Technology-Supported English Language
Teaching Professional Development: A Case Study of a
Secondary English Teacher’s TPACK
Finita Dewi, Nenden Sri Lengkanawati and Pupung Purnawarman
Sekolah PascaSarjana, Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia, Jl. Dr.Setiabudi, Bandung, Indonesia
Keywords: TPACK, CALL, Technology TPD
Abstract: Teachers play a pivotal role in designing lessons, choosing and selecting suitable technology tools to engage
students in various types of authentic tasks and problem solving activities essential for their lifelong skills.
In integrating technology into their lessons, teachers are required to have technological, pedagogical and
content knowledge (TPACK). Despite the growing number of studies in technology integration, not much
has been done to specifically investigate how professional development program supports teachers to
acquire this knowledge. This study sought to examine the extent to which a Technology-Supported English
Language Teaching Professional Development (TSELT PD) program can support an English teacher’s
TPACK, and how the teacher selects a repertoire of technology suitable for her classroom practices. This
research shows a preliminary result on the impact of TSELT PD program to support teachers in designing
technology-integrated English lessons. Research questions were addressed through lesson design activities
and teacher’s lesson plan. The study demonstrated that having involved in a TSELT PD Program, the
teacher’s TPACK were reflected on her lesson plan through her ability to align the selection of technology
with her curriculum goals, use the technology to support instructional strategies, and select technology tools
compatible with the curriculum goals.
1 INTRODUCTION
ICT has become a fundamental part of everyday life
in the 21st century. It transcends the boundaries of
space and time, allowing people to reach out to the
world around them using their skills to facilitate the
connection they wish to have. Its ubiquity has made
a great shift in the way learners learn (Prensky
2004) and it has also changed the way teachers teach
(Becker 2000). The promises of technology
integration provide ground for expectation of
success, improvement, or excellence in education
(Yang & Walker 2015). Having technological skill
to utilize ICT may develop students’ higher order
thinking skills (OECD 2001), increase levels of
participation and collaboration (Reeves et al. 2005),
and amplify teachers’ creative teaching strategies
(ChanLin et al. 2006). However, with all the
promises of ICT, its utilization in Indonesian
education is still low (Harendita 2013). A study
survey conducted by Son, Robb, & Charismiadji
(2011) on Indonesian EFL teachers’ computer
literacy and competency, showed that teachers’
basic computing skills are generally high. However,
teachers’ frequency in using computer applications
is very limited to few types of applications such as
word processing, presentation tools, or some
technology tools use as learning resources.
To respond to the demands of the need to
prepare teachers with the necessary knowledge and
skills to integrate technology into their teaching,
today’s teacher professional development may need
to be focused on this issue. Teachers’ knowledge in
knowing how to use technology for day to day
activities is not necessarily in line with the
knowledge in knowing how to use it for teaching
and learning purposes (Koehler & Mishra, 2006).
Understanding technology pedagogy and content
knowledge (hereafter TPACK) is what teachers
need to meaningfully integrate technology into
teaching (Koehler & Mishra, 2006). TPACK is
originated from the framework of pedagogical and
content knowledge (PCK) proposed by Shulman
(1986). With the emergence of educational
technology, Koehler & Mishra (2006) added
Dewi, F., Lengkanawati, N. and Purnawarman, P.
Technology-Supported English Language Teaching Professional Development: A Case Study of a Secondary English Teacher’s TPACK.
DOI: 10.5220/0008214700002284
In Proceedings of the 1st Bandung English Language Teaching International Conference (BELTIC 2018) - Developing ELT in the 21st Century, pages 123-132
ISBN: 978-989-758-416-9
Copyright
c
 2022 by SCITEPRESS – Science and Technology Publications, Lda. All rights reserved
123

technology into PCK and described TPACK as the
interweaving of technology, pedagogy and content
knowledge. The transactional relationship between
content, pedagogy and technology needs to be
understood by teachers in order to orchestrate and
coordinate technology, pedagogy and content into
teaching (Mishra and Koehler, 2006).
Despite a number of studies on technology
integration, not much has been done to investigate
the connection between technology professional
development for teachers, classroom
implementation and students’ responses. Studies
investigating teachers’ TPACK mostly relied on
teachers’ self- report and survey (Mahdum 2015) or
evaluation of instructional design (Cahyono et al.
2016). Given that the area of research in looking at
teachers’ TPACK in language learning is still
understudied, further investigation need to be
conducted to gain more in- depth understanding on
how teachers integrate technology in EFL classes
not only through self- report and survey but also
through comprehensive observation.
2 MANUSCRIPT PREPARATION
2.1 TPACK for Teachers
TPACK framework discusses the connection
between the three components of the knowledge,
among others are the knowledge of technology,
pedagogy, and learning content. TPACK is an
expansion of Pedagogical Content Knowledge
(PCK) proposed by Shulman (1986). PCK seeks to
complete the gap between content and pedagogical
processes. According to Shulman (1986), one who
teaches a course must be able to demonstrate his/her
knowledge of the subjects as the requirement for
teaching. Although knowledge about teaching
methods is important, it is considered as the second
priority of the qualifications of a
teacher. Furthermore, Shulman said that knowledge
of a subject matter is a combination of content
knowledge and pedagogical knowledge.
