Brantley-Dias, L. & Ertmer, P. A. (2013). Goldilocks and TPACK: Is the Construct “Just Right?” Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 46(2), 103–128. 

This article, written just eight years after the original TPACK model was released, supports a view of TPACK as too complex, too hard to measure, and possibly too out of date, to be useful for classroom teachers to use. In this article, the authors undertake a critical review of the TPACK framework in order to answer the question, “What added value does TPACK offer the educational community…” (p. 105)? After reviewing the underpinnings of TPACK, they conclude that TPACK puts too much emphasis on technology at the expense of focusing on content and pedagogy. According to the authors, there is little evidence that studying the TPACK framework actually helps teachers make thoughtful decisions about technology integration. Continuing their quest to whittle the TPACK down to size, the authors investigated ways to measure the impact of using TPACK. The size of the TPACK framework makes quantifying its success difficult because one survey can’t measure all seven components adequately, and because there is a lack of clarity surrounding terms related to educational technology. The authors review literature that advocates narrowing the scope of TPACK by tying it to specific subjects or types of technology. Further review of the research led the authors to describe using design tasks to evaluate teacher use of TPACK, but again found that the complexity of the TPACK process made it difficult to analyze through lesson plans and written reflections. Finally, the authors mention using teacher observations as a way to measure TPACK; however, once again, the authors cite research that suggests the complexity of TPACK would require multiple observations to adequately observe the generalizability of teacher knowledge into practice. Finally, the authors looked at research with the idea that combining assessments might be a way to adequately assess a teacher’s TPACK, but the assessments they reviewed were few and too dissimilar to be of use.

In the next part of the article, the authors explore ideas related to the effectiveness of TPACK when it is actually used as intended. The authors state that TPACK ignores variables that significantly affect how well TPACK works as a set of guiding principles. They quoted Somekh (2008) who noted, “Teachers are not ‘free agents’ and their use of ICT for teaching and learning depends on interlocking cultural, social, and organizational contexts. . .” They go on to address whether or not TPACK promotes the kind of teaching and learning needed to prepare students for the 21st century. In the last part of the article, the review suggested ways to reconfigure TPACK to be more user friendly; concentric circles instead of a Venn diagram, circles within circles, and eventually proposing that a return to a focused goal of “simply helping teachers understand how different instructional materials, include technology, support effect teaching” (p. 120). In the end, the authors recommend a shift away from looking at TPACK as a way of integrating technology to look at it as a way to promote technology-enabled learning, where teachers learn about technology related to their fields and use it in a way that leverages their content expertise and subject-specific pedagogical skills.

The authors did cover a lot of territory in this article, and even though they presented some fairly convincing arguments, I wonder if their stance arises from the move of TPACK from the university teacher education program to the teacher classroom–a bias born of perspective. I actually agree that to do this model justice as a classroom teacher would be incredibly unwieldy.  However, as a tool to help teachers new to the profession think about the potential uses of technology in the classroom, it does have value. It is, after all, a framework.  Just as an empty frame doesn’t tell us much about the artist, a framework out of context for teacher practice would reveal just as little about the teacher or the framework.

Now 17 years after the original TPACK framework was written, I believe that technology is a tool, sometimes a very fancy, versatile tool, but still just a tool. A ubiquitous tool with endless possibilities. Today’s teachers need help in learning how to use their expertise to analyze the attributes of available technology so they can choose the right tool for the job. But teachers should also be cognizant of the way that pedagogy, content knowledge, and technology interact, so that in the midst of the multitude of technological tools that districts are thrusting at teachers (my district has four required programs that teachers must use on a daily basis, two emails for each teacher, Windows and Google suite for educators, and. . .the list goes on) they have an understanding of how to look at the bigger picture.