Introduction and Overview of the Research
Background and Rational
Integrating Information and Communication Technology (ICT) in education has become increasingly important in enhancing the teaching and learning experience. The TPACK framework integrates Technological, Pedagogical, and Content Knowledge and offers a robust structure for STEM teachers to incorporate technology into their teaching practices effectively (Mishra & Koehler, 2006). Peer review of teaching (PRT) has been identified as a valuable professional development tool that promotes reflective practice and continuous improvement (McKenzie et al., 2008). This research proposes to explore how PRT, guided by the TPACK framework, can enhance STEM university teachers’ teaching practices across different classroom settings, including physical, online, and hybrid. The TPACK framework has not previously been used with PRT in higher education.
Research Questions
RQ1: What challenges do university teachers face when integrating ICT in various delivery modes, such as physical, online and hybrid classrooms?
RQ2: How can the TPACK framework be effectively integrated into the guidelines of the peer review of teaching (PRT) to enhance teaching practices?
RQ3: Will the developed guidelines of PRT affect university teachers’ teaching practices with ICT in physical, online, and hybrid classrooms?
Objectives
The main objectives of this study include to:
- identify university teachers’ challenges when integrating ICT in various delivery modes, such as physical, online and hybrid classrooms;
- develop guidelines for the peer review of teaching (PRT) by integrating the TPACK framework;
- evaluate the impact of these PRT guidelines in various delivery modes, such as physical, online and hybrid classrooms.
Review of Current Literature
Peer review is a well-established practice in higher education that improves teaching quality (Johnston et al., 2022). However, integrating ICT into teaching adds a new dimension to the peer review process. Studies have explored the effectiveness of peer review in physical classrooms, focusing on aspects like technology selection (Zheng, Chen, Cui & Zhang, 2009), pedagogical use of ICT tools (Susanto et al., 2020 Liesa-Orús et al., 2020), and student engagement (Robinson et al., 2021). Similarly, research on online classrooms highlights the importance of peer feedback on aspects like online learning platform navigation (Kerman et al., 2024), the use of collaborative tools (ibid.), and fostering a virtual learning community (Lowenthal et al., 2023). Blended or hybrid classrooms present unique challenges, requiring peer review to consider physical and online ICT integration aspects.
The TPACK framework (Mishra & Koehler, 2006) has gained significant traction in recent years for its emphasis on the complex interplay of technology, pedagogy, and content knowledge in effective teaching. Research suggests that strong TPACK fosters innovative and effective ways to integrate technology into various teaching contexts, including physical, online, and hybrid classrooms (Cutroni & Paladino, 2023).
Peer Review of Teaching in Physical Classrooms Using ICT
Research indicates that PRT in physical classrooms, supported by ICT tools like video recordings and feedback platforms, significantly enhances teaching practices (Johnston et al., 2022). ICT facilitates detailed feedback and reflection, enabling teachers to observe and analyse their teaching methods and student interactions effectively (Wong & Yang, 2017)).
Peer Review of Teaching in Online Classrooms Using ICT
In online classrooms, ICT is essential for PRT due to the digital nature of the teaching environment. Tools such as learning management systems (LMS), video conferencing software, and digital libraries are used to conduct reviews and provide feedback (Camilleri & Camilleri, 2022). Studies show that PRT in online settings fosters a collaborative culture among educators and helps them adapt to online pedagogy (Koehler et al., 2014).
Peer Review of Teaching in Hybrid Classrooms Using ICT
Hybrid classrooms combine elements of both physical and online learning environments, presenting unique challenges and opportunities for PRT (Raes, 2021). ICT tools in hybrid settings must accommodate in-person and remote interactions (Frisch & Greene, 2021). Effective PRT in hybrid classrooms leverages technology to bridge the gap between teaching modes, enhancing flexibility and inclusivity (Raes, 2021; Chrysi Rapanta et al., 2021).
Research Design and Methodology
Research Design
This study will adopt a mixed-methods approach, combining quantitative and qualitative data to comprehensively evaluate the TPACK-based PRT framework’s effectiveness.
Participants
A sample size of 30 participants will include university teachers from the Faculty of Science and Engineering engaged in physical, online, and hybrid teaching environments. A purposive sampling technique will ensure a diverse representation of teaching experiences and technological proficiencies.
Data Collection
- Pre- and post-intervention interviews (5 participants): To gather qualitative data on the perceptions and experiences of using ICT in physical, online and hybrid teaching environments.
- Pre- and post-intervention surveys (30 participants): To gather quantitative and qualitative data on teachers’ knowledge about TPACK and perceptions and experiences with ICT in PRT.
- Observations (10 participants): Classroom-recorded videos (incl. physical, online and hybrid) will be conducted to assess the practical application of feedback received through PRT.
Data Analysis
Quantitative data will be analysed using non-parametric and descriptive statistical methods to identify trends and correlations, while qualitative data will be analysed thematically to extract key themes and insights. The video data will be analysed using a coding scheme based on the TPACK Framework.