Koehler & Mishra (2006) developed the idea of
technological, pedagogical and content knowledge,
which pragmatically explains the concept of
knowledge. Knowledge is considered as a tool for
designing a particular purpose. This is being used as
the foundation of a "learning technology by
design". Polly & Brantley-Dias (2009) explained
that the TPACK framework not only refers to what
is done by the teacher but also to what is known by
the teacher. TPACK framework can be seen in
Figure 1 which separately describes each knowledge
that needs to be owned by teachers, namely the
knowledge of Technology, Pedagogy and Content as
well as the relationship among those elements.
Figure 1: Framework of Technological Pedagogical and
Content Knowledge (Mishra & Koehler, 2008)
Mishra & Koehler (2008) explained that teachers
develop TPACK in a cyclical way beginning with
the technology that is already known, then continue
on teaching scenarios which have not or poorly
known. TPACK framework can also help teachers
to become designers, creators and decision makers
in the technology integration. A number of studies
have described the need for further research on
TPACK and the aspects of consideration to develop
teachers' knowledge. Robin (2008) emphasized the
need for further research on the advantages of using
multimedia associated with TPACK in learning
activities. Furthermore, Polly & Brantley-Dias
(2009) suggested to conduct research on how
teacher trainers and material developers can help
teachers to continue to develop their TPACK.
2.2 TPACK in EFL Teachers
Professional Development
For teachers, by designing technology integrated
lesson can be the best way to learn about
educational technology (Koehler & Mishra, 2006).
Teachers may work in team with different level
expertise in content, pedagogy, and technology and
develop lessons which can give solutions to some
pedagogical problems through the use of technology
BELTIC 2018 - 1st Bandung English Language Teaching International Conference
124

(Mishra et al. 2007). By having the experience to
design technology- integrated lesson, teachers can
not only learn the technology tools but also build
something which is related to their needs and
determine the specific instructional goals on the use
of some particular technology tools (Punya et al.
2007).
Some studies have been done to investigate the
development of in-service teachers TPACK through
technology professional development. Tai (2015)
investigated the impact of TPACK-in-Action CALL
workshop on the developments of teachers’ CALL
competency and how they adopt what they learn in
the workshop into teaching in their classroom.
Involving 24 in-service elementary EFL teachers in
Taiwan, this study indicated that after involving in
15 hours of TPACK workshop, the teachers show
the development of their CALL competency. The
workshop implemented the TPACK-in-Action
model which consisted of modelling, analyzing,
demonstrating, application and reflection. The
development of teachers’ CALL competency can be
seen from the way they selected the online materials
and appropriate technology for content teaching.
They could also match the affordances of
technology with the instructional goals and
pedagogy. In contrast, using similar model to Tai
(2015), Sarhandi, Khan, Buledi, & Asghar (2016)
found different result in their study. Their study
indicated that although the participants have
qualified pedagogical knowledge, they were unable
to successfully integrate technology in their
teaching. This happened due to their lack of
technological knowledge and pedagogical skills on
using the technology tools. It was predicted that the
workshop did not provide enough guidance on the
integration of technology. Therefore, this study
suggested that there is an urgent need to incorporate
the pedagogical handling of technology along with
the technical training.
In Indonesian context, Cahyono et al. (2016)
examine how Indonesian EFL teacher improve the
quality of their instructional designs and teaching
practice after being introduced to TPACK
framework. This study involved 20 secondary
school teachers taking teaching practice course at
master degree program. The participants joined 16
sessions of the course comprising the introduction to
TPACK framework, the making of instructional
design based on the TPACK framework and peer-
teaching practice. The result of the study showed
that the teachers benefited a lot from the TPACK-
oriented teaching practice course and have
successfully prepared instructional designs and
performed the teaching practices by applying the
TPACK framework.
Findings of these studies reveal the importance
of teachers’ ability to select online materials and
appropriate technology for content teaching.
Teachers with strong pedagogical knowledge or
technological knowledge, might fail to integrate
technology into their teaching when they are lack of
the skills on using technology tools for educational
purposes. Technology professional development
program should provide teachers with the
opportunity to use the technology and to become
familiar with ways in which to integrate technology
into their classroom (Frei, Gammill, & Irons, 2007,
p. 179). In addition, the making of instructional
design based on TPACK framework will also
contribute to the development of teachers’ TPACK.
2.3 Technology Integration in EFL
Classes
The definition of technology integration has evolved
over time, starting from the perspective that canters
on technology towards the direction which
emphasizes on the pedagogical aspects of the
technology itself. Ertmer (1999) states that
integration can be seen by observing the extent to
which the technology is used to facilitate the
learning activities. Although the definition of
integration has changed, literature related to the
integration of the technology has not changed much
and showed little effect on day-to-day learning
activities (Ertmer, 1999). In general, many teachers
are not ready and do not feel confident to use
technology in the classroom (Willis et al. 1999).
