve eğitimde teknoloji kullanımına yönelik görüşleri [Pre-service mathematics teachers’ perceptions of TPACK competency levels and views on technology use in education]. Erzincan University Journal of Education Faculty, 24(3), 457–468. https://doi.org/10.17556/erziefd.994172
  62. Uslu, N. A., & Usluel, Y. K. (2016, March 7–9). A proposal for designing strategies and content in a professional development program for ICT integration. Paper presented at the International Technology, Education and Development Conference (INTED 2016), Valencia, Spain.
  63. Vongkulluksn, V. W., Xie, K., & Bowman, M. A. (2018). The role of value on teachers' internalization of external barriers and externalization of personal beliefs for classroom technology integration. Computers & Education, 118, 70-81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2017.11.009
  64. Wang, Q., & Woo, H. L. (2007). Systematic planning for ICT integration in topic learning. Educational Technology & Society, 10(1), 148-156.
  65. Winnips, K., & McLoughlin, C. (2000). Applications and categorization of software‐based scaffolding. In Proceedings of the World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia and Telecommunications (Vol. 1, pp. 1798–1799). Norfolk, VA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE).
  66. Yıldız Durak, H. (2019). Modeling of relations between K-12 teachers’ TPACK levels and their technology integration self-efficacy, technology literacy levels, attitudes toward technology and usage objectives of social networks. Interactive Learning Environments, 29(7), 1136–1162. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2019.1619591
  67. Yıldız Durak, H. (2021). Preparing pre-service teachers to integrate teaching technologies into their classrooms: Examining the effects of teaching environments based on open-ended, hands-on and authentic tasks. Education and Information Technologies, 1-23. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10511-5
  68. Zaragoza, A., Seidel, T., & Hiebert, J. (2021). Exploring preservice teachers’ abilities to connect professional knowledge with lesson planning and observation. European Journal of Teacher Education, 47(1), 120–139. https://doi.org/10.1080/02619768.2021.1996558
  69. Zhao, Y., & Frank, K. A. (2003). Factors affecting technology uses in schools: An ecological perspective. American Educational Research Journal, 40(4), 807–840. https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312040004807