Developing and validating a questionnaire for evaluating the EFL ‘Total PACKage’: Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK) for English as a Foreign Language (EFL)

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Full text download(s)

Published copy (DOI)

Author(s)

Department/unit(s)

Publication details

JournalComputer Assisted Language Learning
DateAccepted/In press - 26 Dec 2017
DatePublished (current) - 5 Jan 2018
Number of pages27
Pages (from-to)1-27
Original languageEnglish

Abstract

This paper introduces a new self-report questionnaire for the assessment of TPACK for English language teaching which does not prescribe a particular approach to language teaching or the use of particular technologies. Development and validation of the questionnaire involved: (1) creation of an initial item pool based on a review of the literature on Pedagogical Content Knowledge (PCK) and the use of technology in EFL, (2) evaluation of the content validity of the initial items with a panel of 36 international experts in computer-assisted language learning, (3) exploration and validation of the underlying factor structure through the administration of the questionnaire to 542 EFL practitioners and Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) and Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA). A six-factor solution, comprising PCK, TK, CK, Technological Pedagogical Knowledge (TPK), Technological Content Knowledge (TCK), and Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPCK), emerged from the EFA and was subsequently confirmed through CFA. The emergence of TK and CK, but not PK, as independent factors might be explained as follows. PK and CK are intrinsically linked, that is any expression of subject matter is an attempt to communicate understanding thereof. TK tends to be taught independently from CK and PK on pre-service teacher education programmes and continuing professional development programmes. And CK, namely a degree in English, has long been, and in some contexts continues to be, the only requirement to become a language teacher.

Bibliographical note

© 2018 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group. This is an author-produced version of the published paper. Uploaded in accordance with the publisher’s self-archiving policy. Further copying may not be permitted; contact the publisher for details.

Discover related content

Find related publications, people, projects, datasets and more using interactive charts.

View graph of relations