The causes of this situation can be identified as
follows, the majority of programs preparing teachers
to integrate technology into the learning was carried
out in a less effective way and did not provide
relevant examples (Ertmer et al. 2003). Another
factor is the fact that in general, personal use of
technology by teachers outside of school cannot
efficiently be translated into learning activities in the
classroom (Russel et al. 2003). The use of
technology in learning is unique and requires good
preparation. Ertmer (1999) believes the teachers
faced serious challenges in trying to integrate
technology into learning activities. He pays attention
to some factors that hinder teachers in integrating
technology. These factors are related to the lack of
trainings, time and other facilities. Furthermore,
other hindrances are related to teachers’
understanding and beliefs in their day-to-day
teaching which might not be relevant to the
Technology-Supported English Language Teaching Professional Development: A Case Study of a Secondary English Teacher’s TPACK
125

implementation of technology integration itself
(Ertmer, 1999).
In relation to this, Byrum & Cashman (1993)
conducted a study on the problems, perception and
preparation that must be done by the teachers in
implementing technology integration. The study
showed that 24% of the respondents have been
asked to develop lesson plans that integrated
technology into the teaching learning processes.
Meanwhile, 83% of them stated that they were ready
to implement the technology into the curriculum.
Byrum and Cashman (1993) also described the
teachers' understanding of the relationship between
technologies and how this understanding was shaped
based on their experience during college years.
Furthermore, from the research it can be concluded
that teachers were not exposed to the integrated use
of technology, because many of them only had the
experience of a teacher- centred learning
environment and the teaching process itself was
focused on the technology rather than on the
elements of pedagogy.
3 METHODOLOGY
This study is part of a larger study which sought to
investigate the extent to which a technology-
supported English language teaching professional
development (hereafter TSELT PD) which is based
on TPACK framework from Koehler & Mishra
(2006) could support the secondary in-service
English teachers’ knowledge and skills in planning
and implementing technology integrated English
lesson. The larger study employed a multiple-case
study design involving three secondary English
teachers from three different schools, and examined
the teachers’ TPACK development from planning to
the implementation of the technology integrated
lesson in classrooms as the result of the TSELT PD.
Due to its limitation of space, this paper will only
focus on one out of three participating teachers. Using
a qualitative case study design, this paper will
present the TSELT PD process and describe
whether or not TPACK was reflected on the lesson
plans of the teacher.
3.1 The Setting
The TSELT PD program in the present study was
conducted independently for the purpose of this
study. TSELT PD program consisted of a three-
day- workshop and lesson design activities. On the
first day, the workshop materials covered the
overview of the advancement of today’s technology,
the introduction to technology integration in
language teaching and learning to respond to the
demand of today’s education and the needs of
today’s students, the brief introduction to some
possible technology tools to be integrated into
English lessons, and the discussion on the type of
activities teachers usually do in their classrooms.
On the second day, the participants were introduced
to some technology tools which can be integrated
into English
lessons (i.e. Padlet, Canva, Kahoot,
Screencast O’Matic, Timeline maker, online mind
map, etc.). They had the opportunities to explore the
technology tools and discuss the possibility of
those technology tools to deliver certain topics in
relation to the curriculum and their teaching
objectives. These activities were aimed at
introducing the teachers to technological knowledge
(TK) and technological content knowledge (TCK).
On the third day of the workshop, the
participants were given a teaching demonstration on
the use of some technology tools in English lesson,
then, they were asked to discuss and reflect on the
stages of the teaching demonstration. They reviewed
the technology tools which have been introduced in
the previous workshop and discussed how to teach
those tools in their classrooms. This activity related
to the
technological pedagogical knowledge (TPK).
Finally, at the end of the third day, the participants
were asked to design lesson plans with the
integration of at least one technology tools which
they have explored. These final activities is related
to technological pedagogical content knowledge
(TPACK) of the teachers, in which they were to
orchestrate the content that they were going to
deliver and determine how they were going to
deliver the content using technology tools.
3.2 Participants
One secondary high school teachers in Bandung
involved in this study. In recruiting the participants, a
set of technological knowledge survey was prepared
to obtain the information on the teachers’
knowledge about and experience in using
technology in their classrooms. Their participation
was voluntarily as the survey was distributed
through Bandung English Teacher WhatsApp
group. Out of 20 teachers who filled out the form, 8
of them were willing to join the workshop, and 3 of
them were chosen to continue to lesson design and
implementation process. This paper drew from a
case of one of the teachers joining the lesson design
activities.
BELTIC 2018 - 1st Bandung English Language Teaching International Conference
126

3.3 Data Collection and Analysis
In order to see the reflection of teachers TPACK,
recordings from the lesson design activities were
transcribed, and the teacher’s lesson plans were
collected. The lesson plans were analyzed using the
TPACK lesson plan rubric adapted from Harris,
Grandgenet & Hofer (2010). This rubric focus on the
integration of technology in the lesson plan
comprising four categories with a 4 point-scale
followed by a specific description for each score. The
categories are 1) curriculum
goals and
technologies, 2) instructional strategies and
technologies, 3) technology selection, and 4) Fit.