Significance and Expected Outcomes
This research will contribute to a culture of continuous improvement in higher education teaching by empowering STEM teaching staff to leverage the full potential of ICT for richer learning experiences for teachers and students. By leveraging the TPACK framework within a PRT framework, this study aims to:
- Enhance the quality of STEM teaching through structured peer feedback and reflective practice.
- Provide a scalable framework for integrating ICT in various STEM teaching environments.
- Identify best practices and address challenges in using ICT for PRT, offering practical recommendations for STEM educators and policymakers.
- Produce a robust, adaptable peer review framework based on TPACK that empowers higher education STEM teachers to critically evaluate and improve their teaching practices with ICT across diverse classroom settings.
- Enhance understanding of how peer review with a TPACK focus fosters the development of effective ICT integration skills in higher education STEM teachers.
- Produce evidence-based recommendations to support higher education institutions in promoting and implementing effective peer review practices for ICT-enhanced STEM teaching.
References
Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge: A Framework for Teacher Knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017–1054. p.9 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9620.2006.00684.x
Mckenzie, J., Pelliccione, L., & Parker, N. (2008). Developing peer review of teaching in blended learning environments: Frameworks and challenges. Retrieved May 19, 2024, from https://www.ascilite.org/conferences/melbourne08/procs/mckenzie-j.pdf p.2
Johnston, A. L., Baik, C., & Chester, A. (2020). Peer review of teaching in Australian higher education: a systematic review. Higher Education Research & Development, 41(2), 390–404. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2020.1845124
Zheng, L., Chen, N. S., Cui, P., & Zhang, X. (2019). A systematic review of technology-supported peer assessment research: An activity theory approach. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 20(5), 168-191. DOI: 10.19173/irrodl.v20i5.4333
Susanto, R., Rachmadtullah, R., & Rachbini, W. (2020). Technological and Pedagogical Models: Analysis of Factors and Measurement of Learning Outcomes in Education. Journal of Ethnic and Cultural Studies, 7(2), 1–14. https://www.jstor.org/stable/48710080
Liesa-Orús, M., Latorre-Cosculluela, C., Vázquez-Toledo, S., & Sierra-Sánchez, V. (2020). The Technological Challenge Facing Higher Education Professors: Perceptions of ICT Tools for Developing 21st Century Skills. Sustainability, 12(13), 5339. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12135339
Robinson, A., Simonetti, J. H., Richardson, K., & Wawro, M. (2021). Positive attitudinal shifts and a narrowing gender gap: Do expertlike attitudes correlate to higher learning gains for women in the physics classroom? Physical Review Physics Education Research, 17(1). https://doi.org/10.1103/physrevphyseducres.17.010101
Nafiseh Taghizadeh Kerman, Seyyed Kazem Banihashem, Karami, M., Er, E., Stan van Ginkel, & Omid Noroozi. (2023). Online peer feedback in higher education: A synthesis of the literature. Education and Information Technologies, 29. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-12273-8
Lowenthal, P. R., Horan, A., DeArmond, M. C., Lomellini, A., Egan, D., Johnson, M., Knut Möeller, Fayth Keldgord, Kuohn, J., Jensen, S., Stamm, A., & Pounds, D. (2023). Classroom Community and Online Learning: A Synthesis of Alfred Rovai’s Research. TechTrends, 67(6), 931–944. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-023-00904-3
Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge: A new framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record. 108(6), 1017-1054.
Cutroni, L., & Paladino, A. (2023). Peer-ing in: A systematic review and framework of peer review of teaching in higher education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 133, 104302. p. 6, 9, 13, 15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2023.104302
Wong, G. K.-W., & Yang, M. (2017). Using ICT to Facilitate Instant and Asynchronous Feedback for Students’ Learning Engagement and Improvements. Emerging Practices in Scholarship of Learning and Teaching in a Digital Era, 289–309. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-3344-5_18
Camilleri, M.A. & Camilleri, A.C. (2021). The Acceptance of Learning Management Systems and Video Conferencing Technologies: Lessons Learned from COVID-19, Technology, Knowledge and Learning, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-021-09561-y
Koehler, M. J., Mishra, P., Kereluik, K., Shin, T. S., & Graham, C. R. (2013). The Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge Framework. Handbook of Research on Educational Communications and Technology, 101–111. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-3185-5_9
Raes, A. (2021). Exploring Student and Teacher Experiences in Hybrid Learning Environments: Does Presence Matter? Postdigital Science and Education. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42438-021-00274-0
Frisch, B., & Greene, C. (2021, June 3). What It Takes to Run a Great Hybrid Meeting. Harvard Business Review. https://hbr.org/2021/06/what-it-takes-to-run-a-great-hybrid-meeting
Rapanta, C., Botturi, L., Goodyear, P., Guàrdia, L., & Koole, M. (2021). Balancing technology, pedagogy and the new normal: Post-pandemic challenges for higher education. Postdigital Science and Education, 3(3). https://doi.org/10.1007/s42438-021-00249-1