The result taken from the a na ly s i s of the
le ss on plan w er e th en triangulated with the data
taken from the transcript of lesson design activities.
4 FINDINGS & DISCUSSIONS
This part of the paper presents the description of
teacher’s technological knowledge, the analysis of
the lesson plan based on the TPACK lesson plan
rubric and the result of the FGD.
4.1 Technological Knowledge
Ms. Anti is a secondary English teacher from
Bandung, West Java. She has been teaching for 21
years. She uses technology tools for both personal
and educational purposes. Based on the
technological knowledge survey, Ms. Anti is able to
use technology tools for day to day use such as
email, Microsoft office tools, online forum, blog,
and social media. In addition, she is also familiar
with some technology tools which usually created
for educational purposes, such as online quiz creator
(Quipper), and online class (Edmodo). She also
admits that she is not familiar with other technology
tools such as, online sticky notes (linoit and Padlet),
online mindmap (Mindomo, iMind Map), website
creator (Google site, Weebly), and screen casting
software (Screencast o’matic). To her, technology
tools have been used as learning resources, such as
using video from YouTube or as a tool to report the
result of students’ learning. She believes that
technology can change the way she teaches as it can
provide a more variation in teaching learning
process as well as in providing teaching content for
students. She also believes that students enjoy
learning English with technology because of its
multimodality.
4.2 Lesson Plan 1
The first lesson plan was designed for two meetings
(2 x 80 minutes). In this lesson plan, Ms. Anti wanted
her students to be able to 1) find detail information
from the
conversation on the recording, 2) identify
the expressions of certainty, uncertainty, and asking
for repetition, 3) practice the expressions, and 4)
create a conversation using those expressions based
on some situations given by the teacher. The first
meeting will focus on goal number 1-3 with the
emphasis on listening and speaking activities, and
the second meeting will focus on goal number 4
with the emphasis on speaking activity. In her plan,
4 technology tools will be integrated in her
lesson; audio recording, speech-to-text application,
voice recorder, and Padlet (online sticky note). In the
audio recording, there will be two people discussing
about how to make a guitar become shiny. In this
conversation, one person explained what to do while
the other tried to catch the information. Once in a
while, the man in the conversation asked for
clarification or showed his uncertainty about the
explanation. Prior to listening to the recording, Ms.
Anti planned to provide the students with a list of
guided questions to help them find specific
information from the recording. Then, she planned to
ask the students to practice the expressions using
text- to-speech application, to ensure that students
pronounce the words correctly, and finally she
planned to ask the students to create a conversation
explaining how to do or operate something to their
friends. She will ask her students to record the
conversation using voice recorder in their mobile
phones, then upload the result on Padlet.
The first category on the TPACK lesson plan
rubric examined how technology matched with the
curriculum goals as stated in the lesson plan.
Referring to the rubric, Ms. Anti’s lesson plan
received score 3 (technologies selected for use in the
instructional plan are aligned with one or more
curriculum goals). The use of audio recording
combined with guided questions may help students in
reaching the first and the second goals. However, the
use of speech-to-text application for goal number 3
might not be enough to facilitate students in
practicing the expressions, because the application is
only useful for
checking pronunciation. Students need
to practice using the expressions in context. The use
of voice recording tool may help students to do the
conversation outside the classroom in the real
settings. Students can also self-check the result of the
conversation. Uploading the recorded
conversation on Padlet may also be useful for the
Technology-Supported English Language Teaching Professional Development: A Case Study of a Secondary English Teacher’s TPACK
127

students to be able see students’ work and do peer
checking. However, Ms. Anti did not state any
specific goal of using Padlet in her lesson plan.to
see students’ work and do peer checking. However,
Ms. Anti did not state any specific goal of using
Padlet in her lesson plan.
The second category on TPACK lesson plan
rubric was about the match between instructional
strategies and technologies. In her lesson plan, Ms.
Anti stated that her lesson was based on cooperative
learning, in which, by the end of the lesson, the
students will work together to create a conversation
and record it using voice recorder. In the process,
students will be asked to work in group to identify
detail information from the audio recording, practice
the expressions of certainty and uncertainty, and
finally record their voice. The technology use may
support the students’ active participation, hence, not
all the chosen tools might optimally facilitate the
cooperative learning process. Speech-to-text, for
example, is more suitable for individual usage, as
students can practice their pronunciation and self-
check their accuracy. While voice recorder can be
very suitable for students working in groups. Thus,
some of the choices of the technology tools do not
directly facilitate the cooperative learning.
Therefore, this category received score 2
(technology use minimally support the instructional
strategies).
The third category referred to the compatibility
of the technology selection with the curriculum
goals and instructional strategies. Examining the
content of the lesson and the instructional plan, this
category received score 3 (Technology selection(s)
are appropriate, but not exemplary, given
curriculum goal(s) and instructional strategies). Her
plan in using audio recording can help students to
build their background knowledge and get the
model of conversation using the targeted
expressions. Departing from this model, students
practice the expressions and create their own
conversation. However, some of the tools cannot
maximally support the cooperative learning strategy
she chose as the instructional strategy. The last
category was about the ‘fit’ of the content, pedagogy
and technology together. Some of the technology
tools she chose could be considered in line with the
content she will deliver and the pedagogy she will
utilize in delivering the content. Therefore, for this
category, the lesson plan received score 3
(Content, Instructional strategies, and
technology fit together within the instructional
plan).
4.3 Lesson Plan 2
The second lesson plan was designed for 1
meeting (1 x 80 minutes). In this lesson plan, Ms.
Anti aimed at having students to find detail
information on a reading text about “The Bird of
Paradise”. She chose
3 technology tools in her lesson; Word-it-out (a
word cloud creator website), a video about bird of
paradise downloaded from YouTube, and Kahoot
(an online quiz creator). She planned to start the
lesson by showing some keywords taken from the
passage using Word-it-out, then she will ask the
students to discuss the familiar or unfamiliar
words. She will continue her lesson by asking
students to identify the words they have discussed
on the video being shown. Then, she will group
the students (group of four) and distribute a
reading passage. She will cut out the reading
passage into 4 parts and distribute each part to
each member of the group. The reading activity
will be conducted using jigsaw-reading strategy.
Finally, after all students read and discuss the
passage, she will provide a set of reading
comprehension questions using Kahoot.
For the first category of the rubric, Ms. Anti’s
lesson plan received score 4
(Technologies selected
for use in the instructional plan are strongly aligned
with one or more curriculum goals). All the technology
tools chosen in this lesson plan will be able to
scaffold the students in getting detail information of
the passage. Word-it-out and Video showing will
prepare students with some keywords they will
encounter in the passage and help them understand
the text while reading it. The use of Kahoot, which
is a game based learning activity, can be the reason
for students to read carefully and answer the
questions accurately as they might have the urge to
win the game.
For the second category, which focuses on the
technology and instructional strategy, Ms. Anti’s
lesson plan received score 4 (Technology use
optimally supports instructional strategies). In the
plan, she will use jigsaw reading strategy which is a
part of cooperative learning. It is stated that students
will have to work in group of four, read some parts
of the passage, then share and discuss what they
have read to get the complete idea of the whole
passage. Using Word-it-out and YouTube can help
students before they do the jigsaw reading activity,
while playing game with Kahoot can support them
to work together while finding the answers to the
questions prompted on Kahoot.
BELTIC 2018 - 1st Bandung English Language Teaching International Conference
128

The third category, which examined the match
of the choice of technology tools to both curriculum
and instructional strategies, the lesson plan received
score 3 (Technology selection(s) are appropriate, but
not exemplary, given curriculum goal(s) and
instructional strategies). The use of word-it-out and
YouTube video are appropriate to have the students
ready to read and comprehend the passage, while
Kahoot is appropriate to check their comprehension
on the information inside the passage (Curriculum
Goal). All of the technology tools are also
appropriate to support the jigsaw reading strategy
(instructional strategy).
Regarding the content, pedagogy, and
technology fitness, Ms. Anti’s lesson plan received
score 4 (Content, instructional strategies and
technology fit together strongly within the
instructional plan). The content provided in the
lesson which is related to the students’ ability to
obtain detail information of a passage is in line with
the curriculum. Using jigsaw reading is a good way
to support students’ active learning in understanding
the passage. The choices of technology can support
all the activities to support students during the
lesson.
4.4 Lesson Plan 3
The final goal of the third lesson plan is having
students to create an infographic about some
endemic animals in Indonesia. The lesson plan
was divided into four meetings (4 x 80 minutes).
In this lesson, Ms. Anti wanted her students to be
able to 1) listen and identify information about
Komodo dragon from a video, 2) identify the
structure and language features of a report text, 3)
write a report text about some endemic animals in
Indonesia, and finally, 4) create an infographic
explaining one endemic animals in Indonesia.
There will be 4 technology tools to be integrated
in her lesson; YouTube video, Power Point slides,
Wikipedia and Canva (graphic-design tool
website). In the first meeting, she planned to start
building students’ knowledge about endemic
animal by showing a video downloaded from
YouTube about Komodo Dragon and ask students
to answer some comprehension questions based on
the video. At the second meeting, Ms. Anti will
provide students with a report text about
Rhinoceros and discus the structure of the text and
its language features. The third and fourth
meetings will be used to do collaborative writing
activities, students will be asked to find
information on certain endemic animals on
Wikipedia, then write a report text based on the
information they obtained. Peer-correction and
teacher feedback activities will be conducted
before students start creating the infographic using
Canva website.
For the first category, the third lesson plan
received score 4 (Technologies selected for use in
the instructional plan are strongly aligned with one
or more curriculum goals). All the technology tools
which will be used in this lesson can support the
curriculum goals stated in the lesson plan. The use
of YouTube video can help students in building the
students’ knowledge and give examples on the kinds
of information they need to find when writing a
report text about animal. The use of Power Point
slides, prompting on the structure and the language
features of the report text, will give ideas to the
students on the type of text they are expected to
write. The use of Wikipedia will help students to
search and select important information for their
writing task. Finally, using Canva as a graphic-
design tool website will boost students’ creativity
not only in writing report text, but also presenting it
in an informative and attractive ways.
For the second category, this lesson plan also
received score 4, which means “technology use
optimally supports instructional strategies”. As Ms.
Anti planned to use collaborative writing activity,
she will group the students from the beginning of
the lesson. She will encourage each students to be in
charge of different tasks and lead different stages of
the writing process. For example, one student will
be responsible to collect and compile information
selected by their friends, one will be responsible to
type all the ideas for the writing, one will be
responsible to edit the text based on the teacher and
peer feedback, and one will be responsible for
creating the infographic. Choosing Wikipedia as the
source of information and Canva for creating
infographic is appropriate to support this
collaborative work.
The third category focused on matching
technology to both curriculum and instructional
strategies. Considering the choices of technology
tools, as mentioned above, the choices matched the
stated curriculum goals and supported the
collaborative writing activity as the instructional
strategy she planned to have in her lesson.
For the fourth category, that is the fit among
content, pedagogy and technology, Ms. Anti’s
lesson plan could be considered exemplary
(content, instructional strategies and technology fit
together strongly within the instructional plan). She
has been able to orchestrate the content she wished
to deliver to the students, the appropriate
instructional strategy to support her goals, and the
choice of technology tools which are suitable for
students to create an infographic report text in a
collaborative writing environment.
Technology-Supported English Language Teaching Professional Development: A Case Study of a Secondary English Teacher’s TPACK
129

4.5 Lesson Design
The lesson design activities were conducted before
the teachers created their lesson plans. The
researcher and the three participating teachers sat
together discussing what the teachers were going to
deliver in their class. This part will focus on the
lesson design conducted with Ms. Anti.
It was started with discussing the existing
lesson plans she usually have for delivering
certain learning content. She explained the
objective of the lesson, the stages of activities she
usually did, and some supplementary materials she
usually provided to her students. Having discussed
the existing lesson plan, we started to explore the
possibilities of making some changes in her lesson
plan in order to give new ways of learning
experiences to the students. We looked at some
technology tools which have been introduced
during the workshop and tried to see the
affordances of the tools. The possible pedagogy in
relation to the technology tools were discussed
and evaluated to see the match with the curriculum
goals and the learning content.
The first lesson plan focused on listening and
speaking activities to practice expressions of
certainty, uncertainty and asking for clarification.
Ms. Anti usually used an audio recording and asked
the students to answer some comprehension
questions. Then she asked the students to create a
dialog and demonstrate the dialog before the class.
In the new lesson plan, Ms. Anti planned to use
additional technology tools; speech-to-text
application for practicing pronunciation, voice
recorder for recording students’ dialog, and Padlet
for displaying the recorded dialog. Speech-to-text
was chosen because she found out that students
usually have difficulties in pronouncing some
words, such as the words ‘certain ‘and ‘uncertain’,
or the phrases ‘can you say that again?’, ‘are
you sure?’, etc. Based on the conversation
with Ms. Anti during the lesson design, the use of
voice recorder was considered to give more
opportunities for the students to do the dialog in the
real situation outside the classroom. Students can
also listen to their own conversation and do self-
correction or peer-correction. The use of Padlet was
considered to save the time for doing the
conversation before the class. Padlet can make it
possible for the students to listen to other groups’
dialog and give comments.
The second lesson plan focused on reading
activities to find detail information from a text. Ms.
Anti usually gave students a text about “bird of
paradise” then asked the students to answer
comprehension questions based on the text. She said
that usually, students were reluctant to read the text
and answer the questions. The lesson went a little
boring for the students. In the new lesson plan, Ms.
Anti wished to conduct a more interactive reading
activity for her students, so she decided to choose
three technology tools to be integrated in her lesson;
Word-it-out for prompting keywords in pre-reading
activity, a YouTube video for helping students
identifying the keywords, and Kahoot for checking
students’ comprehension. During the discussion,
Ms. Anti stated that students usually have
difficulties to comprehend a passage because they
found too many unfamiliar words in the text,
therefore, she believes that using Word-it-out to
prompt some keywords in pre-reading activity will
be beneficial for the students. The use of YouTube
video will give the students some visual description
of the words being discussed in previous activities.
She believes that by doing so, the newly learned
words will retain longer in the students’ mind.
Furthermore, by using Kahoot, she wants to try
gamifying her class and see the reaction of her
students. She predicts that her students would love
answering comprehension questions using the game-
based activity.
The third lesson plan focused on writing report
text about endemic animal in Indonesia. Ms. Anti
usually give students a model of report text,
discussed the language features and the structure of
the text, then, asked the students to write a report
text about one of the endemic animals in Indonesia.
In her new lesson plan, she planned to use 4
technology tools to be integrated in her lesson;
YouTube video about Komodo Dragon to give
students background knowledge about the topic to
be discussed, Power Point slides to present the
model text and show the structure and language
features of the text, Wikipedia for students to search
information about endemic animals of their own
choices, and Canva to create infographic as the final
product. She mentioned that will be suitable to
attract students attention on the topic, the use of
power point slides will make it easier for the
students to identify the structure and language
features of the text together with the teacher.
Wikipedia will help students to learn and select
information which is relevant to their needs, while
Canva will boost the students’ creativity in writing a
report text.
5 CONCLUSIONS
This study focused on examining whether or not,
and how the teacher’s TPACK was reflected in the
lesson design activity and in the lesson plan
documents. The data shown that the teacher
BELTIC 2018 - 1st Bandung English Language Teaching International Conference
130

considered the relationship among content,
pedagogy, and technology during the process of
lesson planning. From the three lesson plans, it can
be seen that she gradually developed the way she
chose the technology tools to be integrated in
delivering certain learning content and considered
the appropriate instructions for classroom activities.
The third lesson plan reflected her TPACK
knowledge in designing an infographic project
which strongly connected the materials she wanted
to deliver, the instructions as well as the
appropriate technology tools to be integrated.
The findings of this study are in line with the
findings of similar studies conducted by Koehler et al.
(2011) & Tai (2015). In this study, the teacher had
the opportunities to design technology-integrated
lesson based on the materials that she learned
from the workshops. The teacher was able to
develop her understanding of the
interrelationship among technology, pedagogy and
content, and tried to adjust the three components to
fit each other.
The workshop, which was not relying on
lectures and demonstration only, gave the
opportunities to the teacher to explore and play
around with the technology tools as user and
designer. As mentioned by Burns (2002) & (Zhao,
2003), enabling teachers to use technology
meaningfully requires more than affording them
to isolated technology skills. By working
collaboratively with other workshop participants and
the researcher, considered the affordances of the
tools and tried to solve authentic problems related to
her classroom practice, she learned to creatively re-
purpose some technology tools (i.e. Speech to text,
Padlet, Word it out) which were not designed for
educational purposes (Mishra et al. 2009).
Sometimes the group discussed how the content can
drive the integration of technology tools (and their
pedagogical use) and sometimes they also discussed
the possibilities of what the tools can do that can
drive the pedagogy of the content. In this manner,
they play with technologies and ideas, and be open
to constructing new experiences for students
(Koehler et al., 2011).
Technology professional development which
aimed to help teachers to integrate technology
should not be thought of a single event or isolated
programs (Zhao et al., 2006 p. 162). In this study,
the series of lesson design activities also became an
important aspect in helping the teacher designing
technology- integrated lesson plans. The continuous
discussions with the other participants and the
researcher allow the teacher to develop different
mindset towards technology. This mindset was
developed towards the process of thinking deeply
about the role of technology in the learning process
(Koehler et al., 2011). Through the discussions, the
teacher was able to invent new ways of teaching
(Zhao et al. 2006) by integrating technology into her
teaching sequences.
However, this study is still limited to the
reflection of teacher’s TPACK on the lesson plan
only. Further investigation need to be conducted to
see how the teacher implement her lesson plan into
real action in the classroom. Niess (2008) stated that
“no matter how marvellous the coursework is in
providing teachers with knowledge about teaching
with technology, they must have opportunities to
apply this knowledge” (p. 246). Therefore, the
teacher’s experience in implementing what has been
planned, evaluating the value of specific
instructional strategies, and comprehending the
complexities involved in teaching with technology
will contribute more to the development of TPACK.
REFERENCES
Becker, HJ 2000, 'Findings from the teaching, learning,
and computing survey: is Larry Cuban right?’
Education Policy Analysis Archives, vol. 8, no. 51, pp.
1–31.
Byrum, DC & Cashman, C 1993, 'Preservice teacher
training in educational computing: Problem,
perception and preparation', Education, Journal of
Technology and Teacher, vol. 1, no. 3, pp. 259–274.
Cahyono, BY, Kurnianti, OD & Mutiaraningrum, I
2016, 'Indonesian EFL Teachers’ Application of
TPACK in In-service Education Teaching
Practices', International Journal of English
Language Teaching, vo. 4, no. 5, pp. 16–30.
ChanLin, L et al 2006, ‘Factors influencing
technology integration in teaching: a Taiwanese
perspective', Innovations in Education and
Teaching International, vo. 43, pp. 57–68.
Ertmer, PA 1999, 'Addressing first- and second-order
barriers to change: Strategies for technology
integration', Education Technology Research and
Development, vol. 47, no. 4, pp. 47–61.
Ertmer, PA et al 2003, 'Increasing preservice teachers’
capacity for technology integration through the use of
electronic models', Teacher Education Quarterly, no.
30, pp. 95–112.
Frei, S, Gammill, A & Irons, S 2007. Integrating
technology into the curriculum, Huntington Beach,
CA: Shell Education.
Harendita, ME 2013, 'Why Resist? A Closer Look at
Indonesian Teachers’ Resistance to ICT', International
Journal of Indonesian Studies, Vol 12013, vol. 1, no.
2, pp. 79–109.
Harris, J, Grandgenet, N & Hofer, M. 2010, 'Testing a
TPCK-based technology integration assessment
instrument. In CD, Maddux, D, Gibson & B, Dodge,
eds', Research highlights in technology and teacher
education2, Chesapeake, VA: Society for Information
Technology-Supported English Language Teaching Professional Development: A Case Study of a Secondary English Teacher’s TPACK
131

Technology in Teacher Education (SITE), pp. 323–
331.
Koehler, MJ et al 2011, 'Deep-play: Developing TPACK
for 21st century teachers', International Journal of
Learning Technology, vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 146–163.
Available from:
http://punya.educ.msu.edu/publications/koehler.et.a
l.ijlt2011.pdf.
Koehler, MJ & Mishra, P 2006, Technological
pedagogical content knowledge: a framework
for teacher knowledge.
Koehler, MJ & Mishra, P 2006, 'Technological
pedagogical content knowledge: a new framework
for teacher knowledge', Teachers College Record,
vol. 108, no. 6, pp. 1017–1054.
Mahdum 2015, 'Technological pedagogical and content
knowledge (TPACK) of English teachers in
Pekanbaru, Riau, Indonesia', Mediterranean Journal
of Social Sciences2, vol. 6, no. 5, pp. 168–176.
Mishra, P & Koehler, M 2008, Handbook of technological
pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) for
educators, New York, Routledge.
Mishra, P, Peruski, L & Koehler, M.J 2007, 'Developing
technological pedagogical content knowledge
(TPACK) through teaching online', Proceedings of
Society for Information Technology Teacher
Education International Conference 2007, vol. 2, no.
2, pp. 2208–2213. Available
from: http://www.editlib.org/p/24918.
Mishra, Matthew Koehler & Kareluik 2009, 'The song
remains the same: looking back to the future
educational technology', Tech Trends, vol. 53, no. 5,
pp. 48–35.
Niess, M.L 2008, 'Guiding preservice teachers in
developing TPCK in American association of colleges
for teacher education', In Handbook of
technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPCK)
for Educators, New York: Routledge for the American
Association of Colleges for Teacher Education, pp.
223–250.
Oecd, 2001, Schooling for tomorrow learning to change:
ICT in schools, France, OECD of Publication Service.
Polly, D. & Brantley-Dias, L., 2009. TPACK: Where
do we go now? Tech Trends, 53(5), p.46.
Prensky, M 2004, 'The emerging online life of the digital
native', pp. 1–14. Available from:
http://www.bu.edu/ssw/files/pdf/Prensky-
The_Emerging_Online_Life_of_the_Digital_Native-
033.pdf [Accessed May 20, 2016].
Punya, M., Koehler, M.J & Zhao, Y 2007, Faculty
development by design: integrating technology in
higher education, Greenwich, CT: Information Age
Publishing.
Reeves, TC, Herrington, J & Oliver, R 2005, 'Design
research: a socially responsible approach to
instructional technology research in higher education',
Journal of Computing in Higher Education, vol. 16,
no. 2, pp. 97–116.
Robin, BR 2008, 'Digital storytelling: a powerful
technology tool for the 21st century classroom. Theory
into Practice, vol. 47, no. 3, pp. 220–228. Available
from:
http://www.informaworld.com/10.1080/004058408
02153916.
Russel, M et al 2003, 'Examining teacher technology use:
implication for preservice and inservice teacher
education', Journal of Teacher Education, vol. 54, pp.
297–310.
Sarhandi, PS et al 2016, 'Integration of technology with
pedagogical perspective: an evaluative study in in-
house call professional development', Arab World
English Journal, Special Is, no. 3, pp. 23–35.
Shulman, LS 1986, ‘Those who understand:
knowledge growth in teaching', Educational
researcher, vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 4–14.
Son, J, Robb, T & Charismiadji, I 2011, 'Computer
literacy and competency: a survey of Indonesian
teachers of English as a foreign language', Call-Ej,
vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 26–42. Available
from:
http://eprints.usq.edu.au/18371/3/Son_Robb_Charis
miadji_Doc_18371.pdf.
Tai, SJD 2015, 'From tpack-in-action workshops
to classrooms: call competency developed and
integrated', Language Learning & Technology, vol.
19, no. 1, pp. 139–164.
Willis, J, Thompson, A & Sadera, W 1999, 'Research on
technology and teacher education: current status and
future directions', Educational Technology
Research and Development, vol. 47, no. 4, pp. 29–45.
Yang, S & Walker, V 2015, 'A pedagogical framework for
technology integration in ESL classrooms: the
promises and challenges of integration', Journal of
Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, vol. 24, no.
2, pp. 179–203. Available from:
ttp://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?eid=2s2.0-
84938068761&partnerID=tZOtx3y1.
Zhao, Y, Frank, KA & Ellefson, NC 2006, 'Fostering
meaningful teaching and learning with technology:
characteristics of effective professional
development. In E. A. Ashburn & Ro. E. Floden, Eds',
Meaningful Learning using Technology, New York:
Teacher College, Columbia University, pp. 161–179.
BELTIC 2018 - 1st Bandung English Language Teaching International Conference
